MET Study Group: Bowers vs. Widdowson
MET Study Group- Tasks A1&C1 | Gerry Munzing | September 25th, 2004
In the hopes of stimulating a friendly discussion on the following MET task, I toss out these raw thoughts to anyone who feels compelled to comment. As you will notice, I do not relate them back to Stern's three ways of looking at theory as I found myself comfortably absorbed with the debate between Bowers and Widdowson. Wooh! My heart starts to beat quickly in anticipation, as I get ready to send this one out.
Cheers,
Gerry
Bowers:
"Theory is context free; but teachers face a number of important constraints in their work."
Widdowson:
"The concern of Applied Linguistics is to provide a theoretical perspective for practical and applicable course of action."
I agree more with Bowers. The theory doesn't come first. Teaching comes first. If there were no teaching the theory would be meaningless. Just as when playing music or especially a sport, you have to get out there and try it, you have to practice and practice until you get good enough to perform.
With teaching, one usually starts to perform before having reached a level of mastery. In fact, with teaching the only way to reach that level of mastery is to practice teaching and that in itself is an exciting, if not life altering, experience. The theory informs the practice. It helps us to refine our ideas and methods. Rarely does theory lead to the discovery an approach. I believe that approaches usually are discovered by the teacher in the classroom while teaching or while preparing for lessons, and it is usually independent of the influence of theory. However, any approach will always relate back to theory and it is this relation that allows us as teachers to articulate what we do when we teach. In essence think Widdowson's statement is rather idealistic.
Bowers:
"Language is irrelevant. What we need to understand is teachers, students, administrators, and how they react to change."
Widdowson:
"We obviously need to understand language because that is precisely what we are teaching."
Here I completely and wholeheartedly disagree with Bowers, at least in terms of saying that "language is irrelevant." No way. I do think that we need to understand teachers, students, and administrators. This is definitely important, but why this justifies ignoring language is beyond me.
Bowers:
"There is nothing demeaning about being practitioners impatient of theory."
Widdowson:
"It is demeaning for teachers to deny the importance of theory, for in doing so they deny themselves opportunities for development."
I'm afraid I agree with Bowers on this one. Teachers don't have to give a hoot about theory if they don't want to. And they will grow and develop as teachers even if they never read a book about teaching or about Applied Linguistics. Teachers learn through teaching. The theory is unnecessary. However, just as it is helpful for teachers to learn more about the language they are teaching, I do believe that teachers who study the theory behind teaching and learning are better able to understand and articulate what it is they do when they teach. But they are not required to do this. Teachers should come to theory from an intrinsic motivation rather than from someone demeaning them for not being aware of the implications of certain theories.
Bowers:
"There is nothing 'mere' about expediency."
Widdowson:
"There definitely is something 'mere' about expediency; it is not informed or supported by principle."
Neither of these matter. What matters is what actions are taken and the effects the actions have. It does not matter whether the actions are born out of expediency or not. Expedient actions may very well be informed and supported by principle.
Bowers:
We need blueprints, not maps.
Widdowson:
We don't need blueprints: they're "fixed, unchangeable, inflexible." We need maps.
In terms of teaching, I like Widdowson's statement here. No lesson plan is a blueprint that can be replicated exactly like a building each time the lesson is produced. A lesson is never taught exactly the same way twice. Teachers make minor or major adaptations and take alternative routes that may or may not even be on the map of the lesson plan. Teaching is too spontaneous to be fixed in any permanent way. It's not so much like a symphony as it is like jazz. There is a form to be followed, but deviations are to be expected and welcomed.
Gerald Munzing
with 
and 
