ELT Journal July 2009

NEW from OXFORD
More support for your

Young Learners
classroom
An international journal for teachers of English to speakers of other languages
NEW
ELTB
ELTB
NEW Volume
EDITION 63/3
July 2009
Grammar for Young Learners Storytelling with Children
Volume 63/3
Articles Reviews
n Ready-made grammar activities n Fully revised with new ideas and
‘Very good’ as a teacher response Teaching Other Subjects through English
to suit different learning styles stories The value of a focused approach to written corrective Cross-Curricular Resources for Young Learners
feedback Uncovering CLIL
n Strengthens grammatical n Guidelines on combining stories Traversing the lexical cohesion minefield Developing and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence
accuracy in a fun and purposeful with drama, poems and music, Critical reflection in a TESL course: mapping To Get to Know Each Other Leads to Better Mutual Understanding
conceptual change Teaching Modern Languages to Young Learners
way cross-curricular studies and
July 2009
Challenges in teaching ELF in the periphery: Teaching Foreign Languages in the Primary School
n Focus on grammar through personal development the Greek context Literature and Stylistics for Language Learners
Why and how textbooks should encourage extensive reading Oxford Learner’s Thesaurus
drawing, storytelling, songs and n Selection of ready-to-tell stories, Point and counterpoint Building a Validity Argument for the Test of English as a
Foreign Language™
games photocopiable worksheets and Process-oriented pedagogy
Form-focused Instruction and Teacher Education
easy-to-draw pictures Text messages
Websites review
A tale of two songs
IATEFL Cardiff Online 2009
Comment
www.oup.com/elt ELT and the challenges of the times
in association with
oxford
C
Every effort has been made to trace the owners The Editorial Panel
of copyright material in this issue, but we shall be David Bell
pleased to hear from any copyright holder whom we Ohio University, USA
have been unable to contact. If notified, the publisher
will attempt to rectify any errors or omissions at the Sue Garton
earliest opportunity. University of Aston
Laura Grassick
© Oxford University Press 2009 British Council, Egypt
All rights reserved; no part of this publication Carol Griffiths
may be produced, stored in a retrieval system, or British Council Teacher Training Project, DPRK
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, Peter Grundy
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, IATEFL
without either the prior written permission of the
Publishers, or a licence permitting restricted copying Graham Hall
issued in the UK by the Copyright Licensing Agency Northumbria University
Ltd, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London W1PS 9HE, Éva Illés
or in the USA by the Copyright Clearing Center, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest
222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, Massachusetts 01923, Barley Mak
USA. The Chinese University of Hong Kong
UK ISSN 0951-0893 (print); 1477-4526 (online) Jonathan Marks
Leba, Poland
Typeset by TnQ Books and Journals Pvt. Ltd.,
Chennai, India. Alice Oxholm
Printed by C.O.S. Printers Pte Ltd, Singapore Sheffield Hallam University
Annamaria Pinter
Advertising University of Warwick
Inquiries about advertising should be sent to:
Linda Hann Barbara Skinner
Oxford Journals Advertising University of Ulster
60 Upper Broadmoor Road Jane Spiro
Crowthorne RG45 7DE Oxford Brookes University
UK Melinda Tan
Email:: lhann@lhms.fsnet.co.uk University of Central Lancashire
Tel: +44 (0)1344 779945
Fax: +44 (0)1344 779945 Key Concepts Editor
Alan Waters
Website University of Lancaster
Article titles, abstracts, and Key concepts appear free
online through the ELT Journal website: Text Messages Editors
http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org Jill and Charles Hadfield
Abstracting and Indexing Editorial Front Office
British Education Index covers ELT Journal Jane Magrane
The Advisory Board Consultant to the Editors
Michael Carrier Cristina Whitecross
ELT Adviser
Consultant on Research Design
Simon Greenall Catherine Walter
IATEFL Department of Education, University of Oxford
Catherine Kneafsey
Oxford University Press
Norman Whitney
ELT Consultant
The Editor
Keith Morrow
The Reviews Editor
Philip Prowse
Aims
ELT Journal is a quarterly publication for all those involved in the field
of teaching English as a second or foreign language. The journal links
the everyday concerns of practitioners with insights gained from related
academic disciplines such as applied linguistics, education, psychology,
and sociology.
ELT Journal aims to provide a medium for informed discussion of the
principles and practice which determine the ways in which the English
language is taught and learnt around the world. It also provides a forum
for the exchange of information among members of the profession
worldwide.
The Editor of ELT Journal is supported by an Editorial Advisory Panel
whose members referee submissions. Their decisions are based upon the
relevance, clarity, and value of the articles submitted.
The views expressed in ELT Journal are the contributors’ own, and not
necessarily those of the Editor, the Editorial Advisory Panel, or the
Publisher.
Contributions
Contributions are welcome from anyone involved in ELT. Contributors
should consult the current Guide for contributors before submitting articles,
as this contains important information about the focus and format of
articles. Articles not submitted in accordance with the Guide will not be
considered for publication. The Guide can be obtained on request from the
Editor, and is now available online. See our website:
http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org
If you wish to write a review for ELT Journal, please contact the Reviews
Editor. Unsolicited reviews cannot be accepted for publication.
Correspondence
e d i t o r i a l : The Editor, ELT Journal, Homerton House, Cawston Road,
Reepham, Norwich nr10 4lt, UK.
Email: editor@eltj.org
re vi e w s: The Reviews Editor, ELT Journal, po Box 83, Cambridge
cb3 9pw, UK. Fax +44 (0) 1223 572390
Email: reviews@eltj.org
ELT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009

ª The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Announcements
Developing What is the Oxford Journals Developing Countries offer?

Countries Initiative This offer represents our commitment to providing free and greatly reduced
online access to many of our journals for low income countries.
What does it include?

Institutions within qualifying countries can apply for the full Developing
Countries collection, the Humanities and Social Science subset, or the
Science, Technical, and Medical subset.
Which institutions qualify for this offer?

This offer is available to established not-for-profit educational institutions
from qualifying countries based on country incomes as established by
the World Bank Report 2006. Access is either free or greatly reduced
depending on which list they appear in.
For full details see: http://www.oxfordjournals.org/access_purchase/
developing_countries.html
Back issues Subscribers to E LT Journal have access online to articles, features, and
reviews from 1996 to the present—together with ‘advance access’ to
forthcoming articles. You can search the archive by author, title, or by any
keyword: http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org
Some institutional subscribers (e.g. university libraries) may also have
subscribed to the Oxford Digital Archive, which gives online access to every
issue of ELT Journal from Volume 1/1 (1946) to the present.
Individuals, or institutions not wishing to subscribe to the whole Digital
Archive, can get access to articles and features from 1981 to 2006, and
to reviews from 1998 to 2006, by purchasing an archive C D - R O M. This
is searchable by author, title, or by any key word: http://www.niche-
publications.co.uk
E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccp049

Contents
ELT Journal Volume 63 Number 3 July 2009
Articles
Jean Wong and ‘Very good’ as a teacher response 195
Hansun Zhang Waring
John Bitchener and The value of a focused approach to written corrective feedback 204
Ute Knoch
Iain McGee Traversing the lexical cohesion minefield 212
Thomas S. C. Farrell Critical reflection in a TESL course: mapping conceptual change 221
Nicos Sifakis Challenges in teaching ELF in the periphery: the Greek context 230
Dale Brown Why and how textbooks should encourage extensive reading 238
Point and counterpoint
William Littlewood Process-oriented pedagogy: facilitation, empowerment, or control? 246
David M. Bell Another breakthrough, another baby thrown out with the bathwater 255
William Littlewood OBE: a coin with two sides or many different coins? 263
Text messages
Andy Kirkpatrick and A tale of two songs: Singapore versus Hong Kong 265
Andrew Moody
Comment
Chris Lima ELT and the challenges of the times 272
Reviews
Steve Darn Teaching Other Subjects through English by S. Deller and C. Price, Cross-
Curricular Resources for Young Learners by I. Calabrese and S. Rampone,
and Uncovering CLIL by P. Mehisto, M. J. Frigols, and D. Marsh 275
Silvija Andernovics Developing and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence: A
Guide for Language Teachers and Teacher Educators by I. Lázár et al.
(eds.), and To Get to Know Each Other Leads to Better Mutual
Understanding by M. Bedynska et al. (eds.) 277
Simon Smith The TeMoLaYoLe Book: Teaching Modern Languages to Young Learners
by M. Nikolov et al. (eds.), and Teaching Foreign Languages in the Primary
School by C. Kirsch 280
Amos Paran Literature and Stylistics for Language Learners: Theory and Practice by
G. Watson and S. Zyngier (eds.) 284
Stephen Coffey Oxford Learner’s Thesaurus: A Dictionary of Synonyms by D. Lea
(chief ed.) 288
Jesús Garcı́a Laborda Building a Validity Argument for the Test of English as a Foreign
Languageä by C. A. Chapelle et al. (eds.) 291
Darren Elliott Form-focused Instruction and Teacher Education: Studies in Honour of
Rod Ellis by S. Fotos and H. Nassaji (eds.) 295
Websites for the language teacher
Diana Eastment IATEFL Cardiff Online 2009 297
Correspondence 300
IATEFL 302
Please visit ELT Journal’s website at

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org
‘Very good’ as a teacher response
Jean Wong and Hansun Zhang Waring
Much scholarly and pedagogical attention has been devoted to corrective

feedback. In this paper, we turn to positive feedback, and in particular, call for
a reconsideration of teachers’ use of explicit positive assessments such as ‘very
good’. Based on examples from an ESL classroom, we show that utterances such
as ‘very good’ may have the potential of inhibiting learning opportunities within
particular pedagogical contexts. We then broaden our discussion by offering
a range of suggestions for managing the complexities of positive feedback in the
language classroom.
Introduction An integral part of language teaching is giving feedback. As Fanselow (1987:

267) writes, ‘to teach is to provide feedback’. Over the past three decades, we
have made great strides in understanding the various facets and strategies
of feedback in language teaching. Much of the scholarly inquiry, however,
has been devoted to feedback giving when something goes wrong, i.e.
negative or ‘corrective’ feedback (Gass and Mackey 2006). In this paper, we
ask what kind of feedback teachers should give when nothing appears to be
going wrong. What do we say when a student has just produced a correct
response? To many, the answer may be obvious, uninteresting, or
unimportant. We argue otherwise. To that end, we will first introduce some
background on positive feedback and its related practice of ‘praising’. We
will then briefly show how the use of ‘very good’ may inhibit learning
opportunities in a particular pedagogical context. Finally, we will offer some
teaching suggestions on responding to correct student contributions in
ways that possibly promote learning.
Background In contrast to the large body of literature on corrective feedback, work on

positive feedback is difficult to find. Allwright (1980) categorizes positive
feedback such as ‘fine’ or ‘good’ as part of the ‘quality judgements’ integral to
the guidance we give as teachers in the language classroom. Some empirical
work on positive feedback has addressed how it is done. Based on data
gathered from English language classrooms, Seedhouse (2004: 206–7)
claims that positive evaluation is often implied in the absence of feedback in
the initiation–response–feedback sequence (Sinclair and Coulthard 1975).
By examining 25 hours of classroom discourse, Hellermann (2003: 88)
shows that positive assessments done in teacher repetitions are
characterized by:
1 rhythmical placement synchronized with student response,
2 falling pitch contour,
E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn042 195

Advance Access publication August 20, 2008
3 mid-level pitch,
4 longer duration than student responses.
Others have considered what positive feedback really accomplishes.

According to Mehan (1979: 64), positive evaluation is a ‘terminal act’ that
marks the final boundary of a sequence (cf. Schegloff 2007). Utterances like
‘very good’, for example, can merely signal that it is time to move on to the
next person (Fanselow op. cit.) or the next activity (‘transition ritual’ in
Brophy 1981: 18).
One function of utterances such as ‘very good’ is to praise—a way of
reinforcing a student’s giving of a correct response, which, in the context of
language teaching, means reinforcing correct comprehension or
production of a language structure, for example. Notably, the correctness of
a student’s response is not necessarily a key consideration in whether
a teacher offers praise. Brophy (op. cit.) maintains that teachers sometimes
offer inappropriate praise, lauding students for incorrect answers as well as
correct ones. In citing O’Leary and O’Leary, Brophy (ibid.) indicates that
three features must be present in order for praise to function as
reinforcement. First, the praise must be contingent on the actual execution of
the behaviour that is being reinforced. Second, the praise must be specific
about the behaviour being reinforced. Third, the praise must be sincere and
addressed to the particular context in question.
For example, one problem with the use of ‘very good’ in a second language
teaching context, according to Fanselow (op. cit.), is that if a teacher uses the
phrase ‘very good’ in response to a student’s utterance, ‘I extremely happy’,
to what does the teacher’s praise refer? Fanselow (ibid.) argues that the
precise target in this case may be ambiguous. It may be that the teacher is
pleased that the student is happy, or the teacher may be overjoyed that the
student has produced a response at all. Alternatively, it is conceivable that
the teacher is only responding to the portion of the utterance that is correct,
despite the fact that the utterance produced by the student is not fully
accurate (Fanselow ibid.: 281).
Clearly, feedback giving, and in our case, positive feedback giving, is not
a straightforward task. More experienced teachers, however, may be better
equipped to manage its complexities. Forgas and Tehani (2005), for
example, report that experienced feedback givers are mindful of the impact
of mood on feedback and, accordingly, they give more positive and polite
feedback when they are in a sad mood. They remain alert and compensate
for their sad mood in giving proper feedback.
In sum, even a simple item like ‘very good’ has its many faces. A plethora of
issues surround its use. The cases discussed below are used as a point of
departure for rethinking how a language instructor should respond to
students’ correct answers or responses, at least, on some occasions like the
ones displayed in the ensuing discussion.
Examples of ‘very While the role of assessment such as ‘very good’ in marking sequence
good’ from the ESL closing has been noted before (Mehan op. cit.; Schegloff op. cit.), we would
classroom like to take a step further in suggesting that its use may in fact result in the
196 Jean Wong and Hansun Zhang Waring

unintended effect of shutting down learning opportunities by signalling not
only sequence closing but also ‘case closed’. In particular, we show a few
instances of classroom data in a form-focused check-homework context,
where the focus is on checking learners’ ability to use ‘present perfect’ or
‘present perfect progressive’. The brief analysis given below is derived from
a more detailed conversation analytic treatment of a much larger amount of
relevant data (see Waring 2008). The transcripts presented below have been
simplified for readability. The only notation unfamiliar to the reader may be
the two sets of vertically aligned brackets, which indicate simultaneous talk
or overlapping non-verbal conduct (indicated in double parentheses) by
different participants.
In the first instance, the relevant exercise item is:
Wow, I didn’t know you were married.
How long ___________________?
(Purpura and Pinkley 2000: 73)
In Extract 1a below, Miyuki raises a question regarding this item:
Extract 1a 1 Miyuki I have one [ques]tion,

2 Teacher [Yes.]
3 Miyuki Number three is if without ‘be’ is not good?
4 Teacher How long you’ve been marrie[d?
5 Miyuki [Have you married.
6 have you married.
This sequence spans 75 lines of the transcript and lasts two and a half
minutes. It turns out to be the most complicated error correction sequence
in the two-hour class. Briefly, Miyuki has treated ‘marry’ as a verb, in which
case its correct present perfect form would be ‘have married’, except that the
punctual aspect of ‘marry’ is ill-fitted to the duration query of ‘how long’
(that is ‘marry’, like ‘find’ or ‘explode’ and unlike ‘sleep’ or ‘work’ are verbs
that entail no duration). Since the form of ‘married’ may be either a verb
or an adjective, Miyuki’s confusion is not surprising. One wonders,
however, why Miyuki did not raise her concern much earlier when the
‘married’ item was first being dealt with. Here is what happened four
exercise items and 66 lines of transcript earlier:
Extract 1b 1 Teacher Number three. Kevin.

2 Kevin ‘Wow. I didn’t know you were married’.
3 ‘How long have you [been married’. ]
4 Teacher [((encouraging nods))]
5 ((emphatically)) Very good. How long have you been
6 married. ((smiley voice)) Very good. Number four.
7 Mai,
‘Very good’ as a teacher response 197

Note that from line 4 onward, the teacher’s ‘very good’ is delivered
immediately and emphatically, along with the encouraging nods, the smiley
voice, a repetition of the response as well as a second ‘very good’. Aside from
the fact that her turn components emerge one after another without leaving
any space for others to come in, this dramatic combination of verbal and
non-verbal expressions not only accepts Kevin’s response as correct but also
puts it on a pedestal, so to speak. One might argue that against the backdrop
of this finale-like, heavily advertised ‘perfect’ answer, any attempt to
articulate understanding problems or explore alternative answers, as in
Miyuki’s case, would appear less than expected or desirable.
In the next segment, we see that the ‘case-closed’ quality of ‘good!’ is so
strong that even when the teacher offers more space for learner contribution
immediately thereafter, no uptake emerges. The relevant exercise item is
this:
In fact the team (5) (won) _____________ 98% of the games they (6)
(play) ____________ so far.
(Purpura and Pinkley op.cit.: 32)
Extract 2a 1 Teacher Okay? Who’s next? I think Jae? Is that you?

2 Are you next? Alright.
3 Jae ((reads)) ‘In fact, the team has won uh
4 ninety eight percent of the games’.
5 ((pause))
6 Teacher ((th[ree consecutive nods)) ]
7 Jae [they have played so far.]
8 Teacher Good! ((in excited tone)). In fact the team has won
9 ninety eight percent of the games ((in staccato
10 tempo)) they ((pause)) have ((pause))
11 pl[ayed ] [so ]
12 Students [played]
13 Student [so far.]
14 Students far.
15 ((T walks around))
16 Teacher Is everybody okay?
17 ((Ss writing))
18 Yes? Okay ((reads instructions for next exercise))
Note that the teacher’s ‘Good!’-initiated response turn in lines 8–11 has
many of the finale-like qualities as those seen in the previous case. The
delivery of the repetition is notable. The staccato delivery of ‘they have
played so’ exhibits a fairly typical teacher-like tone in imparting information

that is important, salient, and worthy of remembering. It serves to establish
the singular, irrefutable correctness of Jae’s response, thus implicitly
proposing that the case is now closed.
Despite this finale-like interactional state, in the ensuing space, the teacher
displays no urgency to move on. The long gap during which she walks
around provides an opportunity for learners to ask questions about the two
just-completed verb forms—‘win’ and ‘play’. The subsequent ‘Is everybody
okay?’ makes available another window of opportunity. Yet, no questions are
raised; all seems well. That is, until 418 lines of transcript and ten items
later:
Extract 2b 1 Marie number five uh ‘the team has very good players’. In
2 fact, the team is winning or
3 Teacher has won.
Clearly, Marie has not fully grasped what the correct answer is or why it is
correct as opposed to any alternatives, and the earlier ‘very good’ closing did
not seem to present a favourable environment for voicing her
understanding problems.
There is, of course, always the issue of whether Miyuki or Marie had any
concerns to voice earlier on in the first place. One might argue, for example,
that their questions emerged over time. Since we are not privy to what
was going on in their heads at the time, what we are proposing is that had
there been a more ‘inviting’ space for student concerns when each item
was initially dealt with, there might have been more room for those
concerns to be developed and articulated, and that the uses of ‘very good’ in
these particular contexts have not been conducive to creating that space.
In sum, there is some evidence that the use of ‘very good’ delivered in
a particular tone and/or package may be inhibiting learning opportunities at
least in a form-focused context. This outcome or by-product may be acute
when the context is a language learning setting, one in which direct
speaking opportunities in class and the frequency of them may contribute to
and impact students’ developing mastery of the target language. In what
follows, we expand the discussion to the use of explicit positive assessments
such as ‘very good’ in general and propose some suggestions for teaching.
Suggestions for the Given our overall discussion above, some teachers might ask, ‘What are the
teacher alternatives for providing positive feedback other than using ‘‘very good’’?’
In this regard, we propose some ways of getting around a ‘very good’
dilemma. Our suggestions for what to do or say as alternative strategies are
to be taken as preliminary steps in an understanding of what should go into
the giving of positive feedback, when ‘very good’ appears to be not ‘good’
enough. We begin with specific classroom techniques and move on to
a more general call for awareness, reflection, and action research.
Use ‘very good’ Arguably, in some circumstances feedback tokens such as ‘very good’
sparingly should be used sparingly or even hardly at all especially with higher-level
learners who may need less reinforcement or ‘stroking’ in the first place
(Brophy op. cit.). In fact, learners typically assume that an answer given is

correct unless teachers tell students otherwise (Brophy ibid.; Seedhouse op.
cit.). Herein might be a small time-saving mechanism, i.e. not offering
positive feedback after every student response, particularly with more
advanced learners.
Produce ‘very good’ Teachers might say ‘very good’ using a mid-rising intonational contour,
with ‘non-final’ which has the effect of functioning as a continuer, soliciting ‘more’ or
intonation further responses from the students. In other words, utter ‘very good’ with
accompanying appropriate non-verbal cues so that the feedback gives off
a ‘non-final’ rather than a ‘finale-like’ tone.
Accept with less The teacher may accept the student’s correct response with less evaluative
evaluative tokens tokens such as ‘okay’, ‘alright’, and the like. In fact, there is some evidence in
Waring (op. cit.) that when ‘okay’ is used instead of ‘very good’, students may
proceed to ask follow-up questions about the just-completed item.
Ask ‘permission’ to The teacher may wish to give a simple, quick nod of the head up and down,
move on which implies approval of the student’s correct answer in a non-verbal
manner and immediately follows up by saying ‘Okay to move on?’ If the
original respondent to the item does not have any problems with moving on,
then the teacher turns to the whole class and asks again ‘Okay to move on?’
Providing feedback in this manner is akin to ‘opening up closings’ which
gives added interactional opportunity spaces, if needed, for anyone in the
class to put forth ‘unmentioned mentionables’ (Schegloff and Sacks 1973).
This technique may be important particularly for those students who are
reticent to speak up and may need extra encouragement or interactional
space in which to do so. In contrast, note that in Extract 2a above, the
teacher’s production of ‘good’ in an excited manner and her repetition of
the correct student’s answer with staccato tones and pauses served to
close off further student questions even though she also asked ‘Is everybody
okay?’
Problematize correct Teachers might help students become more actively engaged with the
responses learning by problematizing a correct answer. We do all kinds of things in
response to an incorrect answer, such as silence, hesitation or delay,
questioning certainty (‘Are you sure?’), asking for repetition or clarification
(for example, ‘Can you say that again?’). If we use these same strategies for
a correct answer, chances are students will try harder to reach an
understanding of not just what a correct answer is, but why it is correct.
Ask ‘pursuit’ Teachers might respond to a student’s correct answer by pursuing with
questions questions such as: ‘Why do you say that?’ ‘How did you get or arrive at that
answer?’ ‘Go deeper into why this is a correct response. Can you explain?’
‘Explain why this is a correct answer based on what we have just learnt (or
based on the grammatical rules we have just studied)?’ This kind of
feedback affords the student an opportunity to support or defend his or her
answer and to display confidence that what he or she has just said is correct
or on target.
Elicit peer Teachers might draw in wider class participation by turning to others in
contribution addition to the one who initially responded and ask: ‘Anyone else?’ ‘What

does someone else have?’ ‘Do you all agree?’ ‘Does anyone have a different
answer?’ These kinds of feedback questions are not intended to imply that
the one who answered initially had an incorrect answer, although the
teacher may need to do some initial work to change this perception or
‘habit’, given that it is a common practice in classrooms that when a teacher
calls on more than one student regarding a particular exercise item, it is
highly probable that the one who originally responded was not entirely
correct. Alternative positive feedback questions such as those suggested
here may open up the classroom floor for further learning opportunities,
allowing students the chance to question, debate, or agree with answers given
by other students.
Use whole class Teachers may invite other students in the class to participate in providing
‘feedback signs’ feedback responses by using signals of various kinds, for example, brightly
coloured, laminated cards that state: ‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘maybe’, or ‘I agree’ versus ‘I
disagree’ that show whether they have the same answer as the one who
originally responded to the exercise item in question (for form-focused
instruction). This allows others in the class an opportunity to participate and
reflect upon how and if their own answer differs from the one given by the
original respondent. And when the teacher notices that there are differing
cards held up by the students, indicating a range of varying responses to the
item in question, the teacher may open up the discussion and clarify or
correct erroneous responses. Ideally, the students initially do not see each
other’s cards or responses so that they are forced to make an independent
‘judgement’ on the item first.
Recognize the Based on our analyses of the classroom data displayed above, which may be
potential negative taken as indicators of what does occur in real teacher–student interaction on
impact of ‘very good’ some occasions of form-focused instruction, we would caution teachers that
in praising students for giving correct responses by offering positive
feedback tokens like ‘very good’ (‘excellent’, ‘good’, ‘wonderful’, or the like),
ironically, this may have a negative impact on the learning situation
(potentially), shutting down the sequence, which may lead to closing off of
further student participation, for example, students’ further questions
and comments. Teachers should use feedback tokens such as ‘very good’
appropriately, being sensitive to the contexts in which utterances of this
kind may inhibit rather than encourage student learning and participation.
Engage in self- Just as Forgas and Tehani (op. cit.) have noted that experienced feedback
reflection givers are mindful of the impact of mood, and how that may affect the kind
and frequency of feedback they give, we would suggest that (language)
teachers, particularly those who are novices but perhaps more experienced
ones as well, engage in some form of self-reflection of their positive feedback
methods and utterances, for example, paying attention to when they use, do
not use, or even overuse feedback tokens like ‘very good’, ‘excellent’, or the
like. Our analyses of the data shown above reveal instances of ‘very good’ as
possibly shutting down learning opportunities in form-focused instruction.
Teachers might examine form-focused and other instructional contexts in
order to get a (better) sense of when they use positive feedback tokens such as
‘very good’ (if at all).

Conduct action Teachers might engage in action research and have themselves videotaped
research teaching a (form-focused) lesson, and subsequently transcribe and analyse
the videotape by themselves or with another colleague, focusing on how,
where, and when they use feedback tokens like ‘very good’ or whatever else
they offer to students in terms of positive feedback, praise, or
encouragement when students give a correct response (some other forms of
positive feedback may fall in the domain of non-verbal behavioural cues).
Another side of this coin would be to include a ‘coding scheme’ for positive
feedback, noting when, where, and what was provided as positive feedback
on teacher observational forms used by supervisors when conducting
required teacher observations. On the supervisor’s part, the goal would not
merely be to check off that positive feedback was provided, as if it were some
taken for granted ‘default setting’ but to examine more actively the kind of
feedback utterances which a teacher employs, their use and appropriateness
in terms of furthering or possibly stifling students’ participation and
learning opportunities. If this kind of notation of positive feedback is
included as a dimension in teachers’ observational reports, teachers most
certainly would (begin to) engage in self-reflection concerning how and
what they provide as positive feedback. Regular self-reflection and
(required) observational reports along parameters such as those proposed
may enhance the quality of teacher performance and better serve the
interests of those whose continued educational growth is at stake, that is the
students.
What teachers might find as a result of their self-reflection and action
research is that ‘very good’ is not something to be avoided at all cost. When
‘very good’ is used along with further ‘pursuit’ questions or the elicitation of
peer contribution as discussed above, its ‘case-closed’ quality may be
significantly mitigated. Moreover, in a less form-focused context where the
task is ‘open’ (Kahn 2008), ‘very good’ may just provide the exact amount of
encouragement students need in continuing their exploration. Finally, ‘very
good’ may be necessary or even essential to encourage the participation and
performance of some children, lower- and intermediate-level learners, those
in special education, or any student in need of more ‘stroking’ or confidence-
building measures. The point is, there is a very important affect dimension
that ‘very good’ affords, and our challenge is to take advantage of the positive
affect that ‘very good’ brings without suppressing learning opportunities.
Conclusion Some teachers may find that they already use alternative positive feedback
techniques such as those mentioned above. And indeed, teachers, in
observing and being mindful of their own teaching style, may think of other
ways of providing positive feedback, ones that would work for their
particular classroom contexts, which have to take into consideration time
and other classroom management issues as well. Overall, we are not
implying that categorically there is no room for ‘praise’ or feedback tokens
like ‘very good’, but that in a larger context, positive feedback should be
meaningful and authentic, in tune with what a teacher hopes to accomplish
in his or her teaching goal(s). We, as (language) teachers, must examine in
detailed ways what feedback tokens such as ‘very good’ possibly do in
classroom interaction from the perspective of promoting and encouraging
students’ continued learning and growth (or not), and in the data that we

have displayed, this involves the kind of learning activity in which students
focus on form. Examining, altering, or varying the ways in which teachers
provide positive feedback to learners is another dimension in scaffolding
instruction (Vygotsky 1978) and providing guidance or ‘knowledge of
results’ (Allwright op. cit.: 167).
Revised version received June 2008
Notes Schegloff, E. A. and H. Sacks. 1973. ‘Opening up

Some of the suggestions for this paper came from closings’. Semiotica 8/4: 289–327.
audience participants at a discussion session Seedhouse, P. 2004. The Interactional Architecture of
facilitated by Waring and Wong (2008) entitled, the Language Classroom: A Conversation Analysis
‘Conversation analysis and giving feedback in the Perspective. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
language classroom’, presented at the Teachers of Sinclair, J. M. and M. Coulthard. 1975. Towards an
English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and
Annual Convention. Pupils. London: Oxford University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The Development
References of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA:
Allwright, R. 1980. ‘Turns, topics, and tasks: patterns Harvard University Press.
of participation in language learning and teaching’ Waring, H. Z. 2008. ‘Using explicit positive
in D. Larsen-Freeman (ed.). Discourse Analysis in assessment (EPA) in the language classroom: IRF,
Second Language Research. Rowley, MA: Newbury. feedback, and learning opportunities’. The Modern
Brophy, J. 1981. ‘Teacher praise: a functional Language Journal 92/4: 577–94.
analysis’. Review of Educational Research
51/1: 5–32. The authors
Fanselow, J. 1987. Breaking Rules: Generating and Jean Wong is an Associate Professor at The College
Exploring Alternatives in Language Teaching. New of New Jersey. Her work has appeared in Applied
York: Longman. Linguistics, Research on Language and Social
Forgas, J. P. and G. Tehani. 2005. ‘Affective Interaction, International Review of Applied Linguistics,
influences on language use: mood effects on Issues in Applied Linguistics, and in edited volumes
performance feedback by experts and novices’. (Gardner and Wagner 2004; Richards and
Journal of Language and Social Psychology Seedhouse 2005; Bowles and Seedhouse 2007). Her
24/3: 269–84. research inquiries include how to use conversation
Gass, S. and A. Mackey. 2006. ‘Input, interaction analysis (CA) as a resource for understanding
and output: an overview’. AILA Review 19: 3–17. interaction and advancing issues and concerns in
Hellermann, J. 2003. ‘The interactive work of language pedagogy.
prosody in the IRF exchange: teacher repetition in Email: jwong@tcnj.edu
feedback moves’. Language in Society 32/1: 79–104.
Kahn, G. 2008. ‘The social unfolding of task, Hansun Zhang Waring is a lecturer in Linguistics and
discourse, and development in the second language Education at Teachers College, Columbia University,
classroom’. Unpublished EdD dissertation, Teachers where she teaches Conversation Analysis and
College, Columbia University. Speaking Practicum, among other courses. Her
Mehan, H. 1979. Learning Lessons: Social work has appeared in Applied Linguistics, Journal of
Organization in the Classroom. Cambridge, MA: Pragmatics, Research on Language and Social
Harvard University Press. Interaction, Discourse Studies, Text and Talk, and
Purpura, J. and D. Pinkley. 2000. On Target Workbook Journal of Sociolinguistics. She is currently interested
1. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education. in using CA to examine instructional practices and
Schegloff, E. A. 2007. Sequence Organization. their relevance to learning opportunities.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Email: hz30@columbia.edu

The value of a focused approach to
written corrective feedback
John Bitchener and Ute Knoch
Investigations into the most effective ways to provide E S L learners with written
corrective feedback have often been overly comprehensive in the range of error
categories examined. As a result, clear conclusions about the efficacy of such
feedback have not been possible. On the other hand, oral corrective feedback
studies have produced clear, positive results from studies that have targeted
particular error categories. This article presents the results of a study that examined
the effectiveness of targeting only two functional error categories with written
corrective feedback in order to see if such an approach was also helpful for ESL
writers. The ten-month study was carried out with 52 low-intermediate E S L
students in Auckland, New Zealand. Assigned to groups that received written
corrective feedback or no written corrective feedback, the students produced five
pieces of writing (pre-test, immediate post-test, and three delayed post-tests) that
described what was happening in a given picture. Two functional uses of the
English article system (referential indefinite ‘a’ and referential definite ‘the’) were
targeted in the feedback. The study found that those who received written
corrective feedback on the two functions outperformed the control group on all
four post-tests.
Introduction In 1996, Truscott declared that the provision of written corrective feedback
on ESL student writing was ineffective and harmful and that it should
therefore be abandoned. He maintained that there was empirical evidence
(for example Semke 1984; Robb, Ross, and Shortreed 1986; Kepner 1991) to
show that the practice was not worth continuing. Ferris (1999), in her
response, pointed out, among a range of arguments, that the research base
he was drawing upon was too limited and conflicting in its findings and that
restraint should be exercised while further investigations were undertaken.
Of the studies that have been conducted until fairly recently, most, in terms
of their design, execution, and analysis, were flawed to some extent (see
Guenette 2007; Bitchener 2008 for a review of these issues) so this has
meant that firm conclusions about the efficacy of written corrective feedback
are not yet available.
Another reason for the failure of earlier work to produce conclusive answers
to the question of efficacy is the unfocused approach that was taken with
regard to the range of error categories treated. Up to 15 different linguistic
error categories were sometimes included in these studies so it was likely to
produce too much of a cognitive overload for learners to attend to. By
204 E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn043

comparison, oral corrective feedback research (for example Doughty and
Varela 1998; Lyster 2004), by focusing on a single error category, has been
able to reveal clear, positive effects for the focused approach.
Although positive findings have been reported in three recent written
corrective feedback studies (Sheen 2007; Bitchener 2008; Bitchener and
Knoch 2008) that were conducted over a two-month period, another
shortcoming of the existing research base has been its primary focus on text
revision. Little attention has been given to investigations of the extent to
which written corrective feedback can facilitate accuracy improvement in
the writing of new texts.
In order to address both of these issues, this article presents the findings of
a ten-month longitudinal investigation of the extent to which a targeted
focus on two functional error categories resulted in improved accuracy in
four new pieces of writing.
The study The study investigated the following research question: does accuracy in the
Introduction use of two functions of the English article system improve over a ten-month
period as a result of written corrective feedback?
Accuracy was measured over a ten-month period by means of a pre-test post-
test design (a pre-test after one week; an immediate post-test following the
corrective feedback treatment after two weeks; three delayed post-tests after
two, six, and ten months).
Participants The study was conducted in the English Language Department of

a university in Auckland, New Zealand. Students from four existing low-
intermediate classes were invited to take part in the study. Fifty-two students
were available for the ten-month data collection period. Students who were
new to the university were assigned to a proficiency level after taking
a standardized grammar test, a writing test, and a one-on-one interview.
Students who had previously been studying at a lower proficiency level were
placed in the low-intermediate level on the basis of earlier competency-
based assessments. The English Language Department describes its
approach to the teaching of English as communicative and gives an equal
focus to reading, writing, speaking, and listening. Most of the students were
migrants who had settled in New Zealand within 18 months of
commencing study at the low-intermediate level. Four hours of instruction
were provided five days a week. The students (19 males and 33 females) were
predominantly from East Asian countries: Korea (15 per cent), Japan (11 per
cent), and the People’s Republic of China (18 per cent). Other countries
represented were Vietnam, Yemen, Russia, Switzerland, Saudi Arabia,
Chile, Brazil, Serbia, Turkey, Somalia, Romania, Iran, Sri Lanka, India, and
Indonesia. The average age of the students was 31.7 years. The majority
(78 per cent) claimed to have had formal instruction though their length of
earlier study varied across a seven-year period. The four classes were
arbitrarily assigned to one of three written corrective feedback groups
(n ¼ 39) or the control group (n ¼ 13) that did not receive corrective feedback.
Target structures Compared with earlier studies on the value of written corrective feedback
(see Ferris 2003), where sometimes as many as 15 linguistic forms and
The value of a focused approach 205

structures had been examined, this study investigated the effect of targeting
two functional uses of the English article system: the referential indefinite
article ‘a’ for referring to something the first time (first mention) and the
referential definite article ‘the’ for referring to something already
mentioned (subsequent mention). Other functional uses of the definite and
indefinite articles were not targeted in the study.
These structures were targeted because students across English language
proficiency levels experience difficulty in the use of the English article
system (Butler 2002; Bitchener, Young, and Cameron 2005). For example,
they may experience difficulty deciding whether an article is required and, if
it is required, whether it should be the definite or indefinite article. So that
second language learners are not stigmatized as a result of incorrect usage
when communicating with native speakers of English and so that doubts do
not arise about which items they may be referring to, it is important that
corrective feedback be provided on the use of articles when students reveal
recurrent difficulties with correct usage. The occasional error may not
necessarily impede the overall coherence and cohesion of a text but frequent
errors may well do so. The extent to which written corrective feedback, as
one form of input, can facilitate the acquisition process is investigated in this
study. Accuracy in the use of these functions in the pre-test revealed a mean
score of 59.41 per cent, thereby indicating that students at a low-
intermediate level have only a partial mastery of the functions.
Treatment Each of the three groups within the wider written corrective feedback group
received different combinations of written corrective feedback. These are
presented in Table 1 below.
Written corrective feedback group Group one—received direct error correction,

written, and oral meta-linguistic explanation
Group two—received direct error correction
and written meta-linguistic explanation
Group three—received direct error
correction
No written corrective feedback Group four—received no corrective
table 1
group feedback
Group treatments
The three types of written corrective feedback referred to in Table 1 involved
the procedures given in Table 2.
Feedback type Feedback procedures

Direct error correction n Place tick/check above correct uses of two functions.
n Correct incorrect uses with ‘a’ or ‘the’ above
each error.
n Insert ‘a’ or ‘the’ where they were omitted but
required.
Written meta-linguistic n Use ‘a’ when referring to something for the first time.
explanation n Use ‘the’ when referring to something that has
already been mentioned.
e.g. A man and a woman were sitting opposite
me. The man was British but I think the woman
was Australian.
206 John Bitchener and Ute Knoch

Oral meta-linguistic n The 30-minute mini-lesson.
explanation n Above rules and examples explained.
n Additional examples illustrated on whiteboard
and discussed with class.
n Students completed five-minute controlled practice
exercise, filling gaps in each sentence with ‘a’, ‘the’,
table 2
or neither, and answers were then discussed.
Feedback procedures
Instruments Each of the five pieces of writing required a description of what was
happening in a given picture (settings at a beach, a picnic, a campsite, a family
gathering, a sporting event). Picture descriptions were chosen because the
range of people, objects, and activities illustrated had the potential to create
obligatory opportunities for the use of both English article functions. Thirty
minutes was given for the writing of each description.
Procedure The procedures of the study were administered according to the timeline
provided in Table 3.
Day one Pre-test (writing task one)

After one week Written corrective feedback treatment provided
Immediate post-test (writing task two)
After eight weeks Delayed post-test one (writing task three)
After six months Delayed post-test two (writing task four)
table 3
After ten months Delayed post-test three (writing task five)
Timetable for procedures
The sequence of activities for the immediate post-test varied as follows
across the groups:
Group one
The immediate post-test was completed after the students had been given
five minutes to consider the error corrections and the written meta-
linguistic explanation and had received the 30-minute lesson (oral meta-
linguistic explanation).
Group two
five minutes to consider the error corrections and the written meta-
linguistic explanation.
Group three
five minutes to consider the error corrections.
Group four
The immediate post-test was completed as soon as the uncorrected pre-test
piece of writing had been returned.
Analysis The analysis of the data involved several steps:

1 Obligatory uses of the targeted features were identified.
2 Written corrective feedback or no corrective feedback was provided (as
described above).

3 Accuracy was calculated as a percentage of correct usage. For example, in
any one script, three correct uses of the targeted features from ten
obligatory occasions meant a 30 per cent accuracy rate.
4 Inter-rater reliability calculations with a trained research colleague
revealed a 95 per cent agreement on the identification of targeted errors
and a 98 per cent agreement on the assignment of errors to the targeted
categories.
5 Descriptive statistics for the pre-test and the four post-tests were
calculated separately for the written corrective feedback groups and the
no feedback group.
6 Because no statistically significant differences on the pre-test scores were
found between the groups, a two-way repeated measures analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was chosen to address the research question.
Results Table 4 below shows the descriptive statistics for the treatment group and
the control group at the five different testing periods.
Group Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5
table 4 N M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD
Descriptive statistics for
1 CF 39 59.15 17.71 84.05 11.70 79.31 11.49 81.44 12.20 86.21 11.15
mean test scores by
2 Control 13 63.23 17.51 67.08 21.45 56.62 22.29 62.46 18.97 58.92 16.16
group and testing period
SD ¼ standard deviation CF ¼ corrective feedback
Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the mean percentages for the five
testing periods for each group. Table 4 and Figure 1 illustrate that whilst both
groups scored around 60 per cent on the pre-test, only participants in the
treatment group were able to increase their accuracy after the pre-test and
keep that gain in accuracy over the following testing periods.
Mean percentages over time
90 CF
Control
85
80
75
70
65
60
figure 1
Mean percentage 55
accuracy for treatment 50
group and control group Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5
over time. CF = corrective feedback
To determine the most appropriate data analysis technique, an independent

t-test was conducted to determine if there were any statistically significant
differences between the two groups on the pre-test. As this was not the case,
t (50) ¼ –.721, p ¼ .474, a two-way repeated measures ANOVA was chosen to
analyse the data (Table 5 below).

Source df F p
Between subjects
Group 1 1293.29 ,.001
Within subjects
table 5
Time 4 13.06 ,.001
Two-way ANOVA
Time · group 4 15.52 ,.001
analysis
Table 5 shows that there was an interaction effect between time and group,
which illustrates that the two different sets of participants performed in
different patterns over time. This interaction effect occurred because the
control group showed no significant increase over time, whilst the
treatment group did. To identify which testing periods differed statistically
significantly for the treatment group, a repeated-measures ANOVA was
conducted with Tukey’s post-hoc pairwise comparisons. These showed that
all post-tests differed statistically significantly from the pre-test (p , .001).
Interestingly, even without another treatment, students performed
significantly better at testing period five (after ten months) than at testing
period four (after six months), p ,.001. Testing periods two and three as
well as three and four showed no differences. The same analysis was
conducted on the test scores of the control group. In this case, none of the
testing periods showed any significant differences.
To investigate if the accuracy of the two groups differed on any of the post-
tests, independent samples t-tests were conducted. All these tests were
significant as can be seen in Table 6 below, indicating that the treatment
group consistently outperformed the control group.
Post-test t df p
Time 2—after 2 weeks 3.618 50 .001
Time 3—after 2 months 4.783 50 ,.001
table 6
Independent samples
t-tests for post-tests
Discussion Students who received written corrective feedback outperformed those who
received no feedback in all four post-tests even though all groups developed
differently over time. This means that the provision of written corrective
feedback on a single occasion had a significant effect, enabling the learners
to use the targeted functions with greater accuracy over the ten-month
period. These results corroborate and extend those of three recent studies
(Sheen op. cit.; Bitchener op. cit.; Bitchener and Knoch op. cit.) that
examined the effect of written corrective feedback on new pieces of writing
over a two-month period. The enduring effect on accuracy over a ten-month
period is clear evidence of the potential for focused written corrective
feedback to help learners acquire features of a second language. Whereas
earlier research has focused on a comprehensive range of error categories,
the results of this study demonstrate the value of focusing on a single error
category. In this respect, they corroborate the findings not only of the written
corrective feedback studies referred to above but also of those on oral
corrective feedback (for example Doughty and Varela op. cit.; Muranoi 2000).

Excerpts 1 and 2 below, from the pre-test and immediate post-test texts of
one student, illustrate the accuracy with which the two article functions
were used in the second text after written corrective feedback had been
provided.
Excerpt 1 (pre-test At the kiosk, a woman buys two ice-creams. A woman gives the ice-cream
text) to her child and keeps ice-cream for herself.
Excerpt 2 (immediate On the other side, there is a bull. The bull is chasing a boy near the gate
post-test text) but I think the boy will beat the bull.
In Excerpt 1, the students appeared to be unclear about the need to use ‘the’
when referring to the same woman in the second sentence and about the
need to use ‘a’ when referring to one of the ice creams for the first time. In
Excerpt 2, however, it can be seen that the student has used the articles
correctly. Ten months later, as Excerpt 3 below reveals, the student appears to
have retained a clear understanding of these article uses.
Excerpt 3 (delayed Lots of children are playing in the room. A baby is playing with blocks and
post-test 3) an old man is sleeping on a sofa. The baby is putting the blocks beside the
sofa while the old man is sleeping.
While these excerpts illustrate the accuracy gains that can be made when
written corrective feedback is focused, further research is required to
determine the extent to which it is effective with other error categories in
other linguistic domains. It is especially important that it be tested with
more complex features to determine whether or not its optimal effect is with
single rule-based functions such as those examined in this study.
Conclusion Based on the findings of the study, a number of pedagogical

recommendations can be offered. Teachers should feel confident about
providing direct written corrective feedback on their students’ linguistic
errors, providing it is based to the best of their knowledge on their
students’ ‘readiness’, both in terms of their proficiency level and their
understanding of the merits of focusing their attention on written
accuracy. We believe that student motivation is more likely to be gained if
teachers negotiate with their students about which features they will focus
on, about how frequent the feedback will be given, about the type of
feedback that will be given, and about what the students will be expected to
do in response to the feedback. The study has also shown that a single
feedback session can be effective in developing accuracy in the use of two
rule-based features but if teachers are able to provide additional feedback
on more occasions, it may be possible to increase the accuracy rate and
also reduce the amount of time that is required to help learners achieve
a high level of mastery over recurrent errors. Finally, and most
importantly, we believe that there is clear evidence from the study to
recommend that teachers provide selective, focused feedback on one or
two linguistic error categories at a time rather than feedback on too
comprehensive a range of features. Although it might be argued that this
approach hinders good language learners from making more rapid
progress in acquiring features that have been problematic if they are
required to proceed in a lockstep manner with the class as a whole, we

would suggest that once there are signs of accuracy development, teachers
renegotiate an additional feedback focus with such students. In order to
confirm the advantage of this approach over the more comprehensive
approach, future research is required to compare the two approaches
within a single research design.
Final revised version received May 2008
References E F L classrooms’. Language Learning

Bitchener, J. 2008. ‘Evidence in support of written 50/4: 617–73.
corrective feedback’. Journal of Second Language Robb, T., S. Ross, and I. Shortreed. 1986. ‘Salience of
Writing 17/2: 102–18. feedback on error and its effect on E F L writing
Bitchener, J. and U. Knoch. 2008. ‘The value of quality’. T E S O L Quarterly 20/1: 83–93.
written corrective feedback for migrant and Semke, H. 1984. ‘The effects of the red pen’. Foreign
international students’. Language Teaching Research Language Annals 17/3: 195–202.
Journal 12/3: 409–31. Sheen, Y. 2007. ‘The effect of focused written
Bitchener, J., S. Young, and D. Cameron. 2005. ‘The corrective feedback and language aptitude on ES L
effect of different types of corrective feedback on E S L learners’ acquisition of articles’. T E S O L Quarterly
student writing’. Journal of Second Language Writing 41/2: 255–83.
9: 227–58.
Butler, Y. 2002. ‘Second language learners’ theories The authors
on the use of English articles’. Studies in Second John Bitchener is an Associate Professor in the
Language Acquisition 24/3: 451–80. School of Languages and Social Sciences at AUT
Doughty, C. and E. Varela. 1998. ‘Communicative University, Auckland, New Zealand. He teaches on
focus on form’ in C. Doughty and J. Williams (eds.). the MA in Applied Language Studies programme
Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language and supervises a wide range of Masters and Doctoral
Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press. thesis students. His research interests include
Ferris, D. R. 1999. ‘The case for grammar correction written and oral corrective feedback and the
in L2 writing classes. A response to Truscott (1996)’. discourse patterning of academic genre. He is
Journal of Second Language Writing 8/1: 1–10. President of the Applied Linguistics Association of
Ferris, D. R. 2003. Response to Student Writing: New Zealand and Co-Editor of New Zealand Studies
Implications for Second Language Students. Mahwah, in Applied Linguistics.
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Email: john.bitchener@aut.ac.nz
Guenette, D. 2007. ‘Is feedback pedagogically
correct? Research design issues in studies of Ute Knoch is a research fellow at the Language
feedback on writing’. Journal of Second Language Testing Research Centre at the University of
Writing 16/1: 40–53. Melbourne. She completed her PhD at the
Kepner, C. G. 1991. ‘An experiment in the University of Auckland focusing on diagnostic
relationship of types of written feedback to the writing assessment. Her research interests are in the
development of second-language writing skills’. areas of language assessment (particularly the
Modern Language Journal 75/3: 305–13. assessment of writing, rating scales, rater training,
Lyster, R. 2004. ‘Differential effects of prompts and the assessment of languages for specific
and recasts in form-focused instruction’. purposes) as well as language pedagogy and
Studies in Second Language Acquisition language and immigration. She is a recipient of
26/3: 399–432. a Spaan Fellowship in Second and Foreign Language
Muranoi, H. 2000. ‘Focus on form through Assessment from the University of Michigan in
interaction enhancement: integrating formal 2006 and 2008.
instruction into a communicative task in Email: uknoch@unimelb.edu.au

Traversing the lexical cohesion
minefield
Iain McGee
When teachers hear the word ‘cohesion’, they usually think of grammatical
cohesion—an aspect of cohesion reasonably well covered in student books and
teacher materials. However, occupying an area that straddles both lexis ‘proper’
and cohesion lies ‘lexical cohesion’. In what follows, it is argued that the teaching
and learning of certain aspects of lexical cohesion is problematic, and that this
state of affairs may be behind the current neglect of this subject in EFL materials
and classrooms. The paper begins with a brief overview of Halliday and Hasan’s
(1976) classification of lexical cohesion, and then looks, in turn, at four types of
cohesive device. Learners’ uses of these different cohesive ties are discussed, the
obstacles to correct usage are noted, and suggestions are made as to how teachers
can help students to develop this aspect of their writing.
Definition and While the terms ‘cohesion’ and ‘coherence’ tend to crop up together in the
overview literature, the relationship between the two is a contested one: for example,
Carrell (1982: 486) argues that coherence leads to cohesion, whereas
Halliday and Hasan (1976: 2) suggest that cohesion brings about coherence.
One thing that all writers would agree on, however, is that the use of lexical
cohesive ties does not, necessarily, make a text more coherent, or ‘better’
than another. As Connor (1984: 308, 311) points out, a text lacking in lexical
cohesive ties may be better organized, or the points may have better support
than a text with more lexical ties. Having made this important
qualification—putting lexical cohesion in its place—we can now look in
more detail at the subject.
In Halliday and Hasan’s (1976: 4) influential work Cohesion in English, the
authors explain that cohesion is a semantic concept, referring to meaning
relations in text.1 They divide cohesion into two broad areas: grammatical
cohesion and lexical cohesion. The former includes reference (for example
three blind mice . . . they), substitution (for example My axe is too blunt. I must
get a sharper one.), ellipsis (for example Which hat will you wear? This is the
best.), and conjunction (for example use of the words but, yet, so, etc.). The
bulk of Halliday and Hasan’s book concerns itself with discussing these
types of cohesive ties, and books aimed at developing academic reading and
writing skills have given considerable attention to reference and
conjunction and their roles in helping texts hang together.2 Even though
lexical cohesion is the more pervasive in creating textual cohesion, it is

Advance Access publication July 29, 2008
neglected in ELT (as noted, for example by Flowerdew 2006: 209).
Halliday and Hasan classify lexical cohesion in the following way:
1 Reiteration
a same word repetition
b synonym or near synonym
c superordinate
d general word.
2 Collocation
Regarding the first of these two classes—reiteration—Halliday and Hasan
provide the following examples of how reiterative inter-sentential cohesive
ties can be made (Figure 1).
figure 1
From Halliday and
Hasan (1976: 279)
Regarding the second means of achieving lexical cohesion (collocation),

Halliday and Hasan (op.cit.: 284) define this as ‘cohesion that is achieved
through the association of lexical items that regularly co-occur’. As
Tanskanen (2006: 12) notes, collocation is not always considered to be a type
of lexical cohesion (cf. McCarthy 1991: 65), and it will not be considered as
playing a role in creating lexical cohesion in this paper. However, collocation
knowledge will be referred to as a specific type of knowledge which
students need to have to enable them to use reiterative lexical cohesive
devices correctly.
In the sections that follow, I look in more detail at the four reiteration devices
noted above in the context of developing E F L learners’ writing skills.
Repetition While repetition is a standard way of achieving lexical cohesion, particularly

in science texts, the fact remains that there can be a lot of, what Ting (2003:
6) calls, ‘redundant repetition’ in students’ writing. From a marking point of
view, it may be that teachers are hesitant to draw attention to redundant
repetition in student writing: repeating a word does not impede
understanding, and neither is overuse necessarily misuse. However, the
effect of such repetition on the reader can be quite negative. To illustrate this
point, I reproduce below a paragraph written by a Saudi intermediate user
of English, studying at a Saudi university, answering a question about
student preparation for exams. The text has not been edited.
Text 1
In order for a student to have a good, healthy studying is having breaks.
Breaks are very benefical thou they are short. A studant ought to have
a five minutes break every one hour. He can spend it watching TV, eating,
drinking, relax or even taking a bath to stress out. Why having a break?
Simply because the maind’s effietioncy goes down after a constent
study. To sum up, having regular breaks is an important method for
a seccesful study.
Traversing the lexical cohesion minefield 213

The student’s use of break/breaks five times in the above extract certainly
does give the text a rather tedious and monotonous feel to it, detracting from
the otherwise well organized, though simply written paragraph. So, why is it
that students ‘overdo’ repetition in their writing?
Firstly, it has been argued that the L1 may play a role in L2 repetition
(McCarthy op.cit.: 67, 68). Typical text structure patterns and style
preferences in the L1 may well transfer to L2 usage, and Mohamed and
Omer (2000) have noted the prevalence of repetition as an Arabic cohesive
device in text.
Secondly, it may be that students do not appreciate the importance of variety
in academic writing. Repetition is particularly common in speech, and
Shaw and Liu (1998) have noted the tendency of EFL learners to write in
a spoken register. Clearly, students need to be made aware about academic
writing norms in English, which eschew, to a large extent, repetition.
An additional reason may be found in the texts that E F L students typically
read. Edited and simplified texts are not rich in their lexical cohesive ties and
Cox, Shanahan, and Sulzby (1990: 60) argue that exposure to ‘contrived’
texts has a negative effect on the development of a learner’s use of lexical
cohesive ties in writing. Ironically, while texts are simplified to help
students, such texts are, implicitly at least, also training the readers in ‘sub-
standard’ lexical cohesive device usage.
Fourthly, and finally, it may be that a student only knows of one way of
referring to a concept. This is a typical explanation for the lack of variety in
student writing (see for example Ting op.cit.: 6); however, it may well be that
this factor plays a more significant role in elementary students’ writing than
in intermediate/advanced students’, as argued below.
The student who wrote Text 1, above, was given some grammatical feedback
on his text, and he then attended a class in which the writer of this paper
talked about and exemplified the importance of the use of synonyms to add
lexical variety to academic writing. The students were asked to rewrite their
first draft paragraphs, paying particular attention to the avoidance of
repetition and the use of synonyms. The student’s second draft is
reproduced below. Grammar and spelling mistakes are retained.
Text 2
In order for a studant to have good and healthy studing is having healthy
breaks. Breaks are very benefical even though they are short. A studant
ought to have a five minutes break at least every one hour. He can spend
[it] his leisure time waching Television, eating, drinking, relaxing or even
taking a bath to destress. Why should you have a time out? Simply
because the mind’s efficiency goes down after constant study. To sum up,
having continuous rests is an important method for secessful study.
Even though the student has the same break ‘cluster’ towards the beginning
of the paragraph, it is noteworthy that he attempted to reduce its use. He
makes three changes in this regard. Firstly, he substitutes ‘it’, present in the
first draft, and included in square brackets in the above (originally referring
to ‘break’) with ‘his leisure time’.3 Further on he substitutes ‘break’ directly
for ‘time out’ and ‘continuous rests’. It should be stressed that the student
214 Iain McGee

rewrote the second draft within a day or two of producing the first text: the
real problem, therefore, seems to have been one of awareness (the second
point noted above).
The next point to consider with regards to repetition is complex
repetition—the use of a derivational form of a word, rather than an exact
repetition—in a text to effect lexical cohesion. Examples in the student text
above would be ‘studant’ (used twice), ‘studying’ used once (incorrectly),
and ‘study’ (twice) as a noun. While word tables showing derivational forms
are still fairly standard items found in E F L books, they are typically used in
exercises to highlight the grammar of the language, rather than
highlighting how different word forms may be used as cohesive ties in a text.
However, tables of this kind can easily be adapted to such usage. It is
important to include information about the frequent or strong collocates of
different word forms because if this information is not provided, it is quite
likely that student attempts to use certain word forms may produce
unidiomatic combinations. The two examples below, from the same class of
intermediate students referred to earlier, illustrate this problem.
Example 1: They need to catch some rest while they are reviewing . . .
Example 2: . . . it also helps if he arranges a schedule so that he could get
some breaks in between studying.
The collocations ‘catch some rest’ and ‘get some breaks’ are both untypical in
native speaker usage. According to the Oxford Collocations Dictionary
(2002), ‘get’, ‘have’, and ‘take’ are typical collocates of ‘rest’, and ‘have’ and
‘take’ typically collocate with ‘break’. Not only, therefore, do students need to
know different word forms to engage in complex repetition, they also need
to know the typical collocates of the different word forms, and this is a heavy
learning burden.
Synonyms Inkpen and Hirst (2006: 224, 225) note three types of differences between
synonyms/near synonyms: denotational differences (i.e. where there is
a difference in meaning, for example ‘lie’ is deliberate, ‘misrepresent’
indirect), attitudinal differences (for example ‘thin’ is neutral, ‘skinny’
pejorative), and stylistic differences (for example in formality: ‘cops’ and
‘police’). True synonyms are few and far between, and research, particularly
in corpus linguistics, has helped us discover the different distributions of
‘apparent’ synonyms in different genres, the semantic prosodies that these
words have (for example ‘bring about’ tends to be used in positive contexts,
‘cause’ when the consequence is negative), and the different collocation
patterns in which synonyms occur. Given such a state of affairs, simply
encouraging students to use synonyms for key words in their writing, rather
than repeating them, is, in effect, an invitation to commit semantic suicide.
We would not usually expect our students to be sensitive to the above noted
points, and yet such knowledge is required to use synonyms successfully.
The following examples, from the same class of Saudi intermediate level
students noted above, are from essays looking at what society can do to
reduce road traffic deaths. Before the students embarked on this task, it was
stressed that they should try to use synonyms, rather than repeat key words

in their writing. At that stage in the course, they were not warned about the
potential dangers in trying to use synonyms as cohesive ties.
Example 3: . . . In the last year, my school made that day to introduce us the
laws and to respect the regulations . . ..
Example 4: . . . accidents . . . To decrease the rate of bad events.
Example 5: When you become an adult or have a permission to drive you
should behave as big guy with good thinking.
Example 6: (In talking about people who die in car accidents)
A huge number of souls . . . Many innocent human . . .
Example 3 is a successful use of synonyms: ‘laws’ (of the road) and (traffic)
‘regulations’ work well as synonyms within this sentence. Turning to the
fourth example, while ‘accidents’ are ‘bad events’ we can recognize that the
student’s attempt at synonymy is not idiomatic. The fifth example is a good
illustration of stylistic insensitivity. While women cannot drive in Saudi
Arabia, i.e. adults in the Saudi driving context are all male, ‘big guy’ would be
much better substituted with ‘grown up’—‘big guy’ is too informal for this
type of writing. With regards to the sixth example, the use of ‘souls’ in this
context is untypical in current English language usage. A human is not
usually referred to as a soul, except within a religious context (for example
‘Have you ever thought about your soul?’). When it is used in other contexts,
its typical collocates (for example ‘brave’, ‘hardy’) give the word a ‘tough’
aura which is not appropriate for a victim, as in the context of the essay. In
addition, while we could speak of ‘innocent humans’, the more typical
collocations of ‘innocent’ are ‘people’ and ‘victims’.
The above commentary is by no means meant to belittle the student efforts:
they are trying, as encouraged by their teacher, to use different vocabulary,
rather than simply repeating words or using more ‘run of the mill’ frequent
vocabulary items. However, the task is not an easy one. It may be that
teachers and teacher materials are partially to blame in at least two areas
here: the use of synonym lists for example, may give students the false
impression that certain words are (always) interchangeable. In addition,
simplistic answers to student vocabulary questions can easily suppress
synonym sensitivity appreciation, rather than enhance it.
Superordinates Other than their use in definitions, superordinates (i.e. words which
‘contain’ other words, for example ‘vehicle’ is a superordinate of ‘car’) receive
very little attention in the classroom. While many students have heard of the
word ‘synonym’, ‘superordinates’ (also called hypernyms) and
‘subordinates’ (hyponyms) are not words typically heard in the EFL writing
classroom.
It is usually the case that the more specific word is used first in a sentence or
text, and then superordinates are used later on, as they contain less
information. This being so, as Salkie (1995) points out, subordinates and
superordinates cannot be simply switched round in a text. For example, in
the text below, Example 7, where ‘Brazil’ and ‘country’ have been switched
around from the original text, Brazil seems to refer to a different country to
that referred to in the opening words.
216 Iain McGee

Example 7: The country, with her two-crop economy, was even more
severely hit by the Depression than other Latin American states and
Brazil was on the verge of complete collapse.
(Salkie 1995: 16)
One useful teacher resource available from the internet is WordNet 2.1
(available from http://wordnet.princeton.edu) which is a lexical database
developed at Princeton University. This program provides a wealth of
information about words and their typical hyponyms and hypernyms.
To encourage the same class of intermediate students referred to earlier to
use superordinates in writing a paragraph about the Titanic disaster, the
following figure (Figure 2) was provided. The students were given no
further help about how to use the words, just encouraged to use them.
figure 2
General and specific
vocabulary
Below I provide two examples of the students’ writing. The lexical chain
usage is noted below the student text, followed by a short commentary. The
texts have not been edited.
Example 8: Titanic was one of disastrous stories. It was a nice and most
beautiful vessel in its century. It travelled to America but when it was in its
voyage, a dire event was waited the ship. Actually, the ocean liner struck by
a mountain of ice and then it sunk.
Chains
Titanic–vessel–ship–ocean liner
Travel–voyage
Event–struck
It is interesting to note here how the student uses ‘travel’ before ‘voyage’
where ‘travel’, as a verb, is a complex superordinate of ‘voyage’ (noun), i.e.
the more general word is used before the more specific. The student follows
the same pattern (i.e. more general word used before the more specific) in
his use of ‘event’ before ‘struck’. As such, these uses, while not wrong, are
not so typical, and it may be that this particular student would have benefited
from some more input on typical superordinate usage, and the usual
pattern in ordering.
Example 9: In 1912, one of man made disaster, which was the great vessal
in that time, called titanic. titanic was a voyage from Southampton in
England to New York City.the ship had prominent people from American,
British and European families .titanic began the travel and it impact with
an iceberg. That event was responsible for sinking ocean liner.

Chains
(the great) Vessel–titanic–titanic–the ship–titanic–ocean liner
(a) Voyage–(the) travel
(It) Impact–(that) event
Of particular note here is the omission of ‘the’ before ‘ocean liner’ in the last
sentence, which, if interpreted uncharitably, could be seen as referring to
a different ship, i.e. Titanic’s impact with an iceberg led to the sinking of
an(other) ocean liner. Students must be made aware that the omission of the
definite article (or a determiner) before the superordinate can lead to
‘unfortunate’ ambiguity.
Overall, the student attempts to use the hypernyms/hyponyms were quite
successful, despite the limited input from the teacher. It would seem that
superordinate usage is less of a minefield than synonym usage: the Titanic
is always an ocean liner and an ocean liner is always a ship; however, ‘slim’ is
not always ‘thin’ or ‘skinny’ (as noted above in the Synonyms section).
General words The ‘general word’ class of Halliday and Hasan overlaps, to a certain extent,
with more recent research on nouns, for example Flowerdew’s (op.cit.)
signalling nouns. These nouns (for example ‘achievement’, ‘problem’,
‘situation’) can be used in a number of ways and they are a useful way for
students to refer back to a particular event/state of affairs referred to earlier
on (i.e. anaphorically) in their writing. I have exposed more advanced level
students to the use of such words in corpus data, and analysed their abilities
to use these nouns. In one such exercise, the students were asked to use
a number of general nouns anaphorically in a third draft of a report, and to
highlight their presence by underlining them to enable me to check on their
usage. The students’ use of the nouns was, by and large, successful.
However, one of the nouns in particular (‘situation’) was quite regularly
misused. Two student extracts are provided below.
Example 10: Mass transit is very uncommon in Saudi Arabia; only private
automobiles cruise the streets, most of which are air-conditioned. All of
these situations are dependant on burning of fuel which produces more
carbon dioxide lead . . ..
In this example, ‘All of these situations’ refers back to the lack of mass
transit, the use of private cars, and the use of air conditioning. This phrase is
not a particularly common one in standard English: it is interesting that the
student felt that he had to use the plural (‘situations’) to refer to the
preceding information. An additional concern in this text is that ‘situations’
does not seem to be the best noun to use: ‘uses’ or ‘means of transport’
would seem to be more appropriate.
Example 11: (Referring to reports about the confiscation of certain
passenger items by Saudi Arabia airlines staff)
Because of that, many items were taken away by Saudi Airlines and
people change their thought and prefer not to go to K S A. These unhelpful
situations happens in a bad time, especially when S CT wanted to increase
the number of foreign tourists.
218 Iain McGee

The collocation ‘situations happens’ is not typical in native speaker
corpora—more frequent collocates of ‘situation’ would be ‘arise’ and ‘occur’,
and the plural ‘situations’, as already noted, is not very common. As with the
previous example, the choice of the word ‘situation’ seems
inappropriate—‘developments’ would seem to fit better in the text. Finally, it
should be noted that the student has used an inappropriate colligate, i.e.
grammatical partner, in the phrase—‘in’ rather than ‘at’. In his study of
a learner corpus, Flowerdew (op.cit.) found colligation errors to be by
far the most common mistake made by learners, in their use of
signalling nouns. This being so, it is probably worthwhile introducing these
general nouns to students in some typical phrases, for example the noun
‘situation’ could be provided in the frame ‘this situation has arisen at
a . . . time’.
The next step Having noted the above issues, there follow a number of brief suggestions
for teachers to consider when thinking about the teaching of lexical
cohesion to their students in their reading and writing classes.
1 Raise awareness of the role of lexical reiterative devices in creating
textual cohesion. Texts can be analysed for different reiterative devices
and comparisons made between published texts and students’ writing.
Salkie’s (op.cit.) workbook contains some exercises specifically aimed
at encouraging students to identify reiterative cohesion in texts.
Though a useful resource, it should be noted that this is not a book
aimed at E F L learners, and the texts used contain some rather difficult
vocabulary.
2 Warn students against adopting a simplistic attitude towards the use of
synonyms. Altered texts can be given to students asking them to identify
inappropriate uses of near synonyms, and students can also be
challenged to choose from a variety of options which word (from a list of
‘synonyms’) is missing from a stretch of discourse. Such exercises will
highlight the point that synonymy is a slippery concept.
3 Give students practice in using hyponyms and hypernyms of key words
in their writing. Students are sometimes asked by teachers to use certain
specific words in their writing, and it is not too difficult to develop this
kind of exercise to work on this specific skill. Wordnet 2.1, as noted
earlier, is a useful resource for teachers to refer to.
4 Be aware of the problem of collocation. As noted above, collocation
errors are pervasive in student attempts to vary their lexis. As much as
possible collocation knowledge must be developed alongside reiteration
skill development. Collocation dictionaries or corpus data can be used by
teachers to help give students the most typical or strongest collocates of
important words.
5 Increase student awareness of redundant repetition in their writing.
Highlighting overuse may well provide the required stimulus for
students to begin thinking about lexical ties in their writing. It is
important to encourage effort here, otherwise students may well just
revert to ‘default’ repetition in the face of difficulties.

Conclusion The use of lexical cohesive ties has been found to be a significant
differentiating factor between native speaker and non-native speaker
writing (Connor op.cit.: 307), and while it is tempting to postpone a focus on
good writing style in the classroom to advanced level classes, this is probably
not the best course of action to take. While lexical cohesion is a complex area,
and fraught with difficulty, it has been suggested in this paper that there are
certain exercise types and awareness-raising activities that can make the
subject a rewarding one for students and teachers to explore together in
class: there are ways to traverse the minefield of lexical cohesion—indeed,
some quite interesting ways.
Final version received April 2008
Notes Perspective. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin

1 The writer is aware of further work by these University Press.
authors in which they refine this taxonomy, for Inkpen, D. and G. Hirst. 2006. ‘Building and using
example Hasan 1984, 1985, and Halliday 1985. a lexical knowledge base of near-synonym
However, the basic types of lexical reiteration, differences’. Computational Linguistics 32/2: 223–62.
while renamed or reclassified, remain. Lea, D. (ed.). 2002. Oxford Collocations Dictionary for
2 As Connor (1984: 302) points out, substitution Students of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
and ellipsis are not as common in written McCarthy, M. 1991. Discourse Analysis for Language
discourse as in conversation. Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3 It should be noted here that ‘leisure Mohamed, A. H. and M. R. Omer. 2000. ‘Texture and
time’—typically referring to a long period of culture: cohesion as a marker of rhetorical
time—is not a particularly appropriate synonym organisation in Arabic and English narrative texts’.
for ‘break’ (a short period of time) in the text. R E LC Journal 31/2: 45–75.
Salkie, R. 1995. Text and Discourse Analysis. Florence,
KY: Routledge.
References Shaw, P. and E. T.-K. Liu. 1998. ‘What develops in the
Carrell, P. L. 1982. ‘Cohesion is not coherence’. development of second-language writing?’ Applied
T ES O L Quarterly 16/4: 479–88.
Linguistics 19/2: 225–54.
Connor, U. 1984. ‘A study of cohesion and coherence Tanskanen, S.-K. 2006. Collaborating Towards
in English as a second language students’ writing’. Coherence: Lexical Cohesion in English Discourse.
Papers in Linguistics 17/1–4: 301–16. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing
Cox, B. E., T. Shanahan, and E. Sulzby. 1990. ‘Good Company.
and poor elementary readers’ use of cohesion in Ting, F. 2003. ‘An investigation of cohesive errors in
writing’. Reading Research Quarterly 25/1: 47–65. the writing of P RC tertiary E F L students’. Available
Flowerdew, J. 2006. ‘Use of signalling nouns in at http://www.stets.org.sg/
a learner corpus’. Lexical Cohesion and Corpus vol2N2_2003FengTing.P D F. Last accessed 12
Linguistics (Special issue). International Journal of February 2008.
Corpus Linguistics 11/3: 227–47.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An Introduction to Functional The author
Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Iain McGee’s research interests include investigating
Halliday, M. A. K. and R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in differences between teachers’ intuitions about
English. Harlow: Longman. language and corpus data, and the teaching of
Hasan, R. 1984. ‘Coherence and cohesive harmony’ collocation. He taught in Kuwait and King Fahd
in J. Flood (ed.). Understanding Reading University of Petroleum and Minerals, Saudi Arabia,
Comprehension. Newark, DE: International before moving on to Taibah University, Madinah,
Reading Association. Saudi Arabia.
Hasan, R. 1985. ‘The structure of a text’ in Email: idmsjm96@muchomail.com
M. A. K. Halliday and R. Hasan (eds.). Language,
Context and Aspects of Language in a Social Semiotic
220 Iain McGee

Critical reflection in a T E S L course:
mapping conceptual change
Thomas S. C. Farrell
How can teacher educators gauge what participants have learnt after taking
a course in teaching English as a second language (TESL)? One method that can
help both language teacher educators and their students trace conceptual changes
as a result of taking a course is the use of concept maps. This paper examines the
conceptual changes of a group of MA participants in Canada as a result of taking
a TESL course. Pre-course and post-course concept maps were elicited from the
participants who were also asked to write short descriptions of changes (and the
reasons for these changes) they observed between their pre- and post-course maps.
Participants were also interviewed about the contents of their individual concept
map and their perceptions of the course. Results indicate that the course had some
impact on the participants’ prior beliefs and that a concept map may be a useful
tool for tracing conceptual change.
Introduction Participants come to teacher education courses with prior experiences,

values, and beliefs and with specific expectations about the subject matter
they will learn. These beliefs have been accumulated from a variety of
sources including their past experiences as students in the school system
and may act as filters to what they have been exposed to in the teacher
education programme (Lortie 1975). Hence, differences are likely to exist
between what teacher educators may think is important for the participants
to learn and what they actually learn as a result of taking a course. Bearing
this in mind, it is crucial then for educators to be able to establish a reliable
means of gauging the effectiveness of their courses. One method available
to language teacher educators interested in tracing participants’ conceptual
changes, or any changes in participants’ preconceptions or initial intuitive
ideas as a result of taking a course, is the use of concept mapping. Concept
maps are diagrams that show relationships and understandings among
concepts within a specific topic (Novak 1990). This paper outlines a small-
scale study of how a language teacher educator used concept mapping to
trace the conceptual changes of seven participants (the total number of
students who took the course) as a result of taking a course in teaching
English as a second language (T ES L) in a Canadian University.
Preconceptions of Research has indicated that participants come to any teacher education
teaching and programme with prior assumptions and beliefs, sometimes called
learning preconceptions, and experiences about teaching and learning (Shulman
E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn058 221

Advance Access publication November 10, 2008
1987). In language education, many of these preconceptions about teaching
and learning are usually influenced by the participants’ previous schooling
in that they spend many hours subconsciously observing their teachers
while at the same time developing tacitly held images about teaching and
learning (Richards 1998). The result of this type of ‘apprenticeship of
observation’ (Lortie op.cit.; Borg 2004) and other prior experiences is that
participants enter the teacher education programme already possessing
a vast array of tacitly held prior beliefs and assumptions about teaching and
learning which can, as Richards (1998: 71) has highlighted, ‘often serve as
a lens through which they view’ the content of such programmes. The
problem is that if participants find that any of the content they are presented
in the language education courses is in conflict with their prior beliefs, then
rather than restructure their beliefs, many may only fine-tune them a little
(Richards, Ho, and Giblin 1996). In addition, as Burns (1993) has indicated,
all this happened at the subconscious level and as such, teacher education
programmes must provide opportunities for their students to be able to
‘raise to consciousness the nature of the personalized theories which inform
their practice’ (ibid.: 63–4) so that they can become aware of any
inconsistencies between their prior beliefs and concepts they are presented
with in these courses.
Methodology Raising awareness of participants’ prior beliefs and gauging the impact
of a course on these beliefs are as much a methodological issue as
a substantive one. From a methodological perspective, one means that
can help raise awareness of prior beliefs while at the same time gauge
conceptual change as a result of taking a course is the use of concept
mapping. Concept maps are ‘a visual representation of knowledge’
(Antonacci 1991: 174) and show relationships between concepts in a type
of network system and are useful visual indications of what people know
about a topic.
Participants and The seven participants were enrolled in a one-year programme, the MA in
course Applied Linguistics/T E S L, at a university in Canada. Each participant was
assigned the capital letter ‘T’ and a random number (from 1 to 7) behind the
letter ‘T’ so that identities remain hidden. T1 was a female Canadian with
over ten years teaching experience and a certificate in TESL as was T7,
a female Canadian with similar teaching experiences; T2 was a female from
Korea with five years teaching experience as was T5, a female from Korea
who also had about five years teaching experience; T3 was a female from
China and had no full-time teaching experience, but had a certificate in
T E S L as was T4, a female from China, who also had a certificate in TESL; T6
was a male Canadian with about five years teaching experience and
a certificate in T E S L. So, not only had they all prior student experiences but
also many had prior beliefs based on certificate programmes they had taken
as well as prior experiences as teachers (five of the seven teachers). The
course they were taking emphasized the following curriculum: Current
Issues in Applied Linguistics and T E S L, Issues in Language Learning
(Second Language Acquisition), Issues in Language Teaching
(Methodology), Issues in Language Curriculum Development, Issues in
Critical Pedagogy, and Issues in Professional Development.
222 Thomas S. C. Farrell

Data collection Following the work of Fischer, Bruhn, Grasel, and Mandl (2002) who
maintain that in order to ensure greater ownership of the learning process,
students should construct their own concept maps, rather than have a pre-
course map prepared by the course instructor, the seven participants
were each asked on the first day of class to construct a concept map
concerning the topic (‘What does teaching English as a second language
(TESL) mean to you?’) placed inside a circle with several nodes, or spokes,
emanating straight from that circle like a bicycle wheel. These pre-course
maps would be used for diagnostic purposes by the instructor to gauge the
extent of the participants’ prior knowledge and beliefs. On completion of
the maps, the participants were asked to share their answers during
a peer group discussion and reflection session. At the start of the following
class, and in order to clarify what they placed in their concept maps,
a class group discussion was conducted where the participants were
encouraged to further explore their prior experiences and beliefs about
T E S L.
On the final day of class, the participants were again asked to construct
concept maps on the same topic and following the same written and
explained directions as on the first day of class. When the participants had
completed their post-course maps, they were given their pre-course maps
for comparison and asked to write comments about any changes they
noticed between the two maps and the reasons for these changes. Each
participant was also interviewed in order to discuss and reflect on the
changes that had occurred in these maps and any further perceptions they
had of the course they had just completed. In addition, I also attempted to
contact each participant two years after they had taken the course to assess if
they still held the same post-course beliefs about T E S L (I was only able to
contact two of the original seven).
Data analysis In order to analyse the data, a keyword method was applied to the database of
categories that were developed. For example, as a result of taking the course,
one type of category that emerged on the concept maps indicated that many of
the participants interpreted course concepts in terms of critical reflection.
Keywords from this category included ‘beliefs’, ‘teacher personality’, and ‘self-
awareness’ among others. Another interpretation was research and theory
and keywords from this category included ‘theory acquisition’, ‘research’,
‘corrective feedback’, and ‘link theory to practice’, among others. Each
participant’s map was analysed as follows: each keyword was numbered and
a frequency count was noted along with any connections made to other
concepts. The number of keywords from the seven individual maps was
totalled and a pre-course group concept map was constructed after the first
class and a post-course group map was constructed after the last class in
order to provide a visual of what the participants as a whole said they believed
about TESL. In order to check for reliability of my coding of categories,
I trained two other coders and we had an intercoder reliability of about
85 per cent.
Findings The pre-course group map is shown in Figure 1. This illustrates the issues
Pre-course group (in order of frequency) as follows: Teaching theory/methods (6), Language
concept map learning/acquisition (5), Culture (4), Professional development (3), Motivation
Critical reflection in a TESL course 223

figure 1
Pre-course group
concept map. (Number
in parentheses shows the
number of times
a concept was included
in the individual concept
maps.)
(3), and another category which included many diverse items. Teaching
theory/methods was present in six maps without any further explanation. In
the class discussion that followed the first class, they said that they thought
the MA programme would give them many teaching methods and that was
what TESL was for them. The next concept, Language learning/acquisition,
was present in five maps and included learners’ differences especially in
terms of their personality, age, gender, and learning styles into this category.

Culture was the next concept (present in four maps) and included issues
such as culture difference, ethnicity effect on learning and teaching styles,
and culture shock. The group discussion that followed indicated that the
participants were drawing on not only their prior experiences as students in
the school system but also their own language learning experiences (stated
by two of the seven) and from their experiences as students in their initial
language TESL teacher certificate courses (stated by five of the seven
participants); in fact, many of the results of the initial map may be attributed
to some of the participants’ experiences in previous certificate courses as
many of the concepts seem to represent the subject matter of these courses.
Thus, the pre-course group concept map gave the instructor some
indication of these participants’ prior beliefs about, and experiences with,
T E S L.
Post-course group The post-course group concept map is shown in Figure 2. Several new
concept map concepts appeared in the post-course concept maps that were not on the pre-
course maps such as Critical reflection/Self-awareness (23), Research and
theory (9), and Curriculum design (8). In addition, it should be noted that
some concepts appeared in more than one sphere, indicating possibly that
the participants were attempting to make connections between the
concepts.
Critical reflection was the most popular concept in the post-course group
concept map and was subdivided into teachers’ personality, self confidence,
self-awareness, self-assessment, knowledge of subject matter, classroom
lessons, and evaluation. Next came research and theory, further subdivided
into theory acquisition, applied linguistics—especially how, research theory
and practice are linked—can anything be proven, corrective feedback, and
alternative assessment of students. This concept was followed by another
new concept curriculum design with subdivisions of textbooks, ideology,
and materials.
All participants wrote that they had noticed a major new concept of critical
reflection in the post-course maps. In addition, critical reflection enabled
them to note that the post-course maps showed a different understanding of
the concept ‘method’ that allowed for a move away from a focus on looking
for the correct method when constructing the pre-course concept maps.
These two findings are important because both concepts were new and
different from what the participants had said they ‘believed’ to be true for
T E S L before they had taken the course.
Regarding critical reflection, T3, a participant from China, said that she
noticed in her post-course map that she had ‘a new bubble called critical
thinking’ which she explained in the post-course interview as follows:
You need your own thinking, not follow others . . . like teaching is their
own voice in their teaching process. Not just follows the administrators
thinking. I think I need to raise my voice; to express my opinion of what
teaching is and how I should teach in my class including the kind of
material to use in my class, not just the textbook.
Later in the same interview she said that she would try to instil this kind of
critical thinking in her students when she returned to China; she said:

figure 2
Post-course group
concept map. (Number
in parentheses shows the
number of times
a concept was included
in the individual concept
maps.)

‘When I go back to China I would be an English teacher. I will let my
students have this kind of thinking’. Another participant, T5 from Korea,
also said that she would try to incorporate critical thinking into her teaching
because she noted that:
Usually the tradition of education in Korea is we just obey. We just follow
the rules from the government or from the administrator, or some
principal in the school. But now I can think, I can decide, this is good, but
this is not, or I need to follow this, but I don’t think this is good. I can
determine if it’s good for my teaching or for my students. This is critical
thinking for me.
However, she said that this process would not be easy for her to follow in
Korea especially if ‘I want to work in the schools, so I must follow basic rules
otherwise I can be isolated from the other teachers’. In addition, T5 also
mentioned that this process of developing critical reflection was slow for her
because of her past experiences and beliefs and that she only realized that
she was becoming more critically reflective ‘almost at the end of the course’.
Another participant, T2 also from Korea, voiced similar ideas about critical
reflection when she said: ‘In Korea, we cannot say anything to the professor
like bad things, I don’t think so, I cannot say this, but here I can say, I don’t
think so, and I can explain why I don’t think like this’. Similar to T5 above, it
was not until the end of the course that she realized her changed way of
thinking; she continued:
I realized this near the end of the course when I started to think about
politics. I never thought about it, the relationship between politics and
education. And when I saw, like, class ethics, or I thought just racism.
I never thought it’s because it’s politics, but while I am reading the
readings, I can say yeah, everything is related to politics.
T6, a male Canadian participant also realized that he may have just accepted
all he was presented with before in his TESL certificate programme without
question; he said:
There were moments, in my teaching profession, until now, where I’ve
done something ‘cause that’s the way I’ve done it. And, if someone asked
me, I would say ‘well, this is . . . this is, like the way to do it because it’s
effective.’ But without really questioning the context that I was in and
not . . . Without really questioning what was going on.
Asked again two years after taking the MA course if he still held the same
ideas he had expressed above, he said: ‘Yes’. Before taking the MA
programme and in particular the course reported on in this paper, T6 said
that during his T E S L certificate programme ‘while teaching ESL to
international students at the same university (where I got my certificate), I
was nudged (in some cases harder than in others) towards a certain method
of teaching. This helped me at first, as I needed some guidance. But, in the
long run, it may have hurt me as well, for I allowed myself to be boxed in—to
teach a certain way regardless of the teaching context’. Now, two years since
taking the Foundations course reported on in this paper, where he said he
‘was asked to consider with a more critical eye the teaching concepts I was
reading about’, he suggests his own learning ‘continues today in my own
teaching experience’.

T7, a female Canadian participant, noted in the post-course interview that as
a result of taking the course she has ‘started to think more critically not just
about reading things critically, but about the profession as a whole . . . who
drives it and how’. Before the course she said that she ‘believed everything
was wonderful and I was just teaching English’, but post-course she said she
noted a difference and that ‘we have to be careful’. Two years after taking this
course, T7 still maintains that she believes that the course made her ‘more
critically reflective’; she continues: ‘Yes, I feel pretty much the same way.
The course helped me to think more critically about everything in my
profession. I think more about the bigger picture and the overall effect that
teaching English has on people’.
Concept mapping Concept maps can be used as a type of meta-language for learning, not only
for communication but also for synthesizing what a course participant is
learning and how the participant is thinking about course content (Hyerle
2004). Thus, learners can be evaluated about not only what they know but
also how they know what they know by asking them about the information
present in their concept maps. So too was the case for the study reported on
in this paper where the individual and group concept maps gave both the
instructor and the participants a visual (freeze-frame) of what the
participants were thinking at the beginning and the end of the course—the
what they know. In addition, the concept maps seem to make it easier for the
participants to reflect on their beliefs (prior and post) during the interviews
that followed because they could retrieve language from the maps to express
that knowledge in a more organized manner of how they arrived at these
visual representations—the how they know what they know. This may be
a very important consideration for language educators whose class
participants include those whose English is a second or foreign language
and thus far may have struggled to find a voice in graduate TESL courses. It
may also be possible to use concept mapping to influence the manner of
discourse in the class as teacher educators and participants alike begin to
use words such as ‘think’, ‘classify’, ‘sequence’, ‘brainstorm’, and ‘reflect’ to
represent cognitive processes. In addition, the use and discussion of pre-
course concept maps may encourage language teacher educators to refocus
course goals and further refine instructional purposes of a course and as
such they can determine what kind of thinking will be involved throughout
the course.
Mergendoller and Sachs (1994: 589) noted that concept maps can be ‘useful
for measuring cognitive change resulting from participation in academic
courses’. The results of this study have indicated that the technique of
concept mapping has resulted in cognitive change especially in their
attitudes to teaching T E S L and the profession (for example T6 and T7) and
in their beliefs about language teaching (for example T2, T3, T5). However,
I cannot say if this technique was sufficient to induce experiential change
where the participants took any specific actions beyond the mental changes
they noted (Keiny 2008). Other limitations that should be noted include the
small population of only seven participants which makes generalizability of
the results somewhat problematic. Furthermore, this study is based to
a great extent on the participants’ narration of the different issues
concerning their reflections. However, because four of the participants were

using English as a second language, this may have limited their means of
narrative ability in English during the interviews. In addition, the different
cultural backgrounds of the Chinese and Korean participants may also have
influenced what these cultures consider appropriate to report in such an
exercise. A further limitation of this study is recognition of the fact that the
researcher was also the instructor of the class and this too may have
impacted what all the participants, irrespective of culture or language
background, may have considered important to report to the researcher/
instructor.
Conclusion While recognizing some limitations of concept mapping, the results of the
study reported on in this paper suggest that concept maps may be a useful
teaching aid for the instructor to gauge participants’ prior beliefs and
experiences about a topic and to find out if they hold similar beliefs after
taking the course. Concept mapping also gives course participants a visual
representation of their thoughts before and after taking a course, and when
discussion is included in the reflection process, they can gain a greater
conceptual clarity for themselves as a result of having to explain their
conceptions to a partner, a group, or the class.
Final revised version received July 2008
References Novak, J. D. 1990. ‘Concept maps and Vee diagrams:

Antonacci, P. A. 1991. ‘Students search for meaning two metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful
in the text through semantic mapping’. Social learning’. Instructional Science 19: 1–25.
Education 55: 174–94. Richards, J. C. 1998. Beyond Training. New York:
Borg, M. 2004. ‘The apprenticeship of observation’. Cambridge University Press.
ELT Journal 58/3: 274–6. Richards, J. C., B. Ho, and K. Giblin. 1996.
Burns, A. 1993. ‘Teacher beliefs and their influence ‘Learning how to teach in the R SA Cert.’ in
on classroom practice’. Prospect 7: 56–66. D. Freeman and J. C. Richards (eds.). Teacher
Fischer, F., J. Bruhn, C. Grasel, and H. Mandl. 2002. Learning in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge
‘Fostering collaborative knowledge construction University Press.
with visualization tools’. Learning and Instruction Shulman, L. 1987. ‘Knowledge and teaching:
12: 213–32. foundations of the new reform’. Harvard Educational
Hyerle, D. 2004. ‘Thinking maps as Review 57: 1–22.
a transformational language for learning’ in
D. Hyerle (ed.). Student Successes with Thinking Maps. The author
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Thomas S. C. Farrell is a Professor of Applied
Keiny, S. 2008. ‘‘‘Conceptual change’’ as both Linguistics at Brock University, Canada. His
revolutionary and evolutionary process’. Teachers and professional interests include reflective practice
Teaching 14: 61–72. and language teacher education and
Lortie, D. 1975. Schoolteacher. Chicago, IL: University development. He is a series editor for the
of Chicago Press. Language Teacher Research series for T E S O L, U SA.
Mergendoller, R. and C. Sachs. 1994. ‘Concerning His recent book is Reflective Language Teaching:
the relationship between teachers’ theoretical From Research to Practice (2008 Continuum
orientations toward reading and their concept maps’. Press).
Teaching and Teacher Education 10: 589–99. Email: tfarrell@brocku.ca

Challenges in teaching ELF in the
periphery: the Greek context
Nicos Sifakis
The paper presents a notional account of the challenges facing the introduction of
English as an international lingua franca (ELF) curriculum in the state schools of
the expanding circle, taking Greece as a case in point. It broadly delineates an ELF
curriculum as one focusing on the skills necessary for carrying out successful
communication involving non-native speakers and then highlights a set of
challenges linked to both teaching context and teachers’ perceptions of
professional identity. It focuses on challenges related to three facets of the
professional identity of academically trained Greek state school EFL teachers,
namely, their roles as users, specialists, and, ultimately, custodians of English for
their learners and wider community. These facets are discussed with reference to
a description of the country’s current sociolinguistic and educational profile. The
paper concludes with an overview of the strengths of an ELF curriculum for Greek
state schools and discusses implications for E L F teacher education.
Introduction In the past few years, research in the domain of English as an international
lingua franca (ELF) has posed important questions about the role and
nature of communication between non-native speakers (NNSs) in today’s
globalized world. Topics that have raised heated debates have focused on
issues like the nature of EL F as a variety (or network of varieties) in its own
right, the issue of the ownership of English by its NNSs (Rajagopalan 2004),
or the prospects of ELF testing (Jenkins 2006a). Other areas that have been
extensively discussed have referred to areas such as the nature of successful
NNS–NNS interactions (Seidlhofer 2004) or the lingua franca
pronunciation core (Jenkins 2000), among others.
Despite the ongoing debate, however, there has to my knowledge been
surprisingly little discussion on the actual teaching possibilities for EL F.
Leading EL F scholars have argued that ‘it would be premature to launch into
a discussion of the teaching of this lingua franca before certain prerequisites
have been met’ (Seidlhofer 2004: 209) and that these prerequisites should
include a comprehensive account of EL F use and its users. In a similar vein,
Jenkins (2006b: 174–5) has linked EL F teaching with predominant policies
related to E F L testing.
It is my contention in this paper that an additional concern should be added
to those above, namely, the degree to which teachers are willing and ‘ready’
to engage in ELF teaching. Such a concern can have many dimensions

Advance Access publication November 10, 2008
(for example the increasing demand for proficiency examinations in
countries of the expanding circle that Jenkins refers to above), but here I
would like to focus on aspects of teachers’ professional identity that are likely
to prevent them from integrating EL F into their teaching. By ‘professional
identity’ I mean the wide range of characterizations that teachers, learners,
and others use to delineate different aspects of their teaching practice.
My focus, in this paper, is domains where EL F is expected to have the
greatest impact, i.e. countries of the expanding circle (where English is in
extensive demand but does not have official status). As a case in point, I take
the example of Greece and reflect on the complications that may be posed by
certain facets of the professional identity of E F L teachers who work in the
state sector.
EFL teachers and the Before I refer to these complications, it is fair to ask what an EL F curriculum
E L F challenge might look like. We still lack enough information on which to base
E L F as a a comprehensive proposal, but it should be possible to argue that
communication- a preliminary phase of such a curriculum would focus on:
skills-based
1 making learners aware of what is involved in contextualized instances of
curriculum
successful NNS–NNS communication and
2 engaging them in similar interactions among themselves.
An ELF curriculum would concentrate on those competences and
communication skills that any successful (mainly spoken) interaction
involving NNSs portrays (Sifakis 2004), such as the capability to render
one’s discourse intelligible for their interlocutors through a process of
accommodation (for example making repairs, paraphrasing, rephrasing, or
even allowing for linguistic errors that might facilitate communication). It is
envisaged that these practices would lead learners to realize the importance
that NNS–NNS communication will have for them in the years to come,
appreciate the reasons for learning English (for example as a language for
communication rather than as one for identification—House 2003), and
instil confidence in their own use of the language.
It is expected that, in the first stages, such a curriculum would be used in
addition to established E F L curricula, wherever this is possible. This means
that it will be the responsibility of EFL teachers to make attempts at
integrating it with their established practices and see what works and what
does not work for their learners.
Teachers’ attitudes It would be interesting to see what demands such a curriculum would
towards E L F make on EFL teachers. Apart from the fact that it would require that they
have reached a certain amount of autonomy as teachers, it would also
require that they have a positive attitude towards the issues that EL F
research highlights.
Research into teachers’ and learners’ attitudes towards EL F issues (Jenkins
2007) has shown that people have strong perceptions about what is ‘correct’
and ‘appropriate’ in language communication. This is especially true in
countries of the expanding circle, where EFL teaching is largely dependent
on inner-circle norms (McKay 2003). This means that EL F teaching is not
simply going to be a matter of becoming acquainted with excerpts from the
Challenges in teaching E L F in the periphery 231

various published ELF corpora or reading the EL F literature. It is required
that E F L teachers critically approach EL F research and try to see whether it
can find applications in their own teaching context.
‘Objective’ and What are the characteristics of such a process and what demands would it
‘subjective’ pose? It is possible to distinguish between two sets of challenges that EFL
hindrances in teachers face, those that are ‘objective’ and outside the teachers’ own control
integrating an E L F and those that are ‘subjective’ and within teachers’ conscious control.
curriculum
One set of ‘objective’ problems stems from the current status of the EL F
field. As already mentioned, more research is necessary in clearly
delineating the ELF domain. Furthermore, it is necessary to consider the
many variables of teachers’ ‘contextual situation’ (Stern 1983: 274) that
are conducive to shaping their self-image and sense of professional
obligations and are likely to influence the extent to which they will be
genuinely interested in ELF. These constraints spring from the curricular
situations teachers find themselves in, the available courseware, the
prevailing institutional and educational cultures, and the established
social-professional status teachers enjoy.
On the other hand, ‘subjective’ hindrances are related to teachers’
perceptions about their role and status inside and outside the language
classroom. How teachers perceive EL F may influence their attitude towards
teaching it. Research shows that E F L teachers seem to recognize the
usefulness of the E L F -based skills mentioned in NNS–N NS
communication but are prone to taking up an NS-oriented perspective
when asked specifically about language teaching (Sifakis and Sougari
2005). Other sources of influence, apart from the contextual factors
mentioned above, can be teachers’ previous experiences in pre- and in-
service training or as foreign language learners and their self-image as
educators and subject matter experts. Where teachers live and how they
have been accustomed to teaching can shape their perspectives about issues
that are central to ELF concerns, such as language and identity, the
development of appropriate ESOL policies and pedagogies, the role of
accuracy and efficiency in communication, or established perceptions
about literacy and testing.
A ‘peripheral’ country Let us see how the above features relate to Greece, a typical expanding-circle
profile—the case of country, where English has no official status but is considered a key
Greece prerequisite for ‘surviving’ in today’s globalized world.1
Greece’s ‘de facto population’ is around 11.1 million (2005). The resident
migrant population (which includes economic immigrants from the
Balkans, Eastern Europe, and Asian countries like Iraq and Afghanistan) is
in the region of 10 per cent. A quick look at officially available ethnic
groupings, however, shows that the Greek population is, at least on the
surface, notably homogeneous, with 97 per cent being Greek and 98 per
cent being nominally members of the Greek Orthodox Church. The
official language, Modern Greek, is the L1 of about 99 per cent of the
population and is used throughout the territory and taught at all levels
of education.
232 Nicos Sifakis

Education and E F L Education plays an important role in Greece as a means of providing basic
knowledge and life skills and, especially, preparing pupils for future
employment. The adult literacy level (i.e. people of 15+ who can read and
write) is at 91 per cent, and in 2003, about 74 per cent of the tertiary age
population were enrolled in some type of higher education programme.
As Modern Greek is not widely used outside Greece, foreign language
learning is considered crucial. As expected, English is the primary foreign
language. In 2004, 96.9 per cent of state school pupils of all levels learnt
English (EU25 ¼ 84.9 per cent). Since the late 1980s there has been an
increasing demand for certification of proficiency in English which is today
taken for granted as an employability requirement. Having a C2-level
proficiency certificate is considered as essential for future employment as
having basic computer skills. For the state, these certificates have lifelong
validity and are considered by many as having as much weight as
a university degree. Virtually all pupils aim at acquiring certificates from
acclaimed standardized examination boards, for which they prepare
strenuously by studying at private institutions or attending one-to-one
classes. The E F L teachers occupied in these institutions are, at best,
academically trained, but the great majority are C2-level certificate holders
who are certified by the Greek Ministry of Education to teach.
Greek state school All state school E F L teachers should have a university degree in English
EFL teachers studies. The 2003 state school curriculum follows the cross-curricular
approach. While it focuses on teaching the normative structures and
functions of the language, it does not require that learners reach near-native
speaker proficiency. Rather, the emphasis is on intelligibility and effective
communication with NSs and NNSs and on highlighting the ‘international
elements’ of English.
Since the dominant belief is that effective EF L teaching should aim at
helping learners to pass examinations and acquire certificates, it is generally
assumed that foreign languages are taught and learnt more effectively at
private schools. This has led to a situation where state school E F L
teaching (especially in the large cities) has the status of a TENOR2
situation (Abbot 1981) and state school E F L teachers enjoy a relatively lower
status in relation to teachers of other, more ‘important’ subjects. Also, as
teachers are under pressure to cover the material prescribed by
educational authorities, competent learners can become easily
demotivated and weaker learners find the lessons difficult to follow.
As Greek society is rapidly becoming multicultural, state school classes
are increasingly multicultural and multilingual. However, while this
phenomenon has had an enormous impact on the economy of the country,
essentially helping to push it forward, it has not been acknowledged as
positive by the majority of Greeks. In many cases, these attitudes are evident
in state schools too (Dimakos and Tasiopoulou 2003). At the same time,
Greeks consider themselves a largely monolingual and monocultural
community. As Greek is the dominant language of education, it seems to
me that it would be good if state school E F L teachers used EL F as a ‘neutral’
and non-threatening medium of self-expression and a means of raising
their learners’ intercultural awareness.

Three ‘hats’ of EFL In view of the above, how ‘ready’ are Greek E F L teachers serving in the state
teachers sector to integrate an additional EL F curriculum into their everyday
practices? To try to answer this question, it is important, in my view, that we
draw attention to the social, professional, and pragmatic reality that these
teachers find themselves in. In what follows, I will attempt to further explore
this reality by referring to three hats that these teachers wear, or three
distinct roles that they adopt with regard to the language they teach, their
learners, and the wider community.
Teachers as language As mentioned, English does not have an official status in Greece, which
users means that its knowledge is not necessary in carrying out important
transactions. However, in everyday life, English does play an increasingly
visible role in various domains (in shop names, restaurant menus, even
words and phrases that combine Greek and English, commonly termed
‘Greeklish’) and its knowledge is helpful when engaging with modern
technology (for example computers, mobile phones, electronic games,
satellite TV, internet, manuals, etc.). However, engaging with the language
in this way means mainly practising receptive macro and micro skills
(reading and some listening), although in certain areas productive skills
may also be called for (for example in email communication or online
chats).
What use of the language teachers make outside their classrooms is not
easy to say, but it is certain that EFL classrooms would be a primary domain
of English use in the majority of cases. This means that such language use
would reflect the proficiency levels and needs of their learners, lead to
repeated simplification patterns (integrating, at times, Greek), and, to
a large extent, be management oriented. If the language is not practised in
other domains, it runs the danger of becoming fossilized. Still, in the
majority of cases, as E F L teachers are NNSs, their communicative use of
English outside the language classroom would have many of the features
of an ELF variety.
Teachers as language Since English does not have an official status in Greece, any choice for
and teaching would-be E F L teachers to study it further would not be a response to an
specialists underlying pragmatic need, but more a conscious ‘academic’ decision. In
other words, when senior high school students with an interest in English
begin a university degree in English, they do so for two reasons: first, out of
an affinity for the language, its history, literature, culture, and (native)
speakers and, secondly, as a means of seeking employment as teachers,
translators, or perhaps civil servants (as university degree holders) after
graduation.
Currently, university degrees offered in the two Greek Departments of
English Studies are organized around a wide variety of courses
(approximately 40 in either case) that satisfy both of these needs. Students
can also combine courses from the philosophy-philology-pedagogy
departments. While there are courses on offer that will help them form
a comprehensive perception of issues related to intercultural
communication and European foreign language perspectives, it is only
natural that pre-service E F L teachers perceive their university training as
a vehicle for:
234 Nicos Sifakis

1 acquiring a thorough grounding in the linguistics, culture, and history
of the language and
2 developing an informed awareness of the pedagogical principles and
methods they will need as teachers.
As academic excellence is highly valued in any tertiary institution, it would
be interesting to see the extent to which prospective state school E F L
teachers would be open to perceiving the validity of an EL F curriculum for
their own context. The same would be the case for their learners, who would
want to excel in learning the norms of the language.
Furthermore, being a university degree holder in Greece means having
earned a specialist status, similar to that enjoyed by any degree-holding
professional. It is expected that specialists carry out their duties in
a responsible professional manner, which, in the case of EFL teachers,
would mean viewing the teaching of English as similar to that of any
other subject matter and teaching the NS norms. The same situation
applies to most in-service training programmes. Clearly, these are not
favourable circumstances for an EL F curriculum, as the latter might be seen
as a means of lowering the academic and professional standards of
teaching and an inability to respond to learners’ and parents’ expectations.
Also, knowing the language is something that university-educated E F L
teachers share with C2-level certificate holders who also teach. In the
private language schools domain, professionalism and success depend
largely on the number of candidates who pass a particular exam.
University-educated E F L teachers are better off in many ways. In times
when employability becomes more and more difficult, they can be
appointed as tenured state school teachers serving in domains where the
pressure to prepare candidates for exams is non-existent. And, most
importantly, they have had extensive in-depth academic pedagogical
training.
Teachers as language The above parameters can help us understand the intellectual,
custodians/ psychological, and moral qualities of successful Greek state school E F L
guardians teachers, as perceived by themselves and their learners, peers, and broader
community. In the eyes of their learners, fellow teachers, and learners’
parents, E F L teachers are custodians of the English language and culture.
They are therefore responsible for using the few weekly hours to teach
the norms of NS English and expose learners to contextualized examples of
the target language that are linguistically flawless, if communicatively
efficient. The same would be expected of any (foreign or mother)
language teacher.
Conclusion I have tried to draw a notional orientation of the challenges that state school
teachers of a typical expanding-circle country like Greece face with regard to
the possibility of integrating an EL F curriculum. These challenges relate not
only to issues concerning the description of EL F use and users but also to
widespread attitudes about the use and status of English and the
professional responsibilities of academically trained teachers. In particular,
as far as the Greek state school context is concerned, these challenges have
been linked to:

n the low professional status of state school E F L teachers (in comparison to
teachers of other school subjects which are considered more important);
n the higher academic status of state school E F L teachers as university-
trained professionals (as opposed to that of C2-level holders occupied in
the private sector who specialize in preparing learners for certain
examinations);
n the widespread preference for the teaching and learning of a standard
inner-circle norm, which is reinforced by (a) the strong testing-oriented
context and (b) the strong monolingual character of the country’s profile;
and
n the fact that English is not used extensively outside the E F L class.
In this context, communication involving NNSs is perceived as a realistic
situation that Greek state school learners will be facing and need to be
prepared for, yet the link with established classroom practices still remains
to be explicitly made. This clearly has implications for policy makers,
curriculum developers, and educational institutions alike. First, policy
makers in Greece should realize that the endorsement of the teaching of
English as a lingua franca and not simply as another foreign language in
state schools can, if appropriately implemented, help raise learners’
awareness of the increasingly multilingual and multicultural character of
the country in which they live. Second, curriculum developers can offer
extensive opportunities for dialogue among all learners on issues related
to the expression of identity and the arousal of interest in and concern for
other people’s cultures and life histories. And finally, educational
institutions are prompted to engage prospective and in-service E F L
teachers in appropriate reflection-based activities that will empower them in
their implementation of such a project. In particular, a Greece-based EL F
teacher education programme should focus on:
n raising pre-service and in-service teachers’ awareness of the
communication value of E L F -related accommodation skills, with the aim
of empowering themselves and their NN S learners as valid intercultural
communicators, as opposed to maintaining a perspective that views E F L
learners as deficient users of a language that is wholly ‘owned’ by its
native speakers;
n prompting teachers to see their state school classes for the increasingly
intercultural situations that they are and put forward action research
programmes to promote all learners’ cultural identities on the basis of
a shared, non-threatening language, essentially helping to alleviate
negative stereotypical attitudes about immigrants;
n emphasizing the strengths of the communicatively efficient use of
English, as opposed to perceiving the language as subject matter that
needs to be ‘mastered’;
n enabling state school E F L teachers in opening up to the possibilities of
using modern technology to make links with NNS learners of other
countries of the European Union (EU) and, as a result, promote
intercultural communication among EU members;
n ultimately, raising state school teachers’ confidence as autonomous
practitioners.
236 Nicos Sifakis

It is important that ELF research draws attention to delineating those
features of an EL F curriculum that characterize the skills and subskills
required for successful communication involving NNSs. The Greek state
school setting would be ideal for integrating a curriculum that would
respond to current interest in foreign language learning by focusing on
successful communication between NNSs, while drawing attention away
from heavy-duty examination preparation. In this way, state school E F L
teaching might responsibly meet the needs of an emerging reality in ways
that private tuition will not. It is very probable that the same is the case with
similar settings in other countries of the expanding circle.
Final revised version received August 2008
Notes Jenkins, J. 2007. English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude

1 All information provided here is based on the and Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eurostat Yearbook 2006–2007 (available from McKay, S. 2003. ‘Teaching English as an
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ international language: the Chilean context’. E LT
ITY_O F F P U B/K S-CD-0 6-0 0 1/EN/KS-CD-0 6- Journal 57/2: 139–48.
0 0 1-E N.P D F) and Eurybase—The Information Rajagopalan, K. 2004. ‘The concept of ‘‘World
Database on Education Systems in Europe: The English’’ and its implications for E LT’. E LT Journal
Education System in Greece, 2005/06. Brussels: 58/2: 111–17.
European Commission, Directorate-General for Seidlhofer, B. 2004. ‘Research perspectives on
Education and Culture (available from http:// teaching English as a lingua franca’. Annual Review of
eacea.ec.europa.eu/ressources/eurydice/ Applied Linguistics 24: 209–39.
eurybase/pdf/0_integral/EL_EN). Sifakis, N. C. 2004. ‘Teaching E I L—teaching
2 ‘Teaching English for no obvious reason’. international or intercultural English: what teachers
should know’. System 32/2: 237–50.
Sifakis, N. C. and A. M. Sougari. 2005.
References ‘Pronunciation issues and EI L pedagogy in the
Abbot, G. 1981. ‘Encouraging communication in periphery: a survey of Greek state school teachers’
English: a paradox’. E LT Journal 35/3: 228–30. beliefs’. T E S O L Quarterly 39/3: 467–88.
Dimakos, I. C. and K. Tasiopoulou. 2003. ‘Attitudes Stern, H. H. 1983. Fundamental Concepts of Language
towards immigrants: what do Greek students think Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
about their immigrant classmates?’ Intercultural
Education 14: 307–16. The author
House, J. 2003. ‘English as a lingua franca: a threat to Nicos C. Sifakis is a lecturer at the Hellenic Open
multilingualism?’. Journal of Sociolinguistics University in Greece, where he has taught and
7/4: 556–78. written study guides for the MEd in TE S OL since
Jenkins, J. 2000. The Phonology of English as an 1998. He holds a BA in computational linguistics
International Language. New Models, New Norms, New and a PhD in language and linguistics from the
Goals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. University of Essex, UK. His teaching and research
Jenkins, J. 2006a. ‘The spread of E I L: a testing time interests include teacher and adult education,
for testers’. E LT Journal 60/1: 42–50. English as an international lingua franca,
Jenkins, J. 2006b. ‘Current perspectives on teaching intercultural communication and pedagogy, English
world Englishes and English as a lingua franca’. for specific purposes, and distance education.
T ES O L Quarterly 40/1: 157–81. Email: sifakis@eap.gr

Why and how textbooks should
encourage extensive reading
Dale Brown
Extensive reading is believed to have considerable benefits for learners both in

terms of learning gains and motivation and seems to be becoming ever more
popular in the E LT world. So far, however, there seems to be almost no integration
of extensive reading and textbooks.
This article argues that textbooks should be encouraging extensive reading, since
this will confer further legitimacy on extensive reading and may ease many of the
practical difficulties that adopters of extensive reading face. The article then shows
how textbooks could encourage extensive reading: directly, by including material
involving extensive reading; and indirectly, by approaching textbook reading
activities in ways more in tune with extensive reading. A number of proposals for
each of these approaches are discussed.
Introduction Extensive reading has been proclaimed as, ‘the single most effective way to
improve language proficiency’ (Maley 2005: 354). Extensive reading is
thought to lead to considerable learning gains in the areas of reading,
writing, vocabulary learning, and overall proficiency while also increasing
motivation (Day and Bamford 1998), and judging from the number of
journal articles, conference presentations, and new series of graded readers
available, an ever greater number of teachers and institutions seem to be
adopting it. As yet, however, extensive reading is almost wholly ignored
by textbooks. The vast majority of textbooks, with only a few exceptions,
make no reference whatsoever to extensive reading, meaning that it is
up to individual teachers and institutions to convince others of its
merits, integrate it into the curriculum, and deal with the practicalities
involved.
This paper argues that extensive reading should be incorporated into
textbooks. It begins by reviewing the case for extensive reading, before then
explaining why textbooks should be encouraging extensive reading. It then
looks at how textbooks can encourage extensive reading. It suggests that
they can do this directly, by including material involving extensive reading,
and indirectly, by approaching reading activities in the textbooks themselves
in different ways from the current norm. Various proposals for each of these
ideas are discussed and positive moves in a small number of current
textbooks outlined.

The case for A substantial body of research has shown that extensive reading has
extensive reading considerable benefits. Day and Bamford summarize a number of
investigations into the effects of extensive reading thus, ‘Students increased
their reading ability in the target language, developed positive attitudes
toward reading, had increased motivation to read, and made gains in various
aspects of proficiency in the target language, including vocabulary and
writing’ (op. cit.: 33).
Nevertheless, a number of criticisms have been made against extensive
reading. One concern is extensive reading’s delayed impact on learners’
progress. Davis (1995: 330) has noted that, ‘[The benefits] do not emerge
immediately in terms of straightforward examination results’ and Krashen
(1993: 73) admits that, ‘Short-term projects are not as consistently
successful’. However, this is less an argument against extensive reading as
much as a concern that extensive reading programmes be properly
conducted, and the research noted in Day and Bamford (op. cit.) attests to
the benefits given sufficient time; Krashen suggests at least one school year
is required.
A second concern is the unfamiliar roles that extensive reading entails for
both learners and teachers; Day and Bamford (op. cit.) note that teachers like
to teach. Similarly, introducing extensive reading does involve some very
real practical problems (further detailed below). Again, however, these
concerns are not really arguments against extensive reading, but rather
issues to be overcome, and as Davis points out:
Ultimately, whether or not these problems are overcome is a matter of
priorities. Teachers and education planners first have to become
convinced of the enormous boost such a programme can give to their
pupil’s command of the language in order to feel it worthwhile
committing the resources required. (op. cit.: 331)
A far bigger challenge to extensive reading is the criticism that it is
inefficient. Laufer (2003) has noted that studies of extensive reading’s
impact on vocabulary have found very small gains in terms of the number of
new words learnt, and she thus argues that the amount of reading required
for substantial vocabulary gains to be made is simply unrealistic,
particularly in instructed second language teaching contexts. There is no
doubt that for simply learning the meaning of words, direct intensive
methods are far more efficient than extensive reading. However, the gains
from extensive reading even in the area of vocabulary are wider than this,
and Laufer herself acknowledges that extensive reading does result in
vocabulary learning, while also aiding in the consolidation of partially learnt
items and in deepening learners’ knowledge of items. Laufer is also careful
to point out that she is not arguing against reading, but against the idea that
reading alone is sufficient.
Reviewing extensive reading, Davis concludes that:
Any ES L, EFL or L1 classroom will be the poorer for the lack of an
extensive reading programme of some kind, and will be unable to
promote its pupil’s language development as effectively as if such
a programme were present. (op. cit.: 335)
Why and how textbooks should encourage extensive reading 239

This paper agrees and believes that extensive reading has clear benefits for
learners that make overcoming the obstacles that prevent the adoption of
extensive reading worthwhile. This paper does not adhere to Krashen’s (op.
cit.) bold claim that reading alone is sufficient for language acquisition,
but believes that extensive reading should be one part of the language
learning curriculum, and aims to suggest how this can be realized through
textbooks.
Why textbooks Textbooks form the core of many teaching programmes and in many cases
should encourage actually take the place of or become the curriculum. They are also effective
extensive reading agents of change since they allow innovation, which is inevitably disruptive
and threatening, to be introduced in a familiar and structured format
(Hutchinson and Torres 1994). Textbooks are, thus, an excellent vehicle
through which to encourage the adoption of extensive reading. At present,
extensive reading is often regarded as an addition to the language learning
programme rather than a central part of it; textbooks can help make
extensive reading an integral part of it.
Extensive reading should also be integrated into textbooks because doing so
would help overcome many of the concerns about extensive reading that
discourage more institutions and teachers from adopting it. Various
concerns have been outlined, which fall into two broad categories: doubts
about the legitimacy of extensive reading and concerns about the
practicalities of setting up an extensive reading programme.
Doubts about Prowse (2002: 144) sums up this problem when he notes that sometimes:
legitimacy
a class of students reading silently is not perceived as a class learning,
let alone being taught, both by the students themselves and the school
administration.
Textbooks can help overcome this problem by giving credibility and
legitimacy to extensive reading. Textbooks are powerful legitimizing tools,
for teachers, for learners, and for institutions. Littlejohn (1998: 190)
describes them as ‘the most powerful device’ for the transmission of ideas
through the ELT profession and Nunan (1991: 210) notes that, for both
learners and teachers, ‘what gets included in materials largely defines what
may count as ‘‘legitimate’’ knowledge’. Textbooks, then, play a crucial role in
defining the type of content and the type of learning activities that are
credible. Incorporating extensive reading into textbooks will legitimize
extensive reading for all the users of those textbooks as a credible way for
learners to spend their time.
Concerns about The main practical concerns regarding extensive reading are to do with
practicalities cost, lack of time, monitoring students’ reading, managing the library of
books, guiding students to choose appropriate books, and getting
students engaged in reading (Davis op. cit.; Bell 1998; Day and Bamford
op. cit.). While textbooks may not be able to assist with the problems of
cost or managing the library of books, they can certainly ease some of the
other concerns.
240 Dale Brown

Lack of time
This is probably an issue of legitimacy more than anything else. If teachers
and institutions are convinced that extensive reading is a credible activity,
priorities are adjusted and time is found for it, and as explained above,
textbooks can play a powerful part in conferring this credibility.
Monitoring students’ reading

Textbooks can ease this problem considerably with the provision of reading
logs and of activities in which it becomes clear whether students are reading
and what they are reading.
Guiding students to choose appropriate books

Textbooks can help by first ensuring that recommendations for books are at
an appropriate level. They can also recommend and introduce titles of
interest in various ways (see more below).
Getting students engaged in reading as an activity

Textbooks can readily do this by providing activities allowing students to
discuss their reading in various ways (see more below).
How textbooks To this author, extensive reading means reading as much as possible and
should encourage reading material at a comfortable level for the learner; in practice for the
extensive reading majority of students, this means reading graded readers. Extensive reading
means that students choose what to read and it means they do most of the
reading by themselves outside of class; in class some reading is done and
students also talk about their reading.
Textbooks then cannot actually provide this type of extensive reading—the
resulting books would be large ungainly things—but they can encourage it,
both directly and indirectly.
Direct approaches Textbooks can directly encourage extensive reading by explicitly

recommending to learners that they do it. Many textbooks today include
study tips and advice, and occasionally extensive reading may be mentioned.
Language to Go (Crace and Wileman 2002) has a recommendation for
a single-graded reader on the back cover, though within the textbook
itself no reference to this could be found. English Firsthand (Helgesen,
Brown, and Mandeville 2004) suggests reading what it calls easy English
books or magazines in its ‘It’s up to you!’ sections, and the teacher’s
manual makes it clear that this refers to extensive reading. In the vast
majority of books, however, this simple recommendation is curiously
absent.
Clearly, this kind of advice alone, with no further backing, is unlikely to have
much impact. A more powerful way textbooks can encourage extensive
reading is to directly provide activities that let students begin reading or that
allow them to discuss their reading. The major E LT textbook publishers all
publish series of graded readers, and there are a variety of ways textbooks
could include parts of these readers or otherwise encourage learners to
begin reading them.

1 Textbooks could provide reading logs where students record the dates,
book titles, and pages read. This would be a very simple addition to
a textbook, though without additional support would probably have little
impact.
2 Textbooks could provide a book choice flowchart; a series of questions in
flowchart form, about for example the preferred genre, the sex and age of
the lead character, the temporal setting of the book, and more, that lead to
book recommendations.
3 Each unit in the textbook could include a recommendation for a graded
reader related in some way to the topic of the unit. An examination of the
major series of graded readers finds many titles related to typical
textbook topics such as travel, work, family, music, and movies. It may
even be possible to recommend two readers for each topic, thus allowing
learners to at least exercise some choice in what they read. Alternatively,
there could be one unit topic-related recommendation and one unrelated
recommendation, giving learners the option of staying with the topic or
choosing something fresh.
4 Similarly, there could be activities involving the language focus of the
textbook’s units, leading to recommendations for graded readers. For
example, after a unit on describing people, there could be an activity that
involved descriptions of the main characters from two or three readers.
The activity would conclude with students deciding which character they
are most interested in and being invited to go on and read that character’s
story.
5 Following on from the previous two suggestions, short excerpts from the
readers, perhaps the first chapter, could be included to act as a ‘hook’,
getting the students into the story and helping them make their choice.
6 Extracts from graded readers could be interspersed with the units
throughout the textbook to give students a taste of extensive reading.
This is the approach taken by the Cover to Cover series (Day, Yamanaka,
Harsch, and Ono 2007), the only textbook known to this author that
attempts to really integrate extensive reading into its syllabus.
7 Short graded readers could be serialized through the textbook, with one
chapter appearing in each unit. While this would not allow learners to
choose the material they read themselves, and would not result in
learners reading enough material for it to be truly called extensive
reading, this approach would introduce learners to the concept of
reading easy material in a stress-free environment. Indeed one recently
published textbook series takes a similar approach to this. Essential
Reading (Miles, Gough, McAvoy, and French 2008) has a complete short
story at the back of each book to introduce the idea of extensive reading to
students. While Essential Reading follows this format in all its levels, this
approach may be especially appropriate for lower level textbooks, the
students of which often need a lot of convincing that it is possible to read
and enjoy reading English books.
8 Activities that allow learners to discuss their reading could be included in
each unit. The literature on extensive reading abounds with such
activities, and many of these ideas work with any story the learners are
reading. Thus, all the students in a class could be reading different books
of their own choosing, yet still be able to complete the same activities and
discussion. Such activities would provide a regular slot in the class in
242 Dale Brown

which students discuss their reading, and an opportunity for students to
find out about other titles they may be interested in. Most teachers who
have adopted extensive reading use such activities as they ‘can turn the
individual solitary act of reading into a community event’ (Day and
Bamford op. cit.: 141); including them in the textbook would help
organize them, so that, for example, simpler, less demanding activities
come earlier in the course and more challenging activities later.
Indirect approaches Textbooks can also encourage extensive reading indirectly, by approaching
reading activities in ways that are more in tune with extensive reading. Day
and Bamford (op. cit.) list ten features of extensive reading:
1 students read as much as possible;
2 a variety of material on a wide range of topics is available;
3 students select what they want to read;
4 the purposes of reading are usually related to pleasure, information, and
reading for understanding;
5 reading is its own reward;
6 reading materials are well within the linguistic competence of the
students;
7 reading is individual and silent;
8 reading speed is usually faster rather than slower;
9 teachers orient students to the goals of the programme;
10 the teacher is a role model of a reader for students.
Some of these features are clearly irrelevant to the kind of intensive reading
passages that textbooks include; some would be difficult to incorporate into
textbooks; yet others can be incorporated or at least encouraged.
A variety of material on a wide range of topics is available

Textbooks certainly claim to do this, but while the range of topics in most
textbooks is reasonable, the variety of material is less so. Too many textbooks
feature magazine-style reading passages exclusively, ignoring news
reporting, prose fiction, poetry, or anything else.
Students select what they want to read

It should be possible for textbooks, at least to some extent, to allow this. Two
or more texts on the theme or topic could be provided and the learners asked
to choose which they will read. Students who read the different texts could
then be grouped together to share and discuss what they read.
The purposes of reading are usually related to pleasure, information, and

reading for understanding
It could be argued that presenting students with texts that they are required
to read makes it inherently impossible for the focus to be on pleasure,
information, and understanding, despite the best efforts of textbook writers
to find or write interesting material. Yet textbooks could take some steps
towards this with readings that students are not required to analyse or recall
in great detail; in other words, readings that students are not tested on in
some way, but instead are invited to read and then consider whether they

enjoyed them. Innovations (Dellar and Walkley 2004) takes one step towards
this in its review units, by inviting students to look back and choose the
readings they enjoyed the most from the preceding units.
Reading materials are well within the linguistic competence of the students
Textbooks at times include challenging readings for a clear purpose, but very
often there seems to be no discernible reason beyond the fact that that is the
way things are, and perhaps a shared belief among teachers, learners, and
presumably textbook writers that reading should be hard. The purpose of
textbook reading activities is usually either to allow the practice of skills, to
introduce vocabulary, to provide information on a topic or theme, or
a combination of these. While some of these purposes clearly require some
challenge in the reading passage, an overly challenging text will interfere
with others rather than advance them. Textbooks should be more balanced,
with some challenging readings and some well within the students’
capabilities.
Reading speed is usually faster rather than slower

Textbook readings are usually read slowly, with students laboriously poring
over the text, dictionary in hand. This is often due to the overly difficult
nature of the text, as mentioned above, and as Bell (2001) points out, the fact
that so many reading activities interrupt students’ reading actually makes
understanding the whole text more difficult. While slow, careful reading
may be desired at times, frequently there seems to be no reason to slow
learners down.
It may be argued that since extensive and intensive reading are different
beasts, there is no need to make textbook reading activities more in tune
with extensive reading. Intensive reading is valuable and rightly has its place
in the classroom, but the gulf that seems to separate intensive and extensive
reading at present is large. As Day and Bamford (op. cit.) point out, orienting
students to the goals of an extensive reading programme is essential and
would be much easier if textbook readings were more balanced and if the
activities they encountered had a different tone.
Conclusion This paper has argued that extensive reading is an essential part of the
language curriculum, that textbooks should encourage extensive reading,
and that it is possible for them to do so. However, it is worth considering why
textbooks almost exclusively do not do so at present. One reason may be that
publishers and materials writers fear that incorporating extensive reading
into a textbook could deter some potential users. Related to this, publishers
may also fear the possibility that the incorporation of extensive reading is
seen as simply a ploy by the publisher to push sales of its series of graded
readers. Carter, Hughes, and McCarthy (1998) have pointed out the tension
in materials development between the desire to modify users’ views in the
light of research, and the need, for both commercial and pedagogical
reasons, to conform to users’ expectations, and it is clear that at times
publishers and materials writers push change and at times are pulled along
by it. Yet publishers should take courage from Bell and Gower’s (1998)
observation that successful textbooks are usually those that break new
ground while at the same time having something familiar about them. This
244 Dale Brown

writer believes that textbooks should break new ground by encouraging
extensive reading and hopes that the ideas offered above may help; so that
more teachers and institutions may be persuaded to adopt extensive
reading, and ultimately so that more learners benefit from it.
Final revised version received April 2008
References Laufer, B. 2003. ‘Vocabulary acquisition in a second

Bell, J. and R. Gower. 1998. ‘Writing course materials language: do learners really acquire most vocabulary
for the world: a great compromise’ in by reading? Some empirical evidence’. Canadian
B. Tomlinson (ed.). Modern Language Review 59/4: 565–85.
Bell, T. 1998. ‘Extensive reading: why? And how?’. Littlejohn, A. 1998. ‘The analysis of language
The Internet T ES L Journal 4/12: http:// teaching materials: inside the Trojan Horse’ in B.
www.iteslj.org/Articles/Bell-Reading.html. Tomlinson (ed.).
Originally accessed 1 July 2006. Maley, A. 2005. ‘Review of ‘‘Extensive Reading
Bell, T. 2001. ‘Extensive reading: speed and Activities for the Second Language Classroom’’’. E LT
comprehension’. The Reading Matrix 1/1: http:// Journal 59/4: 354–5.
www.readingmatrix.com/articles/bell/index.html. Miles, S., C. Gough, J. McAvoy, and A. French. 2008.
Originally accessed 1 July 2006. Essential Reading. Oxford: Macmillan.
Carter, R., R. Hughes, and M. McCarthy. 1998. Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology.
‘ Telling tails: grammar, the spoken language and Harlow, UK: Longman.
materials development’ in B. Tomlinson (ed.). Prowse, P. 2002. ‘Top ten principles for teaching
Crace, A. and R. Wileman. 2002. Language to Go. extensive reading: a response’. Reading in a Foreign
Harlow, UK: Longman. Language 14/2: 142–5.
Davis, C. 1995. ‘Extensive reading: an expensive Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 1998. Materials Development in
extravagance?’. ELT Journal 49/4: 329–36. Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
Day, R. and J. Bamford. 1998. Extensive Reading in the University Press.
Second Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. The author
Day, R., J. Yamanaka, K. Harsch, and L. Ono. 2007. Dale Brown has worked in E LT for ten years both as
Cover to Cover. New York: Oxford University Press. a teacher and as a full-time materials writer and
Dellar, H. and A. Walkley. 2004. Innovations. editor. He is now a member of the Nanzan English
London: Thomson. Education Center at Nanzan University in Nagoya,
Helgesen, M., S. Brown, and T. Mandeville. 2004. Japan, where he teaches a variety of courses for non-
English Firsthand. Hong Kong: Longman. English majors. His main interests lie in extensive
Hutchinson, T. and E. Torres. 1994. ‘The textbook as reading, vocabulary teaching, and materials
agent of change’. E LT Journal 48/4: 315–28. development.
Krashen, S. 1993. ‘The case for free voluntary Email: dbrown@nanzan-u.ac.jp
reading’. Canadian Modern Language Review
50/1: 72–82.

point and counterpoint
Process-oriented pedagogy:
facilitation, empowerment,
or control?
William Littlewood
A feature of language teaching in recent decades has been the development of

process-oriented approaches. This orientation towards processes encourages us to
facilitate learner choice and individual development. However, it is challenged by
the current educational climate, which prioritizes accountability and assessment.
In this situation, a new perspective on process orientation has emerged. This
perspective focuses not on the processes which occur as part of learning but on the
processes which are the intended outcomes of this learning. Discrete features of the
communication and learning processes become pre-specified ‘learning outcomes’,
which are to be observed and assessed. Outcomes-based education is promoted as
a means of empowering learners with the knowledge and skills required for living.
However, it is also a powerful instrument for effecting compliance with centralized
conceptions of education and can minimize the voices of learners and teachers in
the process of education.
Introduction An important feature of foreign language teaching over recent decades has
been increasing attention not only to the products that we expect learning to
achieve (for example control of selected grammatical structures or
communicative functions) and the pedagogy that might lead to these
products but also to the processes through which learning takes place. As
Hedge (2000: 359) expresses it, ‘the question has become not so much on
what basis to create a list of items to be taught as how to create an optimal
environment to facilitate the processes through which language is learned’.
This has led to increased interest in how learning is influenced by, for
example, affective factors, cognitive styles, and group dynamics. It has also
led to increased attention to students’ natural learning capacities and how to
stimulate these through strategies such as personalization and awareness
raising. At the planning level, it has encouraged teachers to organize their
courses around holistic learning experiences such as projects and tasks, in
the belief that the resulting ‘negotiation of meanings’ is the most effective
facilitator of individual learning.
Processes in the The literature is less explicit than it might be on the precise distinction
classroom between terms such as ‘process’, ‘skill’, and ‘state’. It is common, for
example, to find writing or listening referred to as ‘processes’ in one context

and ‘skills’ in another. Similarly, we find that motivation is discussed both as
an affective ‘process’ and as an affective ‘state’. The position taken in this
paper is that processes may be mobilized as part of a skill (for example as in
‘controlled and automatic processing’) or may cluster together to form
a ‘state’ (for example as in a connectionist account, where mental or affective
states are produced by processes within neural networks) but are present in
both. Thus, when mention is made of what may often be termed a skill or
state, reference is also made by implication to the processes which facilitate or
produce them.
Thanks to seminal work by investigators such as Allwright (1996), Breen
(1986), and Senior (2006), we have become strongly aware of the richness
of classroom interaction and the complexity of the processes within it. Any
analytical framework must be an oversimplification of this complexity, but
here I will distinguish four interconnected levels which figure prominently
in current discussions. Within each level, there are both facilitative and
inhibitive processes.
Affective processes
For example, a student’s learning is facilitated by feelings of self-confidence
and self-esteem, but inhibited by anxiety.
Cognitive processes
For example, learning is facilitated by the capacity to make inferences, but
inhibited by premature closure (in which a student does not consider
alternative answers).
Social processes
For example, learning is facilitated by group cohesion and cooperation but
inhibited by social loafing (when individual students do not contribute to
a group task).
Communication processes
For example, learning is facilitated by comprehension but inhibited when
one person is over-dominant in turn-taking.
A special category of process consists of the pedagogic processes by which the
teacher tries to influence the processes mentioned above. Thus, for
example, she/he may try to influence the affective level positively by creating
a relaxed environment; the cognitive level by asking challenging questions;
the social level by using effective grouping techniques; and the
communication level by creating opportunities for all learners to participate.
In these various ways, the teacher aims to stimulate developmental processes
leading to development at all four levels, for example, towards more positive
attitudes, better critical thinking skills, enhanced ability to cooperate, and
higher proficiency in the ‘four skills’. However, pedagogic processes may
also create negative effects (for example excessive criticism may damage
self-esteem and motivation), so that they may be either facilitative or
inhibitive of learning.
Process-oriented pedagogy: facilitation, empowerment, or control? 247

At this point our perspective goes beyond the classroom and considers the
outcomes of this development, which the student will carry from the
classroom into the future.
Table 1 presents a summary of the types of process mentioned above. Those
in columns 1–3 are processes which occur within the classroom and affect
learning. This is the domain addressed by process-oriented teaching as
understood in the discussion so far. Those in column 4 are the outcomes of
learning. This is the domain addressed by process-oriented teaching as seen
from the perspective of outcomes-based education, which is introduced in
the next section.
As mentioned above, the pedagogic processes (column 3) can in reality be
inhibitive as well as facilitative. Furthermore, the outcomes (column 4) can
be negative as well as positive (for example a student’s classroom
experiences may engender negative attitudes to learning). However, to avoid
a confusing proliferation of columns, only the facilitative and positive
processes are included in Table 1. These are also, of course, the processes
towards which we direct our pedagogical strategies.
1 2 3 4
Facilitative Inhibitive Pedagogic Processes as
processes processes processes outcomes
Affective e.g. self- e.g. excessive
e.g. creating positive
processes confidence anxiety a relaxed attiudes, etc.
environment
Cognitive e.g. making e.g. premature e.g. challenging critical
processes inferences closure ideas thinking, etc.
Social e.g. group e.g. social e.g. effective cooperation
processes cohesion loafing grouping skills, etc.
techniques
table 1
Communication e.g. e.g. dominance e.g. creating the ‘four skills’,
Main types of process in
processes comprehension in turn-taking space to etc.
the foreign language
communicate
classroom
In the next section, I will refer to the processes in columns 1–3 as ‘processes
in progress’ and those in column 4 as ‘processes as outcomes’. The terms are
clumsy but serve to make a necessary distinction in this paper.
Two perspectives on Following from the above, when we talk about ‘process-oriented language
‘process orientation’ teaching’, this may carry two distinct meanings. On the one hand, it might
in the classroom mean that we pay special attention to the processes-in-progress that go on
inside the classroom. This is the perspective taken in the quotation from
Hedge above and by the proponents of, for example, process writing, project
work, or other forms of experiential learning. It is the classroom-
methodological perspective taken by most practising teachers. On the other
hand, it might mean that we attend to the processes that are the intended
outcomes of learning. This is the case for curriculum designers and assessors
when they express the intended outcomes of learning in terms of processes,
skills, and states.
248 William Littlewood

An example of this process-as-outcome perspective is the Singapore English
Language Syllabus 2001 (Curriculum Planning and Development Division
2001). It lists intended outcomes from all levels presented in Table 1 (but
mainly of course from the communication level). For example, by the end of
Primary 2—in the confident can-do terminology featured in many such
documents—‘pupils will’:
n enjoy the creative use of language in, for example, similes, poems, and
jokes (affective level)
n infer and draw conclusions about characters, sequence of events
(cognitive level)
n follow agreed-upon rules for group work (social level)
n speak to convey meaning using intonation (communication level).
Similarly, the English Language Curriculum Guide (Primary 1–6) for Hong
Kong (Curriculum Development Council 2004) expects that by the end of
Primary 6, students should learn to ‘be confident of their own judgement,
performance, and capabilities’ (affective level), ‘question obvious bias,
propaganda, omissions, and less obvious fallacies’ (cognitive level), ‘work
and negotiate with others to develop ideas and achieve goals’ (social level),
and ‘present information, ideas and feelings clearly and coherently’
(communication level).
The two perspectives do not exclude each other but there is tension. The
process-in-progress perspective provides the underpinnings for liberal,
humanistic approaches which emphasize learner choice, individual
development, and autonomy. Its intention is to facilitate growth in
personally meaningful directions. The process-as-outcome perspective
provides the underpinnings for approaches which work with detailed prior
specifications of the directions that learners should follow. This second
perspective is an important move to empower learners by giving them the
skills they need in order to participate fully in future life. However, as we will
see later, it can also form a basis for totalitarian control over how students are
taught to act and think as a result of their education.
Three approaches to Having distinguished these two orientations towards process-oriented

integrating process language teaching, I will make a brief historical excursion into changing
and product in the approaches to integrating process and product over the past three or four
language classroom decades. These approaches overlap, of course, and an individual teacher
may integrate more than one into his or her own pedagogy.
Product-as-outcome The first approach, which is associated with the so-called ‘product-based’
oriented language syllabus underlying the audio-lingual, audio-visual, and early functional
teaching approaches, may be characterized as follows:
n The initial focus is not so much on processes as on the intended products
of learning, conceptualized, for example, as grammatical structures,
vocabulary items, or communicative functions.
n The products which are most appropriate for particular learners may be
determined through needs analysis.
n Classroom learning processes are designed to help learners acquire these
items, for example, through intensive practice, communication activities,
exercises, or writing tasks.

n In general, there is separation of syllabus (what is to be learnt) and
methodology (how it should be learnt).
The main impetus to revise this approach has been the argument that it
neglects both the complexity of the processes involved in using language
and the range of processes that can contribute to language learning (see for
example Nunan 1988).
Process-in-progress The second approach attempts to compensate for this perceived neglect and
oriented language is what most people probably think of when they talk of a ‘process-oriented
teaching approach’. It is the approach summarized in the quotation from Hedge (op.
cit.: 359) above and is associated with humanistic language teaching,
experiential learning, task-based language teaching, and other
communicative approaches. It may be characterized as follows:
n There is a shift from emphasizing what we want students to learn to the
processes by which they learn, leading to a focus on processes such as
creative construction, personal learning strategies, and developmental
processes leading to autonomous performance.
n There is a shift from teaching discrete language items towards focusing
on the processes that are involved in using language for communication
and the need to develop active skills for negotiating meanings in real
contexts.
n There is a move from a ‘transmission’ approach in which the teacher
passes on predetermined knowledge and skills to an ‘interpretative’
approach which facilitates learners’ individualized development.
n This development is recognized as involving not only cognitive aspects
but the ‘whole person’ of the learner in whom cognitive, social, and
affective aspects are inseparable.
n The need to facilitate the learners’ processes of development leads to an
emphasis on creating learning contexts which stimulate motivation and
provide opportunities for personal growth.
For many, this learner- and learning-centred approach represents an
educational ideal. It goes back to the seminal educational ideas of Dewey and
Bruner, and underpins the constructivist approach to education in which,
as Williams and Burden (1997: 51) put it, ‘education becomes concerned
with helping people to make their own meanings’ (emphasis added).
The first approach (product-as-outcome) was challenged predominantly on
the grounds of its conceptions of learning and communication. The second
is challenged mainly from outside the learning context itself. The current
educational climate puts high priority on assessment, control, and
accountability. But if the focus is on the process of learning and each
individual can work towards his or her unique personal outcomes and
meanings, how can the effectiveness of learning be assessed in terms
recognized by the various stakeholders? Or looking at it another way, how
can the stakeholders exert their control over the educational process and
make clear not just what students will study but ‘how they will be able to act
and think as a result of their education’ (Riordan 2005: 56)? This is where
the third approach, oriented towards process-as-outcome, enters the scene.

Process-as-outcome Outcomes-based education has been an educational ‘buzz-word’ in many
oriented teaching places for well over a decade and is now promoted by educational planners
in several countries, including the USA, Australia, UK, Hong Kong, and
Singapore (see for example Stone 2005, on the policy of funding its
introduction into all tertiary institutions in Hong Kong). In the field of
language teaching, we saw above how it has influenced the English
language curricula of Singapore and Hong Kong. It is a fusion of the two
approaches already discussed:
n Like the ‘process-in-progress’ approach, it starts from an initial focus on
processes. But processes are seen now from the second perspective
discussed earlier: processes as the outcomes of learning.
n Like the ‘product-as-outcome’ approach, it is outcome oriented. But these
outcomes are now process outcomes rather than content outcomes.
n Also like the ‘product-as-outcome’ approach, there is an emphasis on the
observable and measurable. Intended learning outcomes are usually
stated with ‘a verb to describe the behaviour which demonstrates the
student’s learning’ (Carroll 2001: 3).
n On the basis of these predetermined learning outcomes, we design the
curriculum backwards, ‘using the major outcomes as the focus and
linking all planning, teaching and assessment decisions directly to these
outcomes’ (Acharya 2003: 8–9).
We saw that the process-in-progress approach has a strong interest in
classroom methodology and the conditions that stimulate learning. This is
not the case with the process-as-outcome approach, many of whose
proponents have a lot to say about the outcomes of learning but little about
the learning and teaching that lead to these outcomes. For example, the
guide to curriculum development by Posner and Rudnitsky (1997) contains
seven chapters on outside-classroom procedures involving learning
outcomes (for example how to write them and design units around them)
but only one on classroom teaching strategies, in spite of recognizing that
‘even the most elegantly organized course, designed for the most
worthwhile learning, can fail if the teaching strategies are inappropriate or
insufficient for the desired learning’ (p. 163). The 2001 Singapore English
syllabus contains well over 100 pages which cover the learning outcomes,
text-types, and grammar to be included in a course, but less than a page on
the six ‘principles of language learning and teaching’ which ‘form part of the
framework and spirit in which this syllabus is to be implemented’
(Curriculum Planning and Development Division 2001: 4). It contains no
equivalent to the suggestions for classroom activities included in the 1991
syllabuses which it superseded.
Where are we now? With respect to process-oriented teaching we stand at a crossroads.

The process-in-progress perspective, which has led teachers to explore
methodological innovations in domains such as process writing, project
work, task-based instruction, and other forms of experiential learning,
continues to attract and inspire teachers. In the minds of many planners
and curriculum designers, however, attention has shifted mainly to the
process-as-outcome perspective, which focuses on the observable results of
classroom processes. The motivation appears to be four-fold, with varying
emphases in different contexts and by different people. Here I rank the

motives according to the closeness of their relationship to actual classroom
learning:
1 The first motive is to ensure that learning has clear directions. Teachers
and course-developers decide what they would like students to learn in
terms which enable participants to clarify objectives and determine to
what extent these have been achieved.
2 Information about whether or to what extent learning has taken place can
be gathered not only at the end of a course but also during the course.
Thus, the second motive is to facilitate formative ‘assessment for
learning’.
3 As Brindley (2001) shows, the wider system can subvert the second
motive and transform information gathered to support learning into
information used for reporting and grading. This is the third motive. It
reaches outside the classroom and may involve purposes of gate keeping
(for the student) and accountability (for the teacher and/or institution).
4 The fourth motive is an extension of the third. When the system itself, for
example, via government education bodies, (a) specifies expected
learning outcomes, (b) measures whether they have been achieved,
and (c) makes student progression and institutional funding contingent
upon the results, tools are in place for people at the centre to exercise top–
down control over the goals and implementation of the educational
process.
The first and second of these motivations are directly beneficial to student
learning. Indeed, they may be integrated with the process-in-progress
approach and make it more purposeful and needs-related. The third
motivation introduces the dimension of accountability and no longer
focuses on the conditions for effective learning, but rather, it focuses on how
the results of learning can be demonstrated. This is also the case with the
fourth perspective, with the added factor that the learning to be
demonstrated has been predetermined by people in authority, whose own
expertise and experience in teaching may be superficial.
With the fourth scenario, then, the wheel of curriculum planning comes full
circle. From the focus on detailed definitions of products of learning that
characterizes the product-as-outcome approach, through the focus on ways
of facilitating individual processes of learning that characterizes the process-
in-progress approach, the focus moves to detailed definitions of processes
themselves as assessable products of learning. The approach is again product
oriented but now the defined products of learning are described not in terms
of discrete language or functional items but in terms of discrete processes.
These definitions prescribe in detail, in words quoted earlier, ‘not just what
[students] will study but also how they will be able to act and think as a result of
their education’ (Riordan op.cit.: 56, emphasis added).
In the context of a totalitarian system (for example as in George Orwell’s
novel 1984 or pre-1989 communist regimes in Europe), the words just
quoted would have sinister implications. Even outside a totalitarian system,
the more detailed and far-reaching these specifications for acting and
thinking become, the stronger is their potential (when underpinned by
assessment, rewards, and sanctions) to become a powerful instrument for
exerting control and imposing the policies and values of those in authority.

The prescriptions can easily form the basis for what Alexander (2004: 29),
in his biting critique of the target-and-performance based National
Curriculum in the UK, describes as a ‘highly centralized and interventive
education system’ in which ‘those who have the greatest power to prescribe
pedagogy’ may be precisely those who have ‘the poorest understanding of it’.
Such a system encourages a ‘culture of compliance’ in which teachers are
merely ‘technicians who implement the educational ideas and procedures
of others’ (p. 11) and attention to outcomes deflects attention from the
classroom pedagogy that should produce them.
Conclusion The question contained in the title of this paper is central to how we conceive
the development of language teaching. The origin of process-oriented
language teaching lies firmly in the desire to facilitate. To the extent that the
processes which we want to facilitate are individual, we cannot—indeed
would not want to—predict their direction and outcomes. There is
a significant shift in emphasis and intention when we say that some
outcomes are more desirable than others, so that we should guide learning
towards them with the desire of empowering students for their future life.
There is an equally significant shift when these desirable outcomes are
determined not by those directly involved in the pedagogical processes that
should lead to them but from outside, often by government appointees. It is
at this point that process-oriented teaching becomes an instrument of
control.
At the current stage we are at, then, a key task is to use what means we have
to ensure that the voices of teachers and learners are not drowned in the
name of accountability; that control stays in the hands of those who also
have expertise; and that we draw benefits from process-oriented teaching
while avoiding its dangers.
Final version received June 2008
Note Breen, M. P. 1986. ‘The social context for language

This paper is a revised and reworked version of a learning—a neglected situation?’ Studies in Second
plenary paper presented at the CLaSIC 2006 Language Acquisition 7/2: 135–58.
Conference held in Singapore in December, Brindley, G. 2001. ‘Outcome-based assessment in
2006. practice: some examples and emerging insights’.
Language Testing 18/4: 393–407.
Carroll, J. 2001. ‘Writing learning outcomes: some
References suggestions’. Learning and Teaching. Oxford Centre
Acharya, C. 2003. ‘Outcome-based education (OBE): for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford
a new paradigm for learning’. C DT Link (National Brookes University. Available at: http://
University of Singapore), 7–9 July. Available at: www.brookes.ac.uk/services/ocsd/2_learntch/
http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/link/nov2003/obe.htm writing_learning_outcomes.html (last accessed
(last accessed 7 June 2008). 7 June 2008).
Alexander, R. 2004. ‘Still no pedagogy? Principle, Curriculum Development Council. 2004. English
pragmatism and compliance in primary education’. Language Curriculum Guide (Primary 1–6). Hong
Cambridge Journal of Education 34/1: 7–33. Kong: Education Bureau. Available at: http://
Allwright, D. 1996. ‘Social and pedagogic pressures www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?langno¼1&;nodeID¼
in the language classroom: the role of socialization’ 2770 (last accessed 7 June 2008).
in H. Coleman (ed.). Society and the Language Curriculum Planning and Development Division.
Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge 2001. English Language Syllabus 2001 for Primary and
University Press.

Secondary Schools. Singapore: Ministry of Education. Polytechnic University, December, 2005. Available
Available at: http://www.moe.gov.sg/cpdd/ at: http://www.ugc.edu.hk/eng/ugc/publication/
syllabuses.htm (last accessed 7 June 2008). speech/2005/sp171205.htm (last accessed
Hedge, T. 2000. Teaching and Learning in the 7 June 2008).
Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Williams, M. and R. L. Burden. 1997. Psychology for
Press. Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist Approach.
Nunan, D. 1988. Syllabus Design. Oxford: Oxford Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
University Press.
Posner, G. J. and A. N. Rudnitsky. 1997. Course Design: The author
A Guide to Curriculum Development for Teachers (Fifth William Littlewood was involved in language
edition). New York: Longman. teaching and teacher education in the UK for many
Riordan, T. 2005. ‘Education for the 21st century: years before moving to Hong Kong in 1991 to join
teaching, learning and assessment’. Change a project in E LT curriculum development. He is
37/1: 52–6. currently a Professor in the Department of English,
Senior, R. 2006. The Experience of Language Teaching. Hong Kong Institute of Education, Tai Po, Hong
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kong. He has published widely in the areas of
Stone, M. V. 2005. Opening remarks at the language teaching methodology and language
‘Symposium on Outcome-based Approach to learning.
Teaching, Learning and Assessment in Higher Email: blittle@ied.edu.hk
Education: International Perspectives’. Hong Kong

Another breakthrough, another baby

thrown out with the bathwater
David M. Bell
‘Process-oriented pedagogy: facilitation, empowerment, or control?’ claims that

process-oriented pedagogy (PO P) represents the methodological perspective of
most practising teachers and that outcomes-based education (OB E) poses a real
and present danger to stakeholder autonomy. Whereas PO P may characterize
methodological practices in the inner circle primary school context described by
Littlewood, it does not fairly characterize practices in most L2 classrooms.
Littlewood’s dichotomy of product and process is better understood in terms of
direct and indirect teaching. Effective pedagogy seeks an appropriate balance of
direct and indirect teaching in diverse contexts in order to fulfil particular student
goals. OBE helps identify and make explicit learning goals and empower students
to attain those goals. Raising fears of control and totalitarianism demonizes OB E.
We need to accept both OB E and POP as enriching the repertoires of teachers and
their ability to respond to the complex and changing needs of their students.
Introduction Many years ago in this Journal, Swan (1985: 87) eloquently captured the
illogic of methodological change in L2 teaching: ‘The characteristic sound of
a new breakthrough in language teaching theory is a scream, a splash, and
a strangled cry, as once again the baby is thrown out with the bathwater’.
Process-oriented pedagogy (POP) sounds very much like a ‘new
breakthrough’ and the critique of outcomes-based education (OB E) sounds
like one more baby being thrown out with the bathwater.
Outcomes, Outcomes, or competencies, or standards, as they are also known, have

competencies, and played an important part in language teaching for over 20 years. TESOL, the
standards American teacher organization, has adopted extensive standards for most
aspects of L2 teaching and teacher education.1 As well as the countries
mentioned by Littlewood, OBE is the theoretical framework that underpins
South Africa’s attempts to democratize education, deal with desegregation
after apartheid, and ensure universal access to English in a multilingual
society.
The opportunities and challenges of OBE have been discussed extensively
and most coherently with regard to language teaching by Auerbach (1986).
Using the terminology of competency and competency-based education,
Auerbach makes a distinction between ‘competency-based systems, in
which competencies are the starting and ending point of curriculum
development’ (which is really the focus of Littlewood’s paper), ‘and
E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccp027 255

competencies as tools, in which competencies are one tool among many in
the process of enabling students to act for change in their lives’ (ibid.: 425–6).
Auerbach concludes:
Rather than promoting the acquisition of prespecified behaviors as the
central goal, we need to develop a model which begins with
problematized aspects of reality, promotes critical reflection on that
reality, and incorporates competencies as means for taking action. In this
model, teachers and students determine jointly what skills are needed to
shape or influence reality: competencies become tools in service of
a transformative education, rather than a constraining framework for
instruction. (p. 426)
I am sure that Littlewood would agree with such a bottom–up stakeholder
generation of outcomes. However, the substance of Littlewood’s article deals
mainly with the systemic aspects of OBE rather than outcomes as important
pedagogical tools, while the tone of Littlewood’s article tends to demonize
OBE and trivialize the concept of learning outcomes.
Control versus Littlewood quotes Riordan (2005) not once but twice and even adds
influence emphasis: outcomes prescribe ‘not just what [students] will study but also
how they will be able to act and think as a result of their education’. Littlewood
then goes on to say that ‘In the context of a totalitarian system (as in George
Orwell’s novel 1984 or pre-1989 communist regimes in Europe) the words
just quoted would have sinister implications’. But of course, most English
learners and teachers of English as a second or foreign language (and even
Professor Littlewood in Hong Kong) are not operating in a totalitarian
system. So why the scaremongering? Littlewood goes on to suggest that
‘even outside totalitarian systems, the more detailed and far reaching these
specifications for acting and thinking become, the stronger is their potential
. . . to become powerful instruments for exerting control and imposing the
policies and values of those in authority’. One might expect some examples
of these detailed and far reaching specifications aimed at controlling acting
and thinking. What we get is ‘question obvious bias, propaganda,
omissions, and less obvious fallacies’. That seems to be the very opposite of
controlling thinking. And ‘enjoy the creative use of language in . . . poems’,
as long as it is not William Topaz McGonagall, of course.
Given these examples, what is so wrong with trying to influence student
acting and thinking? Let us look at the larger context of the quotes from
Riordan (2005). Riordan begins by arguing that ‘It seems self-evident that
we should be clear and explicit about how we want our students to be able to
think and what we want them to be able to do as a result of their education’
(p. 253). And later ‘. . . students will learn more effectively when we have
made clear at our own institutions and in our own programs not just what
they will study but also how they will be able to act and think as a result of
their education’ (p. 256). The question here is not whether we should be
trying to affect how students think and act—that seems to be a sine qua non
of what education is about, whether it is based on the views of Socrates,
Loyola, Steiner, or Dewey—but about being explicit about how we wish to
affect student thinking and behaviour.
256 David M. Bell

At the same time, control over student acting and thinking can just as well be
exerted, if not more so, when outcomes are not explicitly stated. A public
school education in Britain exerts control over students by the implicit
affiliations it promotes with a particular elite group behaviour and the access
it affords to positions in the ruling elite after graduation. Likewise, a child in
an underfunded, tracked, inner city school is implicitly socialized into the
ways of acting and thinking of the lower socioeconomic strata.
But once outcomes are made explicit, they are open to challenge by
stakeholders. Phyllis Schlafly, the American conservative political activist,
has argued that OBE is ‘. . . a process for government telling our children
how to live, what to say, what to think, what to know, and what not to know’
(Schlafly 1993). That sounds very similar to Littlewood’s summoning up of
Orwellian totalitarian nightmare and his quoting of Alexander’s ‘biting’
(probably ‘rabid’) critique of National Curriculum standards in the UK. The
religious right in the USA has long waged battle against William Spady,
leading theoretician of OBE and the introduction of OB E into many state
systems. The opposition has come from a perceived weakening of academic
standards and an emphasis on the explicit identification of affective
outcomes. Put another way, explicit secular values pose challenges to
religious groups who have hitherto promoted implicit religious (and in
some cases, segregationist) values in their local school districts.
Top-down and The battle for control is not therefore as simple as central control bad guy,
bottom-up decision local control good guy; it is more a dialectic between top-down and bottom-
making up decision making. The educational reforms of the authoritarian rule of
Kemal Atatürk in Turkey included free, secular, and coeducational
education at primary, secondary, and tertiary levels and a push for greater
literacy. John Dewey, who spent two months in Turkey advising the Atatürk
government on the implementation of these policies, was a supporter of the
reforms (Wolf-Gazo 1996) and was also in agreement with the change from
Arabic script to a modified Latin alphabet (Lewis 1984). But Dewey
understood that such top-down changes could only be achieved through
local agreement and without which centrally imposed reform represented
a threat (Turan 2000). Dewey argued that:
. . . there is a danger that too much and too highly centralized activity on
the part of the Ministry will stifle local interest and initiative, prevent local
communities taking the responsibilities which they should take and
produce too uniform a system of education, not flexibly adapted to the
varying needs of different localities, urban, rural, maritime, and to
different types of rural communities, different environments and
different industries . . . There is also danger that any centralized system
will become bureaucratic, arbitrary and tyrannical in action. . . . (1983: 280)
It is not, therefore, that OBE offers any intrinsic threat to ‘liberal
humanitarian’ education but rather that any educational reform especially
when its outcomes are so explicitly stated needs localized agreement. And
so, for example the top-down or ‘technological’ implementation of
communicative language teaching (CLT), especially in Asia, has been met in
several places by localized resistance and calls for a more ‘ecological’ or
context-sensitive approach to educational reform (Hu 2005).
Another breakthrough, another baby thrown out with the bathwater 257
The diversity of L2 contexts throughout the world and the need for specific
methodology seems to be overlooked by Littlewood. Littlewood’s examples
of OBE and by implication POP are rooted in L2 learning in public primary
education in inner circle countries, and precisely Hong Kong. It would be
quite wrong to describe liberal education, which Littlewood describes as
consisting of ‘choice, individual development and autonomy’ as prescribing
one particular methodology. Yet that is what Littlewood seems to imply
when he criticizes Posner and Rudnitsky’s (1997) guide to curriculum
development for its lack of methodological guidance. Doesn’t O B E ’s lack of
methodological specifications allow teachers and learners a voice in
determining which methods work best to achieve their specific goals in their
particular localized contexts? Presumably, the methodology appropriate for
the general English needs of primary age school children would be different
from the E S P needs of workers in a car rental agency.
Products versus In his discussion of changing approaches to integrating process and

outcomes product, Littlewood further muddies the waters in his conception of
outcomes. First, one cannot speak of audio-lingual and functional
approaches in terms of outcomes. A product is not an outcome. Outcomes
are explicit descriptions of competencies connected to other competencies
with regard to real-world skills, attainment of which are measured through
authentic assessment. Products may or may not be explicitly articulated;
they mainly exist as unconnected discrete items, are often not connected to
real-world language needs—the five paragraph essay, for example—and are
assessed by tests in terms of points or letter grades. Second, Littlewood
argues that ‘to the extent that the processes which we want to facilitate are
individual, we cannot—indeed would not want to—predict their direction
and outcomes’. How then does a teacher assess a student’s language
development and whether POP is actually facilitating that development?
How does a teacher in a Hong Kong primary school explain to the
stakeholders—students and parents—what the goals of the language
programme are and how do they give feedback to stakeholders about
progress in the attainment of those goals? Littlewood is rightly concerned
about those without expertise making centralized decisions about
outcomes, but we should also be equally concerned about teachers and
teacher educators who lack the motivation to make transparent their goals to
students and parents and so manipulate students through their implicit
curricula. Transparency is vital in the public school system, where it is
imperative that parents as stakeholders advocate for their child. And third,
what exactly is the degree of integration of the various approaches
Littlewood describes in the area of language teaching of which he is most
knowledgeable? It would certainly clarify the discussion if Littlewood can
provide us with some empirical studies of the impact of an outcomes
curriculum on classroom teaching in Hong Kong. But that might be too
much to expect from someone whose biases are all too readily revealed by
the flip put down of the innocuous use of ‘will’ in the conventional writing of
outcomes as ‘confident can-do terminology’.
Direct versus indirect It is also a stretch to claim that ‘processes-in-progress . . . is the classroom
teaching methodological perspective taken by most practicing teachers’, especially in
light of the resistance to the imposition of Western methodologies such as
258 David M. Bell

CLT discussed earlier. In following on from Hedge’s distinction between
a focus on ‘a list of items to be taught’ and the creation of ‘an optimal
environment’ that facilitates the processes through which language
learning takes place, Littlewood uses the terminology of product and
process. This dichotomy has also been described in terms of weak and
strong CLT (Howatt 1984), teaching language as communication and
teaching language for communication (Widdowson 1984), and direct and
indirect teaching (Celce-Murcia, Dörnyei, and Thurrell 1997). The
terminology of Celce-Murcia et al. is especially useful in understanding the
shifting focus in CLT ‘in terms of the emphasis placed on bottom-up
linguistic skills versus top-down communication’ (ibid.: 144). As Celce-
Murcia et al. tell the story, C LT grew out of dissatisfaction with methods that
focused on grammatical forms and structures and lexical items—product-
oriented methods—and a need to more adequately prepare learners for
natural communicative language use. That initially meant that CLT focused
more on process or incidental language learning exemplified in the ideas of
Krashen and the Natural Approach. However, that process or indirect
teaching orientation has swung back to an understanding of the importance
of linguistic competence in the ultimate achievement of communicative
competence and more direct or ‘product-oriented’ teaching through ‘focus
on form’, ‘consciousness raising’, and ‘input enhancement’.
This fluctuating emphasis on direct and indirect teaching is paralleled in
writing methodology in terms of product, process, genre, and post-process.
Hyland’s (2003) critique of process writing is relevant here in terms of POP
in general. First, an emphasis on processes in the classroom tends to
decontextualize language from the very real purposes language is used for
in the real world and the varying conventions that constrain its use. Second,
because an inductive, discovery-based approach to instruction does not
make transparent learning outcomes, it tends to favour those students who
are already implicitly familiar with particular target patterns of interaction
and disadvantage those students especially from lower socioeconomic
backgrounds and cultural backgrounds markedly different to the target
language who are unable to detect the ‘invisible curriculum’. Third, notions
of personal growth and critical thinking reflect a western ideology of
individualism, which may conflict with other collectivist ideologies. In this
sense, explicit learning outcomes can emancipate both students and
teachers. And finally, by stressing individual motivation, personal freedom,
self-expression, and learner responsibility process-oriented pedagogy risks
disempowering teachers and rendering them mere process facilitators.
The indirect teaching involved in process facilitation is certainly attractive to
novice native English speaker teachers who are often adept at creating
environments for pair and group interaction, but shy away from focusing
students’ attention on linguistic features such as the rhetorical structure of
a text, sociolinguistic and pragmatic elements of interpersonal
communication, and of course grammar. Well-written outcomes can help
focus teachers’ attention on areas of language, which they may lack
confidence in or may be unaware of and so bring about a better balance of
direct and indirect teaching. Without tools like outcomes, pedagogy may
become set too easily within each teacher’s comfort zone.
The arbitrary nature Littlewood tends to characterize POP as systemic rather than as a somewhat
of methods arbitrary combination of practices. Littlewood distinguishes four
interconnected processes in the classroom interaction: affective, cognitive,
social, and communication. But what about any number of other processes:
maturational, psychomotor, heuristic, and culturization? The suggestion is
that these are natural components of classroom interaction rather than
processes which have been focused on through pedagogical choices. Just as
Grammar Translation is a term used retrospectively to describe a loose set of
common practices developed over many years in many unconnected
situations (Howatt 1984), process-in-progress language teaching appears to
describe a set of practices which have also developed somewhat randomly
over the years as particular aspects of different language teaching
approaches: Natural Approach, Community Language Learning,
Cooperative Language Learning, CLT, Critical Thinking, and Content-based
Instruction have been absorbed pragmatically into our pedagogical
repertoires. These conventionalized practices are then given an
appropriately academic and bafflingly obtuse sounding name such as
process-in-progress and then touted as a complete system or what has
traditionally been referred to as a method. Of course, the process of
rationalizing our somewhat randomly acquired practices into a complete
system is natural and a process to be encouraged. But we should not lose
track of the often arbitrary way in which our methodological systems evolve.
The use of pedagogical tools such as outcomes, action research, and the
notion of direct versus indirect teaching facilitate the process by which we
need to deconstruct our practices to see if they are really working. As
D’Andrea (2008) suggests:
Using an outcomes-based approach to organizing teaching . . . allows
teachers to clarify for themselves the implicit outcomes that are always
part of any teaching and learning activity. It allows for a reflective
interrogation of all aspects of pedagogical practice and assists in the
selection of appropriate teaching/learning and assessment strategies.
(p. 40)
The multiplicity of In 1780, in the midst of the American revolutionary war, John Adams, who
student needs was later to become the second president of the United States, wrote:
I must study politics and war that our sons may have liberty to study
mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and
philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation,
commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study
painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain.2
Similarly, an immigrant hotel maid might say: ‘I must study English,
management, and information systems so that my daughters can study law
and medicine so that their daughters may study dance and music’. Myriad
are the goals that students may seek and myriad should be the ways that
teachers help them reach these goals. Unfortunately, Littlewood offers only
one way. One wonders how, given their educational goals, John Adams or
a hotel maid would respond to a description of learning objectives in terms
of ‘personal growth’ and the development of a ‘whole person’. ‘Yes’, they
260 David M. Bell

would respond, ‘That’s what I want for my grandchildren, but first there is
a revolution to be won and an Excel spreadsheet to be mastered’.
Dewey recognized this multiplicity of student needs and that in order to
fulfil such needs the life of the school could not be separated from the life of
the community in which it exists.
The great weakness of almost all schools, a weakness not confined in any
sense to Turkey, is the separation of school studies from the actual life of
children and the conditions and opportunities of the environment. The
school comes to be isolated and what is done there does not seem to the
pupils to have anything to do with the real life around them, but to form
a separate and artificial world. (1983: 293)
Conclusion An outcomes approach can play an important role in connecting school and
community. It can convey the evolving socioeconomic and cultural needs of
the larger community through top-down outcomes: literacy and girl’s
education in Atatürk’s Turkey, multiethnic and multiracial cooperation, and
universally shared linguistic skills in South Africa. And at the same time, the
bottom-up identification of outcomes through the collaboration of teachers,
students, and parents can enable each of these stakeholders to ‘act for
change in their lives’ in their local communities.
We should neither uncritically accept methodologies such as OBE and POP
nor should we dismiss them out of hand. There should be a willingness to
accept outcomes as one more tool and process-oriented teaching as yet
another tool which together can enrich the repertoires of teachers and
their ability to respond to the complex and ever-changing needs of their
students.
Notes Dewey, J. 1983. ‘Report on Turkey’ in J. A. Boydston

1 http://www.tesol.org/s_tesol/seccss.asp?CID¼ (ed.). The Middle Works: Essays on Politics and Society,
86&DID¼1556 1923–1924. Vol. 15 Collected Works. Carbondale, IL:
2 Source: in a letter to Abigail Adams, 1780. Southern Illinois Press.
Retrieved from http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/ Howatt, A. P. R. 1984. A History of English Language
quote_blog/John.Adams.Quote.0CAD Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hu, G. 2005. ‘Contextual influences on instructional
practices: a Chinese case for an ecological approach
References to E LT’. T E S O L Quarterly 39/4: 635–60.
Auerbach, E. 1986. ‘Competency-based E SL: one Hyland, K. 2003. ‘Genre-based pedagogies: a social
step forward or two steps back?’. T E S OL Quarterly response to process’. Journal of Second Language
20/3: 411–30. Writing 12/1: 17–29.
Celce-Murcia, M., Z. Dörnyei, and S. Thurrell. 1997. Lewis, G. L. 1984. ‘Atatürk’s language reforms’ in
‘Direct approaches in L2 instruction: a turning point J. M. Landau (ed.). Atatürk and the Modernization of
in communicative language teaching’. T E S OL Turkey. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Quarterly 31/1: 141–52. Posner, G. J. and A. N. Rudnitsky. 1997. Course
D’Andrea, V. 2008. ‘Organizing teaching and Design: A Guide to Curriculum Development for
learning: outcomes based-planning’ in H. Fry, Teachers (Fifth edition). New York: Longman.
S. Ketteridge, and S. Marshall (eds.). A Handbook for Riordan, T. 2005. ‘Education for the twenty-first
Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: century: teaching, learning and assessment’. Change
Enhancing Academic Practice (Second edition). 37/1: 52–6.
London: RoutledgeFalmer Page. Schlafly, P. 1993. ‘What’s wrong with outcomes
based education?’. The Phyllis Schlafly Report, 26/10
(May). Retrieved from http://www.eagleforum.org/ Wolf-Gazo, E. 1996. ‘John Dewey in Turkey: an
psr/1993/may93/psrmay93.html. Date accessed educational mission’. Journal of American Studies of
13 December 2008. Turkey 3: 15–42.
Swan, M. 1985. ‘A critical look at the communicative
approach’. E LT Journal 39/2: 76–87. The author
Turan, S. 2000. ‘John Dewey’s report of 1924 and his The author David Bell is an Associate Professor of
recommendations on the Turkish educational Linguistics at Ohio University. He has taught E SO L
system revisited’. History of Education 29/6: 543–55. in the UK, Italy, Japan, and the US A. His research
Widdowson, H. G. 1984. ‘Teaching language as and interests are pedagogy, pragmatics, and the interface
for communication’ in H. G. Widdowson (ed.). of language and culture.
Explorations in Applied Linguistics 2. Oxford: Oxford Email: belld@ohio.edu
University Press.
262 David M. Bell

OBE : a coin with two sides or many

different coins?
William Littlewood
Bell is an eloquent advocate of outcomes-based education (OBE). The

benefits which he discusses correspond mainly to the first two motives for
the ‘process-as-outcome’ approach mentioned in the penultimate section of
my own article:
1 The approach can help give learning clear directions and serve as a basis
for determining what learning has taken place;
2 We can use this information not only at the end of a course but also
during a course, to improve further learning.
All this, as I say, is beneficial to student learning and Bell is right in thinking
that I would agree with the ‘bottom-up stakeholder generation of outcomes’
that he himself describes.
Bell also shares my concern about ‘those without expertise making
centralized decisions about outcomes’. This concern reflects the third and
fourth motives that I mention:
3 The wider system may ‘hijack’ information intended to support learning
and use it as a basis for reporting and grading. See the paper by Brindley
referenced in my original article; and
4 The system itself may specify the outcomes, measure their
achievements, and use the results to determine funding and
progression. See the paper by Alexander (referenced in my original
article) which Bell, mysteriously, dismisses as ‘probably rabid’.
It seems that Bell and I agree, then, that OBE can be either a ‘good thing’ or
a ‘bad thing’. So where does our disagreement lie? Bell is right that the main
direction of my own article is to emphasize how OBE, though it is politically
correct now in many parts of the world, has inherent dangers which our
profession needs to be aware of and guard against. If he perceives this as
‘demonizing’ OBE, so be it: I am not averse to demonizing dangers that lie
within OBE, if this helps to avoid them. Bell, I suggest, does the opposite:
apart from that his fleeting mention of concern about ‘centralized
decisions’, he sanctifies OB E, even invoking the blessings of such
authorities as Dewey and the second President of the USA (but not, alas,
invoking concrete evidence to show in what conditions OBE works as he
claims).

We may be simply seeing two sides of the same coin or we may be dealing
with different coins. OBE, as Bell says of process-oriented pedagogy (POP),
exists in ‘a somewhat arbitrary combination of practices’. For example,
outcomes may be defined at varying levels of specificity, in terms of different
constructs, by different people (including teachers, programme leaders,
schools, government bodies, elected or nominated individuals), at the
beginning of the curriculum planning process (as the theory advocates) or
grafted post hoc on to a curriculum already in use (a survival strategy in some
contexts where OBE is imposed top-down). All these variations are
significant and, as with POP, we should neither demonize nor sanctify OBE
in all its combinations. We need more evidence on which forms of OBE
really do benefit student learning and which ones hinder it. Perhaps this
exchange will help to generate some.

text messages
A tale of two songs: Singapore versus

Hong Kong
Andy Kirkpatrick and Andrew Moody
Introduction by Jill The text for this ‘Text messages’ is two YouTube videos from what has
and Charles Hadfield become known as ‘The battle of the songs’, based on the relatively light-
(series editors) hearted, but nevertheless keen rivalry between Singapore and Hong Kong.
The two cities share a colonial history similar in some respects, but crucially
different in others. Hong Kong was ceded to the British in three stages:
Hong Kong Island in 1842, Kowloon, on the mainland, some 20 years later,
and the New Territories, encroaching further into the Chinese mainland, on
a 99-year lease expiring in 1997. Singapore has a longer colonial history,
beginning in 1819 when Sir Stamford Raffles established a British port and
trading station on the island. Both colonies then followed roughly parallel
paths, becoming important East–West trading centres during the
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, both occupied by the Japanese in
World War II, both experiencing a huge growth in the manufacturing sector
during the fifties, and then becoming powerful commercial and financial
centres for Asia. However, their post-colonial histories are somewhat
different: Singapore went through a process of democratic reform in the late
forties and fifties, achieving a form of self-government in 1959 and
independence in 1963, via a merger with the Federation of Malaya. Civil
unrest led to the establishment of an independent democratic republic in
1965. Colonial rule in Hong Kong, in contrast, ended relatively recently. The
return of not only the New Territories but also the whole of Hong Kong to the
People’s Republic of China was agreed in 1984 and took place at the expiry of
the lease in 1997. Hong Kong, unlike Singapore, is not an independent
democracy, but a Special Administrative Region (S A R) of China.
Both cities have written important chapters in the history of language
contact between Chinese and English, but the two songs illuminate the
differences that have arisen between them and claim these as advantages in
different and competing ways.
Our commentators are Andy Kirkpatrick, Chair Professor and Head of the
Department of English, Hong Kong Institute of Education, and Andrew
Moody, Associate Professor and Coordinator of the MA Programme, from
the Department of English, University of Macau.
The texts The texts, ‘Singapore is a better place than Hong Kong is’, written and
performed by Eskewme and ‘In Hong Kong our hearts are strong’, written

Advance Access publication May 7, 2009
and performed by Wokstarz, are too long to be reproduced in full here (and
the written texts cannot do justice to the performed songs). However,
citations of the most relevant passages will be made throughout the article.
The songs can be viewed in full on YouTube (Eskewme 2008; Wokstarz
2008).
Language notes Singapore is a better place than Hong Kong is

We got more art and culture, all they got is biz
We so stylo, they just vile-o
We speak Singlish, awmost English-lah
Singapore is a smarter place than Hong Kong is
We keep more of our history than Hong Kong did
We so good tase, they jus’ gone case
We speak Singlish, awmost English-lah
Can or not?
Okay-lah!
Readers of this series will recognize in the above extract from the
Singaporean song some of the distinctive linguistic features of Singaporean
English from Anthea Fraser Gupta’s commentary in an earlier Text
Messages (Hadfield, Hadfield, and Gupta 2007). Several words are spelt to
capture the sounds of Singapore English, such as awmost (line 4) and tase
(line 8). Other examples from later verses include
I doe no, Cantonese izzit? (line 22)
Why you lookat me lidat? (line 28)
ES KE W ME. We very stylo milo one awreddy okay (line 40)
There is also a distinctive Singaporean flavour to the vocabulary, with
examples of the creative adaptation of standard English lexis to give
expressions such as stylo milo and the term ‘Singlish’ itself. Borrowings
from Malay are also evident in later verses:
We so WH AM B AM
They so ayam (lines 26–7)
We pick leaders
Alamak—but not much choice! (lines 36–7)
Where ayam means ‘sour’ and alamak is a mild swear word.
Use of local particles is also characteristic here. The song is peppered with
the informal/colloquial particle lah, as in ‘Singlish, awmost English-lah’ and
‘Okay-lah’. Other particles in later verses are the past tense particle la and the
expressive particle wa:
Our shophouses-wa! So pretty (line 14)
266 Andy Kirkpatrick and Andrew Moody

Distinctive grammatical patterns are also evident where the linking verb ‘to
be’ is deleted: ‘we so stylo’, ‘They jus’ gone case’. But, as pointed out by
Gupta, this is an optional rule and ‘be’ appears here in other contexts,
especially in the more formal register, for example in the title and opening
line, ‘Singapore is a better place than Hong Kong is’. The frequent use of
‘izzit’ as a non-variant tag-question form is also distinctive, although the use
of non-variant tag forms is common in many varieties of English.
However, while linguistic features of Singapore English (‘Singlish’ as it is
called within the song) are used plentifully in the Singapore song, few
features of Hong Kong English are present within the Hong Kong song:
Hong Kong is perched on the water’s edge,
standing in the sunrise
Our home’s a place of eternal change,
like its ever-changing skies
Hong Kong is mountains and valley lakes, mostly green and rural
Outside the cities are forest walks:
step into a new world
In Hong Kong, our hearts are strong
we all sing one song
From Lo Wu to Lan Kwai Fong
here’s where we belong (lines 8–18)
In comparing the Hong Kong song with the Singaporean one, what is most
noticeable is the lack of any explicitly distinctive linguistic features of Hong
Kong English. The spelling, vocabulary, and grammar all conform to the
British standard. The only explicit Hong Kong referents are to the place
names Lo Wu, the border town with China, and Lan Kwai Fong, an area of
bars and restaurants on Hong Kong Island.
There has been a long-standing debate about whether Hong Kong English
represents a distinctive variety (Luke and Richards 1982; Bolton 2000,
2002). However, the total lack of distinctive features of Hong Kong English
in this song is somewhat unexpected given the number of scholars who have
described features such as local lexis (Benson 2003) and creative writing
(Vittachi 2002). One particularly distinctive feature of Hong Kong English
that is missing within the Hong Kong song is code switching. The presence
of Cantonese-English code switching in the speech and writing of Hong
Kong speakers when they are communicating with each other is well
attested and is frequently used in popular media like newspapers and
advertisements (Li 2000, 2002). Perhaps surprisingly, therefore, no code
switching occurs in this song. In fact, apart from place names, there are no
Chinese words here at all. Indeed, the only Chinese lexis in either of the two
songs occurs in the Singaporean song, kwai-lan (line 53), a Hokkien term
used to describe someone who is ‘malicious or an irritant’.
Text messages: A tale of two songs 267

Commentary The Singaporean song is unmistakably Singaporean in its use of language.
There is also a feeling of self-confidence in the use of this distinctive
language, ‘Singlish’, coupled with humour and wit. A switch between styles
is also noticeable. For example, the following text is not sung, but appears as
printed text in the YouTube video, and is written in a more formal register
than the rest of the song:
Okay, so the choice at newsstands is a bit limited
But the choice at the hotel buffets is not
Please discard your chewing gum, durians and independent way of
thinking on your way in (lines 42–4)
It also demonstrates an ability to self-satirize, which contrasts amusingly
with the braggadocio of the rest of the song. We suggest that the song itself
and its linguistic features illustrate a linguistic creativity that is both
sophisticated and self-confident.
In contrast, the only example of lexical creativity or bilingual language play
in Hong Kong’s reply is the name of the performer, Wokstarz (wok ‘a convex
frying pan used in Chinese cooking’ in place of the more conventional ‘Rock
stars’).
One explanation for this lack of code switching and bilingual creativity is
that the songwriters have taken the deliberate choice to use a form of
English that is as close to an international standard as possible, a choice that
may have been motivated by a desire to present Hong Kong people as more
cultured, sophisticated, and serious than the Singaporeans. One might
argue that it demonstrates a linguistic sensitivity in understanding that code
switching might not be understood in an international domain. However,
the informal nature of the domain and topic could also signal a lack of self-
confidence in the use of a local variety of Hong Kong English. The
Singaporean song has a certain self-mocking tone that both explicitly pokes
fun at Singapore systems and implicitly uses local forms of English to poke
fun at Singapore English and its speakers. This tone is completely absent in
the Hong Kong song. Instead, the Hong Kong song asserts that, unlike
Singapore, ‘we are free to laugh over anything’ and that ’our comedians have
gags’ (lines 34–5). The freedom to parody and laugh at Hong Kong English
forms—or any other aspect of Hong Kong life—however, is not expressed in
the song’s text.
However, while there may appear to be no explicitly distinctive linguistic
features of Hong Kong English in the song, it does display a distinctive
rhetorical style that contrasts dramatically with the Singapore song. The
song resonates with Chineseness. The first verse of the song, with its
references to ‘sunrise’, ‘the water’s edge’, ‘valley lakes’, and ‘forest walks’, is
a lyrical equivalent of looking at a typical Chinese landscape or shan-shui
(mountain-water) painting. It evokes a Chinese scene. The chorus, with its
emphasis on a united people standing as one, looks as though it may be
derived from the Olympic slogan ‘One World, One Dream’, but also calls to
mind old Chinese Communist Party political propaganda paintings where
the workers and peasants stand side by side with heads turned upwards
looking towards the promise of a bright dawn. For example, the line of the

refrain ‘our hearts are strong’ curiously uses plural ‘hearts’ (with the
grammatically correct ‘are’) instead of reading ‘In Hong Kong, our heart is
strong’. What is suggested is that unification derives from individuals all
striving towards the same goal, and this sentiment is very similar to that
expressed by the Chinese term tong bao ‘from the same womb’, a term used
by Chinese of different political persuasions and nationalities to refer to
each other. The diversity of Hong Kong is also represented in the
refrains ‘from Lo Wu to Lan Kwai Fong’. The distance between these two
locations is as much metaphorical as it is geographical. Lo Wu
represents the gateway into the Mainland, while Lan Kwai Fong symbolizes
the centre of Hong Kong’s international community and cosmopolitan
lifestyle.
The next verse suggests that Hong Kong and its people have weathered
tougher times than Singapore and are thus made of somewhat sterner stuff:
Once refugees or just wanderers
now our home is Hong Kong
We are survivors so come what may:
history has made us strong (lines 19–22)
Hong Kong is the mature elder brother who will guide Singapore to
adulthood from its current rather childish adolescent phase, perhaps
exemplified in Hong Kong eyes by its use of ‘Singlish, awmost English-lah’:
Small Singapore is our little bro:
rivalries do blow up
We’ll help him learn all the things we know:
we will help him grow up (lines 23–6)
We should point out, however, that the sung lyric of line 26, ‘we will help
him grow up’, is quite different from the one actually printed, which is
‘though he makes us throw up!’ If this printed lyric is treated as
a mistaken lyric (as we suspect it is), however, the actual text is ironic. The
Hong Kong song descends into cliché and stereotypical Chinese tropes and
removes any trace of local linguistic features from the text. Likewise, the
Hong Kong song condescends to call Singapore ‘our little bro’ (line 23).
However, the stereotypical motifs and rhetorical structure of the
Hong Kong song can hardly be called ‘mature’ in comparison to the
Singapore song.
Another Chinese rhetorical trope evident in the song is balance or
parallelism. This is common in many texts, but is particularly valued in the
Chinese rhetorical tradition (Kirkpatrick 2005) and most frequently
exemplified in couplets that adorn either side of doorways and mantels in
Chinese temples and homes. This use of balance and parallelism is
exemplified in lines 40–1:
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, it’s east, it’s west, it’s old, it’s young
Though once it was so tragic but now it’s really magic, it’s home, it’s home

Although these examples of rhetorical style borrowed from Chinese are not
distinctive characteristics of Hong Kong English and could be found in
various other Englishes, their presence within this song—especially when
viewed as a response to the Singapore song—is marked as the only features
that appear to be borrowed from Hong Kong English norms. The song
concludes with the chorus reiterating Hong Kong’s sense of unity, ‘we all
sing one song’.
Conclusion In conclusion, we argue that, while the Hong Kong song displays none of
the explicitly distinctive linguistic features of a nativized variety of English,
preferring instead to use a more formal register and language features that
largely correspond to exonormative standards, its use of rhetorical tropes and
its style imbue it with an intensely Chinese flavour. The rather prim
seriousness—almost sanctimony—of the Hong Kong song is heightened
by the near constant presence of two schoolgirls in the video clip. They
are shown engaged in almost stereotypically innocent pastimes such as
playing playground pat-a-cake. This provides a striking contrast with
the somewhat raunchy performance of the Singaporean singer. Similarly,
the adherence to Chinese conventions contrasts with the iconoclastic
sense of play, creativity, and capacity for self-satire of the Singaporean
song.
While it would be foolish to make too much of this based on two songs, the
use of Chinese rhetorical styles could indicate that Hong Kong is coming to
see itself—and, importantly, presenting itself—more and more as
a Chinese city and is thus less likely to be in the process of creating a new and
separate identity through a nativized variety of English in the way that
Singapore has done. Rather, the Hong Kong identity revealed within this
brief battle of two songs represents a move more towards seeking an identity
within the Chinese sphere, and this is reflected in the use of Chinese
rhetorical tropes and style. It would not be surprising to see Hong Kong
moving closer to the Mainland. After all, the British ceded control more than
a decade ago and Hong Kong’s future is obviously inexorably tied to China,
of which it is now a SAR under the ‘One Country, Two Systems’ model of
governance. Perhaps Hong Kong is becoming more comfortable with
a Chinese identity, while Singapore is developing a unique Singaporean
identity?
Final revised version received March 2009
References Hadfield, J., C. Hadfield, and A. F. Gupta. 2007. ‘Text

Benson, P. 2002. ‘Hong Kong words: variation and messages: travels with auntie’. ELT Journal
context’ in K. Bolton (ed.). 61/1: 63–8.
Bolton, K. 2000. ‘The sociolinguistics of Hong Kong Kirkpatrick, A. 2005. ‘China’s first systematic
and the space for Hong Kong English’. World account of rhetoric: an introduction to Chen
Englishes 19/3: 265–86. Kui’s Wen Ze (rules of writing)’. Rhetorica
Bolton, K. (ed.). 2002 Hong Kong English: Autonomy 23/2: 103–52.
and Creativity. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Li, D. C. S. 2000. ‘Cantonese-English code-switching
University Press. research in Hong Kong: a Y2K review’. World
Eskewme. 2008. ‘Singapore vs Hong Kong’. YouTube. Englishes 19/3: 305–22.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v¼VpjNgIwyrbE
(Accessed on 10 July 2008).

Li, D. C. S. 2002. ‘Cantonese-English code-switching a monograph for Hong Kong University Press
research in Hong Kong: a survey of recent research’ English as a Lingua Franca in ASEA N: Roles, Features
in K. Bolton (ed.). and the Multilingual Model of Language Teaching. His
Luke, K. K. and J. C. Richards. 1982. ‘English in Hong World Englishes: Implications for International
Kong: status and functions’. English World-Wide Communication and English Language Teaching was
3/1: 47–64. published by Cambridge University Press in 2007.
Vittachi, N. 2002. ‘From Yinglish to sado- Email: akirkpat@ied.edu.hk
mastication’ in K. Bolton (ed.).
Wokstarz. 2008. ‘Re: Singapore vs Hong Kong’. Andrew Moody is an Associate Professor of English
YouTube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/ in the English Department at the University of
watch?v¼oxrwro_YcgE. (Accessed on 20 June 2008). Macau, where he teaches Sociolinguistics at both the
undergraduate and graduate levels. He has taught at
The authors universities in Beijing, China, and Japan before
Andy Kirkpatrick is Chair Professor and Head of the coming to Macau and holds a PhD (University of
English Department at the Hong Kong Institute of Kansas) in English Language and Literature. His
Education. Immediately prior to that, he was research interests include the development of
Professor of Language Education at Curtin varieties of World Englishes and the role of English
University in Perth, Australia, where he worked for in popular culture, especially within Asia. His
11 years. In addition to Australia and Hong Kong, he articles have appeared in American Speech, World
has taught in the fields of Applied Linguistics and Englishes, Asian Englishes and English Today and he is
Language Teacher Education in Burma, China, currently editing, with Jaimie Shinhee Lee,
Singapore, and the UK. His research interests a collection of essays for Hong Kong University Press
include contrastive Chinese-English rhetoric and entitled English in Asian Pop Culture. Currently he is
writing and the development of ‘multilingual’ involved in a long-term research project examining
varieties of English. He is currently editing the the language shift in Macau.
forthcoming Handbook of World Englishes to be
published by Routledge in 2010 and working on

comment
ELT and the challenges of the times

Chris Lima
Comment is a feature which allows contributors to express a personal, and

sometimes controversial, view about a matter of current concern in the profession
outside the format of a reviewed academic article. The views expressed are not
necessarily those of the Editor or the Publisher. Reaction to Comment features is
especially welcome in the form of a letter to the Editor.
Analysing the rise of English as an academic discipline from the marginal

position of a subject fit for women and workers in the nineteenth century to
the status of the most important subject in Oxford and Cambridge in the
1930s, Eagleton (1983: 17–53) traces the role of English in British society and
highlights the importance of ideology in its elevation to the status of a fully
fledged subject. English was only able to gain academic recognition when
supported by a clear and manifest body of beliefs that shaped its study as
a discipline. Perhaps the plight of English Literature in the previous
centuries is somehow being re-enacted in the life of English Language
Teaching in our times.
In his article, ‘ELT and ‘‘the spirit of the times’’’, Waters (2007) argues that
the various trends in E LT that have characterized its discourse and practice
in the last few years are the fruit of the ideological discourse of Western
academics and, as such, fail to find resonance among practitioners and
learners. For Waters (2007: 358), such politically correct (PC) approaches are
fundamentally flawed because they attempt to create a hegemonic
Anglophone E LT world and enforce an ideological and political agenda
which is completely alien to the everyday realities, context, and interests of
‘most ordinary E LT practitioners’.
In his response to the criticism expressed in the article, Holliday (2007) is
prepared to recognize some merits in Waters’ argument but warns that
a distinction should be drawn between superficial political correctness and
the need to readdress power inequalities in E LT and being aware that social,
cultural, religious, and linguistic Western paradigms are ever present in our
professional discourse.
Reading Waters’ and Holliday’s articles, it seems to me that the reason for
the disagreement between them is not political correctness in itself since
both are ready to dismiss it. The main bone of contention between them is
the political dimension of English language teaching and in whose hands
such political power should be. Waters is right in warning us against a false
transfer of political power. Shor and Freire (1987: 35) called educators’
272 E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccp035

attention to the fact that liberating methodologies are not just a matter of
modernizing traditional techniques; conversely, critical pedagogies (CPs)
indicate ‘a different relationship to knowledge and society’. In a review of
CPs, Jordão (2004: 27) recognizes the danger of speaking for the ‘Other’ and
of imposing one’s own values as universal thus ignoring social and
historical differences and tending ‘to be very biased and far from the neutral
and disinterested world views they proclaim’.
Nonetheless, we should also be aware that much of the criticism faced by
new approaches is also the result of some uneasiness reflecting the
unpredictability of the results such approaches may bring. As in any process
of change—from the French Revolution to the Technology Revolution—the
moment we open doors for the transfer of power, the use people will make of
it is no more subject to the handler’s control. Even if Western academics
have come up with theories of learner autonomy, global citizenship
education, critical thinking, and other similar approaches to set their
supposed hidden agendas, the moment teachers and learners start putting
these approaches into practice in the classroom, they acquire some sort of
control over them. Teachers and learners appropriate, delete, and add to new
trends in E LT according to their own principles and the values they see as
important in education (Brumfit 1981: 31). The implications and
consequences of adopting new approaches to E LT will be shaped by the use
teachers and learners make of them in the classrooms.
What we are reading in Waters’ and Holliday’s articles is actually the current
struggle of English language teaching to find a justification for its existence
and to determine the philosophical bases that justify the teaching of English
language in a world where the previous reasons for doing so may no longer
be valid. The early nineteenth century was a period when Britain underwent
unprecedented social and technological change (Leith and Graddol 1996:
137) and English helped to shape the nation’s new sense of unity and
identity. Teaching English in the colonies was perfectly justified since
religious and cultural values had to be taken to the confines of the Empire as
an attempt to create and maintain its unity (Howatt with Widdowson 2004:
128). From the 1970s to the beginning of the twenty-first century, we saw the
consolidation of the globalization process, and English became an essential
tool for the modernization of countries which wanted to have access to the
global economy and society (Graddol 2006: 20). Now that the lure and
glitter of the global market are considerably diminished, the teaching of
English language has to find a new direction and a new justification for its
existence.
It would be naive to think of any sort of methodology or approach, traditional
or progressive, as devoid of political ideological connotations. In the same
way that literary theories—structuralism, post-structuralism, feminism,
and post-colonialism, to mention a few—made their way into English
literary studies, CPs and the new trends in language teaching and education
are making their way into ELT. Like any new development, they face forces
of opposition and attract suspicion and criticism from more traditional
quarters, while the advocates of innovation fight to bring their own
perspective into mainstream education. Both positions must be subject to
criticism and critique. New critical approaches to E LT embody the state of
Comment: ELT and the challenges of the times 273

knowledge and understanding of language and politics we have at this
particular moment in the history of English language teaching. They
should not be seen as the ultimate answer in education. E LT educators
should be open both to ‘the spirit of the times’ and the voices of warning
until the day that such approaches become part of educational tradition
themselves and are also challenged by other winds of theoretical and
political change.
References Shor, I. and P. Freire. 1987. A Pedagogy for Liberation.

Brumfit, C. J. 1981. ‘Talking shop’. E LT Journal New York: Bergin & Garvey.
36/1: 29–36. Waters, A. 2007. ‘ELT and the ‘‘spirit of the times’’’.
Eagleton, T. 1983. Literary Theory. An Introduction. E LT Journal 61/4: 350–9.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Graddol, D. 2006. English Next. London: The author
British Council. Chris Lima is the coordinator of a number of E LT
Holliday, A. 2007. ‘Response to E LT and the ‘‘spirit and literature projects in partnership with the British
of the times’’’. E LT Journal 61/4: 360–6. Council and I AT E F L. She holds a degree in English
Howatt, A. P. R. with H. G. Widdowson 2004. A literature from Goldsmiths College, University of
History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford London, and is currently doing a Masters in Teacher
University Press. Training at the University College Plymouth of St
Jordão, C. M. 2004. ‘Thinking critically of critical Mark and St John. She is the former coordinator of
thinking: critical pedagogies revisited’. Situation the CL and E LT Project and winner of the 2007
Analysis: A Forum for Critical Thought & International British Council Innovation Award. Chris is an
Affairs 4: 21–30. I AT E F L Literature, Media, and Cultural Studies
Leith, D. and D. Graddol. 1996. ‘Modernity and committee member and a board member of the
English as a national language’ in D. Graddol, Extensive Reading Foundation.
D. Leith, and J. Swann (eds.). English History, Email: chrislima90@yahoo.co.uk
Diversity and Change. London: Routledge.
274 Chris Lima

at: http://www.ecml.at/mtp2/T E MO LAY OL E /html/
Temolayole_E_Results.htm
isbn 978 92 871 6297 7
Teaching Foreign Languages in the Primary School
C. Kirsch
Continuum 2008, 224 pp., £22.99
isbn 978 0 8286949 4
The TeMoLaYoLe Book consists of ten edited papers

from the Research into Teaching Modern Languages
to Young Learners conference held in Hungary in
2007. Eight papers focus on the teaching and
learning of English and one on the teaching and
learning of German and French, respectively. The first
six focus on pre-service (P R E SE T ) and in-service
(I NS ET ) teacher education, while the last four
evaluate evidence from the classroom.
In Chapter 1, Mateja Dagarin and Marija Andraka
compare positive evaluations of Slovene I NS ET and
Croatian P R E S E T teacher education programmes for
primary school teachers of foreign languages. They
emphasize the interest in practical classroom
applications amongst both sets of programme
participants and argue that the ability of both
programmes to reflect these concerns chimes well
with Council of Europe priorities. The well-structured
and well-substantiated analysis of their programmes
highlights the crucial importance of the teacher in the
young learner’s world.
Gun Lundberg evaluates a set of action research
projects in Sweden in Chapter 2, focusing on five
main areas of teaching and learning: consequences of
early start, teacher and learner target language use,
teaching and learning strategies in the modern
foreign language (MF L ) classroom, children’s
motivation, and assessment and record keeping. I
feel that this article tried to cover rather a lot of ground
within the space of its 14 pages. Fascinating
discussion of children’s motivation to learn a foreign
language, for example (pp. 29–30), seems to me
rather telescopic. Additionally, I found it hard to get
an overall picture of each focus area, as I feel that
Lundberg’s main interest was the power and
potential of action research rather than information
about and analysis of the projects themselves.
The TeMoLaYoLe Book: Teaching Modern Languages
to Young Learners In contrast, Małgorzata Szulc-Kurpaska’s third
chapter opts for depth rather than breadth of analysis.
M. Nikolov, J. Mihaljević Djigunović,
Her article evaluates the experiences of eight Polish
M. Mattheoudakis, G. Lundberg, and T. Flanagan (eds.)
P R E S E T teachers who did their teaching placements
European Centre for Modern Languages, Council of at kindergartens instead of primary schools due to
Europe Publishing 2007, 150 pp. Available free online a shortage of primary school vacancies. The article
280 Reviews
looks at how the trainee teachers attracted children’s article succeeds impressively in combining
attention, how they adjusted tasks to meet children’s background project information with balanced
needs, and how they attempted to maximize analysis of outcomes and recognition of limitations
exposure to L2. Szulc-Kurpaska explains also how the of the project.
trainees’ feedback on working with younger learners
Charis-Olga Papadopoulou looks at the potential for
than they were originally trained for has led to
discontinuity when foreign languages are taught in
modifications in the early education methodology
both primary and secondary sectors. She argues that
course offered by her teacher training college.
two common misconceptions contribute greatly to
In Chapter 4, Mariola Bogucka uses a set of open discontinuity. One is that early foreign language
questions to find out how 12 Polish early education learning’s purpose is simply additional years of study
teachers of English see their role and significance as to the years spent studying in secondary school. The
teachers. Of particular interest for me was her brief other is that early foreign language learning is not
analysis of her interviewees’ consistent use of really learning at all, but rather playing and having fun
narrative modes of thought when talking about for no obvious reason. Papadopoulou goes on to
teaching and the strong and rather alarming finding consider the extent to which the primary and
that all except one of these teachers considers their secondary curricula for German as a second foreign
school staffroom an ‘impersonal, uncomfortable and language in Greece provide continuity for children
‘‘cold’’ place’ (p. 53). Bogucka acknowledges that to learning the subject. She does this by analysing the
some extent her sample is self-selecting as all 12 extent to which the objectives, themes and content,
teachers are highly committed to their job and to assessment, and methodology components of the
using any means possible to develop professionally. curriculum are likely to promote continuity. I found
She concludes intriguingly by wondering whether her conclusion that more research needs to be carried
teachers of other subjects or with different profiles out slightly disappointing but justified given the
would discuss the same aspects of teaching and use evidence available to her. Her focus on continuity
the same type of narrative discourse when talking between primary and secondary for German in
about teaching. Greece struck me as highly relevant to the teaching of
English as a foreign language in many state school
Marina Mattheoudakis, Kateřina Dvořákova, and
contexts elsewhere.
Katalin Láng evaluate the extent to which 27 student
teachers based in Greece, Hungary, and the Czech Gloria Vickov examines the degree to which
Republic were able to implement the input, ideas, and children’s own cultural identity can be incorporated
activities from a short teacher education module into early foreign language learning materials in
focusing on using stories. The authors conclude that Croatia. Thorough analysis shows clearly that the
the content of the module might need to be tailored lexical items in the coursebooks make minimal
a little more closely to the educational traditions of references to Croatia and numerous references to
the country in which it is used and that all trainee Anglo-Saxon culture. The premise of the article is that
teachers needed more support with adapting stories Croatian culture is under-represented in coursebooks
for their own context. As far as I can work out, the and that this is out of keeping with the aims and
authors use the term ‘storytelling’ as a synonym for values of the national curriculum in Croatia. I would
‘use of storybooks’. Although I feel the authors do have welcomed discussion of whether it is possible
especially well in clarifying and comparing outcomes that children might nonetheless learn about Croatian
in each country, I think a more explicit definition of culture by comparing it with the examples of foreign
‘storytelling’ would provide a clearer foundation for culture in their books. I think the article would also
some of their analysis and discussion. benefit from inclusion of teachers’ and/or children’s
views on whether Croatian culture is under-
In the sixth article, Réka Lugossy considers the effect
represented in their coursebooks. I wondered, too, if
of a set of carefully selected authentic picture books
many of the lexical items referring to Anglo-Saxon
on the learning of young Hungarian learners and their
culture were realistic or relevant in the modern world
teachers. Her evaluation focuses on four schools and
and think this point might have been given more
suggests that using the books increased both learner
consideration.
and teacher motivation and linguistic development,
led to increased participation from boys and socially Zeljka Zanchi looks at when and whether phonemic
disadvantaged children, and resulted in greater transcription is introduced in primary schools. Her
rapport between teacher and learners. An unexpected findings suggest that it is rarely introduced in the
ripple effect was the interest of teachers not involved Croatian primary sector and that when transcription
in the case study in using the picture books. This is introduced, it is not done so systematically. I feel
Reviews 281
that some of the analysis of findings is partial and Australia, and China. The reason for this choice of
loads the dice in favour of the idea that pronunciation continent and countries is not explained, while the
can be taught explicitly. Her claim for instance ‘Points to remember’ listed at the end of the chapter
(p. 126) that introducing phonemic transcription seem in some cases to contain new rather than
unsystematically at primary level is ‘clearly summarized information. A good example here is
insufficient to result in any knowledge’ seems Kirsch’s point that in early-start foreign language
exaggerated to me. The topic is a fascinating one and provision, there are problems with teacher supply and
clearly relevant to young learners, but I feel that it lack of appropriate assessment procedures (p. 17).
merits a wider frame of discussion than the one This is an impeccable claim, but does not emerge
provided in this article. I wonder, for example, if from the content of the chapter, as far as I can see.
discussion of the cognitive load of a transcription
Chapter 2 moves from a global perspective to
system might be discussed, or the possibility that
a school-based one, via discussion of case studies of
a mix of explicit and implicit teaching may benefit
two London schools which provide good access to
children might be suggested.
foreign languages. The text is peppered with a large
In TeMoLaYoLe’s final article, Luisa Pellicer discusses number of acronyms relating to the English
correspondence and exchange visits between 8- and education system, but I feel that this is unavoidable
9-year-old French and Spanish children in the and is unlikely to hinder understanding for someone
Pyrenees. This is the only article in the volume which unfamiliar with the system in England. The chapter
puts children’s perspectives centre stage. I found it includes photos showing ways in which the two
especially interesting to see how little children knew schools promote the learning of foreign languages
about each other’s lives and how open they were to and also includes children’s views about language
finding out. The article explains the logistics and the learning. Fascinating examples for me included: ‘Ask
rationale for the exchange visits especially clearly. somebody for help . . . Tell them to say something to
you and repeat after them. Ask them to correct you’;
TeMoLaYoLe certainly added to my knowledge about
and ‘Keep on saying things aloud so you don’t forget
some topics and got me thinking more about others I
them’ (p. 31).
thought I already knew something about. The book
has been carefully edited, and for me, the variety of Chapter 3 provides an overview of behaviourist,
focus works well. Inevitably for a selection of cognitivist, and social constructivist views of
conference papers, there is a little unevenness at learning. I found information to be clearly presented
times in TeMoLaYoLe, and the title is perhaps not the and synthesized for the most part, and the critique of
easiest to remember, but I feel that the book will be of Krashen’s input hypothesis (pp. 42–3) particularly
great interest to researchers and teachers who work clear and objective. Chapter 4 looks at how these
with other teachers, as almost every article gives theories are realized in methods and approaches by
a clear evidence-based voice to teachers’ views and considering grammar translation, audiolingualism,
beliefs about their work. total physical response (T P R ), communicative
language teaching (C LT ), and the natural approach.
Teaching Foreign Languages in the Primary School is
I felt that a number of claims about each method or
more of a ‘how to’ book with a theoretical
approach merited explanation. For example, Kirsch
underpinning on teaching M F L at primary level. Most
informs us that T P R teachers tend to spend about
of its contexts focus on England, but the ideas and
120 hours on asking learners to listen to and respond
content in the book seem to me equally relevant to
to sentences before speaking (p. 56). In addition, she
primary EFL teachers in other countries. Examples
cites an Office for Standards in Education (O FS TE D)
used to support the practical aspect of the book draw
review of secondary schools in England (p. 59) as
on French, German, Spanish, and Italian, while case
a way of pointing out shortcomings of C LT in terms of
studies also include the learning of Japanese as
learners’ spoken output. The problem here is that it is
a foreign language.
far from clear from the context she describes whether
In Chapter 1, Kirsch provides an overview of issues the children in question learnt a foreign language
affecting the teaching and learning of foreign from a C LT approach, or if perceived shortcomings
languages in the primary sector. She explains how the might also be attributable to other variables.
perceived benefits of early start may have less to do
Chapter 5, ‘What children say about learning a foreign
with progress in language learning than with
language’, is based on Kirsch’s PhD thesis. It looks at
developing positive attitudes towards other cultures.
six 9-year-olds learning different languages at home,
She goes on to analyse the state of foreign language
on holiday, and at school. Of particular interest for me
teaching at primary level in Europe, the United States,
were the two learners who replicated their fairly
282 Reviews
formal school environment for learning German at Chapter 9 introduces the concept of knowledge about
home as a way of practising and consolidating their language (KAL ), the premise of which is that children
learning. I was also intrigued by children’s views on can improve their own language proficiency if they
how languages should be taught. Both boys and girls have an understanding of how languages work.
placed a high premium on intercultural aspects of Kirsch then goes on to examine what language
language learning, social interaction, and of the knowledge entails, focusing mostly on aspects of
importance of a supportive language learning lexis and syntax, and giving examples of language
environment (p. 78). tasks which in her view help children to develop KAL .
So far, so good. However, I found the thread of
Chapters 6–11 signal a change in direction, with the
argument confusing once more, as Kirsch cites two
main thrust of the book turning to look at practical
reports which are equivocal at best about the benefits
ideas for teaching languages. Chapter 6 considers
of K A L (p. 152), but concludes from these that
how to introduce children to foreign languages. It
children who have an understanding of how a foreign
pays attention to the physical environment of the
language works are nonetheless more likely to
classroom, teacher’s use of the target language,
produce meaningful and accurate utterances than
using rhymes, songs, games, and stories, and
those who do not. This may well be the case, of
making cross-curricular links. I found the core of this
course, but I feel she needs to substantiate her
chapter extremely uneven, as it progressed from
argument. She might achieve this perhaps through
incorporating great detail and clear examples of
discussing the relative merits of embedded and
songs, rhymes, and games, to stating rather brief
explicit K A L approaches with regard to cognitive
generic advice on the benefits of using stories with
characteristics of the children she has in mind and the
children.
amount of support and challenge offered to them
Chapter 7 considers ways of developing children’s within each respective K A L approach.
listening and speaking skills. I thought the explicit
Chapter 10 discusses the development of children’s
focus on strategies the teacher can use to teach
intercultural competence. Her breakdown of
vocabulary (pp. 109–10) might be particularly helpful
elements in intercultural competence and
for pre-service teachers or early years’ specialists new
explanation of different routes into intercultural
to teaching foreign languages. I was a little worried
competence in the classroom are well explained and
though that Kirsch promotes task-based instruction
effectively illustrated with case studies, suggested
(TB I ) as an ideal way to teach listening and speaking.
tasks, and examples of children’s work. Chapter 11
The first reason for this concern is that TBI appears
focuses on language learning strategies. Kirsch
rather suddenly for the first time in this chapter.
clarifies what language learning strategies are, why
I wonder if analysing it in the earlier chapter on
they are important, and illustrates strategies used by
methods and approaches might have provided
the case study children discussed in Chapter 5. She
a more solid platform for discussing it in relation to
suggests a cyclical model for helping learners to
teaching, listening, and speaking. The second
develop learning strategies, similar to the plan-do-
concern relates to Kirsch’s advocacy of it without
review framework suggested by Brewster, Ellis, and
acknowledging that other approaches may also be
Girard (2002: 61). The balance of background theory
useful or that TBI itself may not be without
and practical applications in this chapter seemed to
problems when used with young learners (see Carless
me to work very well.
2002).
Chapter 12 deals with assessment and transition to
Chapter 8 focuses on reading skills at word and
secondary school. Given that part of her target
sentence level and writing skills at word, sentence,
audience is trainee teachers, I found her definition of
and discourse level. I was not sure about the reason
assessment extremely loose in comparison to the
for this anomaly. The chapter is particularly well
clear definitions of learning strategies and
illustrated with examples of children’s work, but as
intercultural competence. Though clear principles of
with Chapter 1, I was not sure the chapter conclusions
good assessment are outlined, links to national and
were sustainable. A conclusion advising that the
European assessment frameworks are made, and
teacher should ‘help pupils develop realistic
concepts of formative, summative, and self-
expectations of what they can achieve’ (p. 137) seems
assessment are clarified, I felt that more on how to
fairly uncontroversial, and the claim that ‘authentic
observe children and keep records of findings would
materials should be used whenever possible’ (p. 138)
be relevant for her focus age group. I found the short
certainly arguable, but neither of these points seems
discussion on transition informed and well
to correlate with the content of the chapter.
structured. I was particularly struck by the inclusion of
Reviews 283
children’s views on transition (pp. 198–9) and by the showPresentation?pubid¼095EN), I feel that it is
practical ideas for effecting transition. important that policy decisions on early start are
based on evidence rather than anecdote or political
I found the style and layout of the book accessible and
expediency. TeMoLaYoLe provides a wealth of data
reader friendly, and the topics very well chosen, but
from the teacher’s perspective, while the great
the handling of content seemed to me rather patchy.
strength of Kirsch’s book is that it gives frequent
The chapters based most closely on Kirsch’s PhD
examples of what children believe and feel about
thesis, ‘What children say about learning foreign
learning a foreign language. For these reasons, I think
languages’ and ‘Developing language learning
both books are well worth reading for anyone
strategies’, were for me the most authoritative and
interested in teacher education, teaching young
well organized. Some of the content of other chapters
learners, or both.
seemed to me less consistent or coherent. I also felt
that the age under discussion could be clearer in
most chapters, notably in Chapter 9. References
Brewster, J., G. Ellis, and D. Girard. 2002. The Primary
The book uses boxes to signpost and structure English Teacher’s Guide (New Edition). Harlow, UK:
content and reflection well, but overall, would benefit Pearson Education Limited.
from far more rigorous and attentive editing. The Carless, D. 2002. ‘Implementing task-based learning
pictures used to show examples of children’s work or with young learners’. ELT Journal 56/4: 389–96.
wall displays are an excellent idea, but they are Dulay, H. and M. Burt. 1974. ‘Natural sequences in
sometimes dark and slightly out of focus, especially in child second language acquisition’. Language
Chapters 2 and 10. The text contains typos on pages
Learning 24: 37–53.
46, 47, and 50, misspelling of names on pages 91 and
Education, Audiovisual Culture and Executive
142, and different dates given for the advent of
Agency. 2008. Key Data on Teaching Languages at
mandatory primary foreign language learning in
England (p. 2 and p. 198). On page 38, Kirsch makes School in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: E AC E A .
mistakes with the languages focused on in the study Available at http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/
by Dulay and Burt (1974) of language acquisition portal/Eurydice/showPresentation?pubid¼095EN
order and on page 53 about timing of the impetus for
audiolingualism. There are some problems with The reviewer
references, too. On page 3, for instance, Kirsch Simon Smith is a freelance teacher and teacher
informs us that ‘the latest studies have shown that trainer. He has lived and worked in Sudan, China,
there is a growth of the area responsible in the brain Saudi Arabia, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and
for language development from the age of six to Poland. He is currently based in Britain and is a tutor
puberty’, while on page 37, she encourages us to read and supervisor on the University of York’s MA
further on neurolinguistics, giving outline details of (by distance) in Teaching English to Young Learners.
recent findings. References are not given in either He also works on training courses for the Norwich
case, however. In addition, the work of Jones and Institute for Language Education and Sue Leather
Coffey is frequently cited in the chapter on Associates. He is especially interested in trainer
intercultural competence and looks well worth training and in working with young learner teachers
consulting. Unfortunately, it does not appear in the who teach in low-tech classrooms.
Bibliography. Email: simon.rsmith@btinternet.com
Despite these reservations, I was very pleased to have doi:10.1093/elt/ccp041
read Teaching Foreign Languages in the Primary School,
as I feel its strengths outweigh its weaknesses. I think
Teaching Foreign Languages in the Primary School will
be of great interest to pre-service teachers and to
those who are interested in primary M F L thinking
and practice in England. This feeling broadly matches
the publishers’ claim in the blurb on the back cover.
At a time when children are starting to learn a foreign
language, often English, at an increasingly young age
(see Education, Audiovisual Culture and Executive
Agency 2008 for example, http://eacea.ec.europa.
eu/portal/page/portal/Eurydice/
284 Reviews
Literature and Stylistics for Language Learners: Theory
and Practice
G. Watson and S. Zyngier (eds.)
Palgrave Macmillan 2007, 248 pp., £56.00
isbn 1 4039 8799 8
Forget the title of this book: although, of course, it

primarily deals with literature and stylistics, it also
284 Reviews
offers valuable insights into language-focused The following four sections go on to address the
pedagogy, into teaching at secondary and higher practice of stylistics and the practice of teaching
education levels, as well as into the teaching of stylistics. The second section, ‘New approaches’,
literature. It is hard for me to assess its value to includes two case studies of teaching stylistics at
stylisticians, but as a teacher this volume university level in the United Kingdom (by Joanna
continuously engaged me in thinking about Gavins and Jane Hodson and by Urszula Clark),
pedagogy. It strengthened my perception of the a chapter on using film in an English Philology course
crucial importance of the organization of learning by in Spain (by Rocio Montoro) and a chapter by John
the teacher, even in these days of learner autonomy, McRae on narrative point of view. The third section,
learner-centredness, and the alleged post-method ‘Corpus stylistics’, opens with an account by Donald
condition. In addition, the importance of this volume Hardy of using discovery procedures with a corpus
lies in showcasing the ways in which, increasingly, the of Flannery O’Connor’s fiction. This is followed by
claims made for literature in language learning are ‘Literary worlds as collocation’, by Bill Louw, and the
beginning to be examined empirically. section ends with a chapter by Mick Short, Beatrix
Busse, and Patricia Plummer in which they describe
For some reason or other, stylisticians often seem to
student reactions to the same stylistics course when
be on the defensive. The first sentence of Ronald
run (with some variations) in Lancaster, in Mainz,
Carter’s foreword to this volume confirms this:
and in Münster.
‘Stylistics has always had a hard time of it’ (p. vii).
As Carter points out, it is often seen ‘as neither one The fourth section, ‘Stylistics, grammar, and
thing nor the other or, much worse, as all things to all discourse’, opens with David Gugin’s discussion
men and women’ (p. vii). Where L2 learners are of Flannery O’Connor’s use of pseudo-clefts; it
concerned, there definitely has been controversy (see continues with Paul Simpson examining activities for
Paran 2008 for a very brief history of this), and I have raising awareness of the Hiberno-English Emphatic
also previously suggested (Paran 2000) that it is Tag (for example ‘so it is’ or ‘so they are’ tagged at the
possible that only advanced learners may benefit ends of sentences); and it ends with an impassioned
from some of the aspects of stylistics. Having said chapter by Judit Zerkowitz on using Grice’s maxims
that, much may depend on the way the approach is to explore the multiple meanings of a short short
used and modified, and there are examples of how it story. The final section, ‘Awareness and cognition’,
is possible, with appropriate choice of text and includes three empirically based chapters from
a careful attention to pedagogical issues, to use three very different contexts. David Hanauer
certain elements of stylistics with learners at presents a comparison of two teaching methods to
intermediate or lower levels (for example McRae develop learners’ ability to interpret modern
1991/2008; Lazar 1990, 1994). Cue the title of the Hebrew poetry; Willie van Peer and Aikaterini
volume under review: the three areas—literature, Nousi discuss prejudice against Germans in
stylistics, and language learners—converge. learners of German as a Foreign Language; and
Sonia Zyngier, Olivia Fialho, and Patricia Andréa do
The book is divided into five sections. Two papers
Prado Rios present research on raising literary
make up the first section, ‘Theoretical perspectives’.
awareness in a Brazilian university.
Chapter 1, ‘Stylistics in second language contexts:
a critical perspective’ by Geoff Hall, presents some of This brief survey will have given the reader a taste of
the general preoccupations of this volume, including some of this volume’s strong points, which are
the value of stylistics for L2 learners and L2 learning. mainly the expressions of a broad and expanded
Importantly, Hall provides a detailed discussion of remit for literature and language. This is evident in
a number of studies which have shown how literature many ways: a broad geographical spread (including
can be used successfully in L2 learning settings (for Brazil, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Spain, the United
example Boyd and Maloof 2000; Kim 2004), as well Arab Emirates, and the United Kingdom), a fairly
as a survey of the variety of analytical tools that broad genre spread (poetry, novels, films, short
researchers can use to show the contribution of stories, detective fiction), and a broadening of the
literature and literary discussion to language geographical origin of writers discussed (including
learning. The second chapter, ‘On Teaching Literature Germany, Hungary, India, Israel, and Nigeria). Finally,
Itself’, by Peter Stockwell, is an analysis of we have languages other than English—Hebrew as L1
Ozymandias, providing insights into the poem and German as L2, as well as different Englishes.
through a description of a teaching session spent
Possibly the strongest point of the book is the variety
reading and discussing it.
of approaches and topics covered, with some
chapters focusing on a detailed discussion of one
Reviews 285
poem in the space of one lesson (Stockwell), others narration of a session; to quote John McRae in his
focusing on a description of a teaching tool (Louw) or contribution to this volume, ‘the veracity of the
procedure (Hardy), and others discussing a whole narration is achieved by the author’ (p. 41)—in this
programme of study (for example Gavins and chapter done through telling the story of workshops
Hodson; Clark; Short, Busse, and Plummer). Many of where this analysis has been presented. It is valuable,
the chapters present pedagogies that are transparent though I am not sure that I would know how to go
and transferable. Of these, two stand out for me. about reproducing the success of the writer. John
Gavins and Hodson’s chapter, ‘When students MacRae’s own chapter is also text based; entitled
become the teachers: a practical pedagogy’ presents ‘‘‘The Shudder of the Dying Day in Every Blade of Grass’’:
a clear pedagogical issue: the connection between Whose words? Voice, veracity and the representation
abstract theoretical discussion and practical of memory’, it looks at narrative point of view in three
application of the theory discussed. The solution novels: Dickens’s Great Expectations, Ken Saro-
found—student presentations—is not new; what is Wiwa’s Sozaboy, and Arundhati Roy’s The God of
new is that the audience for the presentations was not Small Things. As McRae says, this comparison and
the students’ peers but first-year students embarking the contrasts between the three works ‘illuminate
on the same programme. The authors, thus, created questions rather than provide answers: question of
the gap in expertise and knowledge needed to make immediacy, narratorial self-awareness, innocence
this a true learning experience for both presenters and and experience’ (p. 45). What is being advocated here
audience; importantly, both groups reported that they is the importance of comparison and contrast as
felt the benefit of the exercise. I particularly enjoyed a way of raising issues and questions about texts and
this chapter because of the real feel that the authors about our readings of these texts.
give of their classrooms. Another transferable
The most interesting and provocative part of the book
solution to the problem of theory–practice linkages is
is the final section, ‘Awareness and cognition’, with its
Clark’s description, in the chapter ‘Discourse
emphasis on the empirical orientation in stylistics. All
stylistics and detective fiction: a case study’, of the
three papers in this section point the way forward to
way in which the tools introduced in the first part of
an engagement with stylistics and literature that goes
a module are then applied in case study fashion to
beyond theorizing and reflection and attempts to
detective fiction in a four-week series of lectures, each
understand whether our predictions and intuitions
accompanied by a workshop.
actually hold when examined more rigorously. In
It is precisely this transferability of pedagogies that is Chapter 13, ‘Attention-directed literary education: an
the focus of the chapter by Short, Busse, and empirical investigation’, David Hanauer tests his
Plummer. The paper deals with a specific course, model of literary education through a comparison of
‘Language and Style’ and its different iterations in two types of teaching: an explicit modelling group,
three different locations (and, in one of the locations, where the students were presented with models of
three iterations in three different years). It specifically analysis of the poet being discussed, and an implicit
attempts to gauge student reaction to the web-based instruction group, who were asked to read the poet’s
element of the course. Unfortunately, the course works and compare it to poems by other poets of the
never takes on a real feeling, and the detail that is same generation and to discuss their comparisons in
provided is of little relevance to the reader and much groups. The study found evidence that ‘explicit
more suitable for an internal evaluation report than instruction of literary patterns enhances students’
for a published paper. Comparisons of the percentage abilities to use these patterns in independent
of students who said they were ‘interested’ versus the interpretations of novel poems’ (p. 179). Chapter 14,
percentage that were ‘excited’ in Lancaster, Münster, ‘What reading does to readers: stereotypes,
and Mainz may have meaning for the course tutors. foregrounding and language learning’, by Willie van
But for me, it would have been much more interesting Peer and Aikaterini Nousi, looks at the way in which
to read more about the students in the two latter exposure to literary texts can combat prejudice and
locations who ‘saw that stylistics could help them stereotyping of Germans by non-Germans. The
develop their analytical skills’ (p. 121) and to hear their researchers compared a control group (who did not
voices saying that. Student reactions to the web- read the texts) with two experimental groups. One
based element of the course are much better handled read two literary excerpts connected with resistance
in Plummer and Busse (2006). to the Nazi regime during World War II and discussed
them in a 90-minute session; the other group read the
Other chapters focus on text rather than pedagogy.
excerpts, but this was not supported by any
I enjoyed Stockwell’s discussion of Ozymandias,
discussion. Although both experimental groups
a chapter which achieves its effect through the
showed a change in attitude towards Germans after
286 Reviews
reading (in 3 of 14 measures), there was no difference The variety and topic inclusiveness of the volume
between the two groups. The researchers interpret does, however, present problems. I was not sure that
this as suggesting that it is the reading of the text, the chapters fitted neatly into the sections—for me,
rather than the discussion that follows, that causes Short, Busse, and Plummer would have fitted more
attitude change in readers, and suggest that ‘we can into the ‘New approaches’ section, rather than into
save the time often spent on discussing literary texts ‘Corpus stylistics’, and I was not sure of the difference
in class’ (p. 192). The last chapter in the book, by between this latter section and the one entitled
Sonia Zyngier, Olivia Fialho, and Patricia Andrea do ‘Stylistics, grammar, and discourse’ (where two of the
Prado Rios, ‘Revisiting literary awareness’, looks at three papers dealt with corpus approaches). There is
empirical evidence from a literary awarenesss also quite a noticeable variation in the quality of the
programme at a Brazilian university. (It is interesting chapters, and I personally might have omitted one or
to note that, like Gavins and Hodson, the researchers two: but this will happen in any edited book, is hard to
enlisted the help of more advanced students as part control, and is probably not really important. But it
of the teaching programme on the course.) The data was odd to find one chapter that did not touch upon
consisted of written reports which the students literature at all; more importantly, of 15 chapters, only
handed in as part of a portfolio. The researchers seven deal in any way with L2 learners. I cannot be
define three levels of awareness: absence of alone in interpreting ‘language learners’ in the title as
awareness, signal of awareness, and presence of second language learners, even if we take the view that
awareness, and show how the students moved from all of us continue to learn our L1 throughout our lives.
an overall absence of awareness to a state where The distinction must be made: it would be very odd
50 per cent of the texts produced showed either signal not to differentiate between university students
or presence of awareness. Importantly, the taking a stylistics course in English in Lancaster and
greatest change occurred at the beginning of the students in Mainz or Münster taking the same course
programme. in English. In fact, the issue of not being able to
automatically assume that approaches successful in
Interestingly, the papers in this section, too, raise
the L1 classroom will transfer successfully to L2
issues of pedagogy. Although I am not totally
learning is raised by Hall in the opening chapter (p. 5).
convinced by the evidence presented by Hanauer and
Hall also calls for ‘more longitudinal case studies of
by van Peer and Nousi, these two chapters address
learners and classrooms exposed to such
important questions regarding the efficacy of group
approaches’ (see Hall 2005 for an extended
work and group discussion, strengthening my
discussion of the types of research possible in this
conviction that task design and the type of instruction
area). These omissions are therefore important.
provided to students are crucial (see Paran 2008 for
an extended discussion of this). Taking this Possibly the best definition of the aim of this volume
pedagogical perspective to examine other chapters in is in Geoff Hall’s opening chapter, the need to
the book, this meant that I was wondering whether understand ‘the possibilities for stylistic
Montoro’s task was clear enough or whether it was an interventions in our own classrooms and curricula’
example of a task that, if students could do it, they did (p. 3). Even if I feel that more attention could have
not need it, but if they could not do it, there did not been paid to L2 learners, the book does fulfil this aim,
seem to be much help forthcoming (though and as I hope I have shown, it also provides insights
a structure was provided). Thus, I ended up preferring into pedagogy and teaching in general, and therein
the teacher-dominated but structured approach lies much of its value.
described by Stockwell to the focused but possibly
too open group task presented by Montoro. And it is References
also important to remember that there are different Boyd, M. and V. M. Maloof. 2000. ‘How teachers can
ways of modelling. What the papers by Clark and by build on student-proposed intertextual links to
Gavins and Hodson seem to be doing is modelling on facilitate student talk in the ESL classroom’ in J. K.
a very long timescale, combining it with well- Hall and L. S. Verplaetse (eds.). Second and Foreign
scaffolded discussions of the topics introduced. Language Learning through Classroom Interaction.
Taking this aspect on board, it would be interesting to Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
research and see whether there are types of guided Hall, G. 2005. Literature in Language Education.
group work which would raise awareness and
Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
sensitivity to poetry better than both the type of
Kim, M. 2004. ‘Literature discussions in adult L2
modelling that Hanauer provided and the type of
learning’. Language and Education 18/2: 145–66.
group work that his participants engaged in.
Reviews 287
Lazar, G. 1990. ‘Using novels in the language-learning
classroom’. E LT Journal 44/3: 204–14.
Lazar, G. 1994. ‘Using literature at lower levels’. ELT
Journal 48/2: 115–24.
McRae, J. 1991/2008. Literature with a Small ‘l’.
Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan/Nottingham, UK:
CCC Press.
Paran, A. 2000. ‘Survey review: recent books on the
teaching of literature’. E LT Journal 54/1: 75–88.
Paran, A. 2008. ‘The role of literature in instructed
foreign language learning and teaching: an evidence-
based survey’. Language Teaching 41/4: 465–96.
Plummer, P. and B. Busse. 2006. ‘E-learning and
Language and Style in Mainz and Münster’. Language
and Literature 15/3: 257–76.
The reviewer
Amos Paran is a senior lecturer at the Institute of
Education, University of London, where he is the
course leader of the MATESOL by Distance Learning.
His main research interests are reading in EFL,
literature in language learning, and distance
education.
Email: a.paran@ioe.ac.uk
doi:10.1093/elt/ccp040
288 Reviews
Building a Validity Argument for the Test of English as
a Foreign Language
C. A. Chapelle, M. K. Enright, and J. M. Jamieson(eds.)
Routledge 2007, 370 pp., £25.99
isbn 13 978 0 8058 5456 5
The Test of English as a Foreign Language

(T OE FL ) is probably one of the most significant
tests in many people’s lives around the world. The
test is intended to provide evidence of a student’s
Reviews 291
ability to communicate and understand oral and new TO EFL iBT. This book is unique in its scope and
written language in an academic setting of an contents. Very few books have attempted to
English-speaking country. Therefore, it is intended to summarize and make accessible to international
provide information to all the different stakeholders audiences all the research undertaken in a project
not only of the candidate’s language proficiency but such as the implementation of the new TOE FL test.
also of their expected capacity of language use. The However, readers may want to take a look at the
TOE FL has undergone significant variations in this Studies in Language Testing—Cambridge University
millennium. First was the computer-based T OE FL Press/Cambridge ESO L series for other valuable
(C B T ) and since 2005 the internet-based TOE FL examples. Although the intended audience is mainly
(TO EFL iBT). The recent appearance of the T OEF L specialists, Chapter 1 facilitates the terms and
iBT has brought about the need to understand how notions which are necessary to understand the rest of
the test has changed, why it has done so and, more the book while the final chapter provides
importantly, what the steps in this change have been. a comprehensible summary of the book’s content.
While a number of papers on different issues related
The first chapter, by all three editors, serves as an
to the test can be found in research journals such as
introduction presenting the basis of a test that
Language Testing, it seemed necessary to have a more
guarantees that a student will be able to
comprehensive volume to address the changes in the
communicate in an English-speaking academic
new test. However, little or no explanation of the
context. To do so, the authors address topics such as
changes undertaken in the test have been given to the
language proficiency, what is measured and why;
different stakeholders other than those presented on
score interpretation; and interpretation arguments;
the Educational Testing Service (ET S ) website
however, their application of ‘multiple types of
(http://www.ets.org). Since this book’s primary
inferences’ is especially interesting. The writers
audience is ‘applied linguists and measurement
present this application as a metaphor of three
specialists, who [. . .] might provide backing’ (p. 346)
bridges covering four main stages: observation,
or rebuttals to the information presented in the
observed score, expected score, and target score.
volume, it is worth mentioning that if any teacher is
This inference is the basis for later extrapolation of
looking for more specific information they might visit
test results in order for the different stakeholders to
the website above, the article by Zareva (2005), or
take action and make decisions. In fact, this process
simply the first and last chapters in the volume by
guides all the research that is presented later in the
Chapelle et al.
book. This chapter also states a list of needs for the
This volume is a valuable asset for those who might T OEF L project. The chapter concludes with
be interested in seeing the implementation process a description of the interpretative argument for the
of the new test, its fairness, and, overall, whether the T OEF L which includes six interpretative arguments:
process has accounted for all the various aspects that domain description, evaluation, generalization,
intervene both in the language assessment process explanation, extrapolation, and utilization. This is
and in the identification of communicative probably the most illustrative and reader-friendly
competence in an exclusively academic environment. chapter in the book. It is also more accessible to
At this point, it should be stressed that the test general audiences (including regular teachers and
designers did not have in mind assessing the raters who may find the rest of the book either too
students’ competence in other contexts (for instance, complex or of little interest to their jobs).
in a social context) as the only aim of the test is to
The second chapter recounts the evolution of the
provide evidence of the student’s capability to adapt
T OEF L , its initial scope and purposes, what it was
and work in college. Thus, the relevance and use of
supposed to measure, and how the paper-based test
the final score is limited by and to the use and context
evolved into the C B T and finally into the internet-
of the test and would not be relevant for other
based test (TO EF L iBT). It also explains how and why
purposes such as an assessment for immigration or
the Test of Written English (T W E ) and the Test of
working purposes.
Spoken English (TSE ) were introduced and how they
This book, which forms part of the Routledge E S L and were used and progressively evolved to be integrated
Applied Linguistics Professional Series, is composed into the current test. This chapter may be of great
of a preface, an introduction, nine chapters, three interest to those who took those tests and may even
appendices, and the topic index. A bibliography is have had problems understanding their construct
included at the end of each chapter. All through the and delivery. The chapter concludes with an excellent
book, the authors point out their experience in the bibliography that summarizes much of the research
research of designing, assessing, and validating the undertaken over the years by ET S for the test.
292 Reviews
Chapter 3, ‘Frameworks for a new TO EF L’, explains be put together creating the test format and
how the needs in language testing, communicative construct, and observing whether it is appropriate for
competence, and university students’ profiles have collecting the right information about the candidate.
changed in the last ten years. In the late nineties, this It is also at this point where performance comparison
change could be observed in the need to redefine the across cultures, English as a first or other language, or
test’s theoretical construct, to include more complex many other variables, is analysed. Chapter 7,
abilities (integrating all four skills), and take into ‘Finalizing the test blueprint’, deals with rating and
account the relevant contexts. The last part of the obtaining evidence of language proficiency in the test.
chapter is devoted to explaining what is expected The chapter begins with a short summary of the
from a student who is going to perform in an English- previous step followed in the test design and how to
speaking academic setting. It also introduces the generate parallel items for the number of tests
concept of integrated tasks as those which require a required each year. This part will certainly appeal to
combination of different skills to be answered (for those who need to develop items or test tasks for
example, listening plus multiple choice plus writing) other high stakes tests. The middle part of the chapter
and briefly addresses the administration conditions. compares the C B T and TOE FL iBT blueprints very
systematically and with clear and meaningful
A more specialized section begins with Chapter 4,
diagrams. The chapter also concludes with a brief
‘Prototyping new assessment tasks’, that presents
mention of the computer-based delivery system and
the development and design of the pilot tasks for the
a short explanation of how the online rating is carried
test as ‘the first empirical stage of development of
out, including not only the test rating but also how it is
a new T OE FL’ (p. 141). The paper presents evidence
done on the internet. In this section, I missed a brief
that the computer-based delivery should not
mention of the e-rater system (Chodorow and
represent a problem for the prospective students. The
Burstein 2004) that is currently used along with the
evaluative meaning and inference of these tasks was
human rating. Obviously, it is hard to know if it was
obtained through working with expert testers and
operational at that time but it could have been a very
raters. In this way, and by analysing the responses in
valuable addition to this chapter.
the pilot studies, the rubrics for the speaking and
writing measures were obtained. This stage Chapter 8, ‘A final analysis’, deals with the
concluded that further research on the variables that psychometric properties of the test and the transition
could affect task difficulty was necessary. This is the between the current versions of the test. The chapter
first of a number of chapters specifically designed for explains how the measurement properties of the test
experts. If the three previous chapters were were obtained and how the test specifications were
accessible to teachers, from this chapter to the last, revised and planned for equating and scaling. The
a certain degree of specialization is necessary. It also authors present first the research questions related to
requires one to be familiar with testing principles. the test’s assumptions underlying warrant of the
However, for those in the field, it provides significant different TO EFL interpretative arguments (as seen in
suggestions for approaching design and the first chapters). The second part of the chapter
implementing language tests. It also suggests deals with the final field study of the final TOE FL iBT
alternative tasks for each skill and ways of integrating version. Throughout this chapter, the authors make
different skills into each task. It makes an interesting clear the importance of relevant and sound research
distinction between the different expected outcomes in trialling and implementing the test. This chapter
according to the task’s final goal (whether it is for basically confirms and validates the results obtained
finding information, basic comprehension, for during the research and development period. It also
information, or for integration) and how to stresses the importance of scaling and the test’s
implement computer-based speaking tasks. internal consistency. Especially important, but not
fully explained in the test, is the Generalizability
By Chapter 5, ‘Prototyping measures of listening,
theory (Bennett and Rock 1995).
reading, speaking, and writing’, readers will learn of
procedures to validate tasks through research. This The last chapter, ‘The TOE FL Validity argument’
chapter addresses how the tasks were actually summarizes all the stages described in all the
validated though experimentation and trialling with previous chapters. As opposed to most other
students. This chapter and the following address the chapters, it is accessible to most readers. Perhaps the
importance of field testing both the tasks and the test only problem would be that if the reader had not gone
itself to define the rating scales, observe the student’s through all the contents of the book and some
performance as compared to previous versions of the aspects related in this chapter may be not totally clear
test, to see whether the different parts of the test may (for those who have not read the section that Chapelle
Reviews 293
addresses). However, Chapelle still insists that this research not because of its novelty but because the
chapter is aimed at applied linguists and specialists authors, especially in the last chapter, have been
in measurement. At the beginning of the chapter, the able to open up a path to follow for other
author establishes a difference between the ‘validity researchers. For the prospective reader, it would
argument’ (as the evidence that supports the design probably not be advisable to read it thoroughly from
of a prospective test) and ‘accumulation-of-evidence’ beginning to end, but to try to identify the chapters
(as the evidence that supports a test that has already that may be of most interest or use according to
been implemented) (p. 320–1) and goes one step their particular needs. Either way, it is important the
further by ‘presenting the research in terms of its role reader does not miss the first two or the last
in an interpretative argument’ (p. 320). That is to say, chapters. Readers may not expect ready-made
relating validation and the meaning of its argument solutions to their particular situations but to show ‘a
through ‘statements that summarize findings that useful example’ (p. 350) that most likely will bring
support inferences’ (p. 321) about the candidate ideas to their minds and ‘identify areas of agreement
and that can be meaningful to the different or disagreement’ (p. 350) in this excellent piece of
stakeholders. In the following pages, Chapelle research.
reviews what has been presented as domain
definition and inferences (evaluation, generalization, References
explanation, extrapolation, and utilization). The Bennett, R. E. and D. A. Rock. 1995. ‘Generalizability,
chapter concludes with a diagram that briefly validity, and examinee perceptions of a computer-
summarizes all of these. delivered formulating-hypotheses test’. Journal of
This book establishes a totally new approach to Educational Measurement 32/1: 19–36.
language test design and implementation. The need Chapelle, C. A. and D. Douglas. 2006. Assessing
to set the guidelines and define the circumstances in Language through Computer Technology. Cambridge:
which the test takes place serves as a guide for other Cambridge University Press.
test designers who may find relevant experiences, Chodorow, M. and J. Burstein. 2004. ‘Beyond essay
methodology, and ideas for their own projects. length: evaluating e-raters’ performance on TOE FL
However, many readers will feel overwhelmed not by essays’ (TO EFL Research Report No. RR-73, ETS RR-
the abundant evidence but by the way in which this 04-04). Available at http://www.ets.org/Media/
validation stage is done. The book reflects many years Research/pdf/RR-04-04.pdf (accessed
of valuable experience, research expertise, 31 January 2009).
collaborative work among different groups such as Fulcher, G. 2003. ‘Interface design in computer-
computer engineers and linguists, and, most based language testing’. Language Testing 20/4:
importantly, financial means that cannot be found in 384–408.
other contexts. However, since many examinations Zareva, A. 2005. ‘What is new in the new TO EF L- iBT
(sometimes even high stakes ones) need to be 2006 test format?’. Electronic Journal of Foreign
trialled, this volume will be a valuable asset on
Language Teaching 2/2: 45–57. Available at: http://
most test designers’ night tables. The volume has
e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v2n22005/zareva.htm (accessed 31
much to offer in terms of research methodology and
January 2009).
ideas to validate new tests. The only question that has
not been addressed is technological design.
Designing a computer tool that basically has the The reviewer
features of the new TOE FL does not seem to be Jesús Garcı́a Laborda is Associate Professor in the
extremely difficult and some of the current Department of Applied Linguistics and full researcher
commercial and non-commercial computer-assisted in the Camille group of the Universidad Politécnica de
language learning (and testing) platforms would fit Valencia. He is involved in low stakes language
the T OEF L’ s tasks. However, research is meant to be testing and technology in education and currently
spread and used and many readers will certainly miss lectures on ESP for Tourism. He has coordinated two
a chapter devoted to technology. In this sense, regional research projects about the feasibility of the
Fulcher’s (2003) paper on interface design or the implementation of a computer-based university
volume by Chapelle and Douglas (2006) on entrance examination in Spain.
computer language testing do not seem to add much Email: jgarcial@upvnet.upv.es
that is new. doi:10.1093/elt/ccp044
In conclusion, this book, although dense and hard to
follow at times, may become a cornerstone in testing
294 Reviews
Form-focused Instruction and Teacher Education: mind, the author has conveyed his message with
Studies in Honour of Rod Ellis great clarity. The conundrum is this: should one only
S. Fotos and H. Nassaji (eds.) judge a book by the standards of its own stated goals?
Classroom teachers are certainly capable of
Oxford University Press 2007, 288 pp., £26.00 understanding academic texts and of making links
isbn 978 0 19 442250 5 between those texts and practice. But this is a very
challenging opening section if the target audience is
‘the many teachers (that) acknowledge . . . the
If you are not familiar with the name of Rod Ellis, then
importance of S L A research (yet don’t) regularly read
you probably have the wrong journal in your hands.
such research’ (p. 8).
His work over the last 30 years or so is celebrated in
this festschrift, centring on form-focused instruction Lantolf explores sociocultural theory in the third
(FFI ), a key aspect in much of Dr Ellis’ research into chapter (‘Conceptual knowledge and instructed
second language acquisition (S L A ). second language learning: a sociocultural
perspective’) and, in particular, considers how
The book is organized loosely into three sections,
explicitly and accurately grammar concepts need to
with several chapters in each. The first section serves
be explained.
to introduce the reader to some of the pedagogical,
linguistic, and cognitive theories surrounding ‘focus Skehan (p. 55) alludes to the inevitability of an ‘uneasy
on form’. The second section surveys the work of relationship’ between research and pedagogy at the
Dr Ellis and others and how it relates to classroom start of his chapter (Chapter 4, ‘Task research and
practice, with the third and final section covering the language teaching: reciprocal relationships’), and it is
theme with attention to teacher education. a key chapter in highlighting this discrepancy.
Researchers, he claims, need to limit their focus in
The editors establish the context in their introductory
order to state their findings with any degree of
chapter and lay out their rationale by defining teacher
confidence, whilst pedagogues feel pressure to react
education as ‘the flexible development of professional
to real-world variables. He demonstrates this
knowledge to be applied when needed’ (p. 8). Defining
dilemma with a fascinating and practical analysis of
FFI is, as you might expect, more problematical, but
the differing interpretations of task research
a well organized and swiftly paced taxonomy did
conducted by both ‘pure’ researchers and teacher
a better job of fixing the basic concepts in my mind
researchers.
than several university S L A classes had. FF I is,
fundamentally, any method used to draw the The second section (‘Focus on form and classroom
attention of the learners to language forms, a balance practices’) moves from the general into the more
between traditional study of discrete grammar in specific, and opens with Swain and Lapkin’s well-
isolation, and meaning-led communicative considered study of a young learner of French
methodologies. Whether the focus should be implicit (Chapter 5, ‘The distributed nature of second
or explicit, pre-planned or reactive, is discussed at language learning: Neil’s perspective’). The authors
great length in subsequent chapters. base their thinking in distributed cognition theory;
the idea that ‘our cognitions and memories may be
According to the editors, the book is an attempt to
distributed across the individual, artefacts and
help practising teachers understand ‘the role that
people with whom the individual is interacting’
formal instruction plays in communicative contexts’
(p. 74). It is the kind of framework which has a lot of
(p. 1) and to address the gap between S L A research
currency through the likes of Vygotsky these days
and teaching with a book provided by ‘S L A experts
(also cited in this chapter), perhaps partly
who are language teachers or teacher educators’
attributable, despite its complexity, to its warm and
(p. 8), ‘written from the viewpoint of language
commonsensical feel. In this study, the early teenage
teachers’ (p. 4). I hope to assess the achievement of
participants took part in a multitask activity involving
these aims in this review.
videotaped mini-lessons, narrative writing, written
N. C. Ellis takes the first chapter ‘proper’ after the reformulation by a native speaker, noticing, and
introduction and creates an immediate conundrum stimulated recall and rewriting followed by reflection.
for the reviewer. His contribution (Chapter 2, ‘The It is an enlightening case study, although I wonder
weak interface, consciousness, and form-focused how any adaptations to the process for practical
instruction: mind the doors’), is a densely packed and purposes would impact on its effectiveness.
precisely worded examination of FF I , drawing in
Chapter 6 (‘Recontextualizing focus on form’) seems
research from various related fields. It is not an easy
quite obscure at first reading, but on careful
read, but this is not an easy subject, and with that in
Reviews 295
consideration yields gold. Batstone posits that Exploring teacher decision-making in planning for
discourse patterns, both verbal and non-verbal, classroom-based language assessment’), and Hedge
indicate phases in a lesson which predispose returns to writing feedback, this time as loop input in
students to focus on either form or meaning. As teacher training (Chapter 14, ‘Learning through the
‘attention is a limited resource’ (p. 98), the teacher looking glass: teacher response to form-focused
needs to watch the direction of discourse closely. feedback on writing’). In the fifteenth and final
chapter (‘Explicit language knowledge and focus on
Loewen, in Chapter 7 (‘The prior and subsequent use
form: options and obstacles for TE SOL teacher
of forms targeted in incidental focus on form’),
trainees’), Elder, Erlam, and Philp present both native
demonstrates just how difficult it can be to assess
and non-native teachers with a chastening message;
effectiveness through pre- and post-testing when
before we decide to focus on form, we had better get
correction is unplanned. Nonetheless, the findings of
ourselves a thorough understanding of explicit
this very thorough survey indicate that teacher
grammar rules and metalinguistic terminology.
correction and recasting has value. According to
Nassaji (Chapter 8, ‘Reactive focus on form through To clarify what may have appeared as a criticism
negotiation on learners’ written errors’), this is earlier in this review: although the early chapters
actually a more controversial conclusion than you might be daunting for some in the target audience,
might expect, with some scholars suggesting that the reader will be rewarded for perseverance, as the
corrective feedback is damaging, not merely theoretical grounding is connected to the classroom
ineffective (Truscott 1996, cited p. 117). This is not later in the text. It is also a credit to the editors and
Nassaji’s conclusion, although he does qualify this by authors that the book is cohesive without being
pointing out the value of negotiation in achieving repetitive. While this sounds like damning with faint
learning. Fotos and Hinkel follow on neatly with the praise, it is no mean feat in a thematically linked
final chapter in this section (Chapter 9, ‘Form- collection of papers.
focused instruction and output for second language
The volume as a whole rarely addresses teacher
writing gains’).
education directly, but in its broader sense, it is
The final six chapters are grouped together as ‘Focus certainly about teacher development. There are no
on form and teacher education’. After Richards’ simple answers in this book, there are a number of
rather broad overview of the research/materials contradictions, controversies, and unanswered
development paradigm (Chapter 10, ‘Materials questions, but that is not the fault of the researchers,
development and research: towards a form-focused authors, or editors involved. For their continued
perspective’), comes Pica’s examination of some of commitment to solving these questions, on the other
the most commonplace and unremarkable hand, we should thank Dr Ellis and his colleagues.
communicative activities widely used in classrooms
today (Chapter 11, ‘Time, teachers, and tasks in focus References
on form instruction’). However, when set in the Truscott, J. 1996. ‘The case for ‘‘the case against
context of the earlier chapters and developed so grammar correction in L2 writing classes’’:
thoughtfully by Pica, ‘spot the difference’ and a response to Ferris’. Journal of Second Language
‘information gap’ tasks become vital and important Writing 8/2: 111–22.
again. I found this chapter in particular achieved the
goals of the book, and demonstrates why teachers The reviewer
should persevere with the study of challenging
Darren Elliott (MA ELT, DELTA) has taught at
research-based material (like the earlier chapters of
universities in the United Kingdom and Japan and
this book) to inform their classroom practice.
currently teaches at Nanzan University in Nagoya,
Whilst retaining academic integrity, these final Japan. He is also a freelance teacher trainer. He has
chapters certainly have a more practical emphasis. In published and presented on learner autonomy,
Chapter 12 (‘Using form-focused discovery teacher development, and reflective practice,
approaches’), Tomlinson promotes learner-centred particularly guided by internet technologies.
approaches over teacher-centred instruction in forms Email: delliott@ic.nanzan-u.ac.jp,
and leads in to a study of teacher attitudes to his darrenrelliott@gmail.com
techniques. Rea-Dickins tackles assessment in an doi:10.1093/elt/ccp045
EAL setting in Chapter 13 (‘Learning or measuring?
296 Reviews
Correspondence
From Michael Swan else conforms to his preferences, nor to foist (to use
his own loaded expression) on the rest of us his
I am sorry that Luke Prodromou (ELT Journal 63/2)
idiosyncratic interpretations of professional
was upset by my review of his book English as a Lingua
terminology. Part of his problem, in fact, seems to
Franca: A Corpus-based Analysis (ELT Journal 63/1:
arise from a simple confusion about the meaning of
78–81). He complains that ‘at certain points, Swan
an English prefix. Words beginning with ‘non-’ do not
seriously . . . distorts the arguments of the book’. I do
necessarily incorporate negative value
not believe this is the case. However, English as
judgements—take for example ‘non-metallic’, ‘non-
a Lingua Franca is a long and diffuse book, and even
proliferation’, ‘non-aggressive’, ‘non-judgemental’,
after two careful readings I had some trouble in
‘non-sexist’, or Prodromou’s own expression ‘non-L1
understanding exactly where the argument was
users’. Granted, if someone happens to believe that
going, so I may well have misunderstood the odd
native speakers are superior in some way, then for
point. If so, I apologize.
them ‘non-native speaker’ will have dismissive
It is not my purpose here to reply to Prodromou’s implications, just as, no doubt, some vegetarians
catalogue of grievances in order to further justify my contrive to put a pejorative spin on ‘non-vegetarian’,
criticisms; this would be tedious and unconstructive. or some professional soldiers may sneer at ‘non-
Readers who are sufficiently interested and have £75 military’ attitudes. But that is another matter, and it
to spare can buy the book and make up their own has nothing to do with the core meanings of the
minds. I do however need to take issue with the first of words themselves.
his objections, as this has some general importance.
I am not sure what to make of Prodromou’s other
Prodromou’s preferred term for people speaking non-canonical (as he might put it) interpretation of
a language which is not their mother tongue is a prefix, in ‘anglo-centric’. ‘Anglo’ is commonly used,
‘L2-user’. In my review I refer to such people as ‘non- often disparagingly, for people who are considered to
native speakers (NNS)’. Prodromou regards this be ethnically British or North American. To use the
terminological choice as having wide and term to express disapproval of someone who wishes
unacceptable implications. By using my own term I to talk about native and non-native speakers of
‘foist’ on him views that he does not share. ‘Non- a language which is the mother tongue, in its many
native speaker’, he says, is ‘deficit-laden’ and ‘anglo- different varieties, of people who live on and between
centric’. five continents—now that really is anglo-centric.
The difference between the two terms is that my Prodromou’s principal concern is clearly to defend
term sees people as agents who make use of the non-native speakers of English against prejudicial
language in their own terms whereas the negative attitudes arising from the nature of their language
prefix in non-native speaker reinforces the view that use. This is wholly admirable, and it is a pity that his
non-L1 users are failed ‘native-speakers’ whose knee-jerk reaction to my terminology leads him to see
English is riddled with errors . . . perpetual learners disagreement in an area where, as it happens, we hold
who are forever deviating from ‘native-speaker’ very similar views. I have no sympathy with the kind of
norms. value-judgement which bothers him, and which is
often nourished by perfectionist attitudes in language
‘Non-native speaker’ is a commonly-used expression
teaching that I believe are seriously counter-
in linguistic research, and it has of course no inherent
productive. When teachers and examination systems
pejorative connotations—any more than the ‘2’ in
prioritize accuracy at all costs, in a deranged utopian
Prodromou’s ‘L2-users’ implies second-class status.
attempt to make foreign learners virtually
Prodromou is entitled to use whatever language he
indistinguishable from native speakers, then these
chooses, but he is not entitled to insist that everyone
learners are indeed made to feel that they are failures
300 E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccp036

whose language is ‘riddled with errors’, ‘forever should be called errors, deviations, or non-canonical
deviating from native-speaker norms’. variations depends on a number of factors. But none
Communicative revolution or not, there is still far too of this implies that value judgements are being made
much of this about, and whatever the confusions about the speakers themselves. Even the words
exhibited by discussions of ‘ELF’—which are often ‘failed’ and ‘deficit’, to which Prodromou objects (and
considerable—the current interest in lingua franca which I did not use), are employed quite non-
use of English is doing a great deal of good by judgementally in linguistics: for example by
encouraging a more realistic view. Probably quite generative grammarians in relation to parameter
a small proportion of those who learn English need setting in second language acquisition.
a close approximation to native-speaker accuracy; the
To see proficient non-native speakers/L2 users as
rest may well achieve their communicative aims
‘agents who make use of the language in their own
perfectly successfully even if they deviate from the
terms’ is a perfectly valid stance. But it makes little
less important native-speaker norms, dropping third-
sense to extend this to the bizarre view that their
person -s, using articles in a non-standard way, or not
English is therefore an independent variety which
using the present perfect for the same range of
owes nothing to mother-tongue English. ‘Swan’s
meanings as native speakers would. So, if teachers,
choice of terms’, says Prodromou, ‘confirms the
educational authorities, examiners, and others can
anglo-centric view he expresses elsewhere in his
bring themselves to fuss less about these things—up
review that NNSs’ English ‘‘is directly or indirectly
to a point at least—everybody will be better off.
derived from one of the several NS models’’’. But of
It is important, however, to distinguish statements course it is. Where else does non-native speakers’
about language users from statements about the English come from? Hungarian? Cantonese? An
language they use. Non-native speakers of a language unbroken line of non-native speakers stretching back
may well be successful communicators, using their to the Norman Conquest? As I suggested at the end of
personal variety of that language validly for their own my review, confusion about terminology can lead us
purposes, and with no need to approximate native- into a more general failure to achieve a clear view of
speaker norms any more closely than they do. This the issues we are discussing. It is sad that Prodromou
does not, however, mean that linguists should be has fallen into precisely this trap.
barred from studying non-native varieties of English
and analysing for their own purposes the ways,
Michael Swan
systematic and other, in which these differ from
Didcot, UK
mother-tongue varieties. Whether such differences
Correspondence 301

ELT Journal July 2009

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELT Journal July 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NEW from OXFORD

More support for your

An international journal for teachers of English to speakers of other languages

Grammar for Young Learners Storytelling with Children

www.oup.com/elt ELT and the challenges of the times

ELT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009

Developing What is the Oxford Journals Developing Countries offer?

What does it include?

Which institutions qualify for this offer?

E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccp049

Please visit ELT Journal’s website at

Much scholarly and pedagogical attention has been devoted to corrective

Introduction An integral part of language teaching is giving feedback. As Fanselow (1987:

Background In contrast to the large body of literature on corrective feedback, work on

E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn042 195

Others have considered what positive feedback really accomplishes.

196 Jean Wong and Hansun Zhang Waring

Extract 1a 1 Miyuki I have one [ques]tion,

Extract 1b 1 Teacher Number three. Kevin.

‘Very good’ as a teacher response 197

Extract 2a 1 Teacher Okay? Who’s next? I think Jae? Is that you?

198 Jean Wong and Hansun Zhang Waring

‘Very good’ as a teacher response 199

200 Jean Wong and Hansun Zhang Waring

‘Very good’ as a teacher response 201

202 Jean Wong and Hansun Zhang Waring

Notes Schegloff, E. A. and H. Sacks. 1973. ‘Opening up

‘Very good’ as a teacher response 203

204 E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn043

Participants The study was conducted in the English Language Department of

The value of a focused approach 205

Written corrective feedback group Group one—received direct error correction,

Feedback type Feedback procedures

206 John Bitchener and Ute Knoch

Day one Pre-test (writing task one)

Analysis The analysis of the data involved several steps:

The value of a focused approach 207

Group Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 4 Time 5

To determine the most appropriate data analysis technique, an independent

208 John Bitchener and Ute Knoch

The value of a focused approach 209

Conclusion Based on the findings of the study, a number of pedagogical

210 John Bitchener and Ute Knoch

References E F L classrooms’. Language Learning

The value of a focused approach 211

212 E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn040

Regarding the second means of achieving lexical cohesion (collocation),

Repetition While repetition is a standard way of achieving lexical cohesion, particularly

Traversing the lexical cohesion minefield 213

214 Iain McGee

Traversing the lexical cohesion minefield 215

216 Iain McGee

Traversing the lexical cohesion minefield 217

218 Iain McGee

Traversing the lexical cohesion minefield 219

Notes Perspective. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin

220 Iain McGee

Introduction Participants come to teacher education courses with prior experiences,

E LT Journal Volume 63/3 July 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn058 221

222 Thomas S. C. Farrell

Critical reflection in a TESL course 223

224 Thomas S. C. Farrell

Critical reflection in a TESL course 225