Some would claim we are in a 'post-communicative' stage of instructional theory and practice--not so much a state of limbo but perhaps a plateau of competence; nonetheless, most writers use the term reluctantly and couple it with the "so-called" appellation as Roger Nunn does in a rather insightful manner:
"A so-called 'post-communicative' view of language teaching is said to be more eclectic. Language teaching is seen as an adaptive process rather than as the application of an ideal method or approach. In contexts that seem to require or favour the learning of actual abilities to use a language, it is useful for a teacher to develop a repertoire of holistic activities within which a variety of approaches may be adopted. A teacher's repertoire often includes activities such as simulated conversations in pairs and small groups, speech making or story telling. All of these holistic activities act as a framework for the adoption of different approaches and roles, ranging from strictly and centrally controlled teacher-fronted interaction to devolved interaction in which students structure their own discourse."
See the source: Roger Nunn-- A Holistic Classroom Activity (Online)
The first variable in an eclectic paradigm is the degree to which students engage in and construct their learning process. It can be seen as existing along a spectrum: teacher-fronted classrooms on one side and students structuring their own lessons on the other. It becomes imperative to assess how much control can be responsibly placed in the hands of the student(s) in regards to lesson content. Obviously a large group of elementary students will be on one side, while a small group of adults will be on the other. Further, optimizing the teacher-fronted environment to give maximum control (this side of chaos) to students in their learning process is possibly the greatest challenge to second language teachers. There is a limit to how much control young learners can manage relative to mature adults.
The second variable is the means in which the lessons are delivered "seen as an adaptive process rather than as the application of an ideal method or approach." Roger Nunn uses the term 'holistic activities' and you can see an example using the link above. His class survey could be seen as one element in an eclectic-style curriculum. The focus is on the activity and less so on a specific approach. Although "task-based language learning" is brilliant in its own right, it maintains a 'framework' approach and implies universal application. Carrying out a specific language task includes the method of instruction. Process and content merge in the task itself. While this is an excellent tool in the eclectic box, there is no mention of the potential for dialog in its own right as a collaborative effort, as regulating the language (perhaps in 'non-task' activity) and as moving through and charting out the unpredictable territory of activity that promotes internalizing new language forms. This work of language mediation is not bound by a 'task'. Nonetheless, Nunan's framework has much to offer the learner:
1. A replacement to or a supportive infusion of more student centered learning to certain single approach based syllabi.
2. Utilizing more authentic experiences and materials as well as principles of constructivism compared to top down teaching.
3. More of a sense of personal and active accomplishment including developing a greater sense of language ownership.
4. Increased student participation when task teaching is well planned and implemented sensitive to learners' learning styles, learning and communicative strategies, personalities, multiple intelligences and the overall local contexts, for example.
5. Making specific lesson goals more evident through movement towards and/or success of task completion.
6. Important and ongoing assessment and "washback" to both teacher and learner.
David Nunan--Asian-EFL-Journal--September 5, 2005:
Important Tasks of English Education: Asia-wide and Beyond (Online)
The second variable spectrum has grammar translation exercises on one end and a group of actors performing a play of their own creation in their second language on the other-- between the simplest task and an extreme task, from written exercise to complex activity or traditional device to progressive technique. Whatever example you wish to put on either end, spectra (or spectrums, if you prefer) are useful by nature because they are all-inclusive, and an eclectic paradigm exists to accommodate all possible forms. In this way, an eclectic paradigm differs from CLT or a task-based approach simply because it includes both and any other effective means of language learning, whether it be in a particular case or for broader application.
The third variable is the choice of materials. An eclectic paradigm will encompass everything from fill-in-the-blank worksheets to field trips at the supermarket. The essential criteria for success will be an acceptance of the universal notion that each and every student, group or class will require their own learning agenda and materials ranging from simple handouts to a challenging multi-media activity. Learner-centeredness is the background in the entire learning experience; on the other hand, it doesn't belong in the driver's seat. An individual student will have the greatest potential for participating in the selection of teaching and learning styles as well as lesson content, while the individual in a large group will obviously have less opportunity to be the center of the learning process.
It must be pointed out that the method, approach, task or technique utilized must harmonize with the materials chosen in order to carry out communicative competence successfully. For example, you most likely wouldn't use an information gap task to assess the writing level of 40 high school students, just as you wouldn't use an academic writing textbook with adults wishing to sharpen their speaking skills even if (and I emphasize this) a student requested it.
See: Approaches to Second Language Discussion-1-Two Prevailing Trends
The critical aspect of an eclectic paradigm is making the right choices in each learning environment-- who will have the power to make these choices and how, and in which circumstances these choices will evolve and remain engaging over time are just a few of the questions that must be seriously considered. Once again, there is a spectrum from which to place these choices. An individual adult student will be the most active in his/her own syllabus/curriculum up to and including no curriculum at all (what is commonly referred to as 'free conversation'), while a class of 40 elementary school students will have much less choice up to no choice at all (which seems to be the predominant case). Good manners, discussion, critical thought and compromise (not to mention common sense) can save a lot of time in the selection process, hedge against bad assessments and reduce the potential for a 'wandering curriculum'. Getting it right at the beginning also applies to second language learning.
Finally, there is the spectrum between ESL and EFL. This has to be considered by default. You cannot change the dominant spoken language in your society. If you are in an English-speaking country, you will be blessed with English speaking opportunities at every turn. If you are in Hong Kong, Singapore, parts of Malaysia or Europe or any other place with an English-speaking population, you may have the opportunity to carry out language tasks on a regular basis outside the classroom. If you happen to be almost anywhere else, you are more or less in EFL territory. David Nunan's list above will be extremely difficult to implement but will remain an ideal on the horizon. He points this out further on in the same article mentioned above:
"We are further faced with the fact that the true task of learning a second language in the many EFL environments that Asian learners find themselves are removed from a lot of ‘naturalistic’, non-classroom English speaking settings. Such an understanding of these realities and the principles that surround realistic classroom learning can be of service to classroom teachers wondering what methods, approaches and practices to choose at a specific time."
Asian-EFL-Journal-- September 5, 2005
Whether you want to call it 'Post-Communicative Language Teaching and Learning' or anything else, it’s evident (in the literature) that wider ranging and more encompassing ideas are emerging. The notion that a specific educational framework (such as CLT or a task-based model) can be employed for universal implementation is progressively becoming a less viable option. High speed internet connections and hardware (computers, projectors, flat screens) delivering more diverse and relevant content, the movement toward an International English (versus prescriptive dialects) and new ways of understanding language in broader contexts (as simultaneously a social and psychological phenomenon) are factors involved in a more eclectic shift.
Perhaps ironically, considering the growing importance of technology, the computational metaphor (also known as 'information processing' ) from which much of the communicative movement compiled its database of theory, is now being challenged by more 'holistic', 'ecological' and 'cultural-historical' models that attempt to expand the domain of knowledge and language beyond the parameters of the brain. While we are developing smaller, faster and more efficient machines, our way of seeing the world is becoming increasingly more comprehensive, accommodating and perhaps, broadly social, cultural and historical.
The Language Works Online English Curriculum
eslenglishclassroom.com
Author