Post #3: Postmethod Pedagogy

            This week, the chapters in Brown and Kumar both discuss Postmethod Pedagogy. Brown chapter three describes how the postmethod era came about since people wanted a way to unify the approach to language teaching and because they wanted to put to rest the limited concept of method which was used in the previous century. This chapter also goes into detail about Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT). Some of the main goals of CLT include: a focus on all components (grammatical, discourse, functional, sociolinguistic, strategic), focus on comprehension and production of the TL, and a focus on real-world contexts. TBLT is said to be within the framework of CLT, although some researchers do not agree with this idea. TBLT involves the use of tasks at the core of language learning. These tasks contribute to communicative goals and “point learners beyond the forms of language alone to real-world contexts” (Brown 52). Kumar’s article also discussed CLT and TBLT. The article says that CLT was created as a response to the failing of the audiolingual method, which focused “exclusively and excessively on the manipulation of the linguistic structures of the target language” (Kumar 2006, 3). The audiolingual method didn’t seem to promote the acquisition of communicative ability in the TL. CLT was created in hopes of “moving classroom teaching away from a largely structural orientation...to a largely communicative orientation” (Kumar 2006, 3). I agree with the idea that TBLT is within the framework of CLT. CLT is very important in language teaching. It is important for language learners to be able to produce the TL and not just know the grammar rules of the language. In order for the learners to be able to properly produce the TL, teachers need to make sure they include a lot of communicative activities during class time.  

            Kumar chapter two discusses the meaning of the word method. In order to classify methods, Kumar splits them up into three different groups: language-centered methods, learner-centered methods, and learning-centered methods. He also explains how many researchers are dissatisfied with the notion of methods. This idea goes back to our second week of readings which included Prabhu’s article about how there is no best language teaching method. It makes sense how many researchers dislike the idea of methods since this theory creates so many unanswered questions. Because of these criticisms, the Postmethod Condition emerged. Postmethod pedagogy involves a “three dimensional system consisting of pedagogic parameters of particularity, practicality, and possibility” (Kumar  2003, 34). The boundaries between these three parameters are blurred since the characteristics of each overlap one another. It seems like many SLA theories include parameters or parts that overlap one another or are all interconnected. The overlapping of the parameters makes sense but I think that it’s one of the reasons why there is so much debate and unanswered questions in the field.