The author then shifts into a brief discussion of Task Based Language Teaching, which has been argued by many to be nothing more than a twist on CLT (i.e., little more than a variation of CLT). Here the author notes that just like CLT, TBLT (and its notion of a task) came to be used as an umbrella term to mean virtually anything. The issue of overusing trendy jargon without a collective framework and common definitions is raised, along with the inevitable resulting problems; such issues are noted as having been fundamental to paving the way for the postmethod era. 

The postmethod era is then discussed in light of arguments by Pennycook and Prabhu, with the former noting the rigidity, inequality, and bias inherent in all methods and the latter noting the fact that no method is a panacea, which subsequently behooves TESOL educators to focus on their own “conceptualizations of how their teaching leads to desired learning” (p.66). This is followed by a discussion of several frameworks to guide practice that have been suggested by prominent scholars.

The author then discusses the field’s growing awareness of language as an ideology, along with its sociopolitical issues, and the need for TESOL to reconceptualize notions of language teaching whilst employing critical pedagogy (a term which is used very broadly here). The paper concludes with the assertion that the field is slowing moving into a state of awakening, which must be followed up with goal attainment.

The authors begin with a succinct overview of TESOL trends, beginning with the grammar translation method and ending with TBLT. Following this, the authors note the birth of the postmethod era, which hinges on the acknowledgment of no best method whilst simultaneously emphasizing the need for principles that undergird one’s teaching. The postmethod era, with its emphasis on principles, is then discussed in light of computer assisted language learning (CALL), which has often been viewed as a cure-all in a way that resembles previous conceptions of TESOL methods. 

The authors also discuss the (oft unexplored) concept of a method, which entails much more than a mere prescriptive set of teaching practices. Here, the reader is able to see the many aspects underpinning a method; as a result, the discussion highlights educators’ need to look beyond the superficial aspects of what they may be doing in their classrooms. This is followed by several arguments against the exclusive use of any one method (e.g., no method is appropriate for every context/cohort, using a single method ignores/excludes effective aspects of other methods, adhering to one method often results in the the prioritization of the method at the expense of learning, and the rigid use of methods constrains teacher agency and results in teacher disempowerment).

From here, the authors change course by providing an overview of technology within TESOL (beginning in the 1970s and ending with the present). The authors then outline differences between tech integration versus tech use whilst also noting the construct of CALL within the literature base. CALL as it relates to various TESOL methods is then discussed, which is followed by a discussion of CALL within the postmethod era. In particular, the authors argue for striking a balance between teaching and technology and for the thoughtful incorporation of technology in the L2 classroom (as opposed to using it for its trendiness, which echoes the longstanding problem of haphazard method crazes).  

The piece begins with a brief overview of the construct of method, which transitions into a concise historical account of the method era and the subsequent postmethod era. The author then notes the postmethod era’s recognition that teaching practices should be driven by one’s learners, context, and “sense of plausibility” (p.96). From here, the author outlines several prominent postmethod frameworks (i.e., Stern’s, Widdowson’s, Kumaravadivelu’s, Brown’s, Ellis’, and Long’s), all of which are flexible by design and rooted in a blend of second language acquisition, context-appropriate, and critical pedagogies. The author then examines (via thematic analysis) these frameworks in light of each other to arrive at a broader conceptualization of postmethod pedagogy, which has, until now, remained largely undefined. The author’s analysis yields eight key aspects of postmethod pedagogy, which are discussed. Last, the author notes several limitations of his work.

This article discusses a quantitative study that focused on postmethod pedagogy and educator burnout. Specifically, the author examined the correlation between the use of postmethod pedagogy and the level of burnout among 86 EFL teachers aged from 21 to 45 with anywhere from two to 23 years of teaching experience. The results showed that the implementation of postmethod pedagogy had a negative correlation with burnout; the author concluded that using postmethod teaching could ease teacher burnout. Here, it merits noting that the author was a bit overzealous with his interpretation of the study’s findings; because the study was correlational and not truly experimental, it could not establish causation.

The study also revealed that, overall, the participant teachers did not widely employ (and were not generally willing to employ) postmethod pedagogy.  In addition, it merits mention that the author discusses the issue that many TESOL educators are unfamiliar with the postmethod era and its emphasis on teaching via principles while others are familiar but unwilling to root their practice in principles and reflection. Moreover, the author notes a further issue, which is that of institutional policies that hinder one’s ability to teach as they see fit.  

The author begins with a historical overview of the pre-method, method, and postmethod eras whilst noting their timelines and unique characteristics. Following this, the author discusses the rise of reflective teaching in the postmethod era, which heavily emphasizes teacher empowerment and practice based on allowing educators to “theorize from their practice and practice what they have theorized” (p.282). The author also discusses the postmethod era’s call for the inclusion of reflective teaching as a key aspect of teacher-training programs. 

The author then discusses postmethod pedagogy in Iran, with special attention given to various concerns surrounding postmethod teaching (e.g., the implausibility of method-free instruction, the possibility that the death of methods could negatively impact the field, a lack of details regarding how to prepare postmethod educators, clashes between education policies and eclectic practice, etc.). The author then notes a number of arguments for postmethod pedagogy within Iran. The author concludes that despite studies and arguments supporting postmethod pedagogy, the Iranian context remains hostile to the ideas and practices of the current era. 

The article begins with a brief historical account of foreign language teaching within the context of China. The discussion then shifts into one focusing on the differences (and relationships) between the constructs of approach, method, and technique (and their frequent convolution). From here, the postmethod era is discussed in detail with regard to its three defining aspects (also referred to collectively as postmethod theory) and its three parameters, as outlined by Kumaravaidelu, who originally coined the current condition. 

The second half of the paper focuses on teacher-education within the postmethod era; specifically, the author argues for the need to familiarize to-be teachers with methods (to provide them with numerous options from which to draw/select/combine/alter, etc.), shift programs away from a view of teacher trainers as exclusive experts (in light of the current era’s embracing of individual/unique knowledge), and avoid advocating for/overemphasizing one particular method (because each comes with advantages and disadvantages and because the current era emphasizes each teacher’s ability to chose their own principles and practices). Last, the author puts forth a number of prerequisites for implementing postmethod practices (i.e., the need for prior teaching experience, knowledge of various teaching methods and approaches, knowledge of the limitations and affordances of various methods and approaches, the development of research skills [action and practitioner]), along with a potential training model to help to-be teachers construct their own ideas about methods. 

This article begins with a discussion of teacher knowledge and its construction via various forms of professional development (e.g., from formal study to things such as participating in online teacher discussion forums). The author clearly outlines and illustrates that the notion of professional development extends far beyond traditional concepts of what it means to grow or expand one’s professional skills and knowledge. The author then discusses problems resulting from narrow conceptions of professional development and the exclusive use of knowledge, models, methods, etc. produced by so-called experts (e.g., prominent scholars); here, the author presents a cogent argument for the value of knowledge produced by teachers, who are more familiar with their students, classrooms, etc. than outsiders and who are, thereby, most capable of creating/choosing/employing effective practices. The author then transitions into a discussion of the postmethod era and its focus on disrupting traditional power hierarchies; this is followed by an argument that highlights educators’ ability to make solid, well-reasoned decisions about practice, despite being constrained by external forces (e.g., policies, administrators, etc.). 

The author then focuses on various types of teacher knowledge whilst noting a number of frameworks within the literature. Content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and various sources of teacher-based knowledge (e.g., experience, formal training, etc.) are then discussed in detail. This is followed by several suggestions for developing teacher knowledge (e.g., examining one’s existing knowledge); here, the author contends that developing one’s own knowledge qualifies as a form of professional development.  

The author then discusses reflective teaching (because this is critical within the current era and is an effective means of expanding upon one’s own knowledge). The focus subsequently shifts to changes needed in teacher-training programs, many of which are still employing an approach that is based on traditional power hierarchies; this, in turn, is argued to be not only outdated (given the current era) but also dangerous in that it serves to reproduce existing power imbalances.