Pedagogical Implications

國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

107

practices of teaching large multilevel English classes were also found to be mediated by her cognitions about students and student learning. Her understandings of students as multidimensional agents and of students’ orientation toward learning as

investments over which each student had control led her to acknowledge, respect and encourage the development of learner agency. Such cognitions about students and student learning were found to be fairly different from those described in existing studies on teaching English to large multilevel classes and also led to a more balanced picture of teaching and learning in large multilevel English classes.

The above findings lead to some pedagogical implications that the present study intends to advance for four parties involved in the relevant contexts, including

teachers and teacher educators of TESOL, stakeholders of teaching contexts other than teachers, and researchers of TESOL. The pedagogical implications are elaborated below.

6.2 Pedagogical Implications

In an attempt to provide a more holistic and in-depth understanding of teacher cognitions and practices of teaching in large multilevel English classrooms and to facilitate teaching in such contexts, the present study yields implications for four parties working in the relevant contexts, which include teachers, teacher educators, stakeholders of teaching contexts other than teachers, and researchers.

Employing Borg’s (2006) framework of elements and processes in language teacher cognition as the theoretical lens to view a teacher’s cognitions and practices of teaching large multilevel English classes, the present study finds that three

modifications might need to be made to the framework of Borg. First, in his framework, Borg delineated the impacts that language teachers’ experiences of schooling, professional coursework and prior classroom practices could have on their

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

108

cognitions. However, he failed to recognize the experiences that language teachers develop outside the classroom, such as additional educational experiences and experiences of overseas educational visits, could also have considerable impacts on teachers’ cognitions. This study suggests that the framework should be extended to include the experiences that teachers acquire outside the walls of classrooms and recognize the impacts that these experiences can have on teachers’ cognitions. Second, although the framework indicated that reflection might play a mediating role in the impact of teachers’ prior teaching experiences on their cognitions, it did not give due recognition and value to reflection as it ought to be given. With support from the present and many other related studies (Bailey et al., 1996; Ellis, 2004; Farrell, 2007b;

Wallace, 1991), this study argues that reflective practice plays a more essential role in mediating the impact of teachers’ overall professional experiences on their cognitions and practices. Third, despite acknowledging the impact that contextual factors could have on teachers’ cognitions and classroom practices, Borg’s framework failed to point out that the extent to which teachers can carry out practices that conform to their cognitions is the interactive result of teaching contexts’ willingness to allow spaces for teachers to put their cognitions into practices and teachers’ internal capacity to find room to externalize their cognitions, which also has to do with the amount of time they had spent in the sites. This study suggests the impact of contextual factors on teachers’ cognitions and practices may be more appropriately understood as the interactive result of teachers’ capacity to find room for and the teaching contexts’

volition to allow spaces for teacher autonomy (Benson, 2010).

In addition to the implications advanced for the researchers, to assist teachers in gaining a deeper and more holistic understanding of their cognitions and practices in large multilevel English classes and hopefully in facilitating teachers’ teaching in the contexts, this study also proposes two suggestions for teachers and teacher educators.

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

109

First, teachers may need to engage themselves in constant reflective practice so as to capitalize on their personally unique experiences and derive “nutrients” out of the experiences for their cognitions and practices of teaching large multilevel English classes (Bailey et al., 1996; Ellis, 2004; Farrell, 2007b; Wallace, 1991). Such

reflection could also assist teachers in gaining a more in-depth understanding of their teaching in that they would be more consciously aware of the relationships among their cognitions, practices and overall professional experiences. However, as not every teacher could engage themselves in reflective practice without difficulties, it is hence suggested that teacher educators can cultivate teachers’ abilities and skills in

reflectivity by teaching about reflection (Gunn, 2010; Liou, 2001), providing a supportive environment for reflection (Farrell, 1999; Liou, 2001; Orland-Barak &

Yinon, 2007; Wyatt, 2010) and offering an expert other (Farrell, 1999, 2007a;

Golombek and Johnson, 2004). Second, despite the recognition that certain contextual factors may hinder teachers from implementing classroom practices that reflect their cognitions, teachers need to be cautioned against internalizing those constraints to the extent that they believe that only certain practices are possible within the constraints (Richards & Pennington, 1998). Besides, to gain a wider space for professional freedom within the contextual constraints, teachers may also need to improve their cognitions and practices, and when necessary, develop coping strategies to earn such freedom. To prepare teachers for teaching in the face of contextual constraints, teacher educators are suggested to engage teachers, particular novice teachers, in anticipatory reflection to make them ready for the possible pressure from constrictive contextual factors and to develop means to find and widen spaces for teacher autonomy within those constraints.

Lastly, to create friendly, supportive contexts for teachers to (re)develop their cognitions and practices, other stakeholders of the contexts, including principles,

‧ 國

立 政 治 大 學

‧

N a tio na

l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y

110

students’ parents, teacher colleagues and policy makers are suggested to give more freedom and support to teachers, as some degree of freedom and support is the precondition for teachers to enhance their capability to develop and implement

practices congruent to their cognitions within contextual constraints (Benson, 2010).