from theory to practice

In his article "Introduction: Critical Approaches to TESOL", Alastair Pennycook lists one of the purposes of his article as "to understand the complex ways in which TESOL occurs". His article does indeed approach this... and much more. He describes the ways in which many, many issues of TESOL interact, but he also describes the interaction between theory and practice. I think this is what stood out to me the most.

He rarely outright mentioned this discrepancy, but it exists. We've all felt it in class discussions and seen it in real life: there seems to be a large gap between the possibilities and the real thing... between theory and practice. As Pennycook puts it, "the very nature of a journal like TESOL Quarterly and the requirements for inclusion inevitably tilt things away from accounts of what ordinary teachers are doing in ordinary classrooms around the world" (330). That said, he argues for the importance of theory and critical approaches to TESOL, and describes what he considers to be the three unifying themes that constitute critical approaches. One theme that seemed to be close to his heart was the idea of constantly questioning and problematizing. I'm not sure I completely agree with him, but I could (sort of) see where he was going with it. I just think that at some point we start re-inventing the wheel when it comes to theories. But I digress.

Back to what I'm really talking about, I appreciate Pennycook's attention to the "intricate patterning of power relationships involving language, gender, sexuality, race, class, ethnicity, popular culture, education, immigration, teaching practices, curriculum development, and other concerns". That is a long list, but in short, he wants to demonstrate to us that "critical" approaches to TESOL are just that - critical. They aren't simple, but rather involve a complex combination of relationships between any two or more of the above. I found particularly interesting his comment that relates to the power of English, a concept we discussed extensively in ENG 344 and one that I found fascinating. He writes, "The notion of native and nonnative speakers, furthermore, is interwoven with issues of race and ethnicity, as one's nativeness as a speaker of English is often assumed to correlate with the paleness of one's skin" (333). These types of assumptions and distinctions are what make the world of TESOL so very political and so very complicated.

I would argue that while this concept is complicated enough in theory, it is even more complicated in practice. Pennycook himself writes, "[critical pedagogy in some countries] has become little more than an academic discourse disconnected from everyday teaching practice". He argues for the "pedagogy of engagement" which uses the aspects mentioned above as the basis of curricular organization and pedagogy, rather than something that is adjusted for. He asks us if we are trying to a) give marginalized students access or b) transform the mainstream to be more inclusive. This definitely gave me something to think about. Amidst all of these complicated issues, how will they manifest themselves in my classroom? So many theories are swirling around in my head about "inclusion of power, inequality, discrimination, resistance, and struggle" in Pennycook's words. What do those things look like in the classroom?

In an attempt to tie all these loose ends together... I'm not sure what the implications his pedagogy of engagement are, as I don't completely understand it, but I do think that everyday teaching practice should hold much more weight than it does. Anyone can do research on TESOL. I know nothing about Biology, but I can do research on it and probably write a paper that sounds like I know what I'm talking about. (Actually, maybe not). However, that benefits no one. TESOL theory benefits very few if it is not useful or not put into practice. Pennycook is correct, theory does hold merit and we do need theory to help us grow, change, question, and better understand the "complex ways in which TESOL occurs". However, I believe that the real test of understanding occurs right inside the doors of an English classroom.

Could any given theorist walk into an ESL classroom and implement his idealized view of "how things are" or "how things should be" in a way that conveys meaning to students? There is a long road between theory and practice, and it is not always an easy one to travel. Pardon the very cliche statement, but how many theorists have actually "walked a mile" in the shoes of a teacher? TESOL does, after all, stand for TEACHING English to Speakers of Other Languages. So much preaching... so little practice.