Language Teaching as Sociocultural Activity Rethinking Language Teacher Practice英文精品课件

LanguageTeachingasSocioculturalActivity:RethinkingLanguageTeacherPractice

RUSSELLCROSS

TheUniversityofMelbourne

MelbourneGraduateSchoolofEducation504DougMcDonellBuilding

MelbourneVictoria3010,AustraliaEmail:r.cross@unimelb.edu.au

Theoreticalinorientation,thefocusofthisarticleisthestudyoflanguageteachersandteachingandbuildsonabodyofresearchthathasbecomeincreasinglyin?uentialsincethemid-1990s.S.Borg’s(2006)recentreviewofthe?eldidenti?esanumberofpathwayswithpromisefornewareasofresearch,butitalsohighlightstheconceptualchallengesthatcontinuetoexistintermsofmovingthe?eldforward.ThisarticleaimstoengagewiththesethemesandconcernsbyconsideringthepotentialofVygotskian(Vygotsky,1978,1987)socioculturaltheoryasthebasisforaconceptualframeworktoresearchlanguageteachercognition.Theconceptualchallengesaddressedincludetheneedforatheoreticalorientationthatrecognizesthesocial,practical,andcontextualdimensionofcognition;anunderstandingoftheteacherasahistorical,sociologicalagentwithinlarger(andpolitical)contextsforpractice;anawarenessofthecontradictionsandtensionsthatarisewithincognitionasthinkinganddoingismediatedbyandplayedoutwithinthecontextsthatitexists;andananalyticframeworkcommensuratewithcurrentempiricalandmethodologicaldevelopmentsinthe?eld.

ALTHOUGHTHEKNOWLEDGEBASEOFsecondlanguageteachereducationhasbeenhis-toricallydependentonstudiesofsecondlanguageacquisition(SLA)—andtheirfocusontherela-tionshipamonglanguage,learners,andlearning(Yates&Muchisky,2003)—theapplicationofthatknowledgetothepracticalconcernsofclassroomteachershasbeenapartnershipnotwithoutprob-lems(Kumaravadivelu,2006).Indeed,thedom-inanceofbehavioristandcognitiveparadigmswithinSLAforthebetterpartofitshistoryledtowhatBreen(1985)?rstrecognizedasa“neglect[...of]thesocialrealityoflanguagelearningasitisexperiencedandcreatedbyteachersandlearners”(p.141,emphasisinoriginal).Forthepracticeoflanguageteachingitself,theresulthasbeenasteadybutincreasinglyproblematicrelianceon

TheModernLanguageJournal,94,iii,(2010)DOI:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2010.01058.x0026-7902/10/434–452$1.50/0??C2010TheModernLanguageJournal

methodological“blueprints”forinstructionthat

typicallyconceiveofteachingaslittlemorethanthesumofitsparts—collectionsandpatternsofbehaviorsandtechniquesthat,iffollowed,werethoughttoestablishtherequisiteconditionsfor“learning”tothenoccur(Adamson,2004;Free-man,1994).

Ourgrowingunderstandingofthesocialandculturaldimensionoflanguageandlanguageac-quisitionoverthelast10–15years,however,haschallengedmanyofthecognitiveandbehavioristassumptionsthatwereoncecentraltomainstreamSLA(Firth&Wagner,2007).Inparticular,anin-creasedawarenessofthesituatedandsociallydis-tributednatureoflearninghashighlightedtheneedtobetterunderstandthecomplexitiesofthecontextswithinwhichlearningtakesplace,witharelatedfocusonteachersand,increas-ingly,howteachershavecometounderstandtheirprofessionalroleswithinthosecontextsandtheteaching–learningrelationshipmorebroadly(seeAllwright&Bailey,1991;Edge&Richards,1993;

RussellCross

andRichards&Lockhart,1994,forexamplesofthepractitioner-orientedresearchthatcharacter-izedmuchoftheearlyworkinthisarea).Asaresult,thelastdecadehasseenagrowthinre-searchon,about,andforlanguageteachersandtheirwork,withanespeciallystrongfocusonthetopicofteachercognitioninparticular:“whatlan-guageteachersthink,know,believe,anddo”(S.Borg,2003,p.81).1

Theoreticalinorientation,thisarticleaimstocomplementtheexistingbodyofempiricalre-searchthathasbeenestablishedonlanguageteachersandteaching,byofferingaconceptualframeworkthatengageswithanumberofthemes,issues,andconcernsraisedinS.Borg’s(2006)recentreview.Inanattempt“toimposesomestructure”onadomainthatisstillcomparativelyyoung,S.Borg’ssynthesisofthecurrentstateoftheartprovidesaprogrammaticagendaforfutureresearchbutalsodrawsattentiontoanumberofconceptualissuesandchallengesthatremainformovingforward(seep.280).

Thisarticleisorganizedintothreemainparts.The?rstpartconsidersS.Borg’s(2006)recentreviewofthe?eld,withafocusonthechallengeshisagendapresentsforfuturedevelopmentsinthisareaataconceptuallevel.Inthesecondpart,IoutlineaframeworkforresearchingteachercognitionfromtheperspectiveofVygotskianso-cioculturaltheory(SCT;Vygotsky,1978,1987)tocomplementtheexistingempiricalknowledgebaseonlanguageteachersandteachingandtoaddressthoseconcernsraisedbyS.Borgforad-vancingthecurrentstateoftheart.Finally,inthethirdpart,Ipresentashortillustrativeexampleoftheempiricalapplicationoftheframeworkusingdataonteacherpractice.

ATEACHERRESEARCHCOGNITION

AGENDAFORLANGUAGEWhileacknowledgingtheimportantcontribu-tionpreviousstudieshavemadetoformativere-searchonlanguageteachercognition,S.Borg’s(2006)recentbook-lengthtreatmentofthesub-jectconcludesthatwehavenowreachedapointwherethecurrentmultiplicityofframeworkspresentsahindrancetomovingforward(p.92).Inacomprehensivesynthesisoftheliteratureonlanguageteachercognitiontodate,Borghigh-lightedthefollowingissuesasthebasisforafutureresearchagenda:

rrthenatureoflanguageteachercognition;thescopeoflanguageteachercognitionre-search;

435

rtherelationshipbetweenlanguageteachers’

rcognitionsandclassroompractices;

theimpactofcontextonlanguageteachers’rcognitionsandpractices;

theprocessesofpre-servicelanguageteacherrlearning;

rthenatureofexpertiseinlanguageteaching;therelationshipbetweencognitivechangerandbehavioralchangeinlanguageteachers;themethodologicalissuesinthestudyoflan-guageteachercognition.

Inthefollowingdiscussion,Ibrie?ysummarizethekeyissuesthatS.Borg(2006)highlightedinrelationtoeachofthesepoints,focusingon(a)thenatureandscopeofresearchonlanguageteachercognitionandtherelationshipbetweenteachercognition,practice,andcontext;(b)theimpactofpersonalandprofessionallearningandexperience;and(c)methodology.Ithencon-cludebyconsideringwhatconceptualchallengestheseissuespresentwithrespecttofuturestudiesoflanguageteachersandteaching.

TheTeacherNatureandScopeofResearchonLanguageCognition,CognitionPractice,andandtheContext

RelationshipBetweenWithincontemporarystudiesoflanguageteachersandteaching,cognitionisnowgenerallyunderstoodasbeingpracticalinorientationand“personallyde?ned,oftentacit,systematicanddy-namic”(S.Borg,2006,pp.271–272).Still,despiteconsensusonthegeneralnatureofteachercog-nitioninbroaderterms,thestudieshaveresultedinconsiderableterminologicaldifferencesinhowconceptshavebeende?nedandusedacrossthe?eld.Whereassomestudieshaveuseddifferenttermstorefertoessentiallythesameconcepts,othershaveusedsimilar(andsometimeseventhesame)terminologybutwithinentirelydifferentconceptualframeworks(S.Borg,2006).Ofthevarioustermshavingalowdegreeofconceptualconsistencyacrossthe?eld,manywouldseemtobethosefundamentaltoestablishingacommonfoundationforthedomainasawhole:“cognition,knowledge[...],beliefs,attitudes,conceptions,theo-ries,assumptions,principles,thinkinganddecision-making”(p.272,emphasisinoriginal).

Incontrasttoearlystudiesofteachercogni-tionthatgrewoutofpsychocognitivistresearchinthemid-1970s,Clark(1986/2003)wasoneofthe?rsttoarguethatthe?eldcouldnolongerbereasonablypremisedoncognitionasapurelymentalconstructandindependentofthe“prac-ticalworldoftheclassroom”(p.213).Likening

436

teachercognitiontoa“sense-making”processtiedtositesforteacherpractice,thereisalreadysomerecognitioninClark’sconceptionofcognitionthatteacherthinkingisin?uencedbybothprac-ticeandcontext.Althoughanawarenessoftheimpactofcontextuponpracticeisnotnewwithinresearchonlanguageteaching(S.Borg,1998;Johnson,1996;Spada&Massey,1992),ithasonlybeeninthelast3–5yearsthatthe?eldhasbe-guntoassertaneedtomorefullyunderstandthenatureoftherelationshipbetweenpracticeandcontext(seeS.Borg,2003;Freeman,2004;John-son,2006;andalsoCrookes,1997,asanotablecontributionofearlyworkinthisarea).

Thisrenewedinterestincontexthasemergedfromthedissonanceoftennotedbetweenwhatteachersthinkandwhatteachersdo.Althoughthepsychocognitiveparadigmassumedthatwhatteachersthoughttranslateddirectlyintobehavior(i.e.,acausalrelationshipbetweeninternalmen-talprocesseswithexternalphysicalpractices),theexpandedfocusonthinkinginrelationtoprac-ticeinthe1980sand1990srevealedthatwhatteachersknow,think,andevenbelievecancon-tradicttheirpracticeinclassrooms.Earlystud-iesfocusingonthesetensionsbetweenthinkinganddoingsuggestthattheyprovideapotentiallypowerfulandpositivesourceofteacherlearning(Freeman,1992,1993),withmorerecentworkcon?rmingthata“recognitionofcontradictionsintheteachingcontext”isa“drivingforce”inteachers’professionaldevelopment(Golombek&Johnson,2004,pp.323–324).

TheandIn?uenceExperienceofonPersonalTeachers’andThinkingProfessionalandLearningDoingAlthoughstudieswithafocusonthedisso-nancebetweenteachers’thinkinganddoinghavebeenproductiveintheareaofteacherlearn-ing,earlystudiesonlanguageteachereducationfoundthatmostprogramshadtypicallylittlemorethana“weakeffect”(M.Borg,2004,p.275)onhowtraineeseventuallyteach.However,anunder-standingoftheimpactofpriorlifeexperiencesuponteachercognition—anidea?rstbroachedbyLortie(1975)inhisconceptof“theapprentice-shipofobservation”:Thecountlesshoursteachertraineesspendobservingtheirownteachersasstudentsthroughoutschool—hasresultedinagreateremphasisonre?exivitywithinlanguageteachereducationinrecentyears.Incontrasttoconventional“transfer”modelsofteachereduca-tion(Freeman,1994),contemporaryapproaches,whichfocusonthebeliefsthattraineesbringtoteacherpreparation,havebeenshowntobemore

TheModernLanguageJournal94(2010)

productiveinchangingteacherpractice(S.Borg,2006).Nonetheless,despitearecognitionoftheimpactpreviousexperiencehasuponcognition,therehavebeensurprisinglyfewstudiesonlan-guageteachercognitionthathaveincorporatedanexplicitfocusonteachers’broaderexperiencesasacorefeatureoftheirresearchdesign.Excep-tionsthatmeritcommentincludeHayes’sworkonhowhisresearchparticipants“perceivedtheirlivesasteachers”(1996,p.177;2005)throughafocuson“lifehistories”(2005,p.170)andJohn-sonandGolombek’s(2002)workwithnarrativeinquiryasamethodtobothbetterunderstandthenatureofteachers’knowledgeandpractice,aswellastosupportprofessionaldevelopmentandgrowth.

MethodologicalofTeacherCognition

ImplicationsfortheStudyPerhapsthemostsigni?cantmethodologicalshiftwithinstudiesofteachercognitionsincethe1970shasbeenintermsof“whatcountsasevi-dence”(S.Borg,2006,p.278).Withchangesinhowwehavecometounderstandthenatureofcognitionitself(i.e.,fromapurelymentalcon-struct,toamoredynamicconceptualizationbasedontheinteractionbetweenthinkingandprac-tice),therehasbeenacorrespondingshiftinattemptstodocumentandanalyzecognitionasanobjectofresearch.Thisisperhapsmostevi-dentinthetransitionfromresearchdesignsthatonceassumedaclearseparationbetweenthoughtandbehavior(e.g.,therelianceonself-reportdataaboutwhatteachersthinkortheuseofobserva-tionrecordsofwhatteachersdo)toapproachesincorporatingafocusonboth.Recentworkhasalsomadeaconvincingcasethatnotonlyshouldbothsetsofdatabeincludedinanyonestudybutthattheybestrategicallyjuxtaposedinawaythatpractice-baseddata(e.g.,classroomobservationnotes)areinformedbythinking-baseddata(e.g.,stimulatedrecallorinterviews)—inotherwords,havingdataonpracticegroundedinthe“sensemakingofteachers”themselves(Breen,Hird,Milton,Oliver,&Thwaite,2001;Hird,2003;Hird,Thwaite,Breen,Milton,&Oliver,2000).

However,beyondtheimmediatequestionof“whatcounts”asdata,therehasbeenlessfocusonthesubsequentissueofanalysis.S.Borg(2006)notedthatthebulkofempiricalstudiestodatehavereliedoninductiveanalyticalapproaches,wherebycategoriesandcodesforinterpretinganddiscussingdataaregroundedwithinthespeci?csofeachstudy,ratherthanaprioricategoriescommontothe?eldmorebroadly.Giventhe

RussellCross

absenceofanysharedorestablishedconceptualframeworkfortheorizingandunderstandingthenatureofteachercognition,thisrelianceonin-ductiveapproachesisnotsurprising.Individualstudieshavehadtoformulatetheirownanalyticalframeworkusingtheavailabledatatomakesenseofteachercognitionasitpresentsitselfwithineachparticularcase.Theresult,however,isthat?ndingshavelittletoofferotherstudiesacrossthe?eldatabroadertheoreticalorconceptuallevel,aseachoperatesonitsowntermsandwithinitsownframework.

ISSUESFRAMEWORKANDCHALLENGES:LANGUAGETEACHERTOSUPPORTACOGNITION

RESEARCHCONCEPTUALONTheconcernspreviouslydiscussedleadmetothefocusofthepresentarticle:ThepotentialofaVygotskianperspectiveasthebasisforacon-ceptualframeworktounderstandtherelation-shipamongthinking,practice,andcontextthathasbeenidenti?edintheexistingliterature.Al-thoughthe?eldhasmadesigni?cantheadwayinthelast30years,andespeciallythelast10–15years,onthesubjectoflanguageteachercogni-tionmorespeci?cally,whatcontinuestoremainabsentisasenseofan“overallunifyingframe-work”(S.Borg,2006,p.280)thatbringstogetherthedisparatethreadsofresearchthatcompriseandde?nethecurrentstateoftheart.AsS.Borg(2006)concluded,abroaderconceptualframe-worktoorganizeourcurrentunderstandingofwhatteachersthink,know,anddoisanimpera-tiveformovingthe?eldforward:

[Aunifyingframework]militatesagainsttheaccu-mulationofisolatedstudiesconductedwithoutsuf-?cientawarenessofhowtheserelatetoexistingwork;itremindsresearchersofkeydimensionsinthestudyoflanguageteachercognition;andithighlightskeythemes,gapsandconceptualrelationshipsandpro-motesmorefocusedattentiontothese.(p.284)

AlthoughS.Borg’s(2006)agendaisusefulforgainingasenseoftheexistingscopeandnatureofthe?eld,andespeciallyforidentifyingpro-ductivepathwaysfornewareasofresearch,itisnot,initself,aconceptualframeworktosupportthosedevelopments.BeforediscussingwhataVy-gotskianperspectivemightoffersuchaframe-work,itisnecessarytodistillsomeofthechal-lengesthataconceptualreframingofcognitionwouldneedtoaddressinrelationtoexistingconcerns.

First,andmostsigni?cantly,itisnowclearthereisaneedforamoreexpansivepsychologicalthe-

437

oryofcognitionthatrecognizesthein?uenceofthesocialinrelationtothought—thatis,athe-oryofcognitionthatextendsitsfocustoincludementalprocessestogetherwithteachers’practice,and,increasingly,thecontextswithinwhichtheinteractionbetweenthinkingandpracticetakesplace.Thiscontrastswithearliermentalistthe-oriesofcognitionuponwhichthe?eldwases-tablished.Basedonassumptionsaboutthesep-aratenessofthoughtandbehavior,thesegradu-allylostrelevanceasempiricaldevelopmentsre-vealedthemtobeuntenableandproblematic(e.g.,Clark,1986/2003).However,althoughtheempiricalknowledgebaseofteachercognitionhassincemovedontodevelopinincreasinglycomplexandsophisticatedways(e.g.,Hirdandhiscolleagues’,2000,workonthestrategicjuxta-positioningofdatatogainnewinsightsintoteach-ers’thinkingandpractice),thishasnotbeenpar-alleledwithatheoryorrelatedconceptualframe-worktomakesenseofthoseempirical?ndingsacrossthe?eldasawhole,witharelianceinsteadoninductiveanalyticalapproachesbasedondataspeci?ctoeachstudy.

Onarelatedpoint,asocialpsychologicalun-derstandingofcognitionraisesthefurtherissueofrecognizingtheteachersubjectasasocialagentratherthanamerementalprocessingentitythatactsonorreactstostimuliintheteachingen-vironment.Despitecontemporaryworkthatnowsuggestscognitionliesintheinteractionbetweenthethinkinganddoing,alegacyofthemental-istparadigmhasbeentheneglectofunderstand-ingpowerandagencywithinthatrelationship.Althoughpastinterpretationsmightattributeex-ternalforcesonteachers’thinkinganddoingassomething“beyondtheircontrol”(S.Borg,2006,p.40),assumptionsconcerningthesocialposi-tioningandagencyofteacherswithintheircon-textsforpracticeneedtobemorefullyaddressedasweconsidertheimplicationsofasocialdimen-sionwithinteachercognition.

Asecondconsiderationisthattheframeworkmustbeabletorecognizeandaccountforcognitionasbeingneitherstaticnor?xed,butmalleableandsubjecttochangeandfurtherdevelopmentacrosstimeandexperience.Aclearthemetoemergefromtheexistingliteratureistheimportanceofteachers’priorbackgroundinrelationtohowtheythinkandbehaveinthepresent.Theframeworkmustthereforenotonlyfocusonthecurrentnatureofteachers’thinkingandpracticebutfurtherincorporateafocusofhowthepastcontinuestobeinstrumentalinrelationtosense-makingprocessesthattakeplaceinthehereandnow.

438

Third,theframeworkmustaccommodatethetensionsandcontradictionsthatarisewithincognition.Theresearchfocusingonthesedis-sonancesholdsparticularpromiseforthe?eldoflanguageteacherlearning,education,andde-velopment.However,althoughtheempiricalevi-dencehasrevealedthatadissonancedoesoftenexistbetweenwhatteachersthinkanddo,itisim-portanttofurtherunderstandwhythosetensionshaveemergedandhowtheymightberesolvedtoreconciletheideal(i.e.,knowledgeoflanguageteaching)withtheactual(i.e.,practice).

Finally,andrelatedtoeachofthethreepointsdiscussed,theconceptualframeworkshouldbecommensuratewithcurrentempiricalandmethodologicalinnovationsinthe?eld;thatis,itshouldcomplementwhatisbecominganin-creasinglyqualitativeapproachtoresearch.Whilethisisnottodismissthevaluablecontributionofquantitativemethodsinunderstandingteachersandtheirwork,itisimportanttorecognizethesubstantivegainsmadefromthestrategicjuxta-positionofqualitativelyorienteddataonteach-ers’thinking(e.g.,interviews,re?ectivewriting,andsoon)inrelationtopractice(e.g.,observa-tions,stimulatedrecalls,teachingartifacts,andsoon).

Inlightoftheseconsiderations,thenextsub-sectionfocusesonthepotentialofVygotskianso-cioculturaltheory,anditscognatetheoryofactiv-ity,asthebasisforaframeworkthatengageswiththeseconcerns.

ADoing,SocioculturalandContext

ReframingofCognition:Thinking,Althoughtheterm“sociocultural”hasgainedsigni?cantcurrencywithinthe?eldofsecondlan-guageeducationinthelast10–15years(Firth&Wagner,2007),thelabelcontinuestobealessthan“homogeneous”pointofreferenceacrossthedomainasawhole(Lantolf&Thorne,2007;vanLier,2004,p.13;Zuengler&Miller,2006).Inthisarticle,IusethetermtorefertoVygot-sky’s(1978,1987)theoryonthesocialandcul-turalnatureofhumandevelopment,whichhasbeenespeciallyin?uentialincontemporaryso-cioculturalperspectivesonSLA(Lantolf,2000;Lantolf&Thorne,2006),communication(es-peciallythosemediatedbyInformationandCommunicationTechnologies[Belz&Thorne,2006]),and,mostrecently,assessment(Lantolf&Poehner,2007;Poehner,2007).

GivenVygotsky’spresentin?uenceonthe?eldoflanguageeducation,Idonotintendtorehearsethemoregeneralaspectsofthetheoryhere,buttoconcentrateontwoofitskeyconstructs—theVy-

TheModernLanguageJournal94(2010)

gotskianprincipleofgeneticanalysisandtheno-tionofmediatedactivity—asthebasisforrecon-ceptualizinglanguageteachercognitionfromtheperspectiveof“socioculturalactivity”—thatis,aframeworkthatfusesthedialecticbetweenthink-inganddoingwiththesociallyandculturallyconstructedcontextsinwhichteachers—asthink-ing,historical,social,andculturallyconstitutedsubjects—?ndthemselvesengagedthroughthe“activity”ofteachinglanguage.Althoughtherearealreadysomekeystudiesonteachersandteachingthathavedrawnonsocioculturaltheory(e.g.,Freeman,2004;Freeman&Johnson,2005;Golombek&Johnson,2004;Johnson,2006),itremainsacomparativelynascentareawithinthe?eldoflanguageteachercognitionresearchasawhole,withnoextensivediscussiontodateonhowthetheorymightrelatetobroaderconcep-tualconcernsofthe?eldasabodyofresearchmoregenerally.

AGeneticFrameworkforAnalysis

InVygotsky’s(1981)corethesisthat“allhighermentalfunctionsareinternalizedsocialrelation-ships”(p.164),herejectedthethendominantdescriptive–analyticorientationtopsychologyatthetime,infavorofagenotypicapproachfocus-ingontheoriginsofthephenomenoninquestion.ItisthismeaningofgeneticthatVygotskyappropri-ateswithinhisowntheoryofhumandevelopmentandadvancesasthebasisforan“explanatory”(cf.“descriptive”)analyticframeworkforunderstand-ingthehumanmindandbehavior.Asheputit,“‘behaviorcanonlybeunderstoodasthehistoryofbehavior’(Blonsky).Thisisthecardinalprinci-pleofthewholemethod”(Vygotsky,1994,p.70;seealsoVygotsky,1978,p.65).

Vygotsky(seeScribner,1985;Vygotsky&Luria,1993)proposedthathumandevelopmentspannedfourdifferentbutinterrelateddomains:Thephylogenetic,cultural–historic,ontogenetic,andmicrogenetic.InFigure1,ColeandEn-gestr¨om(1993)representedthisconceptofge-neticdevelopmentasafour-tieredanalyticframe-workinrelationtophysicaltime.Theellipse,rep-resentingthefocalpointofanalysis,highlightsthenestedandinterrelatednatureofallfourdomainsatanyonepointintime.

Inbroadstrokes,thephylogeneticdomaincon-cernsthedevelopmentofhumankindasanatu-ralspecies(i.e.,physicalevolution),thecultural–historicfocusesondevelopmentintermsofthebroader“external”worldwithinwhichhumansexist(i.e.,thesocial,cultural,andhistoricbasisfordevelopment),andontogenesisshiftsthefocustodevelopmentoftheindividualsubjectacrossthe