Leia o texto a seguir para responder à questão:
Kumaravadivelu’s work on language teaching aims to illustrate the emergence of a postmethod condition in the literature on teaching second/foreign languages, and has what I realize to be a very personalized vision of language teaching.
The different chapters discuss how methods evolved, and then critically assess those methods. A theme emerges that methods and predetermined materials and strategies lack the flexibility to be applied to the many varied contexts of English Language Teaching. Postmethod pedagogies can be differentiated from methods by an emphasis on developing teachers’ skills and flexibility to meet students’ needs. Kumaravadivelu’s critique of methods is the most comprehensive and detailed I have read.
The book is divided into three major sections. The first section describes language as system, discourse and ideology. The second section provides a brief history, description, and assessment of language teaching methods and categorizes them as language-centered, learner-centered, and learningcentered. The third section, Postmethod Perspectives, discusses the parameters of postmethod pedagogy and analyses its challenges and barriers. I found this final section the most compelling reading. The postmethod condition commends strategies to “advance a context-sensitive, locationspecific pedagogy that is based on a true understanding of local linguistic, socio-cultural, and political particularities” (p.224). An approach to language teaching that embraces such situational criteria is relevant to any teacher’s, researcher’s or attentive student’s awareness of just what is being taught and how.
(https://tesl-ej.org. Adaptado)
