Page 64 - Linguistically Diverse Educational Contexts

LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE EDUCATIONAL CONTEXTS
that the methodology92 of teaching foreign languages was recognised as a field of linguistics in the mid- 1970s in Poland thanks to Professor Ludwik Zabrocki and his continuator Janusz Arabski (Komorowska, 2017, p. 39). P.E. Gębal, a linguist involved in Polish language glottodidactics, claims that foreign language didactics is to a large extent a reflection of other subject didactics, but it goes far beyond a strictly pedagogical view of its scientific operation and development (2019, p. 11). W. Pfeiffer, a linguist and a German philologist, claims that we distinguish glottodidactics sensu largo and its sub-discipline glottodidactics sensu stricto and further sub-disciplines of glottodidactics 93.
The above can be summarised in the words of Maliszewski (2016, p. 18), who noted that often field affiliation is understood as an alibi that exempts one from studying other (sub)disciplines.
It is not only the positioning of foreign language didactics that causes problems. As W. Wilczyńska and A. Michońska-Stadnik noticed, the heterogeneous vocabulary used to describe (second/foreign) language teaching, such as: foreign language didactics, methodology, glottodidactics, applied linguistics, and educational linguistics, makes it difficult to indicate a clear research field, which is foreign language teaching and learning94. F. Grucza, a linguist and a Germanist, is equally critical about the diverse ways in which glottodidactics is defined, as well as about the object of its interest95. However, as this researcher emphasises, glottodidactics (and thus foreign language teaching) has grown out of linguistics (Grucza, 2007, pp. 22–24). B. Karpinska-Musiał, meanwhile, emphasises the need to consolidate the autonomy of glottodidactics (foreign language didactics) and to situate it on the borderline between humanities and social sciences (2019, p. 392).
Could it be that the gap between theory and practice is also caused by the terminological chaos of foreign language didactics, namely glottodidactics in Poland? Perhaps teachers find it difficult to find their way in this chaos. They look for practical and methodical solutions, materials for lessons, and leave the theories to the scientists, as they do not see any practical applications for them.
My observations show that researchers dealing both with Polish as a second language and with modern foreign languages, or languages of national minorities or migrant pupils, do not seem to exchange experiences among themselves, nor do they read their works (apart from the mainstream and the names), and there is a lack of discussion among them. While it is understandable that research papers on the linguistics or phonetics and semantics of a language will remain in the field of linguistic research, a separate focus on language education and learning in the broadest sense, fostering socially oriented education programmes, plurilingualism, translingualism, interculturalism, and critical pedagogical reflection does not seem sensible, as in such a situation both researchers and teachers do not learn from one another. When reviewing papers consisting of teaching materials for schools written by both language teachers and researchers, I observe that these papers differ in their content. Conferences for researchers and language teachers are organised for each language separately, which among other things illustrates the divisions described above. Also, cultural, intercultural, and pedagogical issues are addressed superficially at language conferences.
Teachers of Polish as a foreign language are currently in a situation where they need support, as an increasing number of foreigners come to our schools and universities and there is a need to educate
92 H. Komorowska uses the word "didactics" interchangeably in the article. 93 Pfeiffer, 2001.
94 Wilczyńska& Michońska-Stadnik, 2010, pp. 42–46.
95Grucza, 1978, pp. 29–44.
49