Mark A. Clarke

The Dysfunctions of the Theory/Practice Discourse

The distinction between theory and practice in professional and public discourse is generally dysfunctional for teachers. There are a number of reasons for this. Because the individuals involved in developing theory are seldom full-time language teachers themselves, the theory/practice distinction creates strata of expertise in which teachers are considered less expert than theorists. The theory tends to be imported from other disciplines and is, therefore, only marginally applicable to language teaching. As in education in general, the discourse tends to be authoritarian and prescriptive. It is also general, necessarily limited in applicability to particular classrooms. Finally, the theory/practice discourse underestimates the institutional, political, and interpersonal constraints in which teachers work. This article expands each of these points in developing the argument that the distinction is unhealthy for the profession. Possible responses are explored.

On Bandwagons, Tyranny, and Common Sense.

My task here is rather straightforward: I will sketch a brief history of second language teaching, reminding you of the revolutions which have occurred in recent memory. I will then attempt to distinguish between a methodological trend and a bandwagon. I will argue, furthermore, that bandwagons exercise subtle control over our professional debates and practices, which control, at the risk of sounding melodramatic, I will call tyrannical. I will conclude by examining the possible functions of bandwagons in professional growth.

On the Nature of Technique: What Do We Owe the Gurus?

Professionals constantly work back and forth between the insights of theory and the constraints of practice in an effort to construct a reasonably well-informed framework within which to conduct their day-to-day activities. One interesting aspect of the theory/practice dichotomy is the impact of acknowledged experts on the classroom behaviors of teachers. In this article I describe in detail one technique for teaching writing to ESL students and use this description as the basis for a discussion of the nature of technique. I then trace my teaching behaviors back to a number of individuals who have influenced my attitudes toward and approaches to the teaching of writing. Finally, I attempt to characterize the relationship between a successful classroom technique and the teachings of gurus.

Principles of Collaboration in School‐University Partnerships

* If it is true that all understanding can be rendered as a story, then this story begins with Mary, Jackie, and Barbara, three fourth-grade teachers who have been teachers and touchstones for us since 1990 (Clarke, Davis, Rhodes, & Baker, 1996, 1997; Davis, Clarke, & Rhodes, 1994). These three remarkable teachers consistently achieve success with lowincome, urban minority students under difficult circumstances using dramatically different methods and materials. Mary, who believes that all troubles can be solved by reading and writing, is the epitome of a whole language, process-oriented teacher. Jackie, a bilingual teacher raised in Chicago, uses technology and street smarts in requiring that her students not back down from the realities that assail them. Barbara, calm and confident in her use of choral drill and leveled reading groups, seems to have stepped out of an episode of Leave it to Beaver. Initially, our fascination with them began as a variation on Stevicks riddle:

Whole language: Reform and resistance

Abstract ‘Whole language’ has emerged recently as a major reform effort in language and literacy education. This article addresses the issue of educational reform and the role of the teacher in the reform process, using whole language as a prototypical example. We argue that change cannot be understood independently of persistence, and that whole language teachers must develop a theoretical framework that not only informs their views of teaching/learning languages, but also provides an understanding of systems and systems change. We develop such a framework using insights from cybernetics and we offer suggestions for action.