RADICAL TEFL

THE STUDY OF EFLT HISTORIES
Radical TEFL would like to publish local histories of EFLT, linked to the EFL
classroom. Articles from teachers and those who are close to
classroom problems in any way are especially welcomed.
The following questions are intended as entry points to
contexts and approaches of such histories.
(A) WHAT IS A HISTORY OF A FIELD?
Is a history of a field the history of what happened? Is a history a study of ideas in a
field? Is a history a study of developments and of processes: or of reaction and protest
against consensus? How far is the history of a field about interpretation and
understanding: if so, by whom? How far should a history understand the historical
and social context in which that history is set? Does a local history need to take into
account wider or deeper trends and ideas?
(B) SOURCES AND EVIDENCE
What are some sources of claims to evidence for histories of EFLT? From those who
lived through an historical period? From learners and teachers: but where will such
sources be found? From coursebooks of a given period? Journal articles? The
connections between any of these? How relevant, to investigations of secondary
school practice, are sources which comprise the academic literature and
‘conversation’ of EFLT source disciplines such as Applied Linguistics? How does
one know if one can trust a source, or claim to evidence? Does one need to take into
account the purposes or the (underlying) motives of the authors of sources such as
research reports, journal articles, etc. , before understanding the significance of these
sources for EFLT history? How far is it legitimate to probe into the underlying
assumptions, career ambitions and secondary-school teaching experience of those
authors?
(C) WHY WRITE AND STUDY HISTORIES?
Why study history? To learn lessons form the past, and so to avoid similar wrong
turnings? To better understand the present? To point out myths? To identify trends
and reactions? To draw attention to alternative traditions which may have been
eclipsed and lost by new thinking? What can historical studies of EFLT learn from
history’s discussions of methods of historical investigation? . How significant are
individuals in history? How significant, by comparison, are leading ideas? How do
ideas become translated into classroom practice: what would an example of a history
of such attempted links look like; what methodological problems would such work
involve?
(D) METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES IN DOING HISTORY
1. In what ways are methods of enquiry in history similar to methods in the
mathematical sciences, and in what ways different? What are some starting points for
62