Journal of Transformative Praxis

Journal of Transformative Praxis, Volume 4, Issue 1, 2023, 42-53, https://doi.org/10.51474/jrtp.v4i1.578

Online publication date: Aug 11, 2023

Publication date: Dec 31, 2023

Views: 44 | Downloads: 28

Employing a qualitative research method and Freire’s critical pedagogy as the main lens, this study explores the techniques of using the contextual approach in the context of secondary level public school in Nepal. Critical pedagogy is seen as one of the burning theories to uplift marginalized learners for equity to enhance the quality of education in the field of English language teaching. Contextualized teaching is not a new approach where its usefulness is understood and practiced. And for lack of training and traditional teaching model still being dominant, this approach has yet to take traction in many school levels of English teaching in Nepal. Data are obtained from participants in-depth interviews and written documents, which were transcribed and analyzed for developing themes. Teachers who have been teaching for long years at secondary level applying contextual approach were purposefully selected as the participants for this study. Through the eyes of the participants the natural world was seen and reached in the conclusion incorporating the practises and experiences. Based on the perspectives of participants and practices the collected data were interpreted and analyzed. Moreover, my own past experience as a student in a rural public school in Nepal also provides the initial drive for this study. Triangulation of data suggests that contextualizing English language teaching practices exists and exhibits in multiple ways and they need to be fore grounded for the benefits they have for innovative teaching, organic leaning, linking learning with real life, and providing students with tools and opportunity to empower themselves as well as own learning.

Critical pedagogy Contextual classroom Meaningful learning Oppressed class

1. Apple, M. W. & Buras, K. L. (2006). The subaltern speak: Curriculum, power, and educational struggles. Routledge.
2. Auer, P.,& A. Di Luzio. (1992). The contextualization of language. Benjamins.
3. Ausubel, D.P. (2000). The nature of meaning and meaningful learning. In: The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7_4
4. Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1993). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
5. Crawford, L. M. (2001). Teaching contextually: Research, rationale, and techniques for improving student motivation and achievement. CCI Publishing, Inc.
6. CREDE. (2021). CREDE. https://manoa.hawaii.edu/code/credenational/contextualization.
7. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, (4th ed.) Boylston Street, Boston. Edwards Brothers, Inc.
8. Dewey, J. (1907). School and social progress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9. Epstein, P. (2010). Indian education for all: Grounded in place and culture. National Writing Project.
10. Essays, U K. (2018). Freire's critical pedagogy lecture. https://www.ukessays.com/lectures/education/approaches/critical-theory/?vref=1
11. Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group Inc.
12. Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching (4th Ed). Longman. https://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/socialresearch
13. Humphreys, M., & Watson, T. J. (2009). Ethnographic practices: from ‘writing-up ethnographic research’ to ‘writing ethnography’. Organizational Ethnography: studying the complexities of everyday life, 40-55.
14. Islam, M. & Sirswal, D. R. (2015). Philosophy of Swami Vivekananda. Centre for Positive Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Studies.
15. Johnson, E. B. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: What it is and why it’s here to stay. Corwin Press.
16. Kafle, N. P. (2011). Hermeneutic phenomenological research method simplified. Bodhi: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5(1), 181-200.
17. Kapur, K. (2009). Teaching English at the primary level in India: An overview. Young learner English Language Policy and Implementation: International Perspectives, 79-87.
18. Koirala B. N. (2020). Robotlaai jitney ki sikshan pasha chhadne? (in Nepali translation: Will you win the robots or leave the teaching profession? Naya Patrika Daily. https://jhannaya.nayapatrikadaily.com/newsdetails/969/2020-05-09
19. Kruppa, J., Rohmann, J., Herrmann, C., Sieg, M., Rubarth, K., & Piper, S. (2021). What statistics instructors need to know about concept acquisition to make statistics stick. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 18(2), 02.
20. Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The post-method condition: Emerging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 27-48.
21. Mclaren, P. (2020). The future of critical pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52(12).
22. Moynagh, M. (2020). Christian Communities for Every Context. https://lausanne.org/content/lga/2020-09/christian-communities-for-every-context
23. Satriani, I., Emilia, E., & Gunawan, M. H. (2012). Contextual teaching and learning approach to teaching writing. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 10-22.
24. Smith, F. (1990). To think. Global Education Review, 3(1), 27-44.
25. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.
26. Thornton, P. B. (2013). Three teaching styles. Faculty Focus: Philosophy of Teaching. Manga Publications.
27. Unaldi, I., Bardakci, M., Akpinar, K. D., & Dolas, F. (2013). A comparison of contextualized, decontextualized and corpus-informed vocabulary instruction: A quasi-experimental study. Dil ve Edebiyat Egitimi Dergisi, 2(8).
28. Valdez, P. N. (2020). Research in Critical Pedagogy: Implications for English Language Classrooms in Asia. PASAA: Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 60, 222-236.
29. Wang, H., & Carlson, S. P. (2011). Factors that influence student’s satisfaction in an environmental field day experience. International Electronic Journal of Environmental, 1(2), 130-139.
30. Whitty, G. (1974). Sociology and the problem of radical educational change. Educability, Schools and Ideology, 1, 112-137.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.