*What is post method pedagogy?

Ans The term ‘post-method’ was first coined by Pennycook (1989) and then was taken up by
others including Prabhu , Alright , Stern and Kumaravadivelu. The emergence of the concept of
post-method pedagogy is related to the dissatisfaction with the methods and approaches that have
so far emerged in the foreign and second language teaching domain over the last century. This
concept began to take a shape from the mid-nineties of the last century as the existing methods
and approaches failed to come abreast with the hopes and expectations with respect to
second/foreign language teaching. None of the existing methods and approaches proved sound
and perfect.In this sense, Post-method pedagogy can be regarded as a good alternative to the
deficiencies experienced by the employment of conventional methods. It involves Stern’s Three-
dimensional framework and Kumaravadivelu’s Macro-strategic framework drawn from
theoretical, empirical and experiential knowledge.

Post-method can be defined as the construction of classroom procedures and principles by the
teacher himself/herself based on his/her prior and experiential knowledge and/or certain
strategies. In other words, post-method involves practitioners constructing “classroom-oriented”
theories of practice. Therefore, post-method is totally different from the existing methods.The
first feature is that it is a search for an alternative to method rather than an alternative method.
The second feature is teacher autonomy. The third feature is principled pragmatism.
.

*What is Kumaravadivelu’s concept of post method pedagogy?

Ans. Kumaravadivelu visualizes a post method pedagogy as a three-dimensional system made up
of three pedagogic parameters: particularity, practicality, and possibility

1.The parameter of particularity: First and foremost, any post method pedagogy has to be a
pedagogy of particularity. It means that language pedagogy must be sensitive to a particular
group of teachers teaching a particular group of learners pursuing a particular set of goals within
a particular institutional context.

2.The parameter of practicality: Kumaravadivelu claims that there should be a harmony

between what the teachers of a particular context will theorize and what they will practise in
classroom teaching. According to him, a theory is meaningless unless it can be applied in
practice. Therefore, teachers themselves should try to derive their own theories from their
language teaching practices on the basis of their understanding of the problems they face while
teaching in their contexts
3.The parameter of possibility: By his third parameter, he states that second language teaching
and learning should be seen not only as learners’ grasping new linguistic and cultural knowledge,
but also as a tool to help them to come to grips with their own identity. In other words, language
education has to provide its participants with challenges and opportunities for a continual quest
for subjectivity and self-identity, and also for connecting their linguistic needs to their social
needs

According to Kumaravadivelu , the post method strategic framework for language teaching
consists of macrostrategies and microstrategies. A macrostrategy is a broad guideline leading
teachers to generate their own location-specific, need-based microstrategies or classroom
procedures.The macro strategies are described below:
(1) Maximize learning opportunities:This strategy envisages teaching as a process of creating
and utilizing learning opportunities. The teacher is seen both as a creator of learning opportunities
for his learners and the utilizer of learning opportunities .
(2) Minimize perceptual mismatches: This strategy stresses the recognition of potential
perceptual mismatches between intentions and interpretations of the learner, the teacher, and the
teacher educator.
(3) Facilitate negotiated interaction: This strategy means the meaningful learner-learner,
learner-teacher classroom interaction where learners are entitled and encouraged to propose topic
and initiate talk, not merely react or respond.
(4)Promote learner autonomy:This strategy refers to helping learners learn how to learn,
equipping them with the means necessary to self-direct and self-monitor their own learning.
(5) Forster language awareness: This strategy involves any attempt to draw learners’ attention
to the formal and functional properties of their L2 in order to increase the degree of explicitness
required to promote L2 learning.
(6) Activate intuitive heuristics: This strategy stresses the importance of providing rich
textual data so that learners can infer and internalize underlying rules governing grammatical
usage and communicative use.
(7) Contextualize linguistic input: This strategy highlights how language usage and use are
shaped by linguistic, extralinguistic, situational and extrasituational contexts.
(8) Integrate language skills: This macrostrategy refers to the need to holistically integrate
language skills traditionally separated and sequenced as listening, speaking, reading, and writing.
(9) Ensure social relevance: This strategy stresses the need for the teacher to be sensitive to the
societal, political, economic, and educational environment in which L2 learning and
teaching take place.
(10) Raise cultural consciousness: This strategy stresses the need to treat learners as cultural
informants so that they are encouraged to engage in a process of classroom participation that puts
a premium on their power/knowledge.

The macrostrategies introduced above are general guiding principles for classroom teaching, and
are to be implemented in the classroom through microstrategies designed to realize the goals of a
particular macrostrategy. One macrostrategy may have many microstrategies. Microstrategies are
associated with different local situations and conditioned by the national, regional, or local
language policy and planning, curricular objectives, institutional resources, and learners’ needs,
wants, lacks as well as their current level of language knowledge/competence, and a great many
other possible factors.
*Discuss the Three-Dimensional Framework of Stern.
Ans. Post-method pedagogy involves Stern’s Three-dimensional framework and
Kumaravadivelu’s Macro-strategic framework The Three-Dimensional Framework proposed by
Stern(1992) does not favor the application of restricted ends of the continuum in its principles. It
suggests that one should find a middle path in the application of the following principles.

1. The intra-lingual and cross-lingual dimension

While intra-lingual strategy involves keeping the two language systems completely separate from
each other, cross-lingual strategy suggests that L2 is acquired and known through the use of first
language. In other words, this principle does not bring any restrictions regarding the use of native
language in the classroom.It encourages teachers to make a decision about the degree of using the
native language according to the level and needs of the learners. It is suggested that cross-
linguistic techniques are appropriate at the initial stages of language learning whereas intra-
lingual techniques are appropriate in advanced stages.

2. The analytic-experiential dimension

While the analytic strategy involves explicit focus on forms of language such as grammar,
vocabulary, notions and functions with emphasis on accuracy; experiential strategy is message-
oriented and involves interaction in communicative contexts with emphasis on fluency. Stern
puts forward that one type of strategy cannot be effective without the other type. Therefore, both
types of strategies are complementary to each other and carry utmost importance for language
learners.
3. The explicit-implicit dimension
Stern argues that language can be taught both explicitly through conscious learning and implicitly
through subconscious acquisition. Unlike what conventional methods dictate, this dimension does
not strongly impose one end of the dimension and disregard the other end. Decision on the degree
of using explicit and implicit strategies depend on the language topic, the course objectives, the
characteristics of the students, the needs, students’ age, maturity, and previous experience

To conclude, this framework presents principles that are applicable and adaptable in every
context and guide both experienced and inexperienced teachers for professional development
both as a researcher and practitioner
 Challenges in implementing CLT in Bangladesh

Bangladesh like many other countries of the world is still suffering from the CLT phobia and,
therefore, has not been able to come out of the method paradigm.In this country we have the
following challenges in implementing the CLT:

1..Challenges faced by teachers:(i)Lack of proper training (ii)Having little knowledge about the
use of language (iii) Not getting enough time to develop and use realia in CLT classes (iv)Vague
concept or misconception regarding the key features of the CLT

2.Challenges faced by the learners: (i)Lack of motivation (ii) Incompetence in language

proficiency (iii) Lack of participatory approach (iv)Reluctance or lack of confidence (v) scope of
little interaction

3.Challenges caused by education system: (i) Financial crisis (ii)Poor infrastructure (iii)Unusually
large classes (iv) Teacher-centred classroom

4.Challenges caused by the CLT itself : (i) Lack of adequate account of EFL teaching
(ii)Inefficiency in the assessment system (iii)Lack of effective use of instruments

This scenario of the present circumstances of the CLT in Bangladesh asserts that the country
badly needs to reconstruct the existing teaching-learning practices for the CLT. To make the
present practices effective, there is no alternative to making them compatible with the contextual
realities of the country and thus developing a method or pedagogy of the country’s own.
Bangladesh like many other countries of the world is still suffering from the CLT phobia and,
therefore, has not been able to come out of the method paradigm. Before the introduction of CLT,
it was the Grammar-Translation Method that was traditionally followed for teaching English in
the country.As with other methods, dissatisfaction was also with this method, especially for its
failure to impart communicative competence to learners. Therefore, the switch over from this
method to the CLT approach was made on the expectation that this change would improve the
quality of English teaching and learning in the country as a whole. Thereupon, new textbooks
compatible with the principles of CLT were written for the students of the primary to the higher
secondary levels of education, and training on this new approach was given to the English
teachers so that they could properly apply the principles of this approach to the classroom
teaching. But in spite of all these efforts, the desired result is yet a far cry. Even after fourteen
years of the introduction of CLT in the country the quality of English education here has not
improved at all.
This scenario of the present circumstances of ELT in Bangladesh asserts that the country badly
needs to reconstruct the existing teaching-learning practices for ELT. To make the present
practices effective, there is no alternative to making them compatible with the contextual realities
of the country and thus developing a method or pedagogy of the country’s own. In this respect,
the concept of the three parameters of the post-method pedagogy—particularity, practicality and
possibility—as proposed by Kumaravadivelu(2001) may come to a great help. However, at the
same time, it is essential to be cautious about some other points of this concept as they are not
applicable in the context of Bangladesh. In other words, only the points which are practical, and
hence, applicable in Bangladeshi context can beutilized.