13.07.2015 Views

Download - Search

Download - Search

Download - Search

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

198 DAVID NUNANDespite the difficulties referred to by van Iier, thcrc is some evidence that the picture isbeginning to changc.The changc has Ixxn prompted in part hy a grokving sensitivity on thepart of many researchers to the complexities of the tcacher’s task. I’ractitioncrs, on theirpart, seem to have grown tired of the s\vings and rountlabouts of pedagogic fashion, antl arelooking for evidence before cmlx-acing the latest tt-end to appear in the educational marketplace. This is not to suggest that a revolution has taken placc, however.While position papers, and logico-tlcducti\ c argumcntation have not tlisappcared fromthe scene (antl I am not suggesting l~or a inomcnt that thcy should), thcy arecounterhalanced hy empirical approaches to inquiry. I believe that these days, \vhcnconfronted liy pedagogical questions antl I)roldcms, researchers and teachers are morelikely than \vas the case ten or fifteen !cars ago, to seck relevant data, rithcr throughtheir own research, or through the rcscai-ch of othcrs. IXescarch activity has increasedto the point whcrc those \Tho fa\mur logico-dctluctivc solutions to pedagogic problcmsarc lieginning to argue that thcrc is too much i-cscarch.(Nunan, 1992)An important concept underpinning action rcscarch (AR) is that ot reflcctilc practiceIn his exccllcnt liook on rcflcctne teaching, Wallace (1 991 ) argues that rcflectilc teachingpro\ ides a \T a! of de\ eloping prolcssional c otnpctcncc 11) integrating two wurces ofkno\i ledge, rcccxi\ cd knon lctlgc antl cxpcricntial kno\z lctlgc, \\ ith practice Wallace’sconccption I\ captured in Figurc 16 1Trainee’sexistingconceptualschemataor mentalconstructsExperientialknowledge‘Reflective cycle’COMPETENCESTAGE 1: (Pre-training)STAGE 2: (Professional education/development)GOALHe links this with action research, arguing that:‘action research’ can he attractivc for two reasons:1 It can havc a specific antl iinmcdiatc outcome \vhich can I)(- directly related topractice in the teacher’s o\vn context.2 The ‘findings’ of such rcscarch might lie Iiriniaril? specific, i.c. it is not claimcdthat thcy are necessarily of general application, antl thcrcforc the methods might hemorc free-ranging than those of conventional rcscarch.. . . ‘Kcsearch’ of this kind is simply an extension of the normal t-cflcctii e practice ofmany teachers, Iiut it is slightly more rigorous antl might conceivahly lead to morceffective outcomes.(Wallace, 1 99 1 : 56-- 7)As we can see from the selcctcd extracts presented ahvc, action rcscarch is justifiedon the grounds that it is a valuable professional dcvclopment tool. It rcpresents what I would

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!