Toward a Postmethod pedagogy

In response to the Kuma, B. article, Toward a Postmethod pedagogy, The 1990s were home to the beginning of new ideas that can restructure 2nd and foreign language teaching and teacher education. The first idea focuses on the need to “go beyond the limitations of the concept of method” with a call to find other ways of designing teaching strategies. The second idea focuses on advocating the creation of efficient teaching professionals.
In other words: idea 1- focused on teaching strategies.
Idea 2- focused on the teachers themselves.
The article focuses on practicality and particularity. What is taught should depend on many factors like who and where. According to Hanlon, professional theories are generated by experts and transmitted from centers of higher learning, while personal theories are those that teachers develop by interpreting and applying professional theories in practical situations while on the job. Included in the discussion of practicality is the difference between theorist- theory and teachers theory, or reflective teaching and action research. The difference between these, as argued in the article is rooted in practicality. Action research is to improve practice rather than to produce knowledge, while reflective teaching suggests that teachers are treated merely as implementers of professional theories. In short, pedagogy of practicality aims for a teacher-generated theory of practice.
The article goes on to explain that the experiences brought to the classroom are shaped by a number of things like social, economic, and political factors that are instilled in us in the environment in which we grow up. The example of students from Sri-Lanka rewriting their ESL books was of interest to me. It is understandable that people put in certain situations and growing up in certain environments will “demonstrate the ability of human subjects to creatively fashion a voice for themselves.” From this article I learned that the classroom is not only a place to learn about specific subjects, it is also a place for students to express themselves.
Toward the end of the article, the author suggests that teacher research is not all static, it is about keeping ones “eyes, ears and mind open to what works and what doesn’t in the classroom.” From this I gather that success in the classroom is due largely in part to the teachers ability to access the needs of his/her students and be able to address the class in ways are sensitive to their political, economic, and social concerns and conflicts.
Language-learning, teaching, and teacher-education need conceptualization and contextualization within the contexts of educational, cultural, social, and political essentials in order to be effective in serving the interests of students. It seems to me in my experience teaching that this is part of the trick to teaching in general.