Here is my abstract: The theme of this conference is “principled pragmatism” which happens to be one of three attributes Kumaravadivelu highlights as part of the post-method condition. Are we really in a post-method condition here in South Korea? The post-method world is one where teachers are equipped with the skills, attitude, and autonomy to create their own relevant theories of practice. Is this happening? How are teachers developing these skills? Are teachers given the autonomy to make their own pedagogical choices? Instead, are teachers in Korea looking for that best method that will make their teaching better? Are they looking for that one book, or that one assessment tool that will make things better? Are they searching for that one activity that will go over well in Monday’s class? Or, are they creating their own theory of practice that based on theory, experience and what Prabhu would call their own “sense of plausibility.” In this interactive presentation and discussion we will discuss the above questions and think about the South Korean context as related to the post-method era. No activities will be shared. It is hoped teachers will walk away with a clearer sense of their role as EFL educators in South Korea.
I was pretty shocked when this was accepted. Maybe someone found the light referencing scenarios sexy. So, now I have to do it! I am hoping to use nice examples of teachers not acting in post-method ways, man. I am also hoping to get a discussion going about the current situation as related to the post-method era in addition to hoping not to make too much of a fool of myself.
Any comments and questions and suggested readings are very welcome.
Final note: My favorite part of the abstract (assuming I am allowed to have a favorite part of my own abstract) is the line, “No activities will be shared.” I wonder if anyone searching for an activity to use on Monday morning will