Appraising Post-Method and Remodeling in English Language Teaching in Iranian Academic Context: Voice of EFL Teachers and Learners
الموضوعات : نشریه مطالعات آموزش زبان انگلیسی
Mehrzad Razavi Moghadam
1
,
Neda Fatehi Rad
2
1 - گروه زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد کرمان، کرمان، ایران
2 - دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد کرمان
الکلمات المفتاحية: Case Study, EFL Learners, Method, Post-Method Pedagogy, Remodeling,
ملخص المقالة :
Nowadays many different methods and strategies regarding English language teaching have been proposed by many theorists but they seem to fail to fulfill the needs of the learners and they came up to be not satisfactory. Post-method pedagogy (PMP) has appeared recently as a concept beyond the concept of all methods. In post-method pedagogy, teachers develop a learning design based on their learners’ needs and the situation of learning. In another words, many of the methods are context-based while PMP is a class-room based approach. The present article tries to investigate the opinions of 50 EFL teachers from universities of Kerman in Iran (i.e., Bahonar university, Islamic Azad university, Payam Nour university, and Institute of Higher Education) and opinions of 150 students of B.A in English teaching from Azad University of Kerman in Iran to analyze the efficacy of post- method pedagogy in English Language Teaching. In so doing a qualitive research with a focus on the case study was conducted. The instruments used in this research were two questionnaires, one by Nikita and et.al (2016) to check for the opinion of the teachers on the efficacy of post-method in English language teaching and the other questionnaire by Tigli (2014) to check for the opinion of learners. The results have shown that 31.00% of EFL teachers strongly agreed with the efficacy of the post-method and among B.A students of English language teaching, 29.76% agreed that post-method was effective in English language teaching.
Birjandi, P., & Hashamdar, M. (2014). Micro-strategies of post-method language teaching developed for Iranian EFL context. Theory and practice in language studies, 4(9), 1875.
Boran, G. S., & Gürkan, S. (2019). Post/Method: Are They Compensating or Competing?. ELT Research Journal, 8(4), 200-220.
Brown, H. D. (2002). English language teaching in the post-method era: Toward better diagnosis, treatment, and assessment. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 9-18). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press Can, N. (2009, December). Post-method pedagogy: Teacher growth behind walls. In Proceedings of the 10th METU ELT Convention.
Can, N. (2009, December). Post-method pedagogy: Teacher growth behind walls. In Proceedings of the 10th METU ELT Convention.
Fahim, M., & Pishghadam, R. (2009). Postmodernism and English language teaching. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies,1(2), 27-54.
Fat'hi, J., Ghaslani, R., & Parsa, K. (2015). The relationship between post-method pedagogy and teacher reflection: A case of Iranian EFL teachers. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(4), 305-321.
Fathi, J., & Hamidizadeh, R. (2019). Iranian EFL Teachers' Willingness to Implement Postmethod Pedagogy: Development and Validation of a Questionnaire. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 165-180.
Gholami, J., &Mirzaei, A. (2013). Post-method in EFL teaching in Iran: Barriers, attitudes, and symbols. Research Journal of English Language and Literature,1(2), 50-6
Halo, L. A. (2022). English Language Teaching with Engagement in Mind: Implementing Post Method Approaches. IARS'International Research Journal, 12(02).
Hazratzadeh, A., & Gheitanchian, M. (2011). EFL Teachers’ attitudes towards post-method pedagogy and their students’ achievement. Paper presented at the 10th METU ELT convention, Ankara.
Hooman, H., Rezvan, R., & Afraz, Sh. (2021). The impact of post method pedagogy on academic achievements, self-efficacy, emotions and self-esteem according to dynamic systems theory. Journal of Language and Translation. 11(3), 193-214. https://doi:10.30957/ijotl-tl.v5i3.633
Hooman, Y. (2014). The evaluation of Iranian EFL textbooks from post method principles pedagogy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(5), 1026.
Huda, M.E. (2013). Post method pedagogy and ELT in Bangladesh. Global Journal of Human Science. 13(1), 7-14
Islam, N. (2020). Implementation of post method pedagogy as an alternative to communicative language teaching at the tertiary level education. Center of Language and Cultural Studies. 5 (3), 135-153
Kumaradivelu, B. (1994). The post method condition: Emerging strategies for second language learning.
Kumaradivelu, B. (2001). Toward a post method pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly. 35, 537-560
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Routledge.
Lusianov, J. D. (2020). Post method era and glocalization in language teaching and learning. Atlantis Press. 4TH International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture and Education. 509, 360-366
Maghsudi, N. (2016). Post method Pedagogy: a plausible choice in Iran? Studies in English Language Teaching. 4(2), 282-288
Naeini, A. V., & Shakouri, N. (2016). Preparing for a postmethod pedagogy: A transformative approach to curriculum development. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(3), 586.
Paul, P. (2022). Post-method pedagogy and remodeling method based English language teaching (ELT) in Bangladesh. Journal of Research and method in education. 12(3), 53-59. https://doi:10.9790/7388-1203015359
Paudel. P. (2018). Teachers' Perception on Post method Pedagogy in EFL Classes of Nepal. Prithvi Academic Journal, 1(1), 46-57. https://doi:10,3126/paj.v1i1.25899
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Communicative language teaching. In approaches and Methods in language teaching. Cambridge Language Teaching Library. 10 (4), 64-69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sabouri, H., & Mahbubi, M. (2023). An investigation into teachers’ perception of post method pedagogy. Journal of Philosophical Investigation. 16(41), 62-73
Tiğli, T. (2014). Method vs. postmethod!: A survey on prospective EFL teachersperspectives (Master's thesis, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü).
Ur, P. (2013). Language-teaching method revisited. ELT journal, 67(4), 468-474.
Zeng, Z. (2012). Convergence or divergence? Chinese novice EFL teachers’ beliefs about post-method and teaching practices. English Language Teaching, 5 (10), 64 -71. https://doi:10.5539/elt.v5n10p64
Journal of Teaching English Language Studies (JTELS) |
Research Paper | Volume 9, Issue 1 |
| |
Accepted: September 2023 Published: January 2024 |
Research Article |
Appraising Post-Method and Remodeling Based English Language Teaching in Iranian Academic Context: Voice of EFL Teachers and Learners
Mehrzad Razavi Moghadam
1PH.D Candidate, Department of English Language, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran.
Neda Fatehi Rad *(Corresponding Author)
2Assistant Professor, Department of English Language, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran. E-mail: nedafatehi@yahoo.com
|
ABSTRACT
Nowadays many different methods and strategies regarding English language teaching have been applied. But they have failed to do so. Post-method pedagogy (PMP) has been appeared recently as a concept beyond the concept of all methods. In the present approach learners create context based on their own knowledge in the class-room. In another words, many of the methods are context based while PMP is a class-room based approach. The present article tries to investigate the opinions of 50 EFL teachers from universities of Kerman (Bahonar, Azad, Payam Nour, Institute of Higher Education) and opinions of 150 students of B.A of English teaching from Azad University of Kerman to analyze the efficacy of post method pedagogy in English Language Teaching. The results have shown that 31.00% of EFL teachers were strongly agree with the efficacy of the present method and regarding B.A students of English teaching 29.76% were agree.
Keywords: Post-Method, Remodeling Method, TEFL
|
1. INTRODUCTION
Originally teaching English is a combination of different theories and practice. There are many methods for teaching English like audio lingual method, total physical response (TPR), communicative language teaching (CLT) and so on, the need for an effective method has led to the invention of different methods over the years (Islam, 2020).
In the last few decades, the focus of scholars has been on different methods and strategies. In recent years CLT has been the preferred method in different parts of the world like Africa, Asia and Latin America during 1980s and 1990s. But unfortunately, it wasn’t very successful as it was predicated by scholars (Paul, 2022). This led to the appearance of the notion of post-method pedagogy which is the concept of going beyond the methods and their inability to perform well over the years (Kumaradivelu, 1994).
This article investigates the opinion of the EFL teachers from different Universities of Kerman (Bahonar, Azad, Payam Nour, Institute of Higher Education) and B.A students of English teaching in Azad University of Kerman regarding the effectiveness of Post-method Pedagogy and remodeling method in English language teaching. The goal of this article is to analyze that whether post-method pedagogy is effective enough for the students in their success toward learning English. Therefore, the present research tries to answer the following research questions:
1. To What extent are the EFL teachers’ view positive toward post method?
2. To what extent are the EFL teachers’ view positive toward remodeling method?
3. Is there any difference between the EFL teachers’ and learners’ view on post method and remodeling method?
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Method and post- method are two different concepts. According to Huda “a method is generally understood as a package of guidelines about how language teaching should be done (2013, p.2)”. Richard and Rogers defined method as “a specific instructional design or system based on a particular theory of language and of language learning (2001, p.35)”.
Paul explains and defines post-method as “a process where the teacher himself/herself constructs classroom procedures based on his/her prior knowledge and experience and certain strategies of teaching language (2022, p.54)”. Post-method pedagogy (PMP) condition is explained as “a particular group of teachers teaching a particular group of learners pursuing a particular set of goals within a particular institutional context embedded in a particular socio-cultural setting (Kumaradeivelu,2001, p.32). In another words, the ideas and concept of method and strategies of teaching a new language is based on Knowledge whereas the concept of post-method pedagogy is class-room based (Paul,2022).
Different researchers such as Kumaradivelu, Jarvis, Richards, Prabhu, Pennycook and Stern have challenged the concept of method regarding language teaching. Methods and strategies have been used and applied to make the process of teaching easier but it made this process more challenging and obscure (Paul, 2022). The concept of method has been judged for ignoring contextual factors and being imperialistic.
In 1994 Kumaradivelu have introduced post-method pedagogy and claimed that “There should be an alternative to method rather than alternative method (1994, p.27)”. He stated that “teachers should be empowered to theorize from their practice and practice what they have theorized (1994, p.27)”.
According to Hazratzad and Gheitanchian (2010) nowadays there has been a growing interest in post-method in Iranian mainstream which has brought about the focus on CLT procedure and materials used in teaching environment. They have conducted a study to analyze the teachers’ achievement. The subjects of the study were 594 EFL teachers from all over of Iran.
One of the articles which focuses on this subject is written by Maghsudi (2016). According to her in the field of language teaching different methods have been appeared over the years to fulfill the needs of all individuals but they have failed to do so. Although eclectism had been introduced as a solution for this problem, but it didn’t have a certain philosophical and theoretical base. As Maghsudi has mentioned “The inefficiency of language teaching methods in fulfilling the needs of all learners has led to death of methods (2016, p.282)”
Islam (2020) has conducted a study regarding this issue. She claims that in Bangladesh CLT has been applied as a method for teaching English as a foreign language since 90s. but it wasn’t successful enough. So, in order to overcome the limitations and obstacles imposed by different methods, post-method pedagogy has been recommended. According to her “PMP focuses on the significance of contextualized materials to bring authenticity back in English language class-rooms which in return ensures learners’ motivation and successful intake of lesson (2020, p.138).
A recent paper written by Lusianov (2020) focuses on the notion of post-method era and glocalization, post-method era is a situation in which scholars try to reconnect and rebuild the relation between theories and practices of methods based on contextualization. She mentions that “The post-method era enables teachers to construct class-room oriented theories of pedagogical practice. As a result, the post-method condition can lead to what is called glocalization in language pedagogy (2020, p.361)”.
The global strategies, ideas, designs and techniques of methods which western scholars have invented and applied on what local teachers need and experience in the class. The concept of glocalization can affect many factors such as individual differences, interlanguage and culture, and learning strategies.
Hooman, Rezvani and Afraz (2021) have conducted a study about the impact of post-method pedagogy on senior high school achievement, academic self-efficacy, emotions and self-esteem. The subjects of the study were 120 female students in Zahedan. The results have shown that post-method had an important role in teaching and the use of this approach could develop academic achievements, self-efficacy and self-esteem.
One of the recent works in this field is conducted by Paul (2022) according to this paper, language teaching theorists and scholars have always looked for an ideal method for the teaching process that meets the different needs of individuals which led to the invention of different methods. One of the recent methods which is prescribed in many countries including Bangladesh is CLT. This method was supposed to maximize learning especially in productive skills but it wasn’t very successful and it has faced many obstacles. So, there is need to go beyond the concept of method.
As Paul mentions” The concept of post-method pedagogy provides ELT practitioners in Bangladesh with an opportunity. PMP entails cultural-sensitive ELT practices that consider the socio-cultural realities as an inseparable part of ELT practices and empower both learners and teachers (2022, p.54)”.
One of the latest works concerning this issue is written by Sabouri and Mahbubi (2023). The goal of this study is to investigate whether the teachers consider beyond the concept of method especially in speaking. The final goal is to understand if the teachers are aware of the value and uniqueness of each teaching context. Whether they recognize the needs of teaching one context from another.
3. METHODOLOGY
3.1. Design
In the present study a qualitative approach has been applied with a case study which includes EFL teachers of Kerman and B.A students of English teaching of Azad University of Kerman. The opinion of EFL teachers and students are analyzed to investigate the efficacy of post-method pedagogy in English language teaching
3.2. Participants
The participants for the aim of the present study includes 50 EFL teachers from four universities of Kerman (Bahonar, Azad, Payam Nour, Institute of higher education). It also includes 150 B.A students of English language teaching from Azad University of Kerman. The age of the students is between 18-22. The subjects of present study are
selected through convincing sampling. Convenience sampling (also known as grab sampling or accidental sampling is a type of non-probability sampling that involves the sample being drawn from that part of the population which is close to hand.
3.3. Instruments and Materials
In the present study two questionnaires are applied regarding the opinions of EFL teachers and B.A students of English teaching towards the effectiveness of post-method and remodeling method. The questionnaire related to the opinions EFL teachers is conducted by Nikita and et.al (2016). The questionnaire regarding the opinions of B.A student of English teaching is performed by Tigli (2014). Both of the questionnaires include 20 questions regarding the subject of the study.
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
EFL Teachers' Questionnaire
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of EFL Teachers' Questionnaire
N | Items | SA | A | D | SD | M |
1 | I try to use authentic teaching materials which are based on the local culture. | 13 26% | 16 32% | 10 20% | 11 22% | 2.62 |
I think dialogues and topics based on learners’ real experiences can help them develop their critical thinking. | 14 28% | 13 26% | 13 26% | 10 20% | 2.62 | |
3 | I think about the ways gender, social class, and race influence my students’ achievement. | 10 20% | 14 28% | 15 30% | 11 22% | 2.46 |
4 | I try to include issues of social justice, poverty, and discrimination as a part of my teaching practice. | 11 22% | 14 28% | 12 24% | 13 26% | 2.46 |
5 | I try to relate what is happening in the classroom to what is taking place in the world outside the classroom. | 9 18% | 16 32% | 15 30% | 10 20% | 2.48 |
6 | I try to create a sense of critical thinking towards social and political issues in my class. | 12 24% | 16 32% | 12 24% | 10 20% | 2.60 |
7 | I feel I have enough knowledge and skill to construct my own theory of practice in the classroom. | 14 28% | 16 32% | 10 20% | 10 20% | 2.63 |
8 | I have my own personal conceptualization of how my teaching leads to desired learning. | 15 30% | 18 36% | 12 24% | 5 10% | 2.86 |
9 | The materials which I use in my classes are chosen for the most part by me. | 10 20% | 8 16% | 12 24% | 20 40% | 2.16 |
10 | In my teaching, I use my own methodology, guidelines, strategies and procedures. | 13 26% | 16 32% | 11 22% | 10 20% | 2.64 |
11 | I have the freedom to be creative in my teaching approach. | 15 30% | 15 30% | 8 16% | 12 24% | 2.66 |
12 | I have the authority in language teaching and use my personal judgement in making pedagogical decisions in the classroom. | 14 28% | 15 30% | 8 16% | 13 26% | 2.60 |
13 | I pay attention to the specific needs of my students in their specific context. | 17 34% | 15 30% | 10 20% | 8 16% | 2.82 |
14 | I employ different methods and different materials in my different class. | 16 32% | 14 28% | 10 20% | 10 20% | 2.72 |
15 | I participate in workshops/conferences related to language teaching/learning issues. | 13 26% | 18 36% | 9 18% | 10 20% | 2.68 |
16 | I share my classroom experiences with my colleagues and ask for their advice or feedback. | 16 32% | 17 34% | 9 18% | 8 16% | 2.82 |
17 | I read books or articles related to effective language teaching to improve my classroom performance. | 15 30% | 19 38% | 11 22% | 5 10% | 2.88 |
18 | As a teacher, I am always thinking about how to develop my language teaching knowledge. | 20 40% | 19 38% | 4 8% | 7 14% | 3.04 |
19 | I try to relate the abstract theories to my own practice in the class. | 14 28% | 13 26% | 10 20% | 13 26% | 2.56 |
20 | I try to test, interpret, and judge the usefulness of professional theories proposed by experts in the field of language teaching. | 14 28% | 18 36% | 13 26% | 5 10% | 2.82 |
Table 2 and figure 1 report mean score percentage of each option of the teachers' questionnaire. As the table indicates, "Agree" with the highest mean score (31.00) received the first rank of the table, and "Strongly Agree" puts in the second rank with the mean score of 27.50. After that, "Strongly Disagree" comes in the third rank with the mean of 21.40 followed by "Disagree" in the fourth rank with the mean of 20.10.
Table 2. Mean Score of EFL Teachers' Questionnaire
N | Options | Mean Score (Percent) | Rank |
1 | Agree | 31.00% | 1st |
2 | Strongly Agree | 27.50% | 2nd |
3 | Strongly Disagree | 21.40% | 3rd |
4 | Disagree | 20.10% | 4th |
Figure 1. Mean Score of EFL Teachers' Questionnaire
EFL Students' Questionnaire
All the 20 items of the questionnaire measured in a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from "Strongly agree" to "Strongly disagree". Frequency, percentage and mean score of each item were used in order to investigate the EFL students’ views towards post and remodeling methods and results are displayed in the following tables.
Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of EFL Students' Questionnaire
N | Items | SA | A | D | SD | M |
1 | New methods are significant for learning English. | 52 34.67% | 46 30.67% | 27 18% | 25 16.66% | 2.83 |
2 | Methods can be realized in their purest form in the classroom according to their core principles. | 39 26% | 41 27.34% | 30 20% | 40 26.66% | 2.52 |
3 | Teachers are resourceful enough to produce their own teaching methods. | 41 27.34% | 43 28.66% | 28 18.66% | 38 25.34% | 2.58 |
4 | Teachers are the consumers of knowledge produced by theorists. | 45 30% | 49 32.67% | 36 24% | 20 13.33% | 2.79 |
5 | Method is what emerges over time as a result of the interaction among the teacher, the students, the materials and activities in the classroom. | 52 34.66% | 38 25.34% | 28 18.66% | 32 21.34% | 2.73 |
6 | Teachers should follow a certain method in our classes. | 35 23.34% | 40 26.66% | 38 25.34% | 37 24.66% | 2.48 |
7 | Students who are trained to be English teachers at universities, should be instructed on new methods. | 51 34% | 45 30% | 35 23.34% | 19 12.66% | 2.85 |
8 | Methods are relevant to our ELT classes. | 42 28% | 46 30.66% | 32 21.34% | 30 20% | 2.66 |
9 | Methods are applicable in our language classrooms. | 48 32% | 42 28% | 27 18% | 33 22% | 2.70 |
10 | There is a single, ideal method for learning English. | 37 24.66% | 31 20.66% | 35 23.34% | 47 31.34% | 2.38 |
11 | Method is a tool of instruction for language teachers which helps them deliver their lesson better. | 43 28.66% | 38 25.34% | 32 21.34% | 37 24.66% | 2.58 |
12 | Every English teacher has his/her own methodology. | 39 26% | 38 25.34% | 37 24.66% | 36 24% | 2.53 |
13 | Methods are Western concepts which ignore the local needs of language learners. | 35 23.34% | 40 26.66% | 52 34.66% | 23 15.34%% | 2.58 |
14 | Teachers should combine a variety of methods in our classes. | 56 37.33% | 38 25.33% | 36 24% | 20 13.34% | 2.86 |
15 | Popular methods such as Communicative Language Teaching are applicable for Iranian learners of English. | 49 32.66% | 32 21.34% | 38 25.34% | 31 20.66% | 2.66 |
Methods are derived from classroom practice. | 47 31.34% | 37 24.66% | 34 22.66% | 32% 21.34% | 2.66 | |
17 | Teachers should follow the principles and practices of the established methods. | 45 30% | 48 32% | 32 21.34% | 25 16.66% | 2.75 |
18 | Teachers should be sensitive toward the societal, political, economic, and educational matters. | 48 32% | 50 33.34% | 32 21.33% | 20 13.33% | 2.84 |
19 | 44 29.34% | 52 34.66% | 30 20% | 24 16% | 2.77 | |
20 | Methods should concentrate on native speakers' values. | 45 30% | 47 31.34% | 31 20.66% | 27 18% | 2.73 |
In the following table, mean score percentage of each option of the students' questionnaire is shown. As table 4 indicates, "Strongly agree" with the highest mean score (29.76) placed in the first rank of the table, and "Agree" puts in the second rank with the mean score of 28.03. After that, "Strongly disagree" comes in the third rank with the mean of 22.35 followed by "Disagree" in the fourth rank with the mean of 19.86.
Table 4. Mean Score of EFL Learners' Questionnaire
N | Options | Mean Score (Percent) | Rank |
1 | Strongly Agree | 29.76% | 1st |
2 | Agree | 2nd | |
3 | Strongly Disagree | 3rd | |
4 | Disagree | 4th |
Figure 2. Mean Score of EFL Learners' Questionnaire
Independent Sample T-test
Prior to address the third research question, normal distribution of data was examined. First, Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test was done for testing normal distribution of data. In fact, distribution of all the received data from both questionnaires is determined by the significance level (Sig) which is more than 0.05 (Table 5&6). Accordingly, with regard to the other pre-assumptions, parametric tests can be used for examining the third research question.
Table 5. One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test (Teacher's Questionnaire) | ||
| sum | |
N | 4 | |
Normal Parametersa,b | Mean | 358.000 |
Std. Deviation | 165.125301 | |
Most Extreme Differences | Absolute | .187 |
Positive | .185 | |
Negative | -.197 | |
Test Statistic | .197 | |
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) | .200c,d | |
Table 6. One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test (Student's Questionnaire) | ||
| sum | |
N | 4 | |
Normal Parametersa,b | Mean | 614.0000 |
Std. Deviation | 421.24516 | |
Most Extreme Differences | Absolute | .265 |
Positive | .265 | |
Negative | -.242 | |
Test Statistic | .265 | |
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.200c, d | |
Table 7 presents descriptive data of EFL teachers and students' questionnaires. Based on the table, mean and standard deviation of teachers' questionnaire is 14.20 and 63.14 (M1=14.20, SD1=63.14). Moreover, mean and standard deviation of the EFL learners' questionnaire is reported as 9.32 and 28.42 respectively (M2= 9.32, SD2= 28.42).
Table 7. Summary of Data (Teachers & Students' Questionnaire) | ||||
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error Mean |
Teachers' Questionnaire | 50 | 14.201 | 63.145 | 10.320 |
Students' Questionnaire | 150 | 9.322 | 28.421 | 2.452 |
Independent Samples T-test was done for testing the possible differences between the EFL teachers and students' views on post method and remodeling method based English language teaching (ELT). For conducting this test, first two hypotheses are formed as;
H0: variances of the two groups (EFL Teachers & students' views) are equal.
H1: variances of the two groups (EFL Teachers & students' views) are not equal.
Based on the tests results, it is obvious that the significance level (sig) is less than 0.05, it means that H1 can be accepted and H0 is rejected. Furthermore, the variance of independent groups of EFL teachers and students is not equal. Considering the significance level of this test (p-value = 0.04) which is less than 0.05 (α = 0.05), it can be said with certainty, there is no difference between the two groups of EFL teachers and learners' views (Table 8).
Table 8. Independent Samples T-test | ||||||||||
| Levene's Test for Equality of Variances | t-test for Equality of Means | ||||||||
F | Sig. | t | df | Sig. (2-tailed) | Mean Difference | Std. Error Difference | 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference | |||
Lower | Upper | |||||||||
Compare | Equal variances assumed | 5.602 | 0.04 | 1.522 | 8 | .157 | 322.00 | 201.92 | -143.22 | 723.22 |
Equal variances not assumed |
|
| 1.522 | 5.643 | .171 | 3122.00 | 201.92 | -179.53 | 801.31 | |
The proposed research questions are explored in this part. As mentioned earlier, the present study examined the attitudes of EFL teachers of universities towards post method and remodeling method. Descriptive analysis towards the first questionnaire indicated that more than half of the EFL teachers tried to use authentic teaching materials based on the local culture and they thought dialogues and topics based on learners’ real experiences develop their critical thinking, but less than half of them thought about the ways gender, social class, and race influence students’ achievement. Exactly half of the teachers tried to include issues of social justice, poverty, as well as discrimination, and they tried to relate the class happenings to the world outside the class. Once again, more than half of the English teachers tried to create a sense of critical thinking towards social /political issues and most of them felt they have enough knowledge to construct their own theory and they had their own personal conceptualization of teaching. However, less than half of the subjects selected the teaching materials, but they used their own methodology, guidelines, strategies and procedures. Additionally, data analysis of the teachers' questionnaire showed that approximately most of the them had freedom to be creative in teaching approach and they had the authority in teaching and used their personal judgement in making pedagogical decisions. They also paid attention to the specific students' needs in specific context and they employed different methods and materials in different classes. Analysis of other items showed that most of the university teachers participated in teaching workshops/conferences and they shared their classroom experiences with their colleagues. Moreover, many of them read books/ articles related to effective language teaching and they always thought about the development of teaching knowledge. They tried to relate the abstract theories to their own practice in the class and tried to test, interpret, and judge the usefulness of professional theories proposed by experts in the field of language teaching.
This study also examined the attitudes of Iranian students of university towards post method and remodeling methods based English language teaching (ELT). Descriptive statistics analysis was conducted for analyzing the items of the students' questionnaire. Analysis of the table revealed that new English methods are significant for EFL learners. More than half of them believed that methods can be realized in their purest form according to their core principles and in their views, teachers are resourceful enough to produce their own teaching methods. Most of them agreed that teachers are the consumers of knowledge produced by theorists and they declared method is what emerges over time as a result of the interaction among the teacher, the students, the materials and activities. Exactly half of the participants agreed that teachers should follow a certain method, and more than half of them agreed that methods are relevant to their classes and they should be instructed on new methods. In addition, more than half of the EFL students agreed that methods are applicable and method is a tool of instruction for teachers which helps them deliver their lesson better, but less than half of them stated that here is a single and ideal method for learning. Once again, more than half of the participants reported that every English teacher has own methodology and methods are Western concepts which ignore the local needs of learners. Data analysis indicated that most of the EFL learners though that teachers should combine a variety of methods and more than half of them thought that popular methods are applicable for Iranian learners and methods are derived from class practice. Additionally, in most views, teachers should follow the principles and practices of the established methods and teachers should be sensitive toward the societal, political, economic, and educational matters. Finally, most of them agreed that teachers should raise cultural awareness and methods should concentrate on native speakers' values.
Further analysis compared the participants' views (English professors and students of Kerman universities) towards post and remodeling methods. To do this, the study applied independent t-test and no significant difference was found between the mean score of the EFL teachers and learners' views. That is to say, the significance level of the test (P-value = 0.04) was less than 0.05 (α = 0.05), thus, there is no difference between the two groups of EFL teachers and learners' views.
It is worth mentioning that findings of this research support Paudel's (2018) results who stated that teachers have a positive and hopeful experience towards post method pedagogy and want to open quality changes in English language teaching, developing context and culture sensitive pedagogy. Findings are also compatible with Gholami and Mirzaei's (2013) study. They examined EFL teachers’ understanding in the post-method era. The results indicated their positive attitude towards developing post-method pedagogy. In contrast to the previous studies, a study by Zeng (2012) revealed the negative EFL teachers’ conceptions of post-method principles. Findings of his study suggested that teachers are greatly influenced by exam-oriented education and lack the required knowledge to implement post-method in their classrooms. In another study done by Hazratzadeh and Gheitanchian (2011), they came to the conclusion that EFL teachers have not been familiarized with post and remodeling method condition in Iranian educational context. Also, Fahim and Pishghadam (2009) reflected their negative views towards post method pedagogy, as they stated that Iranian teachers are not autonomous to take decisions and, in most cases, they have not even heard about reflective teaching
5. CONCLUSION
The profession of second language teaching has experienced fluctuations in theory and practice. Considering the proponents and opponents, post method and remodeling method can be the reasonable and practical solution to the restrictions of the confining concept of the method. It is also observed that traditional methods bear strict limitations which restricted effective teaching and learning. It can be said the traditional methods are considered dead in the post method era. Thus, a method is only feasible when it is associated with a given context. More importantly, in postmodern era, teachers are expected to be capable of improving their own suitable methods on the basis of their knowledge, experience and classroom context. In remodeling and post method pedagogy, teachers are the core elements of educational context where the knowledge, beliefs and experiences are respected and valued. They are taken as the builders of the content for making teaching and learning contextual and need based (Richards & Rogers, 2001). In Paudel's (2018) view, teachers are designers, producers and users themselves. They can generate the context sensitive theory from their given experiences, knowledge and the study of the context. They assess the situation, seek for the possible alternatives and make appropriate need based and context-based decisions, which can be varying from context to context.
This study was an endeavor to shed light on the present status of post and remodeling method based English language teaching (ELT) in Iran. In fact, the current quantitative study tried to elicit academic EFL teachers' opinions as well as the university EFL learners' views regarding post method and remodeling method. The study also analyzed the possible difference between the participants' views (EFL teachers & learners) and no significant difference was seen comparing their answers. From the aforementioned discussion, we come to conclude that the advent of remodeling and post method pedagogy in the English classes in Iran has created relatively positive attitudes in academic EFL teachers and students. Most of the teachers referred to test and interpret the usefulness of professional theories proposed by experts in the field of language teaching. Also, many EFL students believed that new English methods are significant for them. In their views, method is a result of the interaction among the teacher and students, and that popular methods are applicable and derived from classroom practice. All in all, most of the participants agreed that implementation remodeling and post method pedagogy could improve English language teaching as their overall satisfaction was achieved in the EFL academic context.
On the basis of findings, this paper offers some theoretical and practical implications. The realization of remodeling and post method pedagogy necessitates the existence of a suitable teacher education infrastructure. The result revealed that there is a possibility on the implementation of remodeling and post method in EFL context and language classes, so it would be easier to check the reflections of EFL teachers' and learners' views on the pedagogy. Findings of this research may support the relevance of reflective teaching in the post-method era. Iranian EFL teachers should be aware of the new methods of teaching and adopt themselves to change in teaching contexts and they can also create their own pedagogies. Administrators should encourage and motivate their teachers to take more active participation in curriculum design process concentrating on the local needs of their learning and teaching environment. Additionally, Iranian EFL teachers should plan their lessons and design their activities based on the new methods of teaching. Furthermore, teachers' training in the educational context should be presented in order to improve teaching and learning process. Moreover, administrators should devote time for teachers to hold some sessions and discuss the necessary things for improving their teaching and give advice on planning their actions for more development. Eventually, findings of this work can help instructors and educators in designing effective educational courses to improve EFL teachers' opinions considering remodeling and post method pedagogy and its implications in language teaching and learning processes.
REFERENCES
Fahim, M., & Pishghadam, R. (2009). Postmodernism and English language teaching. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies,1(2), 27-54.
Gholami, J., &Mirzaei, A. (2013). Post-method in EFL teaching in Iran: Barriers, attitudes, and symbols. Research Journal of English Language and Literature,1(2), 50-6
Hazratzadeh, A., & Gheitanchian, M. (2011). EFL Teachers’ attitudes towards post-method pedagogy and their students’ achievement. Paper presented at the 10th METU ELT convention, Ankara.
Hooman, H., Rezvan, R., & Afraz, Sh. (2021). The impact of post method pedagogy on academic achievements, self-efficacy, emotions and self-esteem according to dynamic systems theory. Journal of Language and Translation. 11(3), 193-214. https://doi:10.30957/ijotl-tl.v5i3.633
Huda, M.E. (2013). Post method pedagogy and ELT in Bangladesh. Global Journal of Human Science. 13(1), 7-14
Islam, N. (2020). Implementation of post method pedagogy as an alternative to communicative language teaching at the tertiary level education. Center of Language and Cultural Studies. 5 (3), 135-153
Kumaradivelu, B. (1994). The post method condition: Emerging strategies for second language learning.
Kumaradivelu, B. (2001). Toward a post method pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly. 35, 537-560
Lusianov, J. D. (2020). Post method era and glocalization in language teaching and learning. Atlantis Press. 4TH International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture and Education. 509, 360-366
Maghsudi, N. (2016). Post method Pedagogy: a plausible choice in Iran? Studies in English Language Teaching. 4(2), 282-288
Paul, P. (2022). Post-method pedagogy and remodeling method based English language teaching (ELT) in Bangladesh. Journal of Research and method in education. 12(3), 53-59. https://doi:10.9790/7388-1203015359
Paudel. P. (2018). Teachers' Perception on Post method Pedagogy in EFL Classes of Nepal. Prithvi Academic Journal, 1(1), 46-57. https://doi:10,3126/paj.v1i1.25899
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Communicative language teaching. In approaches and Methods in language teaching. Cambridge Language Teaching Library. 10 (4), 64-69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Roy Campbell, M. (2014). Teaching English as a second language in Kenya and United States: Convergence and Divergence. Global Education Review. 2 (2), 84-97
Sabouri, H., & Mahbubi, M. (2023). An investigation into teachers’ perception of post method pedagogy. Journal of Philosophical Investigation. 16(41), 62-73
Zeng, Z. (2012). Convergence or divergence? Chinese novice EFL teachers’ beliefs about post-method and teaching practices. English Language Teaching, 5 (10), 64 -71. https://doi:10.5539/elt.v5n10p64
