Language Teaching Materials and the (Very) Big Picture1
Description
Based on a reading, we developed this mind map in order to resume the main ideas and dates that the author stated and also other authors who defined a wide view of how we develop material and some social implications.
Language Teaching Materials and
the (Very) Big Picture1
2. ELT materials: the 1950s to the 1980s
Britain and North America are the sources of much innovation in ELT
methodology
History is neatly divided into decades, as historians are apt to do, recognising that most of the
social events and materials
2.1 The 1950s/60s and the
Cold War
The ensuing tensions produced the ‘Cold War,’ so called because, although open hostilities never
broke out, they were rarely far from the surface, and constantly in the rhetoric of politicians.
The 1958 National Defense (Foreign Language) Act was swiftly ushered in, providing massive funds
for the development of language programmes
An example of a pattern practice exercise
(Lado & Fries, 1958, p. 7).
The nett effect is that behaviourism in one form of another has been firmly cemented into language
teaching materials, with its persistence right up to the present day, as the continuing use of drills,
substitution tables and such like, demonstrates.
2.2 The late 1960s to the late 1970s
The period from the late 1960s onwards is characterised by the emergence of
numer- Language Teaching Materials and the (Very) Big Picture 287 ‘fringe,’
humanistic methodologies, which, although rarely implemented, were much
talked about and cited.
A humanistic language practice exercise (Moscowitz, 1978, pp. 62–63).
Interestingly, we also saw the origins of another example of the rejection of mainstream,
establishment methodologies in a new perspective on language acquisition theory: Krashen’s Input
Hypothesis.
2.3 The 1970s to the mid 1980s
The process of embourgeoisement in which the increasingly affluent working class
populations of the developed economies were said to be taking on the individualist mindset of
the middle classes, had firmly taken root.
In 1970s the ‘Me Decade.’ This became particularly evident as sub-groupings began to voice their
separate identities. It is in this period, for example, that we saw the further, marked development of
feminism (the so-called ‘Second Wave’), a struggle for the recognition of the status of different
cultures and minorities
An early example of English for special purposes materials (Pearson, 1978, p. 17)
Also of particular note during this ‘me decade’ was the recognition that learners have their own
unique ways of approaching language study, that is, their own styles and strategies.
Extract from Ellis and Sinclair’s “Learning to Learn English” (1989, p. 6)
As a clear break from the top-down regime of grammar rules and specifications of rights and wrongs in
language form, CLT championed not the way language should be but rather how ordinary people use it.
Users mattered, not rules.
3. NEW IMPERATIVES ON MATERIALS DESING: THE MID 1980s ONWARDS
spirit of times VS Cause-effect
External influences to language teaching implementations
The desing of classroom works depends on social attitudes too.
''Why are ELT materials the way they are?''
3.1 Mcdonaldization
characterised by an absolute emphasis on efficiency and total
predictability and is increasingly ‘colonising’ other areas of social life
Ritzer states that
society itself is becoming ‘caged’ as we
are locked evermore into scripted,
predictable, homogenised environments of
consumption.
Gray and Block (2012), in a provocative
paper, discusses how far a process of
McDonaldization is evident in the
standardisation of teacher training in
specific cases.
3.2 Neo-Liberalism
relates to a much broader analysis of the social context in which language teaching
takes place, that of the nature of society as a whole.
has its origins in the work of classical
economists such as Adam Smith and his
famous text from 1776, “The Wealth of
Nations.” Today, however, it is most
closely associated with the dismantling of
state intervention, particularly in the
stripping back of welfare programmes,
state subsidies, state control of
industries, and so on.
For the market to function
as the determiner of all,
neo-liberalism requires the
commodifica- tion of
interactions, whether they
involve a physical product or
an intangible service.
TO CONCLUDE: this is precisely where we need to
start in language teaching, by resisting the manner in
which uniformity is being imposed, and by wrestling back
curriculum decisions into the hands of those directly
involved – teachers and learners.
For materials designers, this means not
being complicit in a scripting of classroom
events. It means designing tasks which are
open-ended and which have the potential
of producing unique outcomes each time
they are used. It means developing
teacher guides which encourage and
support experimenting, rather than
providing the familiar blow-by-blow
instructions.
Above all, it means imagining lan- guage learning and
language teaching as something not locked into neat,
prescriptivist listings of packaged levels and
competences.