WHY “RADICAL TEFL”? [Editorial from Issue Number 1]
A visitor to a TEFL Conference from another field – for example, History, Physics, or the social sciences – might observe: “We have given a lot of thought to how our field grows its knowledge, and develops ways of verifying claims to knowledge. Where is your debate on this?” EFL teaching arguably lacks a similar systematic discussion about tools both for its investigations leading to new knowledge, and tools for the
verification of knowledge. As a result of this lack, claims to understanding of the EFL classroom encounter are often left unchallenged, and undebated.
However, Michael Swan has started this debate for EFLT. Since the publication of his article “A critical look at the Communicative Approach”, many teachers have agreed with him that objections can be made to both the thinking behind Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), and to the claims made by it. In further articles Swan developed his criticisms (these articles are collected in Swan, M. Thinking about Language Teaching, 2012, OUP. The collection includes 'A critical look at the Communicative Approach' (1985)).
Swan’s significance for the exploration of how EFLT makes claims to knowledge about the classroom encounter, the review on page 4 argues, is however not that he specifically challenges CLT, but that the issues he identifies, concerning the claims and assumptions of CLT, are the same issues which other fields of enquiry have explored, as entry points to establishing foundations for growing their knowledge, and EFLT can therefore learn from these fields. Some main issues are: sources of evidence; the trustworthiness of claims; identification of unsupported assumptions; and verification mechanisms for claims to knowledge.
I believe that a forum for EFLT is needed where these rather abstract ideas could be debated further, as other fields have done. The title chosen, Radical TEFL, does not imply “left-wing”, but rather “going to the roots”. Radical TEFL will be interested in, firstly, publishing articles and reviews which explore the growth of knowledge for EFLT. Secondly, we would like to publish “reports from the classroom”, as EFLT pedagogy is under-represented in the TEFL literature, and it is only what happens in the classroom that can verify – or falsify - new claims to knowledge about the classroom encounter.
The TEFL and Applied Linguistics literature rarely cites publications from the Philosophy of Education or the Philosophy of Science, yet it is these fields which deal with how knowledge grows. Radical TEFL would like to publish work drawn from these branches of Philosophy, applied to TEFL. This project would open up a new field: “The Philosophy of EFLT”. By doing this, EFLT can help protect itself from other orthodoxies or ideologies in the future becoming predominant.
Alistair Maclean
verification of knowledge. As a result of this lack, claims to understanding of the EFL classroom encounter are often left unchallenged, and undebated.
However, Michael Swan has started this debate for EFLT. Since the publication of his article “A critical look at the Communicative Approach”, many teachers have agreed with him that objections can be made to both the thinking behind Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), and to the claims made by it. In further articles Swan developed his criticisms (these articles are collected in Swan, M. Thinking about Language Teaching, 2012, OUP. The collection includes 'A critical look at the Communicative Approach' (1985)).
Swan’s significance for the exploration of how EFLT makes claims to knowledge about the classroom encounter, the review on page 4 argues, is however not that he specifically challenges CLT, but that the issues he identifies, concerning the claims and assumptions of CLT, are the same issues which other fields of enquiry have explored, as entry points to establishing foundations for growing their knowledge, and EFLT can therefore learn from these fields. Some main issues are: sources of evidence; the trustworthiness of claims; identification of unsupported assumptions; and verification mechanisms for claims to knowledge.
I believe that a forum for EFLT is needed where these rather abstract ideas could be debated further, as other fields have done. The title chosen, Radical TEFL, does not imply “left-wing”, but rather “going to the roots”. Radical TEFL will be interested in, firstly, publishing articles and reviews which explore the growth of knowledge for EFLT. Secondly, we would like to publish “reports from the classroom”, as EFLT pedagogy is under-represented in the TEFL literature, and it is only what happens in the classroom that can verify – or falsify - new claims to knowledge about the classroom encounter.
The TEFL and Applied Linguistics literature rarely cites publications from the Philosophy of Education or the Philosophy of Science, yet it is these fields which deal with how knowledge grows. Radical TEFL would like to publish work drawn from these branches of Philosophy, applied to TEFL. This project would open up a new field: “The Philosophy of EFLT”. By doing this, EFLT can help protect itself from other orthodoxies or ideologies in the future becoming predominant.
Alistair Maclean