Comments on B. Kumaravadivelu's "The Postmethod Condition: (E)merging Strategies for Second/Foreign Language Teaching": "Alternative to" or "Addition to" Method?

Abstract

are all subtitled Japanese. Thirdly, I would like to react to the comment about my not having read any of the recent literature on the subject of learning strategies, specifically related to the use of Oxford's strategy inventory. Oxford attaches to her five-page response a reference list with 18 entries, 12 of which are unpublished master's theses or doctoral dissertations, papers read at conferences, published a journal unavailable Japan or marked in press. It is simply not possible for overseas researchers to have access to such materials. I would happily participate collaborative research. However, although the call for collaboration is useful, researchers Asia often find a patronizing attitude toward their work and their ideas. I am glad Oxford and Green are working to overcome this by actively working toward collaborative research. To conclude, my position is that there are different kinds of research which produce different results which may be of interest. Research dealing with human beings is notoriously fuzzy and shows a great deal of variation. I welcome that and see such variation as the norm. It is only through supportive collaborative research as well as supportive feedback to others that we can ever hope to begin to fill the gaps on our journey to better understanding of how human beings learn and communicate the world.