In the debates over reading, traditionalists advocate a
sequential, skills-based approach to reading instruction. It’s
all about “basic skills.” First there is instruction on “phonemic
awareness” (the conscious awareness that oral words are
composed of individual sounds), then on phonics (matching
letters to sounds), then practice with fluent oral reading (reading
out loud), then work on comprehension skills. Each stage is
supposed to guarantee the next. It’s a virtual assembly line.
Henry Ford would have been proud. Traditionalists argue that
learning to read requires overt instruction. For them, reading is
what we call an “instructed process.”
More progressive educators, on the other hand, stress
meaning-making. They believe that people learn to read best when
they pick up the skills stressed by the traditionalists as part and
parcel of attempting to give meaning to written texts. There have
been many non-traditionalist approaches, though Whole Language
has been the best known of these after the 1950s. Traditionalists
find the whole meaning-making argument romantic nonsense – a
leftover 1960s permissive coddling of children.
Advocates of Whole Language argue that learning to read
is a “natural” process in the same way in which the acquisition
of one’s native language is a natural process. Every human
child, barring those with quite severe disorders, acquires his
or her native language through immersion in talk and activity.
No instruction is needed or helpful. Whole Language advocates
argue that this is how children should acquire literacy as well.
....................
Today’s reading traditionalists, supported by many linguists,
myself included, argue that learning to read, unlike acquiring
one’s first language, cannot be a biological supported process
and, thus, cannot be “natural.” Literacy (written language)
is too new a process historically to have had the evolutionary
time required to have become “wired” into our human genetic
structure. Written language is, at the very best, 6 000 to 10 000
years old – too short a time to have gained biological support.
Furthermore, written language was invented by only a few
cultures and only a few times, unlike oral language, which has
existed for all human cultures for long enough to have become
part of our human biological inheritance. Learning to read is
not a natural process like acquiring a first language or, for that
matter, learning to walk.

There have always been attempts in the field of English
Language Teaching to find solutions to language teaching
problems. The field has been in constant movement and
change. This change is mostly due to the adoption of new
teaching approaches and methods, which emerged in order to
meet the learner’s needs in different periods. In other words,
the solution to problems in ELT throughout the history was
seen in the new methods which resulted in the search for the
best method that is generalizable and applicable across various
contexts. Effective English teaching is thought to be about
using a method correctly by applying its prescribed principles
and techniques. Nowadays, while teachers who think that they
can perfectly practice the Communicative Language Teaching
Method are considered to be successful teachers, those who
are more on the Grammar Translation Method are considered
as old‐fashioned and not successful at all. Moreover, pre‐
service teachers who are trained to base their teaching on
these methods, especially the communicative ones face an
overwhelming experience when they start teaching in the
actual classroom. They come to realize that what has been
theorized does not usually reflect the reality. Therefore, one
needs to question how successful the use of the methods and
the search for the best method has been.
Classroom‐oriented studies carried out in the last two
decades show that teachers could not be successful in putting
the methods into practice in real classroom situations though
this does not mean that they could not be successful in
achieving learning outcomes. More specifically, the research
results indicate that teachers who claim to follow a particular
method do not practice its principles and procedures, those
who claim to follow different methods often follow the same
classroom procedures and vice versa. Lastly, teachers are
found to be developing and following their own activities that
are not related to any method. This kind of situation brings us
to the post‐method era requiring us to reconsider the
relationship between theorizers and practitioners of methods”
[…]
In brief, there is not a need for an invention of another
method but a need for post‐method pedagogy which is not a
method. I believe post‐method pedagogy does not mean the
end of methods but rather it involves an understanding of the
limitations of the concept of method and a desire to go
beyond those limitations. Therefore, post‐method pedagogy
brings new insights into teacher growth by discussing the place
of the conventional teaching methods and the post‐method
pedagogy.

by Marie Delaney 
Assessment is a crucial part of learning. It can be
difficult to know how to identify learners with special
educational needs (SENs) in the classroom and how to
include learners with SENs in the assessment process.
There are two main challenges with assessment for
learners with SENs: 
Challenge 1 
How do we know if a learner has a SEN? 
It is not our job as teachers to diagnose special needs
and to give labels to learners. It is our job to get to know
our learners and to pay attention to any factors which
support or impede their learning. As a teacher, you may be
the first person to notice that a learner is having a difficulty
with learning in the group situation. A common definition
of a SEN is that the learner is having significantly greater
difficulties in learning than the majority of children of the
same age, or has a difficulty which prevents them from
making use of general educational facilities provided for
children of the same age. 
How do we recognize these difficulties as teachers? 
The easiest way is to do what teachers do best–pay
attention to the learner and their learning. In particular,
look beyond any bad behavior to recognize any potential
signs of learning difficulties. Indicators that a learner might
be having learning difficulties are:
 • The learner can’t follow or understand instructions,
even when the other learners know what to do.
• The learner finds it difficult to focus on their work for
longer periods of time.
• The learner finds it difficult to sit still and wait for
their turn.
• There is a huge difference in the learner’s verbal
and written abilities.
• The learner finds it difficult to start tasks or never
seems to finish them.
• The learner avoids doing the task, often through
poor behavior such as arguing with the teacher.
• The learner does not speak in groups.
• The learner often seems to be disengaged or
daydreaming.
• The learner has problems socializing with their
peers.
Of course, all learners may show these behaviors
sometimes. It is important to notice any recurring patterns
and then to do some further investigation.
When enough information has been collected, it might
then be useful to refer to an educational psychologist for
more help and assessment. It is important that this is done
in partnership with the parent. Be careful when discussing
this sensitive issue with the parent. You can, however,
explain the problems you see the child having in class and
ask for the parents’ support and discuss whether this is
happening at home as well. 
Challenge 2 
How can we assess the learning of children with SENs? 
The other challenge for teachers is the evaluation
and assessment of the progress of learners with SENs.
This can be more difficult. Children with SENs can find
normal methods of testing difficult and de-motivating.
They might have problems writing their answers in the
required time, with sitting still for long periods of time in
an exam and some might find it difficult to understand
the test requirements. Learners with SEN can also lose
confidence if they continually do worse than their peers in
tests and assessments. 
What can the teacher do during the year? 
Even if end-of-year testing is difficult, you can work
with the learner during the year on assessing their own
progress and showing what they can do in different ways.
Assessment for Learning (AfL) is an approach which
involves the learners in their own assessments and allows
them to set their own goals. It can be very helpful for
learners with SEN to measure their progress against their
own targets rather than those of others. Above all, aim to
build learner confidence outside exam times.
 Some strategies to build learner confidence 
In class give opportunities to show understanding in
different ways. For example, learners can make up a role
play, a podcast, a poster, a presentation, or a 3D model.
They can use mini-whiteboards to show their answers
rather than speaking out.
• Allow learners to work in groups on projects where
they have different roles which utilize their strengths.
• Encourage them to measure what they know now,
compared to what they knew earlier in the year.
• Work continuously with learner on acknowledging
their feelings and difficulties but also their strengths:
‘I know it can be de-motivating when you take tests,
but you have great perseverance and never give
up–that’s a great skill’.
• Praise and reward other skills. For example, the
most helpful student, the student who is most
responsible, the most creative thinker.
• Remind them at all times that we are only assessing
a certain type of work, not the whole person.
And a final thought: Remember the learner is more
than their school results.

Questões de Elementos gramaticais