ABAX is an independent and award-winning publisher of ELT materials with offices in Tokyo, Japan and in San Francisco, California. ABAX texts are in use in universities, colleges, high schools and private language schools around the world.
Read more


BREAKING NEWS: Fiction in Action: Whodunit  has won the 2011 ELTons Cambridge ESOL International Award for Innovation!

Last November, Whodunit was awarded The Duke of Edinburgh's English-Speaking Union English Language Award 2010 in an awards ceremony held at Buckingham Palace. Congratulations Adam! Congratulations Marcos!

An eText through Creative Commons!

Fiction in Action: Whodunit. The world's first ELT eText available through Creative Commons. Click on the cover to find out more.



Sunday meanderings and the necessary reductionism of descriptive systems...

Maybe it's because of my earlier career (as short as it was) as a biologist, or perhaps it's due to something else. I don't know… the point (well, starting point at least) is, I like and tend to migrate to ecological descriptions of systems—ecological descriptions of history, the city as an ecological system… And of course language learning too can be seen as an ecology of sorts. That is, learning happens within an ecology formed of interactions between individuals and other individuals, their physical and mental states and their environments.

In his paper "Learning Ecologies of Contagion" first published in Languaging (2006) and recently republished as part of his collection, Teaching in Pursuit of Wow! (ABAX, 2012 but not in our online catalogue yet) Tim Murphey refers to learning ecologies. Here his focus is on the emotional interactive part of the ecology. But I'd like to wander off in another direction. What I want to meander towards is the richness of an ecology. Because that's what an ecology is, rich. Rich beyond rich with interaction. Indescribably rich. Indescribably… Which means of course that we do try to describe ecologies. In all sorts of fields. The ecologies of biosystems, Bateson's ecologies of understanding, economics, which tries to describe the ecology of human exchange. But any such descriptions are necessarily reductionist and hugely so. We try to describe a rich sea of interaction in terms of patterns we can discern. And this reductionism has been a huge intellectual boon. In terms of developing a descriptive science, it has worked extremely well—providing insight after insight into our understanding of interaction-rich systems. But they are descriptions to help us to understand a process, not descriptions to apply to the making or directing of a process. And herein lies the folly. In looking at the descriptive models developed we always need the humility of accepting that our descriptions are not complete. When we try to use our reductionist understanding to build a system, we inevitably fail. This in essence was the Austrian economist, Hayek's critique of Soviet-style command economies. And on this point at least he was right.

Top-down attempts to create or recreate biological ecosystems have been equally unsuccessful. The best we can do is tilt a system in a certain direction and stand back and let the interaction take place.

So too with learning ecologies…

Any learning system is rich with interactions. We can try to reduce and describe these. We can look at social interactions in the learning process, we can look at interactive elements in language development, we can look at the neuroscience of learning, and develop descriptions based on all these approaches. What we cannot do is create a successful approach predicated entirely on our inevitably partial understanding of any of these. We can be informed by our descriptive understandings but ultimately what works, works. And it may work because of elements our models don't yet include. A little humility is never a bad thing.


Photo courtesy of Evgeni Dinev at freedigitalphotos.net

Reader Comments (1)

Interesting post - it dovetails with a lot that we have been working on recently. I think one of the reasons the applied linguistics field and SLA research doesn't better inform classroom teaching is just what you point out: the immense complexity of the classroom is difficult to reduce to one theory. With every student different, every teacher different, and every situation different, the best approach is an eclectic methodology, and not a reductionist one. You could probably make a strong correlation between eclecticism in the classroom and richness of a learning environment.

The limitations of top-down approaches that you mention are also critical. The biggest evolutionary jump in technology in the last 10 years has been from a top-down, closed web to a bottom-up, open web ("web 2.0"), where the value of our use of the web comes from the users themselves (us). Flickr, Facebook, Twitter, Ning or any social network - the value comes from what we put into these platforms, not what the owners put into it.

This is especially critical when it comes to web platforms for language learning, where open platforms are immensely more valuable than the closed platforms most publishers use; closed publisher platforms just bolt their 500-year-old top-down publishing paradigm onto an LMS. (Full disclosure: I work with an open platform ;-). Anyway, open platforms are where learning ecologies flourish.

July 29, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterCleve

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>