Knowledge about Language and the ‘Good Language Teacher’
CONCLUSIONS
From the present study, we feel that we have learnt a considerable amount about ‘Good Language Teachers’ and their teacher language awareness. First, the study provides support for our hypothesis that ‘Good Language Teachers’ are not the ‘finished article’ as far as the declarative dimension of their teacher language awareness is concerned. All three subjects have gaps in their subject-matter knowledge, according to their test performance, and to a varying extent these limitations were seen to impact upon the procedural dimension of their teacher language awareness, as noted in the analysis of their pedagogical practice. At the same time, the study has revealed a number of other characteristics of language-aware behavior which might be hypothesized as generalizable in relation to the teacher language awareness of ‘Good Language Teachers’ worldwide: willingness and ability to engage with language-related issues; self-awareness (with particular reference to awareness of the extent of their own subject-matter knowledge) accompanied by a desire for continuing self-improvement of their teacher language awareness; willingness and ability to reflect on language-related issues; awareness of their own key role in mediating input for learning; awareness of learners’ potential difficulties; and a love of language. As suggested above, these characteristics of the language awareness of ‘Good Language Teachers’ form part of their broader pedagogical content knowledge and are closely interrelated with various aspects of pedagogical content knowledge. Not surprisingly, these characteristics also resonate with the findings of studies of teacher expertise. Tsui (2003), for example, identifies three dimensions as critical indicators of the extent to which any teacher is an expert:
• how teachers relate to the act of teaching, and the extent to which they integrate or dichotomize the various aspects of teacher knowledge in the teaching act;
• how they relate to their specific contexts of work, and the extent to which they are able to perceive and open up possibilities that do not present themselves as such in their specific contexts of work; and
• the extent to which they are able to theorize the knowledge generated by their personal practical experience as a teacher and to ‘practicalize’ theoretical knowledge (Tsui, 2003:247).
The evidence gathered for the present study would suggest that in most respects all three subjects are experts according to Tsui’s criteria, despite the apparent limitations in their subject-matter knowledge.
In relation to our own teaching, this study raises a number of questions, concerning both the needs of ‘Good Language Teachers’ such as those taking part in the research, and the priority given to teacher language awareness in L2 teacher education programs more generally, from pre-service onwards. These subjects all acknowledge their personal need for greater subject-matter knowledge, which would seem to lend strong support to the idea that teacher language awareness should form part of continuing professional development for L2 teachers at all stages of their careers, with such professional development opportunities being available in variety of modes, including self-access. These subjects also have a very clear conception of the central importance of language content in their own pedagogical practice. This, seems to be one of the defining characteristics of the teacher language awareness of the ‘Good Language Teacher’, and is an aspect of teacher language awareness which, in our view, needs to be fostered from the beginning of any pre service L2 teacher education program.
In attempting to foster an active awareness of content issues, however, it would seem sensible not to isolate teacher language awareness from broader aspects of teacher thinking and teacher reflectivity. Instead, the development of teacher language awareness could be promoted as part of an endeavor to encourage reflection across the broad spectrum of pedagogical concerns. The teacher language awareness component of such a program would have as its objective increasing teachers’ understanding of the need to engage with content issues, and enhancing their own awareness of the potential impact of teacher language awareness upon student learning, as well as encouraging teachers to strengthen their language systems knowledge-base. By incorporating attention to teacher language awareness in an L2 teacher education program aimed more broadly at fostering reflective teaching, the objective would be to develop content-related reflection as part of a generally enhanced reflectivity, and to foster the development of qualities such as sensitivity, perception, alertness and vision, noted elsewhere (see, for example, Andrews 1999a:172-177) as being essential both to teacher language awareness and to general teaching competence. Ideally, the reflective practitioner would then, as her career develops, focus as much attention, in both teaching and reflection, on content-related issues (and the improvement of her knowledge and self-awareness in that regard) as on methodology (and increasing her repertoire of teaching skills and activities).
