Download - Search

Chapter 10Numa MarkeeTHE DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION INLANGUAGE TEACHINGIntroductionHE LAST TWO DECADES IN APPLIED LINGUISTICS -whichroughlvT coincide with thc evolution of the communicative approach in language teaching -have seen the tlevelopmcnt of a numhcr of languagc tcaching innovations, including thenotional/ functional syllabus, the process syllabus, the Natural Approach, the proceduralsyllabus, and task-based languagc teaching. All of these proposals have contributed inimportant ways to an understanding of theorctical issues related to designing innovativelanguage syllabuses. Rut it is onl? rather rcccntly that applied linguists have hrgun toinvestigate the problcms associated nith implcmcnting thcsc innovations.Indeed, with the exception of such pionecrs as White (1988), Henrichsen (1 989), anda number of other hvritcrs, not many language tcaching spccialists haw developed anyfamiliarity with the voluminous literaturc that already exists in a number of disciplines onhow and why innovations tliffuse.This is unfortunate Iwcausc, as Kenncdy (1988) and Beretta(1990) demonstrate, a ‘tliffusion~of~innovations’ perspective on syllabus design providescurriculum spccialists, materials dewlopcrs, and tcachcrs mith a coherent set of guidingprinciples for the development and implemcntation of language teaching innovations.Furthermore, it supplies evaluators with critcria for retrospcctive evaluations of the extentto which thesc innovations have actually been implemcnted. In other words, this perspectiveprovides a unified framework for conceptualizing both the development and evaluation ofinnovations in language teaching. Thus, although the terminology used may at first soundcxotic and unfamiliar, a diffusion-of-innovations pcrspectivc on syllabus design, for example,addresses concerns that arc central to all language tcaching specialists.In contrast to applied linguistics, education alrcady po cs a well-cstablished traditionof innovation rcsearch and practice (Fullan 1982, Miles 1964, Nicholls 1983, Kudduck1991), as do such disciplines as sociology (Rogers 1983), urban planning (Lambright andFlynn 1980), and language planning (Cooper 1989).7’hus, a rcviekv ofthc issues that defineinnovation in thc specific contcxt of language teaching nil1 draw on these academicspecializations to dcvelop a multi-disciplinary framework, inspired particularly by Cooper’swork on innovation in language planning. The framework for this discussion consists of thefollowing composite qucstion: “Who adopts what, where, when, why and how?” (Cooper 1989),with responses to each individual componcnt of the question. In this wy, the basic issues