Week 2 Response 2: The Evolution of TESOL

As Celce Murcia relates in her article, most teachers are unaware of the history behind TESOL and the varying methods that have been practiced for hundreds of years--myself included.  Sure, I had heard of the audiolingual method and known about translation-based classrooms, but I never knew why the focus was on each technique and how the context helped shape these different approaches.

These separate ways of teaching a foreign/second language again trace back to the teacher's philosophy on language learning and what they view to be the purpose of instruction.  How does the teacher define acquisition?  What are the reasons for learning the language?  These are all valuable questions to ask oneself before creating lesson plans or stepping in front of a class.  In the past, I have always placed importance on the ability to actually use the language in meaningful, real-life contexts (Communicative Language Teaching).  I believed this was the best (and maybe only) way to effectively teach a language.  However, as Kumaravadivelu states, "Even teachers who are committed to CLT can fail to create opportunities for genuine interaction in their classroom" (62).  He also mentioned the arguments against CLT in many different countries.  This got me thinking, challenging myself and my own methodology.  Was I really fostering student growth and meaningful production of the language?  How could I be sure?  Was this the "best" methodology I could be implementing in my classroom?  Is there such a thing as the "best" methodology?

Reading this article also helped me to classify my philosophy within the Affective-Humanistic Approach, which sees each individual as unique and fosters a respectful, interactive, and goal-oriented classroom environment.  The goal, however, is not the end-all-be-all but rather what the group collectively must word towards and help each other obtain.  This also goes along with my Values-Based teaching philosophy.  Thinking about my definitions of teaching and learning has been both comforting and challenging.  As a teacher, you want your students to succeed, and you want everything you do to aid them in that process.  So where do we go from here?  There may never be conclusive scientific research that spells out what works and what doesn't.  Are we doomed to trial and error approaches in the field of TESOL?

Week 2 Response 1: Understanding Teaching and Assessment

Any teacher knows that there's no such things as "one size fits all" when it comes to instructional techniques or assessment methods.  Sure, it would make life a lot easier if there were, but the fact remains that we are constantly changing as human beings--teachers and students alike.  Day to day, our environment also evolves to accommodate our mood, our thoughts, and our preoccupations.  Individuals know that they can be a completely different person from one day to the next... so why do we expect our students to remain the same?  This is unrealistic and detrimental to overall student success.  And isn't that ultimately what our jobs come down to?

I really appreciated the book looking at assessment and teaching from the very start: our theoretical and philosophical perceptions of education.  The way in which we conceptualize teaching heavily influences the approaches we take in the classroom--from involvement and interaction with the students to the evaluations we use to measure their success, however that may be defined (19).  Despite having taken numerous education coursework, it was by these readings that I determined what my educational philosophy really is: values-based.  The importance of learning as a tool to improve society at large is evident in my lessons and my attitude towards students.  It was interesting to read the other varying philosophies and how they might work together or contradict one another.  For me, it seemed unfair that the book criticize the values-based approach to teaching as "not subject to accountability" (24).  In the end, it is my belief that we all must hold one another accountable for our actions and our attempts to love and help each other reach their full potential.


Another issue I had with the readings was the apparent contradiction in regards to teaching philosophy and the manifestation of such within the classroom--via instructional techniques and assessment methods or materials.  It clearly states, "commitment to a single method of teaching may impede the teacher's full potential" while then going on to say that "eclecticism is not an option" (23).  How can both of these statements be true?  While there may seem to be distinctions between, say, a science-research teaching philosophy and that of art-craft, it does not mean that a teacher is confined to their respective methodologies.  This type of thinking stifles creativity in the classroom and hinders students from experiencing varied types of reasoning and thinking about things.  As an educator, I choose to pull resources and inspiration from all different places in the hopes that each eclectic piece stimulates the mind of a different student, responding to their intellectual and emotional needs as language learners.

Week 1 Response 1: Who Speaks English Today?

There are over 6 billion people on this planet, and only 350 million of them speak a variety of English as their native tongue (Jenkins 15).  More startling is the fact that soon, if not already, there will be more non-native (ESL/EFL) speakers of English than native speakers of this language.  Negating the concept of “power in numbers,” McArthur raises the point that non-native speakers are almost always considered subpar to ENL speakers (16), further supported by Kachru’s argument that the “standards [are] set by native speakers in the Inner Circle” (20).

Yet the concept of the Inner Circle must be questioned as well, because no longer do we live in isolation from the rest of the world.  Immigration, the spread of world markets, and the rise of international media and marketing have completely altered population demographics.  For example, the U.S. may be an English dominant society, but in certain pockets of our nation, there is great diversity in language and culture.  Even here in Bloomington-Normal, there is a large Spanish-speaking sector that does not know English or is currently taking ESL coursework.  I know this because I work with these people, and every day my assumptions about the world and about our country change.  The inevitable fate of the English language is that it will adapt and evolve as it—and every human language—always has, alongside the changing society that speaks it.

Thus, many questions begin to form: How do we determine what is ‘standard’ and what do we teach to our students?  What linguistic and social environment will we be teaching in?  Will our students learn English in a natural setting or as a foreign language?  How will this impact their level of proficiency and our instructional methods?  I think these are valuable questions to ponder as a future language teacher, and I hope to gain more insight into these issues through our coursework this semester.