Patrick Killelea

C&T 491

6/19/2019

Ahn and Canagarajan article reflection

The search for an efficient method was in tune with the ideologies of modernity. That is, the method
would provide an objective way to handle the challenges in teaching in all contexts. Teachers can simply
let techniques take over without letting their own values and dispositions shape teaching. However, TQ
has taken the lead in recent times in questioning the fetish over methods. Prabhu’s (1990)
announcement that there is no best method was a watershed moment in our professional discourse. He
suggested that not only is it unwise to promote one method as powerful enough to answer the various
contingencies in diverse learning contexts, it was doubtful there was anything resembling a predefined
method, considering the messy practice in classrooms where teachers navigate different learning goals,
student expectations, institutional imperatives, and their own teaching philosophies (p. 12).

This passage from “TESOL as a Professional Community: A Half-Century of Pedagogy, Research,

and Theory” by Suresh Canagarajan resonated with me. While learning about different

methods throughout my graduate program, I have come across methods which were treated as

cure-alls for language problems. Many of Krashen’s natural language learning methods, which

rejected explicit teaching of grammar and forms were widely adopted in the eighties. Also,

there are teachers who believe that one language skill, like reading, is more important than the

others, and will make their curriculum reading-heavy even though some students learn best

using communicative methods. In Korea, there have many teaching fads that have come and

gone. When I was a language tutor, many of the upper-elementary and middle school parents

wanted me to teach their children debate skills. An extreme example that I came across as a

teacher in a widely-known language academy was playing CDs of English songs while their kids

slept so they could learn in their sleep. Often, Koreans would ask me if there was any secret to

language learning like when people talk about secrets to weight loss. Unfortunately, there is no
secret to language learning (or weight loss) but just good practices. Teachers have to

understand their students and their needs and use methods as tools in their tool belt. A

balance of techniques that cater to both receptive and productive skills is good because

students are all unique and using a wide range of techniques allows for students of all learning

types to succeed.

Question: I wonder what current fads there are in English education both in Korea and abroad.

The perpetuation of the native-non-native dichotomy causes negative perceptions and self-

perceptions of ‘non-native’ teachers and a lack of confidence in and of ‘non-native’ theory

builders. It leads to ‘non-natives’ being refused places on EFL training courses, limited

publication of their articles in prestigious international journals (Jenkins 2000:9, citing Block)

This passage from Holliday’s summary on the different factions within the TESOL community

reminded me of the lack of respect that “non-native” Korean English teachers receive in

schools. Compared to native-speaking teachers, the Korean English teachers have more work

to do and are paid less. They are the contact point for the school and the other foreign

teachers, so they deal with all of the feedback and complaints. Whenever there is a major

misunderstanding between foreign teacher and student, the Korean teacher must put out the

fire. The Korean teachers are sometimes viewed negatively by the native speaking teacher

because their communication skills aren’t as strong. But, language schools cannot compete

without a native-speaking English teacher. The teachers, or at least their language skills, are a

commodity which the Korean parents feel they must buy to give their children a quality

education. For economic and geo-political reasons, English is the lingua franca, and a native
accent has become the standard by which all language learners aspire to. It leads to inequities

in the workplace between native and non-native teachers and is another example of the how

language can elevate and push down people on the social ladder.

Questions: How can a principal or a wonjangnim improve relations between “non-native” and

native teachers?