This chapter reflects much of what I learned during my first year in MA / TESOL program: why I teach the way I do and how to make my teaching more effective. Casanave discusses three major areas essential for informed decision making: teaching (and learning) philosophy, knowledge of relevant issues, and awareness of context and constraints. During this year I have often been thinking, speaking, and writing about my language learning and teaching experiences (or literacy autobiography as Casanave puts it) in order to understand my underlying beliefs and assumptions about teaching English. Interestingly, I had a slightly different version each time I wrote my literacy autobiography, depending on what my focus was at that particular time. This exercise did reveal a lot about what I perceived as normal in teaching / learning and what I considered to be important.
As far as the second area is concerned, getting acquainted with the trends in teaching and the latest publications is definitely one of the requirements of graduate study. For instance, while I was teaching writing at a university in Russia, I had no idea about product or process writing, let alone post-process. Simply being aware of the existing theories and research could have made developing our own writing part of the curriculum easier and probably more efficient.
Finally, knowing about the context of teaching and the limitations I have was not actually something I learned in the US. I had been aware of that area since I started teaching. However, what I have learned is how to look at the constraints: not as the closed doors, but rather puzzles to solve. Naturally, often there cannot be perfect solutions that bridge the gap between what you would like to do as a teacher and what you actually can do. That is why I like Casanave's use of the term dilemmas instead of problems. Sometimes, all you can do is make the best of what you have, by making decisions based on all three areas. They might not be perfect, but they will make teaching (and learning) more efficient.
Casanave, C.P. (2004). Controversies in Second Language Writing: Dilemmas and Decisions in Research and Instruction. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
I agree with you about coming to the realization that we can be given obstacles but we can also find ways around them. Yes, institutions may have restrictive policies that do not match up with our preferred teaching styles and methods, but that does not mean that we cannot exert our own methods and aims in small ways that can bypass those restrictions. I think that it would also be good to let students know that obstacles do not mean defeat. Sometimes, we MUST teach to the test rather than teach purely for the healthy intellectual development of our students. Sometimes they MUST learn about topics and styles of writing that they do not wish to learn about, but they should also know that they have the option of learning styles and topics they would be interested in AND that they do not have to consider writing or learning to be purely a classroom activity. As teachers try to bridge the gap between what they would like to do and can actually do, students go through a similar experience.
ReplyDelete