Pedagogy of Practicality and Engagement

Methods  is a frequently used word in the field of education.  There are countless methods for classroom instruction, none of which is the "end all, be all".  Methods are good to have, however, there is more to teaching than this concept.  In B. Kumaravadivelu's article "Toward a Postmethod Pedagogy", he visualizes a "three-dimensional system consisting of the parameters of particularity, practicality, and possibility" and argues that a postmethod pedagogy must (a) facilitate the advancement of a context-sensitive language education based on a true understanding of local linguistic, sociocultural, and political particularities; (b) enable teachers to form their own theory of practice; and (c) to aid participants' quests for identity formation and social transformation by shaking their sociopolitical consciousnesses.  I definitely agree with the three parameters, especially the second: practicality.  Throughout my education here at ISU, I have heard a lot about what I should and should not do in the classroom reguarding teaching methods, strategies, classroom mangagement, providing feedback, etc.  That is all well and good, but I know that I will only truly understand what works best when I am thrown into a classroom to fend for myself.  The pedagogy of practicality, in Kuma's view, "seeks to overcome some of the de￿ciencies inherent in the theory-versus-practice, theorists’-theory versus-teachers’-theory dichotomies by encouraging and enabling teachers themselves to theorize from their practice and practice what they theorize." A theory of practice must actually be practiced by individual teachers so they can work out the kinks and thus facilitate in the education of their students in the best possible way. 

When I think of the classroom and actually putting this pedagogy of practicality into action, I think of diversity.  Not just based on race, gender, socioeconomic status, etc, but also students with learning disabilities (LD).  In another class that I am currently taking, we are discussing incusive classrooms that have both "normal" students and students with LD.  How do we teach so that every student understands and learns?  How do we manage a class with such great diversity?  Alastair Pennycook touches briefy on this subject with his theory of pedagogy of engagement: "an approach to TESOL that sees such issues as gender, race, class, sexuality, and postcolonialism as so fundamental to identity and language that they need to form the basis of curricular organization and pedagogy."  I think that what Pennycook is talking about here is simply making students more aware of different types diversity and putting then in the light of "everyone is different, so we are all the same."  In the case of having studens with LD in the classroom, it is imporant to not focus on their "disablilities", but rather their abilities and what they are good at.  This is important not only for the learners with LDs to feel included and accepted, but also for the "normal" kids so that they can see first hand how to treat people of all kinds-with respect and love. 

What I really liked about this pedagogy of engagement is how it encourages students to invest in particular discourses not only intellectually or rationally, but because the "conform to the shape of our desires."  We should desire to invest our time and our hearts into better understanding and engaging diverse people because we want to, not because we have to or should.