Alisa wrote here about a week ago the following insights. It should be posted here as required reading once a week for the next ten years:
No-one wants to be forced to change to something new and many in that situation push back…. though I have seen those who are led to the well actually successfully drink from it – depends on the person and the support/ pressure from above.
As for ‘accepting the SLA research and rationale,’ I think it makes us look ridiculous as a profession to flout the research as though we know better than Krashen and the gang; as if we’ve designed and conducted the peer reviewed PhD research and reviewed others’ work 8+ hours a day for decades….
I think much of the variety and ‘eclecticism’ in teacher practice comes from differing concepts about the purpose of our classes. Some still vehemently hold onto the importance of the 5C’s – maybe because they’ve done a ton of work and have developed lots of curric and programming and see the shift as a rejection of their investment…they don’t wanna feel like frauds….
Others believe it’s not rigorous unless the CALP-content-based instruction is immediate – from absolute novice on up the ladder….
I keep saying this again and again (cuz of my keen eye for the obvious – which I’ve mentioned previously) but any dep’t. or institution willing to look at its WL offering has to start by vetting the purpose of the classes – and building consensus around it. Are they geared toward cultural enrichment – so we can experience ‘peoples, perspectives and products?’ Are they in order to place out of the college language requirement? Are they to inform religious/intellectual studies – which have more academic capital in that setting? Are they to impart communication skills?
You’d be surprised to learn how different members of the same dep’t. see the role of their instruction!…