A01 cohe4573 01 se fm. Qxd

foreign language at the elementary, secondary, or post-secondary level);
and
■
knowledge of the curriculum and educational ends (e.g., whether/how
the content is integrated into language learning).
4
So how would these categories be applied to the teaching of L2 pragmatics in
particular? It is important to identify what specifically teachers of pragmatics
need to know to help learners understand others’ intentions and express
themselves as intended in the given sociocultural context. The following
chart shows a preliminary attempt to answer this question:
4
Adapted from Borg (2003); Freeman (2002); Freeman and Johnson (1998); Johnston
and Goettsch (2000); Shulman (1987).

---

2 4
G R O U N D I N G I N T H E T E A C H I N G A N D L E A R N I N G O F L 2 P R A G M A T I C S
When teachers intend to teach pragmatics, naturally they need to know
what it is (subject-matter knowledge). This would include knowing that
pragmatic norms vary depending on, for example, the regional, genera-
tional, gender and ethnic backgrounds of the speakers, as well as various
contextual factors
5
(knowledge of pragmatic variation), knowing how the 
L2 is typically used (knowledge of the range of L2 pragmatic norms to be
taught), and knowing how to explain pragmatics in the way learners can
relate to (knowledge of meta-pragmatic information). In order to actually
teach L2 pragmatics in the classroom, teachers would need to know instruc-
tional and evaluative strategies specifically as they relate to pragmatics 
( pedagogical-content knowledge). It would be a teachers’ immediate 
concern, for instance, to know how to communicate to their students the
importance of having pragmatic ability in the L2, how to direct learners’
attention to features of sociocultural context, and how to elicit and assess
learners’ pragmatic use of language. In addition, effective and culturally 
sensitive teachers of pragmatics would be well aware of such things as 
the characteristics of the learners (e.g., their cultural identities and levels 
of proficiency), the scope and educational objectives of the curriculum, 
and the limits of the institutional contexts in which they are teaching 
pragmatics (e.g., the flexibility of the curriculum and the time allowed for
pragmatics instruction). Teacher education in the area of L2 pragmatics has
only started to be researched, and this list of components of teacher know-
ledge for teaching L2 pragmatics is a preliminary effort intended to open up
more discussion on this topic.
5
These variations are termed macro-social variation and intra-lingual/micro-social vari-
ation (Barron 2003, 2005; Schneider and Barron 2008).
Selected components of teacher 
knowledge for teaching L2 in general
Components of teacher knowledge specifically
required for teaching of L2 pragmatics*
Knowledge of the learners and local,
curricular, and educational contexts
Knowledge of learners’ identities, cultures,
proficiency, and other characteristics.
Knowledge of the pragmatics-focused curriculum.
Knowledge of the role of L2 pragmatics in the
educational contexts.
*A preliminary attempt adapted from Bardovi-Harlig (1992); Ishihara (2007a); Kasper (1997); Meier (2003).

---

T E A C H E R S ’ P R A G M A T I C S : K N O W L E D G E , B E L I E F S , A N D P R A C T I C E
2 5
Teacher knowledge and beliefs
6
Teachers usually have certain ideas that they know or believe to be true 
generally about learning and teaching. This following list shows specific
areas of teachers’ knowledge and beliefs and can stimulate teacher readers’
reflection as they explore their own beliefs related to learning and teaching.
Teachers’ beliefs can be their implicit theories of, for example:
■
learning in general;
■
the subject matter (e.g., the nature and characteristics of the target
language; and the nature of pragmatics in our case);
■
the nature of knowledge (e.g., how knowledge is generated or acquired);
■
(language) learning;
■
(language) teaching;
■
learners and their characteristics;
■
learning to teach;
■
self (e.g., self-identity and self-esteem);
■
teacher efficacy (e.g., teachers’ perception of their own influence on
student learning);
■
the teacher’s role;
■
the curriculum; and
■
teaching contexts.
7
Past research has found that the teacher beliefs that were formed early tend to
self-perpetuate and may be difficult to change, and that teacher beliefs tend
to be largely influenced by experience from their own learning, professional
training, and previous teaching experiences.
8
Teacher beliefs are also likely
to affect teachers’ perceptions, thinking processes, and decision-making in
the classroom. In the next section, we briefly touch on the potential link
between teacher beliefs and practice.
6
Because teacher knowledge and beliefs are inextricably intertwined, some researchers
in teacher education see it as rather unproductive to attempt to draw a clear line
between the two (e.g., Borg 2006; Meijer et al. 1999). We share this approach and 
discuss teacher cognition more broadly.
7
Adapted from Calderhead (1996); Pajares (1992); Richards and Lockhart (1996).
8
Pajares (1992).

---