Bax and Hu

Bax-
Just as a recap on what Bax sees many teachers doing in the field:
1 Assume and insist that CLT is the whole and complete solution to language learning;
2 Assume that no other method could be any good;
3 Ignore people’s own views of who they are and what they want;
4 Neglect and ignore all aspects of the local context as being irrelevant.

I feel this is a bit harsh as far as CLT because it creates another generalization about teachers of CLT and the way they view other methods. This issue does have some truth to it for some teachers, as shown in the examples but he is generalizing just the way CLT might in saying that a large group of teachers do this with CLT.

“The Communicative Approach is the way to do it, no matter where you are, no matter what the context.”  (281) – this quote is taken from what he feels the CLT message is but I'm not sure I agree, though I have a strong opinion on the contextual importance of teaching, which I feel many teachers are aware of. I don't really agree with him because he is proposing a new method or approach that could be better implicated when teachers are learning to be teachers (have them learn all methods and then explain to them that it is important to consider the context they are teaching in before choosing any one method.)

*Bax seems to be entirely biased against CLT in a way that makes it look like the villain. This may be recent but in our classes we have given consideration to all methods, showing that each has there merit in the classroom in certain ways and this includes CLT. The entire article feels more like a very strong opinion and also seems overly favorable towards the context approach which is exactly what he argues against concerning CLT.

*This may have a valuable point concerning short training courses when there is not time to teach all methods and discuss them. In these cases CLT may be over emphasized no matter what the context thus leaving teachers fairly unable to teach to context without learning through trial and error.

*Then goes on to claim that he is not saying that context approach is entirely new and is backtracking to say that many good teachers and writers already use it. These statements seem fairly hypocritical of previous statements that many teachers are CLT based only. Seems like a minority to me as far as teachers who are so CLT based they cannot fathom using anything else.

*Goes on to note that context is still secondary and that he holds to the opinion that it needs to become the first thought before any methodology is chosen – an opinion which I agree with to an extent. I still feel that he fairly overzealous about this.

Thus his argument:  (285)
a we are in the middle of a shift towards an emphasis on context in language teaching;
b this is an important step in the move to more effective teaching;
c this will only be fully effective if the CLT paradigm is broken down; and therefore
d the profession should adopt a Context Approach, or equivalent, for the sake of teachers, and ultimately of learners throughout the world.

*Sketching Out a Context Approach – why does it need to be an approach? I feel this could be taught in ‘tesol’ classrooms for Teachers as a general rule of thumb concerning all teachings and work just as well as creating an entirely new method just to cope with a few ignorant or CLT based fanatics. It has some merit but I feel that it takes the issues of CLT too far and uplifts contextual approach as the god send answer.

Hu-
*Asks for an understanding of sociocultural differences and how this affects learning in the classroom (China specifically). Concerning CLT and why it doesn’t work with the classroom culture in China.

*Previous method was a cross of Grammar-Translation and Audiolingualism – yet did not create communicative competence for millions of Chinese learners of English.

“By the term 'Chinese culture of learning' is meant a whole set of expectations, attitudes, beliefs, values, perceptions, preferences, experiences, and behaviors that are characteristic of Chinese society with regard to teaching and learning.” (96)

*Similar to Bax article in saying that CLT is not for everyone except Hu uses a specific culture and examples as to why it doesn’t work based on Chinese culture and values.

I see Hu's article almost like an extension of Bax's article, giving a specific example as to why CLT doesn't work in all contexts, which I (overall) agree with. What I struggle with is creating an entirely 'new approach' (or not so new) just to show teachers that they should consider context when teaching with any given method. I feel that this kind of thing should be basic knowledge and should be taught in teacher classrooms as a rule of thumb making the need for an approach unnecessary since I consider this common knowledge for teachers (at least it should be)