"The only constant is change”, a phrase that the philosopher Heraclitus of Ephesus is widely credited with.
Though it may look like a paradox, actually it is not. Without becoming too philosophical, one could argue that this statement communicates the real-life truth that perpetual shifting is the single permanent rule in life. How does this apply to teaching and to the teacher’s role in particular? Let’s start our magical mystery tour.
The first stop: the beginnings of the Communicative Approach
Before this revolution in the world of ELT, teachers were used to being the center of the classroom – a dominant, all-controlling figure orchestrating every move. Many students were quite happy with this situation, since nothing was unexpected: their creativity and spontaneity were neither welcome nor expected. Errors were not tolerated at all and teachers were supposed to correct them and, even better, prevent them from happening.
But soon it all changed. Teachers had two primary functions: facilitators of the communication process and independent participants within students’ groups (Breen and Candlin, 1980). No more centrality, which came as a shock to many, not because they were not ready to relinquish power, but because they were not sure how to go about this new role. What is expected from a facilitator, from a person who joins any group as another member?
Often the answer was this one: “When you are a facilitator, if a person enters your classroom, they won’t know who the teacher is.” This led to misinterpretations of this new role. It was not about making things easier for learners, nor was it about relinquishing power and having learners decide what to do.
This was natural. Think about a pendulum. When it’s at one end and it is moved, it does not stay in the middle but goes to the other end. Over time the pendulum reached a medium. This meant that teachers left their physical centrality, i.e. they did not stand at the front of the classroom at all times, but understood the centrality of their role in learning.
The next stops do not follow chronological order because they overlap.
Stop two: Task-based learning
Our next stop: Task-based learning (Willis, 1996 and Nunan, 1989). As it could be argued that it is a framework within communicative approaches, it did not create the same uneasiness in some teachers as the Communicative Approach. The teacher’s role is more structured, especially in Willis’s framework. Teachers select and sequence tasks, monitor students as they work without correcting mistakes, yet provide scaffolding as needed and help students notice language features and become aware of how language works.
Unlike early Communicative Language Teaching, form gets explicit attention, yet after students have been using language, i.e., after the task.
Stop three: Project-based learning.
Teachers move further away towards the background, acting as a coach or guide. They are expected to negotiate projects with their learners, provide scaffolding and language support as needed and assess both process and product, also encouraging self and peer assessment.
Stop four: The Lexical Approach
The stop: The Lexical Approach (Lewis, 1997). Teachers provide input and work toward learners noticing and discovering language features, while learners play an active, central role.
Stop five: Teachers today
The question goes around in society, “Will teachers be replaced by AI? Will they be necessary at all?” The answer to those questions is “No, teachers won't be replaced and will always be necessary." Why? What is there in our role that makes us unique? On the one hand, we know that we should mediate between learners and teaching materials.
This mediation cannot be black and white, since all groups are different and, even within each group, learners have different styles and needs and are affected by different situations. It is the teacher who knows this and knows when to adapt on the spur of the moment, just by looking at their learners’ faces. Often a learner’s question or comment helps us know where they are in their learning process and the scaffolding we give takes that as the starting point.
AI is a fantastic resource, but it is still a resource. It can help teachers generate materials and it can help learners by offering tailored information, answers to queries they may have when the teacher is not here to help, among other ideas. But the teacher has the final say before giving students AI-generated materials. The teacher’s critical reflection and mediation ensure the materials support learning.
As explained before, the teacher is not at the front of the classroom, yet their role is central to students’ learning.
We have come to the end of the magical mystery tour, and a question seems natural: Will AI become more intelligent and be context-sensitive in the way teachers are? We do not know. However, there have been different attempts to replace teachers since Skinner’s Teaching Machine and still, it is the teacher’s humanity that can make all the difference.
