Silence in English Language Pedagogy: From Research to Practice
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Often book reviews in the field of English language teaching pedagogy open by establishing the importance of a particular arena (e.g., vocabulary, motivation), imply that the book fills a gap in the current discourse, and then follow by detailing how the work may be beneficial in helping educators overcome obstacles that impede student goals.However, when reviewing Dat Bao's Silence in English Language Pedagogy: From Research to Practice, it is perhaps better to first highlight Bao's assertion that silence is an extremely flexible, dynamic, context-dependent construct and not necessarily an impediment toward language learner development.Indeed, Bao opens the book by challenging the reader to consider how silence is framed in the greater research consciousness by showcasing the disproportionate number of recent studies (2019-23) between "verbal participation in education" (13,136) and "silence in education" (281).To segue into this statistic, Bao shares a reaction he received at a conference when he suggested starting a research journal devoted to silent studies in education: "Why devote a whole journal to a negative theme?" (p. 1).Using these stats and anecdote as a launching point to his discussions on the challenges of defining silence, in Chapter 1 Bao cleverly positions silence in English language pedagogy as a topic worthy of exploring with an open mind.In Chapter 2, Bao presents his systematic review findings regarding the distribution of understandings of silence in 32 second-language acquisition (SLA) books published from 2001-22 and how there is substantial progress to be made in understanding the role of silence in SLA.Readers may be particularly interested in the degree to which Bao envisions the potential for growth in the field.This optimism is informed by the seemingly narrow scope and lack of creativity thus far regarding silence dimensionality evident in the systematic review.Chapter 3 continues with an in-depth analysis of five research trends stemming from the 1970s.Here Bao explicitly argues that he "has not simply reviewed the literature on silence but has critically systematised the essence of silence research and weighed its impact on language education" (p.52).In Chapter 4, Bao highlights how silence has been ignored in the language-learning pedagogical discourse and at times treated by stakeholders as something that should be eradicated from the classroom.This chapter stands out to me as a reviewer because Bao presents silence as an essential step in the languagelearning process.Here he outlines five principles of productive silence, six learner strategies in productive silence, a proposed model for classroom activities, and recommendations for teacher development.Due to the depth of perspective and practical advice offered, this chapter is a must-read for both language teachers and policy makers who struggle to accommodate silence in the classroom.In his concluding insights Bao writes the following: "If we stop seeing silence as an obstacle to be overcome, we might start seeing it as a resource to be utilised" (p.72).While silence has been mainly defended to this point, in Chapter 5, Bao acquiesces that indeed there are instances where silence can be problematic in the classroom.Drawn from scholarly research, eight scenarios are provided where silence fails to function productively.Moreover, Bao offers recommendations on how to deal with each scenario.When reviewing the eight scenarios it is clear that Bao remains on the side of silence, which is commendable.For example, scenario seven (silence as resistance to poor pedagogy) highlights how teachers can directly exacerbate silence.While it is true that students may remain silent in the face of poor pedagogy, Bao could have listed specific scenarios where language students purposely use silence as resistance (see L. Smith & King, 2018).Bao does, however, close the chapter by grouping a wide range of silent incidences as "demotivational dilemmas" (p.85).While advice is given (e.g., peer support), as a classroom teacher who faces learner silence on a consistent basis in Japan, I would have enjoyed a longer discussion on this topic.Interestingly, in Chapter 6, Bao seems to have predicted the preceding critique by acknowledging that many language teachers are interested in a "solution" to learner silence.Bao tactfully avoids this perceived
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,038 | 0,124 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,029 |
| Communication savante | 0,014 | 0,014 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,011 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».