第1章简介
1.1起源的研究
从19世纪后期到20世纪末期，近100年来见证了潮涨潮落的英语教学。应用语言学家和外语教师的英语教学方法，成为一门独立的学科，发挥了突出的作用，在英语教学的领域（左缓气，2007:1）不断寻找新的方法和新的研究。We have seen that the history of language teaching in the last onehundred years has been characterized by a search for more effective ways of teaching second orforeign languages. The commonest solution to the "language teaching problem" was seen to liein the adoption of a new teaching approach or method (Richards & Rodgers, 2001:244). Twobooks, in their revised, second editions published in 2000 and 2001 (Larsen-Freemen; Richards &Rodgers) respectively, contain between them nearly twenty methods, such ashttp://www.1daixie.com/dxyylw GrammarTranslation Method, Oral Approach and Situational Language Teaching, The AudiolingualMethod, Total Physical Response, The silent Way, The direct Method, Community LanguageLearning, The lexical approach, Competency-Based Teaching, Communicative LanguageTeaching, The Natural Approach, Content-Based Instruction, Task-Based Language Teaching,and so on.
One might, therefore, think that the methods listed above provide different pathways tolanguage learning and teaching. That is not the case. In fact, there is considerable overlap in theirtheory and practice (Kumaravadivelu, 2006a: 163). As Rivers(1991:283) rightly pointed out, whatappears to be a radically new method is more often than not a variant of existing methodspresented with "the fresh paint of a new terminology that camouflages their fundamentalsimilarity". After a long time of examination of language teaching history, Kelly expressed asimilar viewpoint that the so-called revolutionary teaching concepts are nothing more thanrenaming the previous teaching ideas (Kelly, 1969:ix). Marckwardt (1972:5) saw these"changing winds and shifting sands'* as a cyclical pattern in which a new paradigm of teachingmethodology emerged about every quarter of a century, with each new method breaking from theold but at the same time taking with it some of the positive aspects of the previous paradigm.
Each established method claimed to be better than the previous ones as if they were curablemedicine for all ills (Prabu, 1990). Both qualitative research and quantitative research, however,cannot convincingly prove which of these methods to be the most optimal. As Harmer (2001)articulates it is extremely difficult to come to conclusions about which approaches and methodsare best or most appropriate for our own teaching situations. In the meantime Method http://www.1daixie.com/dxyylwhas beencriticized as a label without substance (Clarke, 1983:109); it "diminished rather than enhancedour understanding of language teaching" (Pennycook, 1989:597) and "is becoming increasinglyunproductive and misguided" (Stern, 1985:251). When this universalistic concept of Method isdiscussed, Allwright (1991) even argues that Method is dead because there is no single bestmethod for all classrooms. Following his lead, Brown, an American scholar, has used theimagery of death again and again. He has sought to "lay to rest" (2002:11) the concept of method,and to write a "requiem"(2002:17) for "recently interred methods"(2002:14). By this means, theywish to draw attention to the fact the concept of method has lost its significance.
1.2 Significance of the study研究目标
The significance of this thesis can be generalized as follows:
Firstly, the study is to comprehensively figure out some questions related to the postmethodpedagogy, such as, has method already been dead or should we cast away method absolutely?What is postmethod pedagogy (PP)? What is theoretical basis of PP? How does PP evolve fromthe past to the present? What is the relationship between method and postmethod? What is thesituation of PP studies both at home and abroad and what are the advantages and disadvantages?What are their implications on English language teaching (ELT) in China?
Secondly, from a macro point of view, the study will be a significant endeavor in promotingthe construction of Chinese ELT system. A number of domestic scholars have persistentlysearched after the way out of Chinese ELT and called for the construction of Chinese ELTsystem and theories (Dai Weidong, 2001, 2006; Hu Zhuanglin, 2002; Gui Shichun, 2004; ShuDingfang, 2005 et al). While PP is a brand new concept of language teaching, it is radicallydifferent from the method-based pedagogy. The study of PP will inspire us to examine China'sELT from a broader view and provide us with implications for the reform of China's ELT.
Chapter 2 Literature Review文献综述
2.1 Introduction of PP后方法的定义
本章包含三个部分：第一部分探讨了后方法的定义，后方法的由来和后方法的发展过程。第二部分对Kumaravadivlu所提出的后方法的核心内容作了简述。后方法的核心内容又可以分为三个部分，即后方法教学的三个参数，后方法教学的三个指标的宏观策略框架。在第三部分中，作者试着分析了方法教学和后方法教学之间的关系。In all of Kumaravadivelu's works and papers, actually, there is not a definitely cleardefinition of postmethod. The concept of postmethod is nothing but a word as opposed tomethod(approach). In fact, postmethod is equivalent with PP, or postmethod is the abbreviationof PR When the word of postmethod was used firstly in 1994 in the postmethod condition:(E)merging strategies for second /foreign language teaching, as we can see, it is accompaniedclosely with "condition". That is to say, "postmethod condition" is used as a whole that isinseparable. In this paper from the beginning to the end, Kumaravadivelu does not tell us exactlywhat the postmethod is. Instead, he first of all makes an explanation of the meaning of methodby citing Mackey(1965). Then he starts to interpret the postmethod condition.
Chapter 3 A Review of postmethod .......................................... 32-45
3.1 Studies abroad in the field .......................................... 32-38
3.1.1 Overview of postmethod pedagogy .......................................... 32-33
3.1.2 Achievements of postmethod pedagogy .......................................... 33-36
3.1.3 Insufficiency of postmethod pedagogy ..........................................36-38
3.2 Domestic studies in the Field ..........................................38-43
3.2.1 Overview of postmethod pedagogy ..........................................38-40
3.2.2 Achievements of postmethod pedagogy ..........................................40-42
3.2.3 Insufficiency of postmethod pedagogy .......................................... 42-43
3.3 Trends of postmethod pedagogy studies ..........................................43-45
Chapter 4 Implications of postmethod pedagogy .......................................... 45-49
4.1 Macroscopic implications .......................................... 45-46
4.2 Microscopic implications ..........................................46-49
Conclusion结论
After waking up to the limitations of the concept of method, we moved beyond methods,entered the uncharted waters of postmethod condition, and took a peek into the still-evolvingworld of postmethod pedagogies.The thesis chiefly discusses Kumaravadivelu's postmethod pedagogy system which, in asense, "seeks to contribute to a true understanding of language teaching methods, in addition tobeing both a critique of, and a corrective to, method-based approaches to languageteaching"(2006a:224). By exposing the problems of method, and by elaborating the potential ofpostmethod, postmethod pedagogies seek to reveal certain options that will lead to areconsideration of the way we conceive pedagogic principles and procedures, and to areexamination of the way we conduct language teaching and teacher education.Kumaravadivelu(2001) argues that a postmethod pedagogy must facilitate theadvancement of a context-sensitive language education based on a true understanding of locallinguistic, sociocultural, and political particularities;rupture the reified role relationshipbetween theorists and practitioners by enabling teachers to construct their own theory of practice;and tap the sociopolitical consciousness that participants bring with them in order to aid theirquest for identity formation and social transformation.
One possible way of conceptualizing and constructing a postmethod pedagogy is to besensitive to the parameters of particularity, practicality, and possibility, which can beincorporated in the macrostrategic framework. The framework, then, seeks to transformclassroom practitioners into strategic thinkers, strategic teachers, and strategic explorers. In short,the framework seeks to provide a possible mechanism for classroom teachers to begin to theorizefrom their practice and practice what they theorize.While postmethod pedagogies have made tremendous achievements in theoreticalconstruction, they are also confronted with huge challenge simultaneously. The challenge,obviously, is how to meet the demands the concept of postmethod makes in its effort to facilitatea context-sensitive, location-specific pedagogy that is based on a true understanding of locallinguistic, sociocultural, and political particularities. And, how to help prospective and practicingteachers acquire and sharpen the knowledge, skill, attitude, and autonomy necessary to devise forthemselves a systematic, coherent, and relevant theory of practice.