Article+Reflection+by+Neşe+Demir

**TOWARD A POSTMETHOD PEDAGOGY ** **B. Kumaravadivelu ** In this article, the writer states that the dissatisfaction with the limitations of the concept of //method// and the transmission model of teacher education heralded the development of //postmethod pedagogy//. Then, he attempts to provide the fundamentals of postmethod pedagogy in his article. I think his article is so well-organized, well-structured and clearly understood because he groups the ideas under subtitles. He intelligently divides his article into three sections.
 * Article Reflection by Neşe Demir **

In the first section, conceptualize the common features of a postmethod pedagogy. He sees the pedagogic parameters in a three-dimensional system as particularity, practicality, and possibility. Firstly, I think, he gives clear examples to explain what particularity is, and I believe the truth of his examples as they are the problems that we sometimes encounter in our classes as well. Secondly, he gives a clear distinction between the descriptions of particularity and practicality. Thirdly, he gives various examples to explain possibility. According to my ideas, a person can understand and have a good deal of information about the topic even that person does not have any idea of that topic before. This is because the writer’s clear language and examples. In addition, he writes from different perspectives- which is a strength- in his article.

In the second section, he offers suggestions for actualizing postmethod pedagogy in terms of the anticipated roles and functions of learners, teachers, and teacher educators. Firstly, I agree with the ideas of the writer about learners. He says that a postmethod learner is an autonomous learner and he divides autonomous learners into three as academic, social, and liberatory autonomy. He gives detailed explanations and features of those types, and I accept that there are differences between them, of course. Secondly, he says that a postmethod teacher is an autonomous individual. He gives place to various researches on teacher knowledge during and after formal teacher education. Additionally, he gives beneficial clues about how should teachers begin an inquiry. Thirdly, he states that we need a fundamental restructuring of teacher education so that it focuses on the education part of teacher education as on the education part of it. Then, he suggests some was to accomplish this. I must confess that I am strongly, positively, affected by his statement and I find his ideas, about how to accomplish it, beneficial and applicable.

When it comes to the third section, he problematizes postmethod pedagogy by raising questions and concerns that might come up in the process of actualizing it. The writer gives the reasons of the possible problems for the postmethod pedagogy and binds the topic towards his conclusion; answers to those problems/questions will vary from context to context and from time to time, and in that sense, a postmethod pedagogy will always remain a work in progress. Thus, I think the writer keeps being objective by saying that.

In the conclusion part, he raises the prospect of the parameters of a postmethod pedagogy replacing the concept of method as an organizing principle for L2 learning, teaching, and teacher education. He clarifies that the pedagogic parameters needs serious consideration and that’s why he leaves the reader with more food for thought.