Casanave Chapter 1 Response
Casanave encourages teachers of L2 writing to reflect on their own identities as writers by interrogating their experiences and beliefs about themselves as writers. Among the main
purposes of such reflection is to develop a more effective and just pedagogy. In the context of Education, Literacy and Composition programs that take a critical approach, this is something I
have experienced. However, in my Linguistics and TESOL training, this was not something we ever were encouraged to do. In the 3 University ESL programs I have taught in (University of
Pittsburgh, Duquesne University, and University of Iowa), instructors are expected to teach all “skills” (reading/writing/speaking/listening/grammar--they are still separated in most programs, which is antiquated in my opinion, but that is another post). The majority of ESL instructors I
know don’t seem to identify as writers necessarily (usually they would say “linguists” or “language teachers”). This lack of specialization* , the legacy of the field’s basis in spoken language as “primary” and a formulaic/product oriented approach to writing are all barriers to the
reflective practice Casanave suggests.
I think ESL teacher training and ESL programs need to offer more in the area of L2 writing
as a specialization. Perhaps before this is possible, these programs to need to encourage more critical reflection on the English language itself.
purposes of such reflection is to develop a more effective and just pedagogy. In the context of Education, Literacy and Composition programs that take a critical approach, this is something I
have experienced. However, in my Linguistics and TESOL training, this was not something we ever were encouraged to do. In the 3 University ESL programs I have taught in (University of
Pittsburgh, Duquesne University, and University of Iowa), instructors are expected to teach all “skills” (reading/writing/speaking/listening/grammar--they are still separated in most programs, which is antiquated in my opinion, but that is another post). The majority of ESL instructors I
know don’t seem to identify as writers necessarily (usually they would say “linguists” or “language teachers”). This lack of specialization* , the legacy of the field’s basis in spoken language as “primary” and a formulaic/product oriented approach to writing are all barriers to the
reflective practice Casanave suggests.
I think ESL teacher training and ESL programs need to offer more in the area of L2 writing
as a specialization. Perhaps before this is possible, these programs to need to encourage more critical reflection on the English language itself.
On page 14 Casanave discusses structural and systemic constraints
and gives the example of the expectation of a term paper being
completed in a relatively short time frame. She says that she tried to write a paper consistent
with the expectations/schedule she had given to her students and found that she was unable
to complete this task satisfactorily.
and gives the example of the expectation of a term paper being
completed in a relatively short time frame. She says that she tried to write a paper consistent
with the expectations/schedule she had given to her students and found that she was unable
to complete this task satisfactorily.
I think this is one of her strongest moments in the chapter. I have worked in departments
that require the L2 students to perform unreasonable tasks under strict time restraints.
I think many instructors become very far removed from the experience of being a student
and/or a language learner(and many have never studied an L2 at the level their students are working). Part of professional development for instructors should be to take language classes and /or attempt everything they ask of their students (in a language that is not their first). l think these experiences of holding ourselves to the expectations we set for our students might provide a basis for unpacking our beliefs and assumptions, as well as creating more realistic expectations for L2 writing and writers.
that require the L2 students to perform unreasonable tasks under strict time restraints.
I think many instructors become very far removed from the experience of being a student
and/or a language learner(and many have never studied an L2 at the level their students are working). Part of professional development for instructors should be to take language classes and /or attempt everything they ask of their students (in a language that is not their first). l think these experiences of holding ourselves to the expectations we set for our students might provide a basis for unpacking our beliefs and assumptions, as well as creating more realistic expectations for L2 writing and writers.
*Most instructors in these programs end up as writing/reading/grammar types of speaking/listening types, but generally you are expected to teach any skill you are assigned.
Comments
Post a Comment