Bahram Behin
Abstract
In this editorial, the segregationalist view of academic disciplines is criticized and the transdisciplinary nature of studies in language education is highlighted. No doubt knowledge of teaching methods, such as those invented according to the expertise in the 70s and 80s, for instance, can be regarded ...
Read More
In this editorial, the segregationalist view of academic disciplines is criticized and the transdisciplinary nature of studies in language education is highlighted. No doubt knowledge of teaching methods, such as those invented according to the expertise in the 70s and 80s, for instance, can be regarded as tools in a teacher’s workshop, but they seem rather outdated in the frenzy of rapid changes the world is experiencing. Today’s need in knowledge, from a rather Arnoldian perspective, is not mechanical knowledge; what is needed is getting closer to people and study them within the context of culture and context of situation, elements which are not regarded as stable anymore and without which any study would be a decontextualized event meaningless to the proponents of cultural turns. An interesting point in this topic is that in Arnold’s view of culture our knowledge of culture should result in knowledge of ourselves and of the world. In the same vein, Kumaravadivelu should take the first step in the formulation of his model for language teacher education towards determining a sense of Self, the concept of “teacher identity” in his model. And if for Arnold literature is the best that has been thought and said in the world, the concept “disciplinarity” in English language education should change and give way to “interdisciplinarity”, “transdisciplinartiy”, or any term or concept that would bring in the complexities of the world to the field.
