See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/236136102

Reconsidering French Pedagogy: The Crucial Role of the Teacher and Teaching

Article  in  French Review, The · May 2001

DOI: 10.2307/399831

CITATIONS READS

13 2,114

2 authors:

Sally Magnan François Victor Tochon

University of Wisconsin–Madison University of Wisconsin–Madison
62 PUBLICATIONS   981 CITATIONS    118 PUBLICATIONS   851 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Deep Approach to Teaching and Learning Turkish View project

World Language Education and International Studies View project

All content following this page was uploaded by François Victor Tochon on 05 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Reconsidering French Pedagogy: The Crucial Role of the Teacher and Teaching
Author(s): Sally Sieloff Magnan and François V. Tochon
Source: The French Review, Vol. 74, No. 6, Special Issue on Pedagogy (May, 2001), pp. 1092-
1112
Published by: American Association of Teachers of French
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/399831
Accessed: 26/04/2010 14:50

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=french.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Association of Teachers of French is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The French Review.

http://www.jstor.org
THE FRENCHREVIEW,Vol. 74, No. 6, May 2001 Printed in U.S.A.

Reconsidering French Pedagogy:

The Crucial Role
of the Teacherand Teaching

by Sally SieloffMagnanand
FrangoisV Tochon

WHATDOESITMEANto teach French at the turn of the millennium? We

know that French, like all languages, is not limited to linguistic features;
communication is embedded in culturally specific situations. We must
take into account how French is shaped by, and reflects, many Franco-
phone cultures. We realize that our task as French teachers is multidisci-
plinary because French cannot be separated from the contexts through
which thinking in French occurs. We know too that the time we have to
share the rich world of French language, culture, and contents with our
students is limited, and that our students come to us with varying moti-
vations and abilities, and, sometimes, under difficult instructional cir-
cumstances. In this article, we attempt to provide a snapshot of French
teaching in the United States as we enter the new century and suggest
how we might turn to the European discipline of Didactics, and specifi-
cally to its Francophone versions, to stimulate our thinking in the future.
We build our picture primarily from leading American sources in order
to demonstrate that, in the United States, our view of learning and teach-
ing French is heavily learner focused through approaches of Commu-
nicative Language Teaching (CLT). Despite our advocacy of the interna-
tional and interdisciplinary nature of French studies, we put little focus
on the critical role of the teacher in conveying these perspectives. To pre-
pare this piece, we surveyed the ERIC database (.org), with the crossed
key words French and pedagogy and processed those contents thematical-
ly using the qualitative analysis software Nvivo (Richards). We also re-
viewed pedagogically based articles appearing in the past two years in
the FrenchReview, Foreign LanguageAnnals, and the Modern LanguageJour-
nal, three leading American journals whose mission statements include
foreign or second language learning and teaching. In addition, we draw
upon our own knowledge of professional history.
This article begins by asking the age-old question "Why study French?".
This question remains important because teacher and student responses
1092
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1093

to it have shaped our pedagogical goals. Next, we consider briefly oppos-

ing views about how foreign languages (FLs) are learned and how these
beliefs have given rise to our current acceptance of CLT. We then pass
briefly to a summary of the data on which we have based our beliefs and
stop to focus on a new line of research called Teacher Thinking. Finally,
we look toward Didactics, a Francophone field little known in the
English-speaking world, which, we propose, offers a promising path for
reconsidering how we conceive our role as French teachers.

Why Study French?

Teachers of French have pondered this question since the century

began. Reviewing 84 years of the Modern Language Journal, Lantolf and
Sunderman discovered four basic arguments for FL study, each of which
has been voiced for French over the years: (a) humanistic benefits; (b) pa-
triotic, practical, and utilitarian reasons; (c) intellectual development; and
(d) pleasure. They see each argument as a response to world events, pri-
marily wars and social and economic pressures. The rationales came first
from scholars in the humanities, later from linguistics, and then from re-
searchers in Second Language Acquisition (SLA). These reasons to French
study continue to motivate students and teachers today.
Humanistic benefits, Lantolf and Sunderman found, constitute the
"most robust set of justifications" (8). In the early 1920s, when French led
American enrollments for the last time (Lambert), Purin suggested that
reading literature in the original language would promote understanding
other cultures. In line with this goal, a 1934 study showed that students
wanted primarily to learn reading and translation: 48% and 44% respec-
tively (Fornwalk and Rogers). In the 1940s the American public, discour-
aged by how long it took students to become proficient readers in another
language, concluded that learning FL was inefficient and embraced litera-
ture in translation. French, with its rich literary and cultural traditions,
lost ground to the more practical appeal of Spanish. Speaking became the
goal of choice during post-World War II audiolingual times. Oral expres-
sion continued to be privileged under proficiency efforts in the 1980s as
French pedagogy sought to develop quasi-native competence (cf. ACTFL,
ProficiencyGuidelines).In 1992, students at two state universities and one
college enrolled in beginning literature courses indicated their positive at-
titudes toward studying literature (Davis, Kline, Gorell, and Hsieh). In
1996, 82% of students from second-year French at the University of Ore-
gon reported studying French to learn about French art, history, and liter-
ature and 94% for cultural enrichment (Siskin, Knowles, and Davis). At
Michigan State University, 80% of freshmen surveyed mentioned the ben-
efits of global and domestic cultural diversity as primary reasons for FL
study (Roberts). In 1993, 1995, and 1999 Magnan surveyed first- through
fourth-semester French students at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
1094 FRENCH REVIEW

Of the humanistic reasons for French study included in the survey,

80%-83% of the students (over the three years) claimed "interest in
French life and culture"; 60%-66%, having "heard about French writers,
painters, and musicians"; 51%-55%, "interest in French in North Ameri-
ca"; and 40%-46%, "interest in French-speaking Africa." In 1999 Knox ac-
knowledged that French studies have for a long time emphasized the
need to develop cultural competence. Obviously, as this rapid journey
through time reveals, French has long been responsive to the humanistic
argument.
French study is also sensitive to the utilitarian argument. We remind
students about the proximity of Quebec; about French presence in the
sciences, social sciences, and humanities; and about Francophone
Africa's potentially important role in global trade (Ossipov). Practical
motivation is clearly important. Indeed, 82% of University of Oregon stu-
dents took French in 1996 because they believed it would help them find
a job and 59% because they considered French useful in business (Siskin,
Knowles, and Davis). Less than half of Magnan's students in 1993, 1995,
and 1999 rated career objectives a reason why they were studying French
(a steadily declining 48%-43% over the three years); in Ossipov's 2000 re-
port, 50% of students believed that knowing French would give them an
employment advantage. Antes's 1999 study put a wider scope on useful-
ness: of French students from four regions in the United States, 47% said
they expected to use French for travel, 15% for business, and 15% for per-
sonal endeavors. Although these data suggest considerable interest in
studying French for utilitarian goals, it would appear that humanistic
benefits of French study seem to draw today's students to courses more
than career goals.
The third rationale for FL study, intellectual and linguistic develop-
ment, has been especially important for French studies. French was tradi-
tionally associated with sharpening mental agility because of its
"crispness of phrase" and because its "logical consciousness" increases
capacity for abstract thought" (Olmsted 4). Recalling the humanistic ben-
efit, Olmsted in 1921 suggested that French also offered the model of
France's "hate of hypocrisy, love of intemperance in all things" (4). More
recently, Cooper correlated SAT scores with FL study to suggest that FL
study improves native language ability, as well as general reasoning. In
1996, 84% of students in Siskin, Knowles, and Davis's study explained
their decision to study French by agreeing with the statement "French is
a precise language."
The fourth rationale appeared as early as 1925: pleasure from learning
language and culture and from reading literature (Fitz-Gerald). It was
echoed in 1934 by 37% of Lafayette College students who cited personal
enjoyment as their reason for FL study. In 1996 Siskin, Knowles, and
Davis's quantitative study showed that students taking French found the
language "beautiful" (98%) and that they were studying French because
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1095

they "enjoyed" it (82%). The greatest number of Magnan's students

claimed to study French because they "like the sound of the language":
82%-85% over the years 1993, 1995, and 1999. Related to the pleasure fac-
tor, as well as to the humanitarian and intellectual factors, is the notion of
prestige. In 1996, 49% of Siskin, Knowles, and Davis's students wanted to
learn French for its prestige. In 2000, 64% of Ossipov's students from Ari-
zona State University cited the same reason.
How do we French teachers respond to these multiple reasons for
studying French? Recently AATF issued an appealing pamphlet entitled
"Why Learn French?". It gave four reasons, pitched primarily toward a
utilitarian message: "French means business! French means jobs! French
means world travel! French means global communication!". And yet,
this brief review of professional history would suggest a much broader
set of goals for our classrooms.
According to Lantolf and Sunderman, the national foreign language
Standards promote a framework for integrating at least humanistic and
utilitarian goals: "FL study is seen as an activity that allows one to com-
municate with and develop an appreciation for people from other cul-
tures and at the same time develop a 'greater awareness of self'; more-
over, individuals will be able to access other 'bodies of knowledge' and
'participate more fully in the global community and marketplace"'
(Kenyon, Farr, Mitchell, and Armengol 5, cited in Lantolf and Sunder-
man 23). Kramsch (Context) brings a cultural lens to the cognitive argu-
ment. She suggests that FL study will give learners an ability to mediate
between their native and acquired cultures with greater insight and per-
ception on both cultures than would be possible without knowledge of
the other. Mental agility thus extends from the linguistic to the sociocul-
tural. The role of pleasure also takes a new spin in research on mediation
and language play (e.g., Cook), in which learners' creative efforts at lan-
guage building feed their language learning success and build their moti-
vation for continued efforts. Studying and learning French today is a
multidisciplinary enterprise in which focus on individual skills has given
way to looking at different modes of expression (interpretive, presenta-
tional, interpersonal) for interactive, analytical, reflective, and even ludic
purposes. Although French students may still cite attaining oral fluency
as their top priority (Ossipov), we strive to define this fluency through a
cultural lens provided by sociolinguistics and through a humanistic lens
from the letters.

How Do We Believe French Is Learned?

When curricular, teacher, and student goals differ, it is a considerable

challenge to establish sequences of study that "we consider professional-
ly credible, intellectually stimulating, and socially responsive" (Henning
23). The effort must be based on how we believe French is learned. There
1096 FRENCHREVIEW
remains considerable controversy about the nature of FL acquisition. To
what degree is there a common denominator between first language (L1)
and second language (L2) acquisition? As Hakuta and Cancino noted,
both L1 and L2 research have gone through the theoretical phases of con-
trastive analysis, error analysis, and performance and discourse analysis;
they explain the influence of L1 acquisition research in L2 studies by two
hypotheses: universal order in language acquisition and the native lan-
guage transfer. If we follow these hypotheses, is it so paramount to use
only French in class or is some alternation between French and English
productive for learners, especially if code-switching is a naturally occur-
ring phenomenon in bilingual communities?
Krashen's well known theory of acquisition claims that acquisition oc-
curs naturally in a stimulus-rich environment where learners respond
spontaneously to input without social sanction. Terrell's Natural Ap-
proach, associated with Krashen's theory (Krashen and Terrell), devotes
class time exclusively to input and language use, relegating grammar to
work outside of class. But, Terrell later allowed a role for drawing atten-
tion to structures in order to shape the communicative act. Today, the de-
bate about whether and how student's attention should be focused on
linguistic form appears in research known as Focus on Form (Doughty
and Williams).
Advocates of Focus on Form propose incorporating grammar in class-
room instruction by flooding input with target features, by designing ex-
planations and tasks that draw students' attention to these features, and
by offering various types of explicit and implicit feedback to students
about the accuracy of their production. Doughty explains that such a
focus on form does not return us to the contrived dialogues and struc-
tured practice of audiolingualism because instruction privileges the
meaning-form interrelationship and prioritizes communicative interac-
tion. Moreover, it is students who notice the forms in the content rather
than teachers who extract them for presentation. Questions still remain,
however, relating to authentic norms (Which forms are to be noticed?), to
sequences of interlanguage development (In what order should they be
targeted for attention?), and to practice (Is an implicit or explicit focus
better for assuring student focus on the forms targeted?). After reviewing
the contradictory results of studies on the pedagogical benefits of Focus
on Form, Ellis suggests that teachers use their professional knowledge
and experience to guide future investigations. Teacher thinking is miss-
ing: "Surprisingly, very little research has explored how teachers arrive
at a decision about what grammar to teach and when and how to teach
it" (Ellis 56).
This revalorization of linguistic form brings forth the next question: At
least for adult L2 learners in an instructed setting, is it productive to
have a metalinguistic awareness, for example, awareness of forms and
structures? There has been recent emphasis on "meta" processes (self-
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1097

referential processes). Do activities involving learners' metalinguistic re-

flections, such as using grammar for understanding, assisted by the
teacher, strengthen the perceived link between language and meaning?
Galatanu studied communication and metalinguistic reflection in French
language learning by adults in their home countries. She found resis-
tance to grammatical explanations but an openness to elucidations of
meaning to conclude that visual instruction, metalinguistic reflection,
discovery of linguistic fact through successive approximations, and con-
ceptualization are complementary and indispensable processes in L2 ac-
quisition. Teachers who believe in the value of metalinguistic processing,
often incorporate the conceptualization of language into classroom com-
munication in the following ways: (a) by simulating different forms of
communication through cooperative research; (b) by identifying and dis-
criminating the linguistic forms appropriate to certain kinds of situa-
tions; (c) by spontaneously explaining linguistic forms; and (d) by using
graphic aids to encourage visualization. These techniques share the fea-
ture of drawing the learner's attention to specific elements in the input,
in line with the belief in educational psychology that learning and acqui-
sition are not possible without attention to the contents of that learning or
acquisition (Schmidt). If competence develops through metacognition
(self-referential cognition), which leads to automaticity in the perfor-
mance of experts in different disciplines, then Krashen's acquisition hy-
pothesis is contradicted by findings of studies dealing with advanced
stages of expertise and proficiency through cognitive routinization (e.g.,
Tochon, L'Enseignant). In this way, the debate on metacognition has
helped discover how awareness of one's own thought patterns supports
learning.

How Are We Teaching?

Where then do we position our language teaching and learning as we

enter the twenty-first century? After a quarter century of development,
CLT is widely accepted in North America and Europe (Germain). Its as-
sumptions supply the language-cultures-content weave for the national
Standardsfor Foreign LanguageLearning(ACTFL, Standards).Largely based
on Hymes's sociolinguistic conception of Communicative Competence
and on Canale and Swain's recognition of multiple communicative com-
petencies (sociolinguistic, linguistic, discourse, and strategic), CLT im-
plies an ability to use a language in all its forms appropriately in all situa-
tions. More importantly, it implies a multiplicity of culturally specific
discourses and interactional practices. In such culturally-charged aspects
of communication, knowledge, values, and expectations flavor what is
understood and what is conveyed. Having communicative competence
as a pedagogical goal implies, then, that teachers possess multiple litera-
cies which allow them to interpret sociocultural norms and, in designing
1098 FRENCHREVIEW
their lessons, be responsive to these expectations for interactions and
understanding. To realize CLT fully, teacher knowledge needs to cross
disciplinary, as well as cultural, boundaries. How have we, as teachers,
translated the notion of communicative competence into our instruction?
To simplify our discussion of CLT within the space limitations of this ar-
ticle, we focus on four of its main attributes: authenticity, the importance
of context, integration of competencies, and a focus on the learner. Within
each category, we highlight current uncertainties about how to match the
theories we profess to follow with the realities of our teaching situations.

Authenticity

The problem of authenticity exists in three main areas of French teach-

ing. Through applied linguistics research it relates to the nature of texts
and to the type of language used; in educational communities it relates to
the nature of the learner's experience. We will treat each in order to show
how juxtaposition of these notions creates a paradox for teaching.
First, let us consider the nature of texts and language. Defined by Gal-
loway as texts written in a French environment by a French-speaking na-
tive for a French-speaking audience, authentic texts are considered bene-
ficial for reading, and by extension, for oral comprehension. Authentic
texts contain the helpful redundancies and style markers that are absent
in pedagogically simplified texts. Perhaps more important, authentic
texts are culturally embedded with multiple voices and multiple realities
and thereby serve to introduce students to diverse dimensions of human
communication, particularly those that are culturally charged (see Gee,
An Introduction).But can learners interact with authentic texts? The teacher
typically facilitates the student's interaction by simplifying the reading
task. Herein lies a greater challenge to authenticity. Can a task be peda-
gogically simplified without rendering it and the reading of the text on
which it is exercised inauthentic? Even if texts are not simplified, is the
classroom reading of them inauthentic simply because it is done in an in-
structional situation (Tochon, "When Authentic")?
Extending the notion of authenticity to language itself, we face issues of
linguistic norm because differences in society are easily discernable in
both oral and written language. Current thinking suggests that truly au-
thentic input exposes students through reading and listening to a variety
of linguistic norms. But what geographical dialect and socioeconomic
and social registers should we teach and for what purposes (Valdman)?
What are authentic expectations for accuracy of nonnative speech? We
clearly face the dilemma of the multicultural class (Kramsch, "Global"):
Can authentic talk types exist through the ears and mouths of nonnatives
and in the classroom setting? Is what is authentically acceptable funda-
mentally different for nonnatives and native speakers? If the authenticity
of the classroom lies in its mediation between the learner's world and the
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1099

target cultures, then is our classroom authenticity, by nature, essentially

different from authentic usage in French target cultures?
Next, we consider authenticity in terms of the nature of the learner's
experience. The educational community relates authenticity to "real life"
learning performance. These scholars show that students benefit from
being placed in roles and faced with situational challenges that corre-
spond to those of daily life. For them, a text is authentic only when a
reader chooses to read it, applies his or her own interpretations to it, and
responds to it in a personal manner. The two definitions of authenticity
are in conflict and create a paradox: on the one hand, a text must embody
target cultural values in order to be authentic; on the other hand, it must
be read through the lens of the foreign learner. Is the notion of authentic
learning, then, not presumptive (Tochon, "When Authentic")? Teachers
and students prepare for situations that will promote authenticity, but
these situations are actualized in a setting and for a purpose that are usu-
ally less than authentic. Terwilliger (1997) showed how dubious we
should be about the possibility of designing classroom experience to be
representative of true performance in life. Despite our best efforts, there
remains a gap between authentic experience as planned for the class-
room and authentic experience as experienced in real life.

The Importanceof Context

How has the profession come to terms with the instructional paradox
of authenticity? First and foremost, we place critical importance on
meaning in context. We offer students contextualized input and create in-
teractions in a contextual frame that recalls and elucidates critical cultur-
al features. Because, for French, our contexts must be diverse to reflect
the diversity and expansiveness of the Francophone world, we offer a se-
ries of contexts, each true, we hope, to its appropriate sociocultural
frame. Bragger and Rice characterize the Standardsas primarily "content
standards," which intertwine all facets of language and content. With
their implications for a strong interdisciplinary focus and opportunities
for cooperative learning, the Standards,they believe, offer the stimulus of
a paradigm change that will push content-oriented instruction to teach-
ing other disciplines, such as biology, either in French class or in French
in biology classes. Perhaps because we have come so far in CLT, we can
now consider incorporating science or social science modules even in
lower-level classes. We need teacher experience and pondering to tell us
how far we can go.

IntegrationofCompetencies

Teaching across disciplines implies integration of competencies. Such

integration fits our notion of sociolinguistic authenticity because, when
1100 FRENCHREVIEW

accessing new knowledge, educated French speakers clearly draw on in-

terrelated linguistic competencies, each based on its own set of shifting
sociocultural norms, and apply them, either singly or interactively, to the
communicative situation. To exemplify the role that integration of com-
petencies plays in CLT, we focus on the relationship between oral ex-
change and the reading-writing activities in texts from the humanities.
Hudson used a Jules Verne novel, described as "Paris in the Twentieth
Century," published only in 1994 as the basis for a series of written and
oral exercises about the novel, its social and cultural context, the author,
and the changes that have occurred in Paris since Verne's predictions. To
enhance the connection between writing and verbal exchange, scholars
such as Schultz have emphasized the value of poetry for supporting lan-
guage learners' critical reading and thinking. Leclair examined the ways
in which poetry can offer insights into French daily culture skills by dis-
cussing the creation of atmosphere in a physical context, the power of
words to evoke emotion, and the use of rhythm. Cazaux showed how the
teacher can become a poetic storyteller and recommended that students
create stories to stimulate their creativity and provide pleasure in devel-
oping language skills. Suggested exercises included combining random
nouns (e.g., "le fer et le bois") and creating a proverb about them, creat-
ing a story using names of consumer products, and developing a story
using only body-language idioms (e.g., "jeter un oeil"). Runte points out
that in order for poetry to arouse students' interest, it must belong to
them culturally and evoke an emotive response. One theme with which
students may identify has been elaborated by Franco-Ontarian eco-poets.
Reading their French texts invites the use of French to the study of geo-
logy, chemistry, economics, or history. In this line, Tochon ("Action")
proposes "action-poetry" that involves students in authentic activities
and the construction of a possible ethic of postmodern, empowering ac-
tion literature by means of the poetic sign. As poetry becomes action, the
poetic act is more than an ephemeral decor: it becomes--etymologically
speaking-a political call. These select examples reveal the multiple goals
of French pedagogy at work: the humanistic emphasis on the literary, the
sociocultural focus on context, the linguistic expression linking orality
and literacy, the interactive nature of language learning as creation and
negotiation, and, we hope, the pleasure of students interacting with
French worlds. They also call to mind the extended knowledge needed
by teachers who embark on multiple competency, cross-cultural, and
cross-disciplinary teaching.

Focus on the Learner

Horwitz hoped that the 1990s would be the "decade of the learner"
(30). Indeed, CLT has created a privileged position for the learner as the
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1101

receiver of input, the decipherer of grammar, the interpreter of culture,

the conveyer of personal meaning, and even the goal-setter for instruc-
tion. Evidence of this shift is found in answers to the question "Why
study French?" at the beginning of this article. Whereas until the last
decade or two teachers answered this question, recent research has more
often than not posed the question to students. This shift from the teacher
to the student perspective is significant and indicative of the current
American educational desire to "serve the clients" of instruction.
Learners are clearly more diverse in preparation today than in any time
in U.S. history. Cognitive psychology and related SLA research have illus-
trated the benefits of attention to learners' styles, strategies, and beliefs and
the style-war problems that may arise when teachers' and students' beliefs
and strategies are at odds (Oxford, Erhman, and Lavine). The communica-
tive classroom today places much responsibility on learners, who work in
pairs or small groups and independently with the Intemrnet, all outside the
teacher's direct control. There is a profusion of collaborative learning tasks,
whose purpose is to allow learners to negotiate meaning and mediate un-
derstanding. Hypothesis testing is critical for interlanguage development,
but in a supportive environment that keeps anxiety low.
This focus on the learner has led to research on the learner as a negotia-
tor of meaning often in a Bahktinian, dialogic sense. It considers learners'
personal struggles with identity as they try on new roles and values,
which, in turn, challenge and reshape their identities (e.g., Kaplan). What
is the teacher's role in this classroom? We have frequently heard "the
guide at the side." The teacher unobtrusively builds a support system or
scaffolding for the learners' linguistic journeys, helping them activate
personal schemata to match their background knowledge against new in-
formation found in the instructional input. Ideally, the teacher is directly
involved only minimally in the interpersonal interaction. We suggest that
this ideal be changed: the role of teacher should be reconsidered to be a
co-negotiator of classroom interaction and a primary elucidator of con-
tent, particularly of the cultural values underlying Francophone ways of
thinking.

Data That Informs Teaching

Data to inform American teaching of French has come over the years
primarily from three sources: (a) content sources from the disciplines
(e.g., literary studies, culture studies, language studies such as lexicogra-
phy or phonetics); (b) reports of methods and pedagogical innovation
from teachers; (c) SLA or Foreign Language Education Research. Begin-
ning with the NDEA institutes and associated research after World War
II, the emphasis has shifted slowly but continuously from the former two
to the latter. What kind of data has SLA and FL Education investigated?
1102 FRENCHREVIEW

Describing the scope of these related disciplines is not at all straight-

forward, for there is overlap between the two disciplines and disagree-
ment among scholars within each one. The broad scope of SLA inquiry
includes such areas as bilingual education in Quebec; creolization in
Haiti, with, for some researchers, its instructional implications; language
loss and maintanence efforts in New Brunswick; and evidences of inter-
language in classrooms. Questions come sometimes from a psycholin-
guistic perspective, focusing on how learners process language from
input, how they relate it to their schemata, and how they rephrase utter-
ances that they perceive to differ from the norm. Such studies often use
techniques from conversational analysis and work in narrative frames.
Another line of inquiry, claimed by the educational community and
some SLA researchers, stems from the "scientific" revolution of the
NDEA era. It produces both surveys and studies evaluating the effective-
ness of instructional approaches, techniques, and materials. This research
has typically been quantitative in nature, attempting to test theories by
controlling groups in order to test hypotheses and generalize results. Re-
cently, there has been a growing concern particularly in the educational
community and also among some SLA researchers about the sociocultur-
al aspects of language acquisition (e.g., Lantolf ); these investigations
often use hermeneutic frames, which facilitate teachers' direct involve-
ment in researching their own teaching.
In addition to this emphasis on the learner and learning, scholars work-
ing in cognitive and educational psychology have begun to reconsider
the role of the teacher and the curriculum, especially in terms of their
contribution to the mediation processes (De Corte; Greeno; Schoenfeld).
For instance, in (teacher-organized) cooperative activities, is the media-
tion of the subject-matter by other students or by the teacher particularly
effective (Leblanc and Lally)?
Because learning is a social endeavor, we need to examine the entire
ecology and history of each learning interaction between the poles of the
learner, the specific instructional content, and the knowledge mediator
(teacher, materials, pedagogical environment, social situation). Of the
three poles, the third has been studied least. What is missing from the
pedagogical picture is a clear sense of how the teacher interprets and me-
diates learning. Characterized as "teacher thinking," this line of research
considers teachers' reflections and behaviors as they participate in the
learning experience.

Toward Teacher Thinking Research

The 1980 ACTFL Priorities Conference Report recognized action re-

search that teachers would do in their own classrooms with their own
students as a "worthwhile and valuable activity for practitioners" (70).
The 1998 Northeast Conference Reports put forth, as its title announces,
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1103

Stories TeachersTell (Hartman). Responding to these stories, Tucker noted

the "goodness of fit" that the stories reveal "between current classroom
practice and contemporary theory" (221). Z~phir took the notion of
teacher participation in research one step farther: she advocated using
the silent voices of teachers as an empirical focus, stating that "In the
final analysis, practitioners themselves will discover what works to make
communicative teaching happen in the classroom" (28). Toward that end,
we recommend a specific type of teacher participation in research: that
teachers view themselves as the objects of investigation; that they exam-
ine their problem-solving initiatives, how they negotiate meaning with
students, and what knowledge they access when they teach. Chaudron
found that this line of research, as revealed in the Modern LanguageJour-
nal, dates back primarily to the late 1960s with development of classroom
observation instruments. In the late 1980s and 1990s, he noted an explo-
sion of research on task-based interaction, some of which included obser-
vation of the teacher's role (see Gass), and of conversational analyses on
teacher talk and its mediating role in interaction (e.g., Anton; Kinginger).
Johnstone's 1999 review on language learning and teaching includes
seven articles on teachers' thoughts about their practice. These articles
provide an initial view of teacher teaching. Teachers categorize what
they know about teaching according to similar rubrics, such as "language
management" and "facilitating the instructional flow" (Gatbonton). Their
actual beliefs stem from a number of sources (Borg) and may differ sub-
stantially from theoretical concepts underlying the methods they purport
to follow (Sato and Kleinsasser). These beliefs encourage them to modify
pedagogical approaches in order to accommodate their beliefs (Turn-
bull). To change their beliefs and develop stronger senses of self-con-
fidence and self-efficacy, teachers benefit from professional activities
(Bruning, Flowerday, and Trayer; Lally).
Like these reports, most studies published in the United States about
teacher thinking have tended to compare teacher beliefs with the meth-
ods they use; they do not typically compare teacher beliefs with think-
ing of the cultures that their teaching is to convey. One exception is
Allen's 2000 report. She describes how doing ethnographic interviews
increased in-service teachers' understanding and awareness of both the
cultures they teach and their own cultures. In the new millennium, we
need comparisons of teacher thinking about their subject-matter as well
as about their methods. We need those comparisons among teachers
with different knowledge bases and who themselves come from differ-
ent cultures.

A Look toward Francophone Didactics in the Teaching of French

Didactics appears to be an almost unknown field in the English-speak-

ing world, although it constitutes a major movement internationally and
1104 FRENCHREVIEW
in French-speaking countries in particular (Tochon, "Semiotic"). Didac-
tics valorizes the teacher as knower. It is the study of meaning-making
processes in each specific subject-matter. Research and practice in Didac-
tics are based on the assumption that knowledge is specific to particular
objects, ideas, and contexts, and, therefore, on the premise that we can
construct a unique pedagogy for each subject matter taught. To construct
that pedagogy, Didactics attempts to integrate academic content with
current theories of education and pedagogy (Bertrand and Houssaye).
Knowledge is teacher specific because a teacher's contribution to stu-
dents' interaction and problem-solving is highly dependent on the back-
ground and expertise of that teacher. The relationship between the
teacher's contribution and his or her expertise is critical because Didac-
tics builds on teacher knowledge in context. Teachers whose interest and
background lie in literature maximize on this expertise in class as they
comfortably lead students toward humanistic goals of language learning,
while others, or perhaps the same teachers at different moments, focus
on sociocultural aspects of the learning task, leading them toward goals
of linguistic competence or cultural understanding. Teaching, like
knowledge, becomes both more individual in its particular orientation,
and more collective in its need to respond to common problems experi-
enced by learners. Research studies in Didactics reevaluate teachers' pro-
fessional thinking and demonstrate that many questions in L2 learning
can be elucidated through in-depth examinations of experienced teach-
ers' spontaneous problem-solving. Didactics suggests, therefore, that
teachers look inward to find a deeper understanding of their own situat-
ed competence.
Because Francophonie constitutes geopolitical spaces sharing economic
and institutional constructions that are culturally and linguistically di-
verse, this varied sociopolitical context gives rise to divergent Didactic
stands. Using the examples of France and Quebec, Martel analyzed the
construction of national instructional spaces to show how contexts influ-
ence teachers' relationship to knowledge and thus how Didactics are
both culturolinguistically colored and continentally influenced. She posits
that sociopolitical environments give rise to particular ideologies of lan-
guage (cf. Gee, "Thinking") that reflect on the way French language is
conceived, researched, and taught. Burnett suggests that one reason
teaching Francophone culture is hard for some American teachers relates
to their lack of familiarity with Francophone ideologies. She explains that
"Individuals perceive, organize, and interpret social constructs, events,
and people through their peronal schemas [which are], to a large extent,
culturally conditioned" (52) and suggests that training teachers in ethno-
graphic interviewing techniques would help them reflect on their own
cultural lenses and those of the cultures they are teaching.
Martel analyzed the conference programs of French language teaching
associations in the United States, Canada, and France. The American and
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1105

Canadian meetings were very method-oriented, while the discussion in

France appeared more knowledge-critical. She discovered an epistemo-
logical difference between what is being researched within the Associa-
tion de didactique du franrais langue 6trangbre (ASDIFLE), for instance,
and associations like the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign
Languages (ACTFL) and the Association qudb6coise des enseignants et
enseignantes du frangais langue seconde (AQEFLS). While the American
and Canadian associations take knowledge for granted and distribute it
with little questioning of its nature, French didacticians in ASDIFLE un-
dertake to question knowledge itself. What does this difference imply for
teacher practice?
Freeman suggests that we study teacher behavior from three vantage
points: "teaching as doing" (technique, methods); "teaching as thinking"
(what teachers know about lesson planning and execution, students, and
learning); and "teaching as knowing what to do" (mediating subject mat-
ter, classroom context, and people in it). From Martel's study and our
analysis of the 2000 conferences of the American Association of Teachers
of French (AATF) and la F6ddration Internationale des Professeurs de
Franrais (FIPF) held jointly in Paris (see Appendix), it would appear that
North Americans (United States and Quebec) tend to focus on "teaching
as doing" and lesson planning, whereas Europeans are concerned more
often with "teaching as knowing what to do." In addition to a continental
influence, there seems to be an effect of teacher background. At AATF
Paris, nonnative French speakers (as revealed by their names) gave more
papers with methods orientations, whereas native French speakers fo-
cused more on content issues. One noted exception regards technology-
enhanced instruction where native speakers at FIPF presented many
methods-oriented sessions.
The difference between the North American and European perspec-
tives suggests that Didactics might offer new insights to American teach-
ers. Didactics is the word used in Francophonie to speak of issues in
curriculum and instruction. For instance, the "D~partements de didac-
tique" in Francophone Canada are often translated "Department of Cur-
riculum and Instruction." However, the meaning of Didactics is more
method-oriented in Quebec, and more oriented toward reflective practice
and theorization in specific disciplines in Francophone European and
African countries.
Given the crucial status that input plays in L2 acquisition and the multi-
dimensional goals for French study, it is critical to examine the relation-
ship of people to knowledge (rapportau savoir). Didactics offers interesting
solutions in this direction. First, it does not consider acquisition as the iso-
lated process of a single cognition being submitted to an input environ-
ment: interchange and dialogue between the three poles of the learner, the
content knowledge, and the knowledge mediator are understood as deter-
mining factors in this sociocultural, as well as linguistic, acquisition
1106 FRENCH REVIEW

process. Second, Didactics is the study of what happens both in real class-
rooms and in natural learning environments. It researches how real teach-
ers and real students interact in learning and acquisition situations. Third,
Didactics attempts to find bottom-up, practical theories that pertain to ed-
ucation in practice, as well as to study the mediation of learned knowl-
edge. It is deeply rooted in the Comenius tradition of understanding the
art of teaching as a theorizing science, a process which has been named
"didactic transposition" (Chevallard); it holds that changes in pedagogical
practice can come only through change in theory underlying method (Ca-
ravolas). Didactics thus involves mediation with knowledge and the
coaching role of the teacher, the act of co-construction which is perhaps
best investigated through qualitative or hermeneutic research studies. Its
findings represent a call to reconsider the input role of the external facili-
tator (the teacher) in the acquisition process. Such a reconceptualization
would fit well with current research in American education and the trend
of reflective practice. Fourth, work in Didactics recognizes the role of me-
diation in the learning and acquisition processes. From that perspective,
we might expect the normal sequence for language acquisition to be: first,
mediation of input; second, learning; and then, acquisition.
Finally, and perhaps most important, Didactics is an integrated part of
European and Francophone culture. As such, Didactics becomes itself
part of the content associated with the "5 Cs" of the national Standards.It
is a cultural archetype. If we truly believe that cultural archetypes should
be integrated into language teaching, we should use Didactics to pass
from studying ways of knowing French to studying Francophone ways
of knowing. To make this change would be truly to incorporate cultural
lessons into our teaching and valorize Francophone ways of thinking. It
would make the study of French more culture-bound, with a return to its
humanistic dimensions, while not losing sight of its social ones. Teaching
French would be much more than putting French words on an American
frame. Our perspective would change, and through it, we could perhaps
offer students a richer experience and greater critical reflection of what it
means to be from part of the Francophone world. Is this not a compelling
reason to teach and study French in the twenty-first century?

UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, MADISON

 .d .r .j

d)
~0 ?r
0l (d "O
Td .E
-
Q

v"l

"0 t- O
(U F
 Appendix
A Comparison of the 2000 meetings of FIPF and AAT

Fiddration Internationale des Professeurs de Frangais American

Les enseignants comme filtres des r~giolectes en franrais Standard
langue seconde France an
Les nouvelles technologies de l'information et de la classroom
communication mettent-elles du lien entre les savoirs? Evaluatio
(a se peu
French th

00 Number of 170 of 478 = 36% about one third of them devoted 126 of 188
methods- to new technologies and their applications
related
presentations 308 non-methods related sessions 62 non-m
with direct which pre
classroom
applications
and pedagogical
materials
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1109

Works Cited

ACTFL. Proceedingsof the National Conferenceon ProfessionalPriorities. Hastings-on-Hudson:

ACTFL Materials Center, 1980.
. ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. New York: American Council on the Teaching of
Foreign Languages, 1986.
SStandards for Foreign LanguageLearning:Preparingfor the Twenty-first Century. New
York: ACTFL, 1996.
Allen, Linda Quincy. "Culture and the Ethnographic Interview in Foreign Language
Teacher Development." Foreign LanguageAnnals 33 (2000): 51-57.
Antes, Theresa. "But Will I Ever Use This Foreign Language? Student Perceptions of the
Applicability of Foreign Language Skills." ForeignLanguageAnnals 32 (1999): 219-33.
Anton, Marta. "The Discourse of a Learner-Centered Classroom: Sociocultural Perspectives
on Teacher-Learner Interaction in the Second-Language Classroom." Modern Language
Journal83 (1999): 303-18.
Bahktin, Mikail M. The Dialogic Imagination.Trans. C. Emerson and M. Holquist. Austin, TX:
U of Texas P, 1981.
Bertrand, Yves, and Jean Houssaye. "Pcdagogieand Didactique:An Incestuous Relationship."
InstructionalScience,An InternationalJournalof Learningand Cognition27.1-2 (1999): 33-51.
Borg, Simon. "The Use of Grammatical Terminology in the Second Language Classroom: A
Qualitative Study of Teachers' Practices and Cognition." Applied Linguistics 20 (1999):
95-126.
Bragger, Jeannette, D., and Donald B. Rice, "The Message Is the Medium: A New Paradigm
for Content-Oriented Instruction." Foreign LanguageAnnals 32.3 (1999): 372-91.
Bruing, Roger, Terri Flowerday, and Marie Trayer. "Developing Foreign Language Frame-
works: An Evaluation Study." Foreign LanguageAnnals 32 (1999): 159-76.
Burnett, Joanne. "Classroom Management-Classroom Survival: One Teacher's Story of
Constructing Practice in a Computer-Equipped Foreign Language Classroom." Foreign
LanguageAnnals 32 (1999): 279-94.
Canale, Michael, and Merrill Swain. "Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to
Second Language Teaching and Testing," Applied Linguistics 1 (1980): 1-48.
Caravolas, Jean-Antoine. La Didactiquedes langues:pricis d'histoire11450-1700. Montreal and
Tiibingen: Presses de l'Universit& de Montreal and Gunter Narr Verlag, 1994.
Cazaux, Henri. "Le Conte: mille et une fagons de dire..." (The Story: A Thousand and One
Ways to Say.. .). Frangaisdans le Monde 282 (1996): 67-70. ERIC document EJ530906.
Chaudron, Craig. "Progress in Language Classroom Research: Evidence from The Modern
LanguageJournal."Modern LanguageJournal85 (2000): 57-76.
Chevallard, Yves. "Didactique?Is it a plaisanterie?You Must Be Joking? A Critical Comment
on Terminology." Didactics in the FrancophoneWorld.Special Issue of Instructional Science
Ed. Francois V. Tochon. 27.1-2 (1999): 5-7.
Cooper, Thomas C. "Foreign Language Study and SAT-Verbal Scores." Modern Language
Journal71 (1987): 381-87.
Comenius (Komensky), Jan Amos. Methodus Linguarum Novissima. Lezno (Opera Didactica
Omnia, I.1), Amsterdam, 1648-1657. Praha: CSAV, 1957.
Cook, Guy. LanguagePlay, LanguageLearning.Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000.
Davis, James N., Rebecca R. Kline, Lynn Carbon Gorell, and Gloria Hsieh. "Readers and
Foreign Languages: A Survey of Undergraduate Attitudes toward the Study of Litera-
ture." Modern LanguageJournal76 (1992): 320-32.
De Corte, Erik. "Fostering Cognitive Growth." EducationalPsychologist 30.1 (1995): 37-46.
Doughty, Catherine. "Acquiring Competence in a Second Language: Form and Function."
LearningForeign and SecondLanguages.Ed. Heidi Byrnes. NY: MLA, 1998. 128-56.
and Jessica Williams, eds. Focus on Form in ClassroomSecond LanguageAcquisition.
,
Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998.
1110 FRENCH REVIEW

Ellis, Rod. "Teaching and Research: Options in Grammar Teaching." TESOL Quarterly 32
(1998): 39-60.
Fitz-Gerald, John D. "Modern Foreign Languages: Their Importance to American Citizens."
Modern LanguageJournal9 (1925): 397-412.
Fornwalt, Russell, J., and Herbert W. Rogers. "Values of Modem Foreign Language Study."
Modern LanguageJournal19 (1934): 161-65.
Freeman, Donald. "Redefining the Relationship between Research and What Teachers
Know." Voicesfrom the LanguageClassroom.Ed. Kathleen Bailey and David Nunan. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge UP, 1996. 88-118.
Galatanu, Olga. "Communication et riflexion m6talinguistique dans l'apprentissage du
frantais par les adultes." Paper presented at the World Congress of Applied Linguistics
sponsored by the International Association of Applied Linguistics. Thessaloniki, Greece,
April 15-21, 1990.
Galloway, Vicki. "Constructing Cultural Realities: 'Facts' and Frameworks of Association."
The Coming of Age of the Profession. Ed. J. Harper, M. Lively, and M. Williams. Boston,
MA: Heinle and Heinle, 1998. 129-40.
Gass, Susan. "Discussion: Incidental Vocabulary Learning." Studies in Second Language Ac-
quisition 21 (1999): 319-34.
Gatbonton, Elizabeth. "Investigating Experienced ESL Teachers' Pedagogical Knowledge."
Modern LanguageJournal83.1 (1999): 35-50.
Gee, James. "Thinking, Learning, and Reading: The Situated Sociocultural Mind." Situated
Cognition:Social, Semiotic,and PsychologicalPerspectives.Ed. David Kirshner and James A.
Whitson. Norwood, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1997. 235-59.
SAn Introductionto DiscourseAnalysis: Theoryand Method.New York: Routledge, 1999.
Germain, Claude. Evolution de l'enseignementdes langues: 5000 ans d'histoire.Paris: CLE Inter-
national, 1993.
Greeno, James G. "The Situativity of Knowing, Learning, and Research." AmericanPsycholo-
gist 53.1 (1998): 5-26.
Hakuta, Kenji, and Herlinda Cancino. "Trends in Second-Language-Acquisition Research."
LanguageIssues in Literacyand Bilingual/MulticulturalEducation.Ed. M. Minami and B. P.
Kennedy. Cambridge, MA: HarvardEducationalReview, Reprint Series no. 22, 1992. 74-97.
Hartman, Douglas K. Stories TeachersTell: Reflecting on Professional Practice. Lincolnwood,
IL: National Textbook, 1998.
Henning, Sylvie Debev. "The Integration of Language, Literature, and Culture: Goals and
Curricular Design." Profession93. USA: MLA, 1993. 22-26.
Horwitz, Elaine. "Attending to the Affective Domain in the Foreign Language Classroom."
Shifting the Instructional Focus to the Learner.Ed. Sally Sieloff Magnan. Middlebury, VT:
Northeast Conference, 1990. 15-33.
Hudson, Anna E. "Discover Paris with Jules Verne." FrenchReview 70.2 (1996): 245-58.
Hymes, Dell. "On Communicative Competence." Directions in Sociolinguistics. Ed. J.
Gumperz and D. Hymes. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston. 35-71.
Johnstone, Richard. "Research on Language Teaching and Learning." Language Teaching:
The International Abstracting Journalfor Language Teachers, Educators, and Researchers33
(1999): 141-62.
Kaplan, Alice. FrenchLessons:A Memoir. Chicago: Chicago UP, 1993.
Kaulfers, W. V. "Retooling the Profession in the Light of Modern Research." Modern Lan-
guage Journal.35 (1951): 501-22.
Kenyon, D. M., B. Farr, J. Mitchell, and R. Armengol. "Framework for the 2003 Foreign Lan-
guage National Assessment of Educational Progress." 2000. Pre-publication edition.
CAL, ACTFL, AIR. (Cited in Lantolf and Sunderman)
Kinginger, Celeste. "A Discourse Approach to the Study of Language Educators' Coherence
Systems." Modern LanguageJournal81 (1997): 6-14.
Knox, Edward, C. "Between Cultural Studies and 'Cultural Competence.'" French Review
72.4 (1999): 669-75.
RECONSIDERING FRENCH PEDAGOGY 1111

Kramsch, Claire. "Foreign Languages for a Global Age." ADFL Bulletin 25 (1993): 5-12.
. Context and Culture in LanguageTeaching.Oxford: Oxford UP, 1993.
Krashen, Stephen D. Principles and Practice in Second LanguageAcquisition. New York: Long-
man, 1982.
, and Tracy D. Terrell. The Natural Approach:LanguageAcquisition in the Classroom.
Oxford: Pergamon, 1983.
Lally, Carolyn Gascoigne, "Language Teaching and Learning Diaries: French Conversation
from Two Different Perspectives." ForeignLanguageAnnals 33 (2000): 224-28.
Lambert, Richard. "Updating the Foreign Language Agenda." Manuscript accepted for
publication in Modern LanguageJournal85.3 (2001).
Lantolf, James P., ed. SocioculturalTheoryand SecondLanguageLearning:Recent Advances. Ox-
ford: Oxford UP, 2000.
, and Gretchen Sunderman. "The Struggle for a Place in the Sun: Rationalizing For-
eign Language Study in the Twentieth Century." Modern Language Journal 85 (2001):
5-25.
Leblanc, Leona B., and Carolyn G. Lally. "A Comparison of Instructor-Mediated Versus
Student-Mediated Explicit Language Instruction in the Communicative Classroom."
FrenchReview 71 (1998): 734-46.
Leclair, Danidle. "Podsie et repr6sentations culturelles" (Poetry and Cultural Representa-
tions). Frangaisdans le monde281 (1996): 63-67. ERIC document EJ527770.
Magnan, Sally Sieloff. Report to the French and Italian Course Chair Committee, University
of Wisconsin, Madison, January 2001. (Manuscript in preparation.)
Martel, Angeline. "Culturally Colored Didactics: The Sociopolitical at the Heart of Sec-
ond/Foreign Language Teaching in Francophone Geolinguistic Spaces." Instructional
Science,An InternationalJournalof Learningand Cognition 27.1-2 (1999): 73-96.
Olmsted, E.W. "A Justification of Modern Languages in Our Schools." Modern Language
Journal6 (1921): 1-11.
Ossipov, Helene. "Who is Taking French and Why?" Foreign Language Annals 33 (2000):
157-65.
Oxford, Rebecca L, Madeline E. Ehrman, and Roberta Z. Lavine. "Style Wars: Teacher-Stu-
dent Style Conflicts in the Language Classroom." Challenges in the 1990s for College For-
eign LanguagePrograms.Ed. Sally Sieloff Magnan. Boston: Heinle and Heinle, 1990. 1-25.
Purin, C. M. "The Importance of Foreign Language Study in the General Scheme of Ameri-
can Education." Modern LanguageJournal4 (1920): 325-30.
Richards, Lyn. Using NVivo in Qualitative Research.Melbourne, Australia: Qualitative Solu-
tions and Research, 1999.
Roberts, Linda. "Attitudes of Entering University Freshmen toward Foreign Language Study:
A Descriptive Analysis." ModernLanguageJournal76 (1992): 275-83.
Runte, Hans R. "Teaching with the P-Word." Mosaic 4.1 (1996): 14-17.
Sato, Kazuyoshi, and Robert Kleinsasser. "Communicative Language Teaching (CLT):Prac-
tical Understandings." Modern LanguageJournal83 (1999): 494-517.
Schoenfeld, Alan H. "Looking Toward the Twenty-first Century: Challenges of Educational
Theory and Practice." EducationalResearcher28.7 (1999): 4-14.
Schmidt, Richard. "Deconstructing Consciousness in Search of Useful Definitions for Ap-
plied Linguistics." AILA Review 11 (1994): 11-26.
Schultz, Jean-Marie "The Uses of Poetry in the Foreign Language Curriculum." French Re-
view 69 (1996): 920-32.
Siskin, H. Jay, Mark A. Knowles, and Robert L. Davis. "LeFrangaisest mort, vive lefrangais:Re-
thinking the Function of French." Patternsand Policies:The ChangingDemographicsof Foreign
LanguageInstruction.Ed. Judith Liskin-Gasparro. Boston: Heinle and Heinle, 1996. 35-69.
Terrill, Tracy. "The Role of Grammar Instruction in a Communicative Approach." Modern
LanguageJournal75 (1991): 52-63.
Terwilliger, John. "Semantics, Psychometrics, and Assessment Reform: A Close Look at
'Authentic' Assessment." EducationalResearcher,26.8 (1997): 24-27.
 1112 FRENCH REVIEW

Tochon, Frangois Victor. L'EnseignantExpert (The Expert Teacher). Paris: Nathan, 1993.
"Semiotic Foundations for Building the New Didactics: An Introduction to the
Prototype Features of the Discipline." Instructional Science, An International Journal of
Learningand Cognition 27.1-2 (1999): 9-32.
."When Authentic Experiences are 'Enminded' into Disciplinary Genres: Crossing
Biographic and Situated Knowledge." Learningand Instruction 10 (2000): 331-59.
"Action Poetry as an Empowering Art: A Manifesto for Didaction in Arts Educa-
tion." Arts and LearningResearchJournal16.1 (2000): 32-53. http://ijea.asu.edu/vln2/
Tucker, Richard G. "Reflections on the Stories Teachers Tell." Hartman. 215-21.
Turnbull, Miles. "Multidimensional Project-Based Teaching in French Second Language
(FSL):A Process-Product Case Study." Modern LanguageJournal83 (1999): 548-68.
Valdman, Albert. "Comment girer la variation dans l'enseignement du franrais langue
6trangbre aux Etats-Unis." FrenchReview 73 (2000): 648-66.
Ziphir, Flore. "Focus on Form and Meaning: Perspectives of Developing Teachers and Ac-
tion-Based Research." ForeignLanguageAnnals 33 (2000): 19-30.

View publication stats