30 Years of TEFL/TESL: A Personal Reflection
Jack C Richards
SEAMEO Regional Language Centre, Singapore

Introduction
Second and foreign language teaching is a field that is constantly in a state ofchange. For example new curriculum frameworks currently being implemented indifferent parts of the world include competency based, genre based, and content
based models. In many countries English is now being introduced at primary rather
than secondary level necessitating considerable new investment in textbooks andteacher training. And among the innovations that teachers are being asked toconsider are Multiple Intelligences, Co-operative Learning, Task-Based Instruction,
and Alternative Assessment.
I have recently had the opportunity to reflect on these and other changes that havecome about in language teaching in recent years. This process of reflection wasprompted by several quite practical tasks. One was the preparation of the third
edition of the Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics(Richards and Schmidt 2002), which required reviewing several hundred journal
articles and books in the field to identify new terminology that has appeared since
the last edition of the dictionary was published in 1994. This resulted in the additionof some 800 items to the third edition. A second task was the preparation of a newedition of Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (Richards and Rodgers
2001), which resulted in the addition of chapters on eight approaches and methods
that had not been included in the first edition of 1986. Another activity was thecompilation of an anthology of current practices in language teaching methodology –Methodology in TESOL: An Anthology of Current Practice (Richards and Renandya
2002) - which likewise required an extensive review of articles published in the last
10 years.
On a more personal level I have recently made a transition from full time to parttime academic life to enable me to accommodate a more flexible life style. It is some
30 years since I completed my own Ph.D. and came to Asia as a teacher andteacher-educator. I have worked continuously in the Asia-Pacific region since then.
Looking back over the last 30 years, at the influences that have shaped my own
thinking and professional practice and reflecting on the current “state of the art” inlanguage teaching prompted me to ask three basic questions:
1. What are some of the key questions we have been concerned about inlanguage teaching?
2. What did we believe and understand about these issues thirty years ago?
3. What do we believe and understand about them now?
To explore these questions I made use of the information obtained from the activities
mentioned above and also examined all the issues of two important professional
journals in language teaching – English Language Teaching Journal and English
Teaching Forum – for the years 1970-1975 and 1995-2000 *. In reviewing thesejournals I sought to identify the issues that were most frequently written about
during the two time periods. This paper presents the results of these activities andexplores the following eight questions:1

x What are the goals of teaching English?
x What is the best way to teach a language?
x What is the role of grammar in language teaching?
x What processes are involved in second language learning?
x What is the role of the learner?
x How can we teach the four skills?
x How can we assess students’ learning?
x How can we prepare language teachers?
In examining these questions I will try to show how our understanding of each issue
has changed over the last 30 years and what current beliefs and practices in relation
to each issue are. In the process we will also see hints of the transition frommodernism (the rejection of prescription, authority, untested claims and assertions infavor on reason, empirical investigation and objectivity closely associated with thescientific method) to postmodernism (the rejection of modernism for failing torecognize the cultural relativity of all forms of knowledge, an emphasis on theautonomous individual, and the adoption of amoral stance against all forms of
injustice). I will also highlight some of the most important terminology that is used incontemporary professional discourse about each issue. My aim is therefore to provide
a brief snapshot of where we are today in TEFL/TESL and the terminology we use todescribe our current beliefs and practices.

1. What are the goals of teaching English?
Purposes for learning English
Today English is so widely taught worldwide that the purposes for which it is learned
are sometimes taken for granted. 30 years ago the assumption was that teaching
English was a politically neutral activity and acquiring it would bring untold blessingsto those who succeeded in learning it. It would lead to educational and economic
empowerment. English was regarded as the property of the English-speaking world,
particularly Britain and the US. Native-speakers of the language had special insights
and superior knowledge about teaching it. And it was above all the vehicle for the
expression of a rich and advanced culture or cultures, whose literary artifacts had
universal value.
English as an International Language
This picture has changed somewhat today. Now that English is the language ofglobalization, international communication, commerce and trade, the media and pop
culture, different motivations for learning it come into play. English is no longer
viewed as the property of the English-speaking world but is an internationalcommodity sometimes referred to as World English or English as an International
Language. The cultural values of Britain and the US are often seen as irrelevant tolanguage teaching, except in situations where the learner has a pragmatic need forsuch information. The language teacher need no longer be an expert on British andAmerican culture and a literature specialist as well. Bisong (1995) says that in
Nigeria English is simply one of a number of languages that form the speech
repertoire of Nigerians which they learn “for pragmatic reasons to do withmaximizing their chances of success in a multilingual and multicultural society.”
English is still promoted as a tool that will assist with educational and economic
advancement but is viewed in many parts of the world as one that can be acquired2

without any of the cultural trappings that go with it. Proficiency in English is neededfor employees to advance in international companies and improve their technicalknowledge and skills. It provides a foundation for what has been called “processskills” – those problem-solving and critical thinking skills that are needed to copewith the rapidly changing environment of the workplace, one where English is play a
growingly important role.
Role of the native speakerIn the nineteen seventies the target for learning was assumed to be a native-speakervariety of English and it was the native speaker’s culture, perceptions, and speechthat were crucial in setting goals for English teaching. The native speaker had aprivileged status as “owners of the language, guardians of its standards, and arbitersof acceptable pedagogic norms”(Jenkins 2000:5). Today local varieties of English
such as Filipino English and Singapore English are firmly established as a result ofindigenization, and in contexts where English is a foreign language there is less of apressure to turn foreign-language speakers of English (Koreans, Taiwanese,
Japanese etc) into mimics of native speaker English, be it an American, British, orAustralian variety. The extent to which a learner seeks to speak with a native-likeaccent and sets this as his or her personal goal, is a personal one. It is notnecessary to try to eradicate the phonological influences of the mother tongue nor toseek to speak like a native speaker. Jennifer Jenkins in her recent book argues that
RP pronunciation is an unattainable and an unnecessary target for second language
learners, and she proposes a phonological syllabus that maintains core phonologicaldistinctions but is a reduced inventory from RP. A pronunciation syllabus for EIL
would thus not be a native-speaker variety but would be a phonological core thatwould provide for phonological intelligibility but not seek to eradicate the influence ofthe mother tongue.
Critical perspectives
The messages of critical theory and critical pedagogy have also prompted reflection
on the hidden curriculum that sometimes underlies language teaching polices andpractices. The theory of linguistic imperialism argues that education and English
language teaching in particular, are not politically neutral activities. Mastery ofEnglish, it is claimed, enhances the power and control of a privileged few. Criticaltheorists have turned their attention to the status of English and the drain on
education resources it demands in many countries and its role in facilitating thedomination of multinational corporations. Teachers are now encouraged to examineand confront the underlying ideologies of texts and textbooks. Textbooks, no longer
seen as indispensable tools, are viewed as controlling instruments, hindering thecreativity of the teacher, maintained in place through the pressure of publishers, andmay result in the deskilling of teachers through their recycling of old, but tried andtested teaching techniques. They are transmitters of a dominant and dominating
ideology. Critics of language programs for refugees and immigrants have pointed outthat often these programs seek to provide the means by which learners can enterdead end low paid jobs rather than genuinely seek to empower them.
In practice however in many parts of the world this has meant little more thanstandards of political correctness being applied to the content of textbooks. Content
of books is carefully scrutinized to ensure that they represent diversity, though manyof the topics teachers and perhaps learners would like to see in textbooks are stilltaboo. McCarthy (2001,132) writing about Critical Discourse Analysis has pointed out

3that “there is a whiff of political correctness in much of what CDA presents, and a
middle-class left-wing bias and academic elitism which is often thinly disguised
behind the unquestioned caring for minorities and the oppressed which CDA
practitioners sincerely posses”.
Then:
x English as cultural enrichment.
x English the language of English-speaking countries.
x Native-speaker privileged status.
x Teachers seen as cultural informants.
x Literature an important dimension of language learning.
x Native-speaker accent the target
x Native-speaker-like fluency the target
Now:
x
x
x
x
x
x

English as a practical tool.
English a world commodity.
English learning not necessarily linked to US or British cultural values.
English teaching linked to national values.
Mother-tongue influenced accent acceptable as well as native-speaker accent
Comprehensibility the target

Buzzwords
critical discourse analysis, critical pedagogy, critical theory, deskilling, diversity,
empowerment, hidden curriculum, ideology, indigenization, English as an
International Language, linguistic imperialism, local varieties, politicalcorrectness, World English

2. What is the best way to teach a language?
The decline of methods
The 1970s ushered in an era of change and innovation in language teaching
methodology. This was the decade during which Communicative Language Teachingcame to replace Audiolingualism and the Structural-Situational Approach. And it was
during this decade that we heard about such novel methods as Total PhysicalResponse, The Silent Way, and Counseling Learning. Improvements in language
teaching would come about through the adoption of new and improved teachingapproaches and methods that incorporated breakthroughs in our understanding of
language and how language learning takes place.
Thirty years later, while Communicative Language Teaching is still alive and well
many of the “novel” methods of the 1970s have largely disappeared. And so to alarge extent has the question that attracted so much interest at that time: “What isthe best method to teach a second or foreign language?” We are now in what has
been termed the post methods era. How did we get there?
Many of the more innovative methods of the 1970s had a very short shelf-life(Richards and Rodgers 2001). Because they were linked to very specific claims and4to prescribed practices they tended to fall out of favor as these practices became
unfashionable or discredited. The heyday of methods can be considered to havelasted until the late 1980s. One of the strongest criticisms of the “new methods” wasthat they were typically “top-down”. Teachers had to accept on faith the claims ortheory underlying the method and apply them in their own practice. Good teaching
was regarded as correct use of the method and its prescribed principles andtechniques. Roles of teachers and learners as well as the type of activities andteaching techniques to be used in the classroom, were generally prescribed.
Likewise, learners were often viewed as the passive recipients of the method whoshould submit themselves to its regime of exercises and activities. The post methods
era has thus lead to a focus on the processes of learning and teaching rather thanascribing a central role to methods as the key to successful teaching. As language
teaching moved away from a search for the perfect method, attention shifted to howteachers could develop and explore their own teaching through reflective teaching
and action research. This, it was argued, could lead to the revitalization of teachingfrom the inside rather than by trying to make teachers and teaching to conform to
an external model (Richards and Lockhart, 1994).
Communicative approaches
Perhaps this difference in orientation explains why Communicative Language
Teaching has survived into the new millennium. Because it refers to a diverse set ofrather general and uncontroversial principles Communicative Language Teaching canbe interpreted in many different ways and used to support a wide variety ofclassroom procedures. The principles themselves can be summarized as follows:
x The goal of language learning is communicative competencex Learners learn a language through using it to communicate
x Authentic and meaningful communication should be the goal of classroom
activities
x Fluency and accuracy are both important dimension of communicationx Communication involves the integration of different language skills
x Learning is a gradual process that involves trial and error
Several contemporary teaching approaches such as Content Based Instruction,
Cooperative Language Learning, and Task-Based Instruction can all claim to be
applications of these principles and hence continue as mainstream approaches today.
In the last thirty years there has also been a substantial change in where and how
learning takes place. In the seventies teaching mainly took place in the classroom
and in the language laboratory. The teacher used chalk and talk and the textbook.
Technology amounted to the tape recorder and film strips. However towards the endof the seventies learning began to move away from the teacher’s direct control andinto the hands of learners through the use of individualized learning, group work andproject work.
Context and resources
The contexts and resources for learning have also seen many changes since the1970s. Learning is not confined to the classroom: it can take place at home or inother places as well as at school, using the computer and other forms of technology.
Today’s teachers and learners live in a technology-enhanced learning environment.
Videos, computers and the internet are accessible to almost all teachers and learners
and in smart schools the language laboratory has been turned into a multimedia

5

centre that supports on-line-learning. Technology has facilitated the shift fromteacher-centered to learner-centered learning. Students now spend time interacting
not with the teacher, but with other learners using chatrooms that provide access tomore authentic input and learning processes and that make language learningavailable at any time.
Influences from corporate sector
In the last decade or so language teaching has also been influenced by concepts andpractices from the corporate world. In the seventies, four ingredients were seen as
essential to provide for effective teaching: teachers, methods, course design, andtests. Teaching was viewed rather narrowly as a self-contained activity that didn’t
need to look much beyond itself. Improvements in teaching would come about
through fine-tuning methods, course design, materials and tests. By comparison
effective language teaching today is seen both as a pedagogical problem and well as
an organizational one. On the pedagogical side teachers are no longer viewed merely
as skilled implementers of a teaching method but as creators of their own individual
teaching methods, as classroom researchers, and curriculum and materials
developers. Beyond the pedagogical level however and at the level of the institution,schools are increasingly viewed as having similar characteristics to other kinds ofcomplex organizations in terms of organizational activities and processes and can bestudied as a system involving inputs, processes, and outputs. Teaching is embedded
within an organizational and administrative context and influenced by organizational
constraints and processes. In order to manage schools efficiently and productively it
is necessary to understand the nature of the organizational activities that occur inschools, the problems that these activities create, and how they can be effectively
and efficiently managed and controlled. These activities include setting andaccomplishing organizational goals, allocating resources to organizational
participants, coordinating organizational events and processes, and setting policies toimprove their functioning (Visscher 1999).
This management-view of education has brought into language teaching concepts
and practices from the commercial world, with an emphasis on planning, efficiency,
communication processes, targets and standards, staff development, learning
outcomes and competencies, quality assurance, strategic planning, performanceappraisal, and best practice. We have thus seen a movement away from an
obsession with pedagogical processes to a focus on organizational systems andprocesses and their contribution to successful language programs (Richards 2001).
Then:
x Methods seen as the key to successful language teachingx Top-down approaches to teachingx Prescriptivism in teachingx Schools and institutions still installing language labsx Teaching and learning took place in the classroomx The teacher was the primary source of input
x Teaching largely book and paper-based
Now:
x Post-methods era
x Communicative approaches
x Bottom-up approaches to teachingx Exploratory and reflective approaches to teaching

6

x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Language lab converted to a multimedia center.
Video and computers a common teaching and learning resource
Learning occurs inside and outside the classroom
Classrooms are connected to one another and to the world
E-mail connects students with other students anywhere in the world.
Teachers and students use the World Wide Web as a teaching/learning
resource
Educational software is an integral part of the curriculum
Focus on organizational systems and processes

Buzzwords
action research, communicative approach, best practice, chatrooms,
competencies. content-based instruction, cooperative language learning, learner
centeredness, learning styles, learning strategies, multimedia centre, on-line
learning, post-methods era, prescriptivism, quality assurance, reflective teaching,smart schools, staff development, standards, strategic planning, task-basedteaching, teacher research,

3. What is the role of grammar in language teaching?
In the 1970s we were just nearing the end of a period during which grammar had acontrolling influence on language teaching. Approaches to grammar teaching and thedesign of course books at that time reflected a view of language that saw thesentence and sentence grammar as forming the building blocks of language,
language learning, and language use (McCarthy 2001). The goal of language
teaching was to understand how sentences are used to create different kinds ofmeaning, to master the underlying rules for forming sentences from lower-levelgrammatical units such as phrases and clauses, and to practice using them as thebasis for written and spoken communication. Syllabuses were essentially grammarbased and grammar was a primary focus of teaching techniques. Correct language
use was achieved through a drill and practice methodology and through controlled
speaking and writing exercises that sought to prevent or minimize opportunities forerrors. The title of the textbook I taught from in those days echoed the emphasis on
controlled practice - Practice and Progress (Alexander 1967). Practice was viewed as
the key to learning, embedded within a methodology with the following features(Ellis 2002, 168):
1. A specific grammatical feature is isolated for focused attention.
2. The learners are required to produce sentences containing the targetedfeature.
3. The learners will be provided with opportunities for repetition of the targetedfeature4. There is an expectancy that the learners will perform the grammatical featurecorrectly, therefore practice activities are success oriented.
5. The learners receive feedback on whether their performance of thegrammatical structure is correct or not. This feedback may be immediate ordelayed.
But in the 1970s Chomsky’s theories of language and his distinction between
competence and performance were starting to have an impact on language teaching.
His theory of “transformational grammar” for example, with core kernel sentences7

that were transformed through the operation of rules to produce more complex
sentences sought to capture the nature of a speaker’s linguistic competence. It
seemed to offer an exciting new approach to grammar teaching, and for a while in
the early seventies was reflected in popular texts book series such as O’Neill’s Kernel
Lessons (O’Neill 1974). Exercises in which learners “transformed” sentences into
more complex ones lay at the heart of Kernel Lessons and similar courses.
Linguistic competence to communicative competence
Gradually throughout the seventies the sentence as the central unit of focus became
replaced by a focus on language in use with the emergence of the notion ofcommunicative competence as well as functional approaches to the study oflanguage such as Halliday’s theory of functional grammar. Krashen’s monitor modelof language learning and his distinction between acquisition (the unconscious process
by which language develops as a product of real communication and exposure toappropriate input) and learning (the development of knowledge about the rules of alanguage) as well as his claims about the role of comprehensible input also prompteda reassessment of status of grammar in language teaching and the value of explicit
grammar instruction. Proposals emerged for an implicit approach to the teaching ofgrammar or a combination of explicit and implicit approaches.
Accuracy and fluency
The development of communicative methodologies to replace the grammar-based
methodologies of the seventies also resulted in a succession of experiments withdifferent kinds of syllabuses (e.g. notional, functional, and content based) and anemphasis on both accuracy and fluency as goals for learning and teaching. The
difference between accuracy-focused and fluency-focused activities can be shown as
follows:
Accuracy-focused activities
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

reflect typical classroom use of language
focus on the formation of correct examples of language use
produce language for display (i.e. as evidence of learning
call on explicit knowledge
elicit a careful (monitored) speech stylereflect controlled performance
practice language out of context
practice small samples of language
do not require authentic communication

Fluency-focused activities
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

reflect natural language use
call on implicit knowledge
elicit a vernacular speech stylereflect automatic performancerequire the use of improvising, paraphrasing, repair and reorganization
produce language that is not always predictableallow students to select the language they use
require real communication

8

However the implementation of communicative and fluency-based methodology did
not resolve the issue of what to do about grammar. The promise that thecommunicative methodologies would help learners develop both communicativecompetence as well as linguistic competence did not always happen. Programs where
there was an extensive use of “authentic communication”, particularly in the earlystages of learning reported that students often developed fluency at the expense of
accuracy resulting in learners with good communication skills but a poor command ofgrammar and a high level of fossilization (Higgs and Clifford 1982). To address thisproblem it was argued that classroom activities should provide opportunities for thefollowing processes to take place (Ellis 2002):
1. Noticing (the learner becomes conscious of the presence of a linguistic featurein the input, where previously she had ignored it)
2. Comparing (the learner compares the linguistic feature noticed in the input
with her own mental grammar, registering to what extent there is a ‘gap’
between the input and her grammar)
3. Integrating or restructuring (the learner integrates a representation of the
new linguistic feature into her mental grammar)
Proposals as to how these processes can be realized within the framework of current
communicative methodologies include:xxx

Incorporating a more explicit treatment of grammar within a text-based
curriculum
Building a focus on form into task-based teaching through activities centeringon consciousness raising or noticing grammatical features of input or output
Using activities that require “stretched output”, i.e. which expand or‘restructure” the learner’s grammatical system though increased
communicative demands and attention to linguistic form

Then:
x
x
x
x

Sentence-grammar the focus of teaching
Linguistic competence the goal of learning
Grammar often taught divorced from context
Accuracy-based methodology

Now:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Accuracy and fluency of equal status
Grammar taught in meaningful context
Focus on grammar in discourse and texts
Communicative competence the goal of learning
Fluency-based methodology
Grammar taught through tasks

Buzzwords
acquisition, communicative competence, comprehensible input, consciousnessraising content syllabus, explicit approach, fluency, focus on form, fossilization,functional grammar, functional syllabus, implicit approach, input hypothesis,
learning, linguistic competence, notional syllabus, noticing, , restructuring, ,9

4. What processes are involved in second language learning?
In the early seventies both British and North American ideas about language learning
were rather similar, though they developed from different traditions. The theory of
behaviorism dominated both psychology and education. According to this theory theprocesses of imitation, practice, reinforcement, and habit formation were central to
all learning, including language learning. Chomsky rejected this theory as
inapplicable to language learning and emphasized the cognitive nature of language
learning and the fact that children appear to be born with abstract knowledge about
the nature of language, i.e. knowledge of universal grammar. Exposure to language
was sufficient to trigger the acquisition processes and initiate the processes ofhypothesis formation that were evident in studies of language acquisition.
Second language acquisition
These ideas generated a great deal of interest in applied linguistics and lead to thefields of error analysis and second language acquisition or SLA which sought to findother explanations for second language learning than habit formation. Error analysis
argued that learners errors were systematic, not always derived from the mothertongue, and represented a developing linguistic system or interlanguage. Gradually aview emerged of the learner as actively and creatively involved in developing his or
her interlanguage, which Dulay and Burt sought to explain in their creative
construction hypothesis. This proposed that learners make use of processes leading
to the creation of novel forms and structures that are not found in the target
language, using natural processes such as generalization. Dulay and Burt argued
that as with first language acquisition, many grammatical features of a second
language are acquired in a predictable order or developmental sequence. By the
1990s however error analysis and the creative construction hypothesis had been
replaced by further developments in Chomskyan theory. Chomsky’s theory of
universal grammar had been elaborated to include innate knowledge about the
principles of language (i.e. that languages usually have pronouns) and theirparameters (i.e. that some languages allow these to be dropped when they are in
subject position) and this model was applied to the study of both first and second
language acquisition (Schmitt 2002).
Information-processing models
Other dimensions to second language learning were explained by reference toinformation processing models of learning. Two different kinds of processing are
distinguished in this model. Controlled processing is involved when conscious
attention is required to perform a task. This places demands on short-term memory.Automatic processing is involved when the learner carries out a task withoutawareness or attention, making more use of information in long term memory.
Learning involves the performance of behavior with automatic processing. The
information processing model offered an explanation as to why learners language
use sometimes shifts from fluent (automatic processing) to less fluent (controlled
processing) and why learners in the initial stages of language learning need to put somuch effort into understanding and producing language (Spada and Lightbown
2002).

10Vygotsky’s theory
Learning through interaction (the interaction hypothesis) was also proposed as analternative to learning through repetition and habit formation. Interaction andnegotiation of meaning were seen as central to learning through tasks that require
attention to meaning, transfer of information and that require pushed output, thelatter triggering the processes of noticing and restructuring referred to above.
Learning came to be seen as both a social process as well as a cognitive one,however. Some SLA researchers drew on Vygotsky’s view of the zone of proximal
development, which focuses on the gap between what the learner can currently do
and the next stage in learning – the level of potential development - and how
learning occurs through negotiation between the learner and a more advanced
language user during which a process known as scaffolding occurs. To take part inthese processes the learner must develop interactional competence, the ability to
manage exchanges despite limited language development. Personality, motivation,
cognitive style may all play a role in influencing the learners willingness to take risks,
his or her openness to social interaction and attitudes towards the target language
and users of the target language.
Current view of second language learning thus argue that for language learning totake place the following elements must be provided in the classroom (Shrum andGlisan 2000, 14-15):
x
x
x
x
x
x

comprehensible input in the target language
an interactive environment that models and presents a variety of social,
linguistic, and cognitive tools for structuring and interpreting participation intalkopportunities for learners to negotiate meaning in the target language, withassistance from the teacher and from one anotheropportunities for learners to interact communicatively with one another in thetarget language
conversations and tasks that are purposeful and meaningful to the learnera non-threatening environment that encourages self-expression

However SLA theory throughout the 90s still tended to reflect a grammar-based viewof language, with an interest in explaining how learners built up knowledge of “rules”
of the target language. Recently this view of learning has been questioned by thosefavoring connectionism which explains learning not in terms of abstract rule oruniversal grammar but in terms of “probabilistic or associative models of acquisition,rather than symbolic rule-based models” (McCarthy 2001,83). SLA theory today
remains strongly influenced by a Chomskyan view of language and limits its focus tooral language and the acquisition of grammatical competence. For this reason it isconsidered to be largely irrelevant in understanding the learning of other aspects oflanguage such as reading, writing or listening (see Grabe 2002).
Then:
x
x
x

Emergence of error analysis and SLA
Cognitive views of learning replace behaviorist theory
Creative construction hypothesis proposed

11

x
x
x

Interlanguage concept proposed
Developments sequences described
Information-processing models of learning

Now:
x
x
x
x

Role of universal grammar
Interactionist model of learning
Learning through scaffolding
Probabilistic models of learning proposed

Buzzwords
automatic processing, connectionism, controlled processing, creative construction
hypothesis, developmental sequence, error analysis, information processing,interaction hypothesis, interactional competence, interlanguage, long term
memory, negotiation of meaning, principles, parameters, scaffolding, second
language acquisition (SLA), short term memory, universal grammar, zone ofproximal development,

5 What is the role of the learner?
In the last thirty years learners have come to assume a much more significant role in
the language learning process from their contribution in the early 1970s. In the
1970s we tended to underestimate the contribution of the learner or to view it as asomewhat negative one. We tended to assume that learners were very much alike intheir reasons for wanting to learn English as well as the ways in which they learn alanguage. It was assumed that good language teaching meant controlling the learnerand that a good teaching method would lead the reluctant learner through thelearning process. But then a rethinking of the learner’s contribution began in earnest.
A book John Oller (Oller and Richards 1973) and I edited at the time, aptly named
Focus on the Learner, sought to capture this new interest. The focus on the learnermanifested itself in several different ways.
Role of motivation
One interest that emerged at this time was the role of motivation in language
learning. Two early motivational orientations that were identified were instrumental
motivation (e.g. wanting to learn a language for the practical benefits it brings) andintegrative motivation (e.g. wanting to learn a language in order to interact with andbecome similar to valued members of the target language community). Anotherdistinction that appeared was the distinction between intrinsic motivation (enjoymentof language learning itself) and extrinsic motivation (driven by external factors suchas parental pressure, societal expectations, academic requirements or other sourcesof rewards or punishment). The construct of motivation emphasized the importanceof individual differences among learners (which also include language aptitude, age,and gender), the learner’s role in determining the goals of language learning and thekind of effort he or she might commit to it, and the need to find ways of creating
motivational conditions in the classroom.

12The emergence of humanistic methods in the seventies reflected another dimension
to a focus on the learner. Humanistic methods were those in which the following
principles were considered important:xxxx

the development of human values
growth in self-awareness and the understanding of others
sensitivity to human feelings and emotions
active student involvement in learning and the way learning takes place.

Community Language Learning and the Silent Way are examples of this movementfrom the seventies, and though these have largely disappeared today the humanistic
philosophy is seen in more recent innovative approaches such as Neurolinguistic
Programming and Multiple Intelligences.
Individualization
A different strand to the focus on the learner theme emerged at the same time under
the rubric of individualized instruction and more generally, individualization.
Individualized approaches to language teaching are based on the assumptions that:xxxx

People learn in different ways
They can learn from a variety of different sources
Learners have different goals and objectives in language learning
Direct teaching by a teacher is not always essential for learning

Individualization includes such things as one-to-one teaching, home study, selfaccess learning, self-directed learning, and the movement towards learnerautonomy, all of which focus on the learner as an individual and seek to encouragelearner initiative and to respect learner differences. In the 1980s it was replaced by
the term learner-centeredness, which refers to the belief that attention to the natureof learners should be central to all aspects of language teaching, including planningteaching and evaluation. Learning is dependent upon the nature and will of learners.
Learner centeredness may be reflected by:xxxx

recognizing learners’ prior knowledge
recognizing learners’ needs, goals, and wishes
recognizing learners’ learning styles and learning preferences
recognizing learners’ views of teaching and the nature of classroom tasks

In learner-centered approaches, course design and teaching often become
negotiated processes through needs analysis, since needs, expectations, and student
resources vary with each group of learners. This was the approach used in theAustralian Migrant Education program and described in Nunan’s book The LearnerCentered Curriculum (Nunan 1988). Learner-centered teaching was contrasted withteacher-centered teaching, i.e. teaching in which primary decisions are carried out by
the teacher based on his or her priorities.
Learning strategies
In the 1980s interest in learner differences also led to the emergence of learnerstrategy research, an issue which received considerable attention into the 1980s and1990s. Strategies first came to attention with studies of the good language learner inthe mid 1970s and the idea that when we teach a language we also have to teach13

language learning strategies and acknowledge different cognitive styles. For example
reading strategies include (Cohen and Dornyei 2002):
With regard to reading habits in the target language:
x Making a real effort to find reading material that is at or near one’s level
As basic reading strategies:xx

Planning how to read a text, monitor to see how the reading is going, andthen check to see how much of it was understood
Making ongoing summaries either in one’s mind or in the margins of the text

When encountering unknown words and structures:xx

Guessing the appropriate meaning by using clues from the surrounding
context
Using a dictionary to get a detailed sense of what individual words mean

Some strategies are more likely to be effective than others and by distinguishing
between the strategies of experts and novices or good language learners versus poor
learners we can improve the effectiveness of teaching and learning. Strategy training
and the notion of strategies still continues to attract attention, though not perhaps
with the same level of enthusiasm that it did a decade ago since many teachers feelthat strategies are hard to identify, sometimes differ from learner to learner, and areoften difficult to address in teaching.
Then:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Teacher-centered teaching
Uniform view of learners
Learning controlled by the teacher and the method
Humanistic methods appear
Role of motivation examined
Individual differences emphasized

Now:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Learner-centered teaching
Diversity a strength
Learning controlled by the learner
Emphasis on individual differenceTraining of learner strategies
New versions of humanistic approaches

Buzzwords
individual differences, individualization, individualized instruction. language
aptitude, learning strategies, learner autonomy, self-directed learning, cognitive
style, extrinsic motivation, good language learner, instrumental motivation,
integrative motivation, intrinsic motivation, learner training, learner strategies,
humanistic methods, learner-centeredness, needs analysis, self-access learning,strategy training, multiple intelligences, needs analysis, Neurolinguistic
programming (NLP),

14

6. How can we teach the four skills?
Teaching listening
Listening, hardly mentioned at all in journals in the 70s has come into its own by thepresent period, and although it continues to be ignored in SLA theory and researchat least in teaching it now plays a much more prominent role. University entrance
exams, school leaving and other examinations have begun to include a listening
component, acknowledging that listening proficiency is an important aspect of
second language proficiency, and if it isn’t tested, teachers won’t pay attention to it.
An early view of listening saw it as the mastery of discrete skills or microskills (e.g.
Richards 1983) and that these should form the focus of teaching and testing. A skills
approach focused on such things as (Rost 1990):
x
x
x
x
x

discriminating sounds in words, especially phonemic contrasts
deducing the meaning of unfamiliar words
predicting content
noting contradictions, inadequate information, ambiguities
differentiating between fact and opinion

The changed status of listening was partly prompted by Krashen’s emphasis on therole of comprehension and comprehensible input, i.e. the input hypothesis, intriggering language development, which lies at the heart of his Natural Approach. In
the 80s and 90s applied linguists also began to borrow new theoretical models ofcomprehension from the field of cognitive psychology. It was from this source thatthe distinction between bottom-up processing and top-down processing was derived,a distinction that lead to an awareness of the importance of background knowledge,
and schema in comprehension. The bottom-up model holds that listening is a linear,data-driven process. Comprehension occurs to the extent that the listener issuccessful in decoding the spoken text. The top-down model of listening, by contrast,
involves the listener in actively constructing meaning based on expectations,
inferences, intentions, knowledge of schema and other relevant prior knowledge andby a selective processing of the input. Listening came to be viewed as an interpretive
process. At the same time the fields of conversation analysis and discourse analysis
were revealing a great deal about the organization of spoken discourse and lead to arealization that written texts read aloud could not provide a suitable basis fordeveloping the abilities needed to process real-time authentic discourse. Authenticity
in materials became a catchword and part of a pedagogy of teaching listening that is
now well established in TESOL. Mendelsohn (1994) summarizes the assumptions
underlying current methodology as:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Listening materials should be based on a wide range of authentic texts,
including both monologues and dialogues
Schema-building tasks should precede listening
Strategies for effective listening should be incorporated into the materials
Learners should be given opportunities to progressively structure theirlistening by listening to a text several times and by working throughincreasingly challenging listening tasks
Learners should know what they are listening for and why
Tasks should include opportunities for learners to play an active role in theirown learning

15

Then
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Accurate recall of the information is a passage was the goal.
Comprehension viewed as decoding.
Learner viewed as a passive participant in listening.
Comprehension viewed as a demonstration of learning.
Native speaker models on tape speaking standard and prestige accents.
Listening materials mainly specially written.
Little distinction between teaching and testing of listening.

Now
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Comprehension viewed as a mix of bottom-up and top down processes.
Learner viewed an active participant in listening.
Comprehension viewed as the basis for acquisition.
Listening strategies are taught.
Role of pre-listening emphasized.
Variety of accents on tape, native and non-native, as well as regional.
Listening materials often based on authentic speech and seek to capturefeatures of authentic speech.

Buzzwords
authentic texts, bottom-up processing, comprehensible input, conversation
analysis, corpus, discourse analysis, input hypothesis, microskills, Natural
Approach, prior knowledge,top-down processing, schema,

Teaching speaking
Speaking has always been a major focus of language teaching, however both thenature of speaking skills as well as approaches to teaching them have undergone amajor shift in thinking in the last 30 years. Speaking in the early seventies usuallymeant “repeating after the teacher, reciting a memorized dialogue, or responding toa mechanical drill” (Shrum and Glisan, 200, 26), reflecting the sentence-based viewof proficiency prevailing in the methodologies of Audiolingualism and Situational
Language Teaching. The emergence of the constructs of communicative competence
and proficiency in the 1980s, lead to major shifts in conceptions of syllabuses andmethodology, the effects of which continue to be seen today. The theory ofcommunicative competence prompted attempts at developing communicativesyllabuses in the 1980s, initially resulting in proposals for notional syllabuses,
functional syllabuses, as well as the Threshold Level and more recently proposals fortask-based and text-based approaches to teaching. Fluency became a goal for
speaking courses and this could be developed through the use of information-gap
and other tasks that required learners to attempt real communication despite limited
proficiency in English. In so doing they would develop communication strategies andengage in negotiation of meaning, both of which were considered essential to thedevelopment of oral skills. Activities borrowed from the repertoire of techniques
associated with Cooperative Learning became a good source of teaching ideas.

16

In foreign language teaching a parallel interest lead to the proficiency movement in
the 1990s, which attempted to develop descriptions of bands of proficiency acrossthe different skills areas and to use these bands as guidelines in program planning.
The proficiency concept was said to offer “an organizing principle that can help
teachers establish course objectives, organize course content, and determine what
students should be able to do upon completion of a course or program of study”(Bragger, 1985,43).
Hadley proposes five principles for a proficiency-oriented teaching:
x
x
x

x
x

opportunities must be provided for students to practice using the language ina range of contexts likely to be encountered in the target culture.
opportunities should be provided for students to carry out a range offunctions (tasks) necessary for dealing with others in the target culture.
the development of accuracy should be encouraged in proficiency-oriented
instruction. As learners produce language, various forms of instruction andevaluative feedback can be useful in facilitating the progression of their skills
toward more precise and coherent language use.
instruction should be responsive to the affective as well as the cognitiveneeds of students, and their different personalities, preferences, and learning
styles should be taken into account.
cultural understanding must be promoted in various ways so that students
are sensitive to other cultures and prepared to live more harmoniously in thetarget language community(Hadley, 1993, 77)

The notion of English as an International Language has prompted a revision of thenotion of communicative competence to that of intercultural competence, a goal forboth native speakers and language learners and with a focus on learning how tocommunicate in ways that are appropriate in cross-cultural settings. At the sametime it is now accepted that models for oral interaction cannot be based simply on
the intuitions of applied linguists and textbook writers but should be informed by thefindings of conversation analysis and corpus analysis of real speech. These haverevealed such things as:xxxx

the clausal nature of much spoken language and the role of chunks (sense ortone groups such as “the other day/ I got a real surprise/ when I got a call/from an old school friend”)
the frequency of fixed utterances or conversational routines in spoken
language (e.g. Is that right, You know what I mean)
the interactive and negotiated nature of oral interaction involving suchprocesses as turn-tasking, feedback, and topic management
the differences between interactional talk (person oriented) and transactional
talk (message oriented)

Then
x
x
x
x
x
x

Speaking and oral interaction seen as ways of mastering basic patterns andstructures
Native-speaker usage the model
Models based on author intuition
Grammatical and situational syllabus
Drills, dialogs, substitution exercises were basic classroom activities.
Accuracy was the primary goal. Little tolerance of errors.

17

x
x

Oral proficiency viewed as dependent upon mastery of structures
Teacher-fronted instruction predominated

Now
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Speaking and oral interaction is seen as the basis for learning
Non-native usage as well as native usage as models.
English for cross-cultural communication a goal
Models informed by corpus analysis
Functional or other type of communicative syllabus
Both accuracy and fluency a primary goal. More tolerance of errors.
Oral proficiency viewed as dependent upon mastery of lexical phases andconversational routines.
Cultural awareness addressed
Pair and group activities predominate.

Buzzwords
chunks, communicative competence, communicative syllabus, conversation
analysis, conversational routines, cooperative learning, communication
strategies, corpus analysis, feedback, fluency, functional syllabus, informationgap, interactional talk, intercultural competence, negotiation of meaning,
notional syllabuses, proficiency, task, task-based syllabus, text-based
syllabuses, Threshold Level, topic management, transactional talk, turn taking,Teaching reading
In the seventies, second language reading ability was viewed as the mastery of
specific reading subskills or microskills, a view that to some extent continues toinform approaches to the teaching of reading today. Skills formed the basis forsecond language reading instruction and these included:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Discerning main ideas
Understanding sequence
Noticing specific details
Making inferences
Making comparisons
Making predictions

These skills were often taught separately. As with listening, bottom-up views ofreading dominated theory and pedagogy and reading tended to be taught byproviding texts (usually contrived texts written to word lists) which student students
read and then answer comprehension questions about. In many classrooms there
was little difference in approach between teaching reading and testing reading.
Advanced reading served as a form of cultural enrichment rather than any real-world
goals.
In the last 30 years the fields of psycholinguistics, cognitive science, discourse andtext analysis as well as the field of second language reading research haveconsiderably enriched our understanding of second language reading processes.
Research has examined such issues as the role of scripts and schema in L2

18

comprehension, the nature of coherence and cohesion in texts, the effects of crosscultural difference in schematic knowledge, the role of prior knowledge incomprehension, and how knowledge of text structure and discourse cues affects
comprehension.. Research has demonstrated that L2 readers can benefit from theunderstanding of text structures and from the use of text-mapping strategies thathighlight text structures and their function.
The role of vocabulary in reading has also been extensively researched. Issues thathave been examined include:
x
x
x
x
x
x

the number of words needed to read L2 texts
the role of context in understanding news words in texts
the relationship between language proficiency and reading ability
strategies for remembering words
effective dictionary use
incidental learning of vocabulary through reading

With respect to the last issue, Hu and Nation (1992) found that a vocabulary of 5000
words was needed to read short unsimplified novels for pleasure, while Hazenberg
and Hulstijn (1996) found that twice as many words as that were needed to readfirst-year university materials. Both studies emphasize the need for vocabularydevelopment a s a component of a reading course, since L2 learners typically are
under prepared for reading unsimplified texts.
Differences between proficient and non-proficient readers has been another focus ofresearch and generated interest in the value of strategy instruction. The teaching ofreading has been one area where strategy training is seen to be teachable,
particularly with less proficient readers. Better readers seem to actively control theirreading and their use of reading strategies. Current thinking on the teaching of L2
reading strategies suggests (Janzen 2000):xxxx

The teaching of strategies should be contextualized
Strategies should be taught explicitly through direct explanation, modeling,
and feedback.
There should be a constant recycling of strategies over next texts and tasks
Strategies should be taught over a long period of time.

Grabe suggest the following research findings should inform approaches to L2
reading:x the importance of discourse structure and graphic representations
x the importance of vocabulary in language learningx the need for language awareness and attending to language and genre form
x the existence of a second language proficiency threshold in readingx the importance of metacognitive awareness and strategy learningx the need for extensive readingx the benefits of integrating reading and writing
x the importance of Content-Based Instruction(Grabe 2002, 277)
Although L2 reading programs are often designed to serve the needs of learners
needing reading for academic purposes, the role English plays as the language in the
Information and Communication Age is also prompting a rethinking of approaches to19the teaching of reading in many parts of the world. Students must now learn to beable to apply what they have learned, to use knowledge to solve problems, and to beable to transfer learning to new situations. Educationists argue that learners need todevelop effective analytical processing skills through reading, problem solving andcritical thinking, and to develop technical reading skills rather than those used forliterary reading. These should be based on the use of authentic texts. In addition
information-literacy skills are needed, i.e. the skills needed to access, analyze,
authenticate and apply information acquired from different sources and turn it into
useful personal knowledge (Jukes and McCain, 2001).
Then:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Reading is viewed as skill development
Language deficiency seen as the major obstacle to reading ability (e.g.
vocabulary and grammatical knowledge)
Learning is text driven
Comprehension is a process of decoding texts
Reading skills developed through graded and specially written texts
Literary reading skills the focus at higher levels and the reading of poetry,drama and literature
Effective comprehension is seen as developing automaticity in basic skills
Reading based on print materials and primarily serves the purpose ofobtaining information

Now:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Reading viewed as a mix of bottom-up and top-down processing
Successful reading depends on strategy use
Learning is learner driven.
Reading skills developed through the use of authentic texts
Comprehension is a creative and interactive process
Technical reading skills and information processing skills the focus at higher
levelsReading based not just on print materials but on hypertext and other sourceof information
Critical reasoning skills a priority for learners to be able to apply theirunderstanding to solving real world problems

Buzzwords
authentic texts, coherence, cohesion, critical thinking, language proficiency
threshold, microskills, metacognitive awareness, prior knowledge, processing
skills, scripts, schema, strategy training, technical reading skills, text structure

20

Teaching Writing
The status of writing within language teaching and applied linguistics has risen
considerably in the last 30 years. The idea that writing is simply “speech written
down” and therefore not worthy of serious attention has been replaced by a much
more complex view of the nature of writing with the growth of composition studies
and the field of second language writing. In the seventies learning to write in asecond language was mainly seen to involve developing linguistic and lexical
knowledge as well as familiarity with the syntactic patterns and cohesive devices thatform the building blocks of texts (Hyland, in press). Learning to write involved
imitating and manipulating models provided by the teacher and was closely linked tolearning grammar. The sequence of activities in a writing lesson typically involved:xxxx

familiarization: learners study grammar and vocabulary, usually through atext
controlled writing: learners manipulate fixed patterns, often fromsubstitution tables
guided writing: learners imitate model texts
free writing: learners use the patterns they have developed to write a letter,paragraph etc

Activities based on controlled composition predominated during this period thatsought to prevent errors and develop correct writing habits. One of my earliest
efforts at textbook writing, Guided Writing Through Pictures, was firmly rooted in thistradition.
Later the focus in teaching writing shifted to the paragraph-pattern approach with afocus on the use of topic sentences, supporting sentences, and transitions andpractice with different functional patterns such as narration, description, comparisoncontrast and exposition. It became apparent that good writing involved more thatthe ability to write grammatically correct sentences. Sentences need to be cohesive
and the whole text needed to be coherent. And the field of contrastive rhetoric
examined different conception of coherence across cultures. The study of model texts
was central with the paragraph-pattern approach. Students would study the featuresof a model text and then write their own paragraphs following the model.
In the 1990s Process writing introduced a new dimension into the teaching of writing
with an emphasis on the writer and the strategies used to produce a piece of writing.
Writing is viewed as “a complex, recursive and creative process that is very similar inits general outlines for first and second language writers: learning to write requires
the development of an efficient and effective composing process (Silva and Matsuda,
2002, 261). The composing processes employed by writers were explored as well as
the different strategies employed by proficient and less proficient writers. Drawing
from the work of first language composition theory and practice, ESL students weresoon being taught such processes as planning, drafting, revising and editing and how
to give peer feedback.
More recently second language writing instruction in some parts of the world has
been influenced by a genre approach. This looks at the ways in which language isused for particular purposes in particular contexts, i.e. the use of different genres ofwriting. Writing is seen as involving a complex web or relations between writer,reader, and text. Drawing on the work of Halliday, Martin, Swales and others, the21

genre approach seeks to address not only the needs of ESL writers to compose texts
for particular readers but also examines how texts actually work. Discourse
communities such as business executives, applied linguists, technicians, andadvertising copywriters possess a shared understanding of the texts they use andcreate and expectations as to the formal and functional features of such texts. Genre
theory has generated a great deal of research into different types of written genre,
including both general types of writing (e.g. narrative, descriptive, andargumentative writing), as well as different text types (e.g. research reports,business letters, essay examinations, technical reports). According to Hyland,
contemporary views of L2 writing see writing as involving composing skills andknowledge about texts, contexts, and readers. Writers not only need realistic
strategies for drafting and revising but also a clear understanding of genre to be able
to structure their writing experienced according to the demands and constraints ofparticular contexts.
The field of second language writing is hence a dynamic one today and one that is
generating an increasing amount of research. Hyland (in press) identifies current
research interests in L2 writing according to three categories – writers, texts, andreaders, and includes the following in a list of issues in L2 writing research:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

revision strategies employed by writers
transfer of composing strategies from L1students preferences for feedback
sources of feedback students make use of
lexical/syntactic/discoursal features of particular genres
effectiveness of instructional strategies for genres
readers’ views of the effectiveness of texts
strategies to help students address audiences in writing

Then:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Focus on grammar and sentence construction
Learning by imitating and practicing models
Little difference between teaching of writing and teaching of grammar
Attempts to avoid errors through controlled and guided writing
Feedback provided by teacher
Mastery of functional patterns the goal at higher levels (narrative, exposition,
description)
Product-based approach
Personal writing often emphasized

Now:
x
x
x
x
x

Focus on composing processes
Focus on genres
Focus on text types and text organization
Use of peer feedback
Focus on effective writing strategies

22Buzzwords
Composing processes, composition studies, contrastive rhetoric, coherence,cohesion, discourse community, drafting, editing, explanations, genre, genre
approach, paragraph-pattern approach, peer feedback, planning, process writing,supporting sentence, text types, topic sentence, transitions,

7. How can we assess students’ learning?
In the 70s testing was something relatively new to applied linguistics. Techniques fortesting grammar and the four skills were being developed and criteria for theconstruction of good test items. We can characterize the goals of testing in this era
as measuring “competence” or underlying ability. “Assessment tended to take theform of proficiency testing, based on general ability constructs, which was largely
unconnected to the curriculum” (Chapelle and Brindley 2002, 284) The basis forteaching and testing was generally one of the four skills and testing was based on
the content that was covered or taught. The test developer or teacher in preparing
tests of the different skill areas was required to sample from among the content that
had been covered in the course. The statistics of sampling thus became a very
important component in traditional quality test design. Tests were norm-referenced,
that is they measured the performance of learners in comparison with other test
takers whose scores were given as the norm. The information obtained from tests
was converted into marks, which were accumulated during the learning of a subject,
and at the end of a course the student and the teacher were expected to be able todraw some inferences about the learner’s ability from the marks obtained: Grammar,
C +; Listening, B; Reading B -; Writing, A, and so on. The criteria that were used toevaluate tests up to the 1980s were mainly (Schmitt 2202, 8):xxx

validity (did the test really measure what it was supposed to measure?)reliability (did the test perform consistently from one administration to thenext?)
practicality (was the test practical to give and mark in a particular setting?)

Since then the concept of validity has been subject to a considerable expansion anda number of criteria added to the notion of validity including (Messick 1989):xxx

user-suitability (for what kind of user might the test be useful)washback (the positive or negative effect the test might have on teachers andother stakeholders)test method (how did the test method used affect the scores?)

New goals and procedures
However there has also been a substantial refocusing of the goals and procedures oflanguage testing. In terms of goals the qualities of criterion-referenced orcompetency-based assessment are often preferred rather than traditional
approaches. Nitko (1983:444) observes:
For many instructional decisions, the information required consists ofknowing such particulars as the kinds of skills a learner has already acquired
and the degree to which these skills can be performed, the patterns of errors alearner habitually makes with respect to performing an assigned task, or the23

cognitive process a learner can or cannot use to solve relevant problems. Test
performance referenced only to norms does not provide such specificinformation about what individuals can do or how they behave.
Criterion referenced testing seeks to measure performance, rather than competence,measuring the learners performance according to a standard or criterion that has
been agreed upon. The student must reach this level of performance to pass the test
and his or her score is interpreted with reference to the criterion score rather than tothe scores of other students. McNamara describes this kind of performance test as
follows (1996:6) comments:
A defining characteristic is that actual performance of relevant tasks are required ofcandidates, rather than more abstract demonstration of knowledge such as that that
required by tests of ability.
Alternative assessment
In the current period attention has also shifted to alternative assessment, referring
to approaches to testing that are seen as complements to traditional standardized
testing usually based on qualitative assessment rather than quantitative assessment.
Traditional modes of assessment are said not to capture important information about
test takers’ abilities in a second language and are also not thought to reflect real-life
conditions for language use. Assessment procedures now include a variety ofmethods for assessing learners’ performance in more authentic circumstances
including self-assessment, peer assessment, portfolios, learner diaries, journals,
student-teacher conferences, interviews, and observation. However alternative
assessment is not without its concerns, since some have doubts about the reliabilityof the procedures that are used as well as the administrative feasibility and costeffectiveness of alternative assessment (Chapelle and Brinley 2002, 282).
Current approaches to testing reflect “a widespread recognition of the need for close
links between the desired outcomes of instruction, curriculum content andassessment, and this new emphasis is increasingly reflected in assessment policies,
materials and methods (op.cit.284)”. Today’s teachers are thus advised to follow
principles such as the following in assessing their learners’ abilities:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Test what was taught in the same way learners practiced it
Use authentic materials as test stimuli
Prepare integrative tests that reflect the type of activities done in class
Provide opportunities for learners to use global language skills in a naturalistic
authentic context
Provide a model to illustrate what learners are to do
Develop a grading system that rewards both linguistic accuracy and creativity

Then:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Tests served to measure student achievement
Tests focused on discrete-point grammar items
Primarily paper-and-pencil testing
Norm-referenced testing
Four skills tested separately
Tests involved artificial tasks
Learners provide one right answer

24

Now:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Tests serve to assess progress in meeting goals
Tests serve to improve instruction
Criterion-referenced testing
Greater use of alternative assessment
Assessment strategies seek to integrate skills in meaningful contexts
Tests involve real-world tasks
Self-assessment by learners
Stronger links between teaching and testingBuzzwords
alternative assessment, authentic assessment, competency-based assessment,
conferences, criterion referenced test, journals, learner diaries, norm-referenced,
performance assessment, portfolio assessment, qualitative assessment,
quantitative assessment, self-assessment, standard, peer assessment,
stakeholder

8. How can we prepare language teachers?
In the early 1970s, learning to teach English as a second language was a process ofacquiring a body of knowledge and skills from an external source, i.e. from experts.
It was a kind of top-down process based on modeling good practices, the practices
themselves built around a standard or recognized teaching method. Becoming alanguage teacher meant acquiring a set of discrete skills - lesson planning,techniques for presenting and practicing new teaching points and for teaching thefour skills. The approach that dominated graduate courses at this time consisted of alimited diet of theory courses, mainly confined to linguistics (syntax, morphology,
semantics), phonetics, English grammar and sometimes literature, plus the study ofmethodology.
Second language teacher education
Between the 1970s and the present period a sub-field of language teaching has
emerged now known as second language teacher education (Roberts, 1998). Thisrefers to the study of the theory and practice of teacher development for language
teachers. In the last thirty years there has also developed a substantial industry
devoted to providing language teachers with professional training and qualifications.
The knowledge base of language teaching has also expanded substantially although
there are still significant differences of opinion concerning what the essential
knowledge base of language teaching consists of. Experts arrive at different answers
to questions such as the following:xxxx

Is language teaching a branch of applied linguistics or a branch of education?
How much linguistics do teachers need to know and whose linguistic theories
are most relevant?
What are the essential subjects in a pre-service or in-service curriculum for
language teachers?
Do teachers need to know how to carry out research? If so, what kind ofresearch?

25

Due to this lack of consensus as to the theoretical basis for language teaching, thekind of professional preparation teachers may receive varies considerably fromcountry to country or even from institution to institution within a country, as acomparison of MA TESOL degrees in Canada and the United States reveals.
Training and development
From the seventies to the present period there has been a marked shift in our
understanding of what we mean by teacher preparation. In the earlier period teacher
training dominated but beginning in the 1990s teacher development assumed a more
central role (Richards 1998). Teacher training involves processes of the following
kind:
x
x
x
x

Understanding basic concepts and principles as a prerequisite for applying
them to teaching
Expanding one’s repertoire of routines, skills and strategies
Trying out new strategies in the classroom
Monitoring oneself and getting feedback from others on one’s practice

Teacher development serves a longer-term goal and seeks to facilitate growth of theteacher’s general understanding of teaching and of himself or herself as a teacher. It
often involves examining different dimensions of one’s own practice as a basis forreflective review, and can hence be seen as “bottom-up”. The following are examplesof goals from a development perspective:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Understanding how the process of second language development occurs
Understanding how teachers’ roles change according to the kind of learners
he or she is teaching
Understanding the kinds of decision-making that occurs during lessons
Reviewing one’s own theories and principles of language teaching
Developing an understanding of different styles of teaching
Determining learners’ perceptions of classroom activities
Acquiring the skills of a mentor

Comparing the two perspectives on teacher education Freeman observed (1982, 2122):
Training deals with building specific teaching skills: how to sequence a lesson or
how to teach a dialogue, for instance. Development, on the other hand, focuseson the individual teacher – on the process of reflection, examination, andchange which can lead to doing a better job and to personal growth andprofessional growth. These two concepts assume different views of teaching
and the teacher. Training assumes that teaching is a finite skill, one which canbe acquired and mastered. The teacher then learns to teach in the same way
s/he learned to tie shoes or to ride a bicycle. Development assumes thatteaching is a constantly evolving process of growth and change. It is an
expansion of skills and understanding, one in which the teacher is responsible
for the process in much the same way students are for learning a language.
Teacher development is not seen as a one-off thing but a continuous process. The
teacher is engaged in exploring his or her own teaching through reflective teaching ina collaborative process together with learners and colleagues. Learning from26

examining one’s own teaching, from carrying out classroom research, from creatingteaching portfolios, from interacting with colleagues through critical friendships,
mentoring and participating in teacher networks , are all regarded as ways in whichteachers can acquire new skills and knowledge. This reflects the prevailing
educational philosophy of constructivism which is currently popular in education
including language teacher education: knowledge is actively constructed and not
passively received. A constructive view of teaching involves teachers in making theirown sense of their own classrooms and taking on the role of a reflective practitioner.
Then:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Teachers trained to use a method“Training” emphasized
Teacher competence viewed as skill masteryTechnical aspects of teaching emphasized
Limited theoretical knowledge base in teacher preparation programs
Teachers learn from experts

Now:
x
x
x
x
x
x

Teachers trained in a variety of methods or approaches
Both “training” and “development” emphasized
Constructivist philosophy of teacher development
Teachers encouraged to develop their own personal approaches to teaching
Broad knowledge base in language teaching
Teachers learn through collaboration and self-reflection

Buzzwords
action research, constructivism, critical friendship, teacher decision-making,mentoring, portfolios, reflective teaching, second language teacher education,teacher development, teacher training, teacher networks

Conclusions
In discussing change in education Kuhn’s (1970) notion of paradigm shift is often
referred to (Jacobs and Farrell 2001). According to Kuhn new paradigms in scienceemerge rapidly as revolutions in thinking shatter previous ways of thinking.
Reviewing changes in language teaching in the last 30 years, while some changes
perhaps have the status of paradigm shifts (e.g. the spread of Communicative
Language Teaching and Process Writing) most of the changes documented above
have come about more gradually and at different times. In some contexts some of
the changes may not even have started. But once the message is heard there is
generally pressure to adopt new ideas and practices and so the cycle begins again.
What prompts the need for change?
Probably the main motivation for change comes from dissatisfaction with the present
state of affairs. Despite the resources expended on second and foreign language
teaching worldwide in almost every country results normally do not match
expectations, hence the constant pressure to adopt new curriculum, teaching
methods, materials, and forms of assessment. Government policy often is the27starting point for change when requirements are announced for a new curriculum or
syllabus or for some other change in goals or the delivery of language instruction.
In planning directions for change, language teaching draws on a number of
influences (Richards and Rodgers 2001). These include:
x
x
x
x
x

trends in the profession such as when particular practices or approaches
become sanctioned by the profession
guru-lead innovations such as when the work of a particular educationists
such as Krashen or Gardner becomes fashionable or dominant
responses to technology such as when the potential of the World Wide Web
catches the imagination of teachers
influences from academic disciplines, such as when ideas from psychology,
linguistics, or cognitive science shape language pedagogy
leaner-based innovations such as the learner-centered curriculum

Once changes have been adopted they are often promoted with a reformist zeal.
Previous practices suddenly become out of fashion and positive features of earlier
practices are quickly forgotten. Doubtless the new directions described in this paper
will be similarly so regarded in a similar review 30 years hence. In the meantime it ishoped that the overview given here will enable language teaching professionals toassess the currency of their own educational practices as well as reflect on thechanges they have experienced or are preparing for in their own institutions.

Jack C. Richards is an Adjunct Professor at SEAMEO
RELC. His most recent book is Curriculum Developmentin Language Teaching (Cambridge 2001).

I am grateful to Mr. Ao Ran, who provided considerable assistance with the content
analysis of the journals.

28

References
Alexander, L.G. 1967. Practice and Progress. London: Longman,
Bisong, J.1995. Language choice and cultural imperialism: a Nigerian perspective. ELT Journal
49/2:122-132
Brutt-Griffler, Janina 2002. World English: A Study of its Deveopment. Clevedon: Multilingual
Matters.
Chapelle, Carole and Geoff Brindley. Assessment. In Schmitt 2202, 289-307.
Cohen, Andrew and Zoltan Dornyei. 2002. Focus on the language learner: motivation, styles
and strategies. In Schmitt 2002.
Docking, Russell 1994. Competency-based curricula – the big picture. Prospect 9, 2, 8-17
Ellis, Rod 2002. Grammar teaching – practice or consciousness raising. In Richards andRenandya 2002, 167-172
Freeman, Donald 1982. Observing teachers: three approaches to in-service training anddevelopment. TESOL Quarterly 16,1, 21-28.
Grabe, Willliam, 2002. Dilemmas for the development of second language reading abilities. In
Schmitt, 2002
Hadley, A.O. 1993. Teaching Language in Context. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Hazenberg, S and J.H. Hulstijn 1996. Defining a minimal second-language vocabulary for nonnative university students: an empirical investigation. Applied Linguistics 17: 145-163
Higgs, T., and R. Clifford 1982. The push towards communication. In T.Higgs (ed). Curriculum,
Competence, and the Foreign Language Teacher. Skokie, IL: National Textboook Company.
Hu, H.M.,and P. Nation 2000. What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts?
Reading in a Foreign Language 8:689-696.
Hyland, Ken. In press. Second Language Writing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jacobs, Groeg M. and Thomas Farrell 2001. Paradigm shift: understanding and implementingchange in second language education. TESL-EJ 5,1 1-17.
Janzen, Joy 2002. Teaching strategic reading. In Richards and Renandya 2002, 287-295.
Jenkins, Jennifer 2000. The Phonology of English as an International Language. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Jukes, Ian and Ted McCain 2001. New schools for a new age. Unpublished manuscript
Kuhn, T.S. 1970. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
McCarthy, Michael 2001. Issues in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
McKay, Sanrda Lee. 2202. Teaching English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

29

Mendelsohn, D.J. 1994. Learning to Listen: A Strategy-Based Approach for the SecondLanguage Learner. San Diego: Dominie Press.
Messick, S. 1989. Validity. In Linn, R.(ed). Educational Measurement (3rd edition). New York:
Macmillan; 13-103
Nitko, A.J. 1983. Educational Tests and Measurement. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Nunan, David. 1988. The Learner Centered Curriculum. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
O’Neill, Robert 1974. Kernel Lessons Intermediate. Harlow: Longman
Phillipson, Robert 1992. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richards, Jack C 1974. Guided Writing Through Pictures. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University
Press.
Richards, Jack C 1983. Listening comprehension: approach, design, procedure. TESOL
Quarterly 17: 219-240
Richards, Jack C and Charles Lockhart 1994. Reflective Teaching in Second Language
Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, Jack C 1998. Beyond Training. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, Jack C and Theodore Rodgers. 2001. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching(2nd edition). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, Jack C 2001. Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Richards Jack C and Richards Schmidt. 2002. Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics andLanguage Teaching (3rd edition). Harlow: Longman.
Roberts, J 1998. Language Teacher Education. London: Arnold
Rost, Michael 1990. Listening in Language Learning. London: Longman
Schmitt, Norbert (editor) 2002. An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. London: Arnold.
Shrum, Judith and Eileen Glisan 2000. Teacher’s Handbook: Contextualized Language
Instruction. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Silva, Tony and Paul Kei Matsuda. 2002. Writing. In Schmitt 2002, 251-266.
Spada, Nina and Patsy M. Lightbown. Second language acquisition. In Schmitt 2002, 115-132.
Visscher, Adrie (editor) 199. Managing Schools Towards Higher Performance. Lisse (TheNetherlands): Swets and Zeitlinger30