-
Post-method Pedagogy and its implication on
EFL Teaching
Introduction
Post-method pedagogy is a new concept
of foreign language teaching. Different
from
the
method
of
foreign
language
under
the
method
condition,
Post-method
pedagogy is not a specific teaching
mode, but a
research of the interaction
between
learners and teachers, the
contact of English teaching and social and
language policy,
the
cultivate
of
multicultural
and
intercultural
communication
competence,
the
scholarship
of
teaching,
strategy
and
method
of
use(
刘道义
,2009).The
Post-method
pedagogy
philosophy pay attention to the people who use
teaching methods(including
teachers and
students) and specific situation, proposed
of
a
and
< br>
empowerment
opinion,
encourage
teachers
to
put
classroom
teaching
into
practice theoretical, put theory
teaching knowledge into practice. This paper
focuses
on the
framework of
Kumaravadivelu's “Post
-method
Pedagogy” and
its
implication
on EFL teaching in Chinese
context, and then state briefly to significance of
the new
teaching methods for the
current foreign language teaching.
1.
Methods and the limitations of the concept of
methods
The
term
methods
,
as
currently
used
in
the
literature
on
second
and
foreign
language teaching,
does not refer to what teachers actually do in the
classroom; rather,
it refers to
established methods conceptualized and constructed
by experts in the field.
The
modern
Chinese
dictionary
(
中
国
社
会
科
学
院
语
言
研
究
所
词
典
编
纂
室<
/p>
2005,383)defines
“
method
”
as
“
The way, procedure used to
solve issues of thoughts,
speeches and
actions, etc.
”
In the
history of
foreign language teaching,
people have
been explored the teaching
method for a long history, and several important
teaching
methods
came
out,
such
as
grammar
translation
method,
the
audio-lingual
method,
communicative
approach,
situation
method,
etc.
After
the
audio-lingual
method
appear,
language
teaching
enter
into
obvious
systematic
and
theory-driven
stage,
every method has its own theory
principle and classroom practice program.
According
to their reflection of the
concept of language, learning concept and teaching
concept,
then
can
part
these
methods
to
three
categories:
language-
centered
method,
learner-
centered method, and learning-centered method.
Each method has been played
a
certain
positive
role
in
the
different
historical
period,
the
different
teaching
environment.
(
董金伟，
2008)
However,
the
disjunction
between
method
as
conceptualized
by
theorists
and
methods
as
conducted
by
teachers
is
the
direct
consequence
of
the
in-herent
limitations
of
the
concept
of
method
itself.
Firstly,
methods
are
based
on
idealized
concepts
geared
toward
idealized
contexts.
Since
language
learning
and
teaching
needs,
wants,
and
sit-
alize
all
the
variables
in
advance
in
order
to
provide
situation-specific
suggestions
that
practicing
teachers
sorely
need
to
tackle
the
challenges
they
confront
every
day
of
their
professional
lives.
As
a
pre-
dominantly
top-down
exercise,
the
conception
and
construction
of
methods
have
been
largely
guided by a one-
size-fits-all, cookie-cutter approach that assumes
a common clientele
with
common
goals.
Secondly,
it
is
too
inadequate
and
too
limited
to
satisfactory
explain the com-plexity of language
teaching operations around the world. Concerned
primarily and narrowly with the
classroom instructional strategies, it ignores the
fact
that
the
success
or
failure
of
classroom
instruction
depends
to
large
extent
on
the
unstated and unstable interaction of
multiple factors such as teacher cognition,
learner
perception, societal needs,
cultural contexts, all of which are inextricably
interwoven.
The limitations of the
concept of method gradually led to the realization
that
“
the
term
method
is
a
label
without
substance
”
,
that
it
has
“
diminished
rather
than
enhanced our understanding of language
teaching
” (
Pennycook, 1989,
p.597), and that
“
language
teaching might be better understood and better
executed if the concept of
method were
not to exist at all
”
2. The research of postmethod pedagogy
2.1 The origin and the
condition of postmethod
At
the
end
of
1980s,
with
the
criticism
on
the
concept
of
method
itself
in
the
field
of
language
teaching, Kumaravadivelu (1994, 29)first
proposed the concept
of
postmethod,
and
redefined
as
consists
of
a
single
set
of
theoretical
principles
derived
from
feeder
disciplines
and
a
single
set
of
classroom
procedures
directed
at
classroom
teachers
The
disciplines
can
be
linguistics,
psychology
and
sociolinguistics,
etc.
and
we
can
also
use
our
own
teaching
strategies
summarized
from our own teaching experience. As to
postmethod, he regards it as a concept which
signifies
a
search
for
an
alternative
to
method
rather
than
an
alternative
method.
Postmethod is not one real teaching
method, but a pedagogy which involves teaching
strategy, teaching material, curriculum
assessment and politics, history and personal
experiences influencing foreign
language learning.
As to the postmethod
condition, it signifies three interrelated
attributes. First and
foremost, it
signifies a search for an alternative to method
rather than an alternative
method.
Secondly,
the
postmethod
condition
signifies
teacher
autonomy.
It
also
signifies
the
teachers
’
potential
to
know
not
only
how
to
teach
but
also
how
to
act
autonomously
within
the
academic
and
administrative
constraints
imposed
by
institutions, curricula, and textbooks.
It also promotes the ability of teachers to know
how
to
develop
a
critical
approach
in
order
to
self-observe,
sell-analyze,
and
self-evaluate their own teaching
practice with a view to effecting desired changes.
The
third
attribute
of
the
postmethod
condition
is
principled
pragmatism.
Principle
pragmatism thus
focuses on how classroom learning can be shaped
and reshaped by
teachers
as
a
result
of
self-observation,
self-
analysis,
and
self-
evaluation.
The
three
major
attributes
of
the
postmethod
condition
outlined
above
provide
a
solid
foundation on which
the fundamental param-eters of a postmethod
pedagogy can be
conceived and
constructed.
2.2 postmethod
pedagogy
Based on postmethod
condition, Kumaravadivelu propose postmethod
pedagogy
which
is
a
three-dimensional
system
composed
of
parameters
of
particularity,
practicality
and possibility.
The Parameter of
Particularity means any efficient language
pedagogy
sensitive
to
a
particular
group
of
teachers
teaching
a
particular
group
of
learners
pursuing a particular set of goals
within a particular institutional context embedded
in
a
particular
socio
cultural
milieu”(Kumaravadivelu,2006)Therefore,
particularity
emphasizes
that
any
pedagogy
should
be
appropriate
for
the
particular
context,
teachers
and
learners,
it
opposes
the
same
pedagogy
for
different
teaching
contexts
and education
targets actively and forcefully. The pedagogy of
practicality, the second
parameter
of
postmethod
pedagogy,
pertains
to
a
much
large
issue
that
has
a
direct
impact
on
the
practice
of
classroom
teaching,
namely,
the
relationship
between
theory
and
practice
(Kumaravadivelu
2001,).
New
basic
research
shows
that
the
theory
and
practice
are
not
simply
the
guiding
and
being
guided
relations,
they
mutually
inform(
吴黛舒
2004,
24).
A
pedagogy
of
practicality,
as
Kumaravadivelu
(1999)
visualizes
it,
seeks
to
overcome
some
of
the
deficiencies
inherent
in
the
theory-versus-practice,
theorists'
theory
versus
teachers'
theory
dichotomies
by
encouraging
and
enabling
teachers
themselves
to
theorize
from
their
practice
and
practice what they
theorize. That is, the pedagogy of practicality
aims for the teacher
to construct a
theory of practice. The third parameter of
postmethod pedagogy is the
pedagogy of
possibility. First, this parameter is regarded
with students' and teachers'
subject
positions--class, gender, race, ethnicity, and the
experiences that they bring to
the
pedagogical settings (Kumaravadivelu 2001,). The
past experiences which tend to
influence ESL/EFL learning/teaching
could be shaped not only by learning/teaching
environment
but
also
social,
political
and
economical
environment.
Secondly,
this
parameter is
concerned
with
individual identity.
Language education is
a
process
in
which
participants seeks for and construct their own
identity. As Weedon(1987, 21)
indicates
it,
constructed
in
the classroom. Thirdly, language
teachers can afford to
ignore the
social cultural
reality that influences
identity formation in the classroom, and nor can
they afford to
separate the linguistic
need from the social needs (Kumaravadivelu
2001
，
544). From
all
above,
the
three
parameters
of
postmethod
pedagogy
are
interrelated,
interacted,
and interweaved, and their boundaries
are blurred.
2.3
Macrostrategic Framework
The
macrostrategic framework for language teaching
consists of macrostrategic
and
miscrostrategic.
Macrostrategies
can
be
considered
as
teaching
principles
and
guidelines, based on
which teachers select and apply microstrategies or
techniques. In
addition,
macrostrategies
are
similar
to
approaches
within
the
notion
of
method
defined by Richards
and Rodgers (1982).The framework consists of the
following ten
macrostrategies as
follows:
Maximize
learning
opportunities:
This
macrostrategy
envisages
teaching
as
a
process
of creating and
utilizing learning opportunities, a process
in
which teachers
strike a balance between their
role
as a managers of
teaching
acts
and their role
as
mediators of learning acts;
Minimize
perceptual
mismatches:
This
macrostrategy
emphasizes
the
recognition of potential
perceptual mismatches between in-tentions and
interpretations
of the learner, the
teacher, and the teacher educator;