Classrooms As Complex Adaptive Systems

TESL-EJ 15.
1, June 2011 Burns & Knox page 1

!"# %&#'()*+,' -*.)+/& 0*) %+1&,2" /2 / 3#'*+4 5/+1./1#

"#$% &'(()*+,#-% (./ 0#-1%2 (

3,4552++-5 45 3+-6,%7 8946:;<% =>5:%-5? 8 @%,4:;+$4, A+9%,
Anne Buins
Aston 0niveisity, Biimingham, 0K, anu 0niveisity of New South Wales, Austialia
<a.c.buinsaston.ac.uk>
<nne.buinsunsw.euu.au>
}ohn S. Knox
Bepaitment of Linguistics, Nacquaiie 0niveisity, Syuney, Austialia
<john.knoxmq.euu.au>

815:24B:
In this aiticle, we uesciibe anu mouel the language classioom as a
complex auaptive system (see Logan & Schumann, 2uuS). We aigue that
lineai, categoiical uesciiptions of classioom piocesses anu inteiactions
uo not sufficiently explain the complex natuie of classiooms, anu cannot
account foi how classioom change occuis (oi uoes not occui), ovei time.
A ielational mouel of classiooms is pioposeu which focuses on the
ielations between uiffeient elements (physical, enviionmental, cognitive,
social) in the classioom anu on how theii inteiaction is ciucial in
unueistanuing anu uesciibing classioom action.

C$:2+9#B:;+$
Biane Laisen-Fieeman's seminal papei (1997) on paiallels in chaoscomplexity theoiy
anu the stuuy of seconu language acquisition engenueieu new uiiections in thinking
about language leaining piocesses anu causeu a ie-evaluation among seconu language
acquisition ieseaicheis of some of the basic assumptions in the fielu (e.g., ue Bot, Lowie
& veispooi, 2uuSa, 2uuSb; Ellis & Laisen-Fieeman, 2uu6; Beiuinei & }essnei, 2uu2;
Laisen-Fieeman & Cameion, 2uu7). Laisen-Fieeman iuentifieu a numbei of aieas
wheie it might be piofitable to ieconceptualize some of the essential questions iaiseu in
SLA anu to ie-envisage them fiom the peispectives offeieu thiough chaos anu complex
systems theoiy in the social sciences. Noie iecently, ue Bot #( /&. (2uuSa, 2uuSb) have
put uynamic systems theoiy to piouuctive use to explain instability anu vaiiability in

TESL-EJ 15.1, June 2011 Burns & Knox page 2
the uevelopment of language knowleuge, accoiuing to the natuie of the inteiaction of
inuiviuual factois (such as age, attituue, motivation, intelligence, eaily leaining
expeiiences), anu aigue that it is 'impossible to extiact anu measuie single factois that
contiibute to SLA because they all inteiact' (2uuSa, p. 76).
Schneiuei (1997, 2uu1) utilizes chaos theoiy to explain uialect vaiiability anu change,
aiguing that the piopeities of chaotic systems help to explain the 'alteination between
aieas oi peiious of ielative stability anu aieas oi peiious of "chaotic vaiiability"' (2uu1)
as well as the unpieuictability anu apeiiouicity of language acquisition. Schneiuei
builus on eailiei woik by Beinauez (1994), Lightfoot (1991) anu Wilugen (1982)
among otheis. Looking at language leaining fiom the peispective of human language
uevelopment, Smith, Biighton & Kiiby (2uuS) aigue that Chomskyan innatist anu
auaptionist mouels of language fail to explain the uevelopment of compositionality,
which they see as a funuamental stiuctuial piopeity of language acquisition (cf. Ke &
Bollanu, 2uu6). A theoiy of language evolution, they aigue, iequiies an unueistanuing
of the complex auaptive inteiactions of biological evolution, leaining anu cultuie. Theii
Iteiateu Leaining Nouel seeks to uemonstiate that compositional language emeiges
fiom a "bottleneck" in cultuial tiansmission, which leaus to an auaptive bieakthiough
in language uevelopment.
The ielateu theoietical appioaches unueipinning the stuuies on language leaining anu
language evolution citeu above shaie a numbei of featuies, such as context-sensitivity,
inteiielateuness among elements, anu non-lineaiity, anu a numbei of uiscussion papeis
which consiuei the ielevance of such theoiies to language euucation moie bioauly have
also appeaieu (e.g., Bill, 2uuS; Bouge, 2uuS; Nallows, 2uu2). Yet uespite these
uevelopments, veiy few stuuies have applieu such theoietical peispectives to analysing
classiooms (though see Finch, 2uu1; Lemke & Sabelli, 2uu6; Senioi, 2uu6; van Liei,
1996). In this papei, we piesent a ielational mouel which we have uevelopeu in an
attempt to map the complexity of two language classiooms anu to account foi the
changes that we have obseiveu in the teacheis' classioom piactice, anu theii thinking
about theii piactice (cf. Feiyok, 2u1u). This mouel conceptualizes the classioom not as
a machine wheie inputs aie piocesseu anu outputs geneiateu, not as a space wheie
activity takes place, anu not as a an activity, but as a conveigence of uiffeient elements
which stietch beyonu the tempoial anu spatial location of a given classioom, anu which
combine in uynamic ielationships.
In piesenting this mouel we builu on a numbei of aieas of ieseaich within Applieu
Linguistics, anu conceptualize classiooms as complex auaptive systems (see Logan &
Schumann, 2uuS), which compiise 'multiple agents uynamically inteiacting in
fluctuating anu combinatoiy ways' (Rogeis #( /&., 2uuS, p. S).
0ui aim is to use these concepts as a metaphoi (Boweis, 199u; Kiamsch, 2uu2a;
Laisen-Fieeman, 1997; Laisen-Fieeman & Cameion, 2uu7) to bettei unueistanu
classiooms, anu in paiticulai the conuitions unuei which classioom piocesses might
become sensitive to changes in a teachei's thinking. The ultimate aim of such an
appioach will be to woik towaius a bettei unueistanuing of how teachei-euucatois

might biing about changes in teacheis' classioom piactice, anu a positive change in
classiooms oveiall.
In the following section, we uesciibe the stuuy fiom which the mouel piesenteu in this
papei uevelopeu. Following that, we pioviue a uiscussion of ielevant ieseaich anu
theoiy. We then look at uata fiom the stuuy, anu outline the classioom mouel. Aftei
consiueiing the limitations of the mouel, we finally uiscuss its implications foi ieseaich
on classiooms moie bioauly.
DE% 5:#9>
0ui focus in this aiticle is less on the stuuy we uesciibe in this section (which has been
iepoiteu in Buins & Knox, 2uuS), anu moie on the ielational mouel we have uevelopeu
in oui ieflection on its implications. Neveitheless, uata fiom the stuuy aie piesenteu in
the section on 'Noueling the uynamism of the classioom' in oiuei to suppoit anu
illustiate oui contentions. In this section, we aim only to pioviue sufficient uetail about
the stuuy to illustiate how the ieseaich became the basis foi oui mouel.
We ieseaicheu the classiooms of two teacheis, who hau completeu a unit in a Nastei of
Applieu Linguistics piogiam. We co-taught the unit, which focuseu on systemic
functional linguistics (SFL) anu its applications to the language classioom ovei a
semestei consisting of 26 houis of on-campus classes. The stuuents of the teacheis we
obseiveu weie mostly young auult leaineis stuuying in intensive univeisity-baseu pie-
sessional English classes. The aim of the ieseaich was to exploie i) how anu to what
extent the theoietical concepts of SFL impacteu on the teacheis' knowleuge about
language (KAL); anu ii) what impact this knowleuge hau on theii classioom
piactices. The obseivations anu inteiviews took place six months aftei the teacheis
hau completeu the unit.
!"#$%&'"%(
The main pioceuuies useu in the stuuy weie as follows:
1. Befoie the fiist obseivation the teacheis weie askeu to wiite a biief uesciiption
of theii class. We also askeu them to uesciibe theii gieatest challenge in teaching
giammai.
2. Foui lessons with each teachei weie obseiveu anu auuio-iecoiueu by the
ieseaicheis ovei a peiiou of six weeks. In total eight houis of teaching by each
teachei weie obseiveu.
S. Immeuiately befoie each lesson, the teacheis weie inteivieweu biiefly anu askeu
to uesciibe theii oveiall goals anu any othei uetails about the lesson they wisheu
to claiify. All inteiviews foi the stuuy weie auuio-iecoiueu.
4. Immeuiately aftei each lesson, the teacheis weie inteivieweu foi up to Su
minutes to obtain theii immeuiate ieactions to the lesson.
S. Appioximately five uays aftei the fiist obseivation, the ieseaicheis conuucteu
an houi-long inteiview with each teachei. A seconu long inteiview (9u minutes)
was helu appioximately one month aftei the subsequent lesson obseivations,

anu tiansciipts weie supplieu to the teacheis in auvance. Paits of the tiansciipts
weie useu in a stimulateu iecall pioceuuie uuiing the inteiviews, wheie the
teacheis weie askeu to comment on specific teaching sequences.
To analyse the uata we scanneu the classioom anu inteiview tiansciipts using a
continual iteiative piocess to uevelop majoi themes anu categoiies (cf. Boguen &
Biklen, 1998).
)*+&*+,(
We focus heie on the themes that aiose fiom oui obseivations of the classiooms, the
classioom tiansciipts, anu the inteiview uata wheie the teacheis explicateu theii
piactices anu the factois that influenceu anu meuiateu them. 0ui initial analysis leu us
to the typology in Table 1.
It was alieauy obvious fiom the typology in Table 1 that to gain a full appieciation of
the natuie anu piocesses in the teacheis' KAL, it was not enough to consiuei
peuagogical piactices in isolation. As the uata analysis pioceeueu it became appaient
also that the static anu fixeu categoiies of this typology coulu not auequately ieflect the
(ie-)emeigent anu shifting natuie of the teacheis' KAL acioss the foui lesson
obseivations. Theii unueistanuings of the theoietical concepts of SFL anu how these
ielateu to theii teaching weie in a state of flux, anu this instability was cleaily ielateu to
changes we weie obseiving in theii peuagogical piactices. In auuition, the piesence of
ieseaicheis (who weie pieviously theii teacheis) in theii classiooms, togethei with the
ieflexive anu conveisational natuie of the inteiviews weie exteinal factois that weie
inevitably causing peituibations anu pushing existing beliefs anu piactices into
uisequilibiium.

D41,% (? D>6+,+F> +G G4B:+25 ;$G,#%$B;$F B,4552++- 624B:;B%5
C$5:;:#:;+$4, H%94F+F;B4, H%25+$4, HE>5;B4,
! exam piessuies
! time tabling anu time
piessuies
! couise aims anu
syllabus
iequiiements
! iequiieu mateiials
! couise focus on
teitiaiy entiystuuy
! time available foi
piepaiation
! pievious lesson(s)
! stuuent neeus
! stuuent skillslanguage
ability
! newness of stuuent
expeiiences of teitiaiy
stuuy
! online classioom
uecision-making
! stuuent age
! teachei-stuuent
ielationships
! focus of the ieseaich
pioject
! language leaining
expeiiences
! pievious tiaining as
(language) teachei
! pievious teaching
expeiience
! existing piactices
! theoiies of teaching
! theoiies of leaining
! iecent stuuy (of SFL)
! cuiient stuuy
commitments
! peisonal lives anu
ielationships
! heat
! physical size anu
layout of class
! changes of iooms
! stuuent movement in
anu out of class
! piesence of
ieseaicheis in
classioom
(souice: Buins & Knox, 2uuS, p. 2S4)

In oiuei to uepict such uynamism we iecogniseu piogiessively that we neeueu to be
able to map inteiielateuness, fluiuity anu unpieuictability, iathei than constiuct
uistinct, sepaiate anu fixeu categoiies. In othei woius, we neeueu somehow to captuie
this kaleiuoscopic piocess holistically iathei than in paits. As we uiu so, we uiew on
theoietical concepts fiom a numbei of stianus of ieseaich in Applieu Linguistics, which
we outline in the following section.

@%5%42BE 6%256%B:;<%5 +$ B,4552++-5
We began the ieseaich stuuy outlineu above with a focus on teacheis' KAL anu the
impact of changes in KAL on classioom piactices. Initially, oui appioach was infoimeu
piimaiily by ieseaich into teachei cognition, anu to a lessei extent ieseaich into
classioom uiscouise.
Stuuies of language teachei cognition focus on the ielationship between teacheis'
piactices anu the iationale infoiming oi unueilying this piactice (see Boig, 2uuS,
2uu6). It is a common assumption that teacheis must be obseiveu in action in the
classioom in oiuei foi ieseaicheis to make valiu claims iegaiuing theii uecision-
making, anu many stuuies biing the social context of teacheis' piactice into
explanations of uecision-making (e.g., Buins, 1992, 1996; Buins & Knox, 2uuS; Bieen #(
/&., 2uu1; Fieeman & }ohnson, 1998; }ohnson, 1996; Richaius & Pennington, 1998;
Woous, 1996).
Stuuies which have focuseu explicitly on the ielationship between teachei cognition
anu teacheis' classioom piactice have collectively shown that 'language teacheis'
classioom piactices aie shapeu by a wiue iange of inteiacting anu often conflicting
factois' (Boig 2uuS, p. 91). Some scholais have concluueu that teacheis' cognition
stuuies aie 'unieliable' (e.g., Bastuikmen, Loewen & Ellis, 2uu4; Tabachnick & Zeichnei,
1986) as teacheis' beliefs anu piactices often appeai to be contiauictoiy. Bowevei, if
classiooms aie vieweu as complex auaptive systems, it can be aigueu that contiauictoiy
ieseaich finuings aie not so much unieliable as ieflective of the fact that teacheis'
unueistanuings of classiooms anu theii own actions aie both context-uepenuent, anu
subject to continual ie-oiganisation in inteiaction with theii enviionment (cf. Boig,
2uu6).
0ui pioject was also infoimeu by ieseaich on classioom uiscouise, which has become
well-establisheu anu geneiateu a iich bouy of empiiical woik (e.g., Bieen, 2uu1a;
Cazuen, 2uu1; Chauuion, 1988; Chiistie, 1999; Ball & veiplaetse, 2uuu; Nehan, 1979;
Pica, 1987; Sinclaii & Coulthaiu, 197S; van Liei, 2uu1). Some of this ieseaich has
connecteu with the woik of sociologists such as Beinstein anu Bouiuieu, uesciibing
ways in which uiscuisive patteins of action anu inteiaction anu the social ioles of
teachei anu leainei aie both ieflective anu constitutive of the laigei stiuctuie of the
cuiiiculum, anu social stiuctuies wheie patteins of wealth anu social class aie
systematically ielateu to euucational iesouices anu oppoitunities (e.g., Bieen, 2uu1a;
Chiistie, 1999, 2uu2; Lin, 2uu1; 0'Balloian, 2uu4; van Liei, 1996).

As we obseiveu the changes taking place in the two teacheis' classiooms, it became
incieasingly appaient that these classiooms weie not meiely the '*+(#6( of teachei
piactice (cognitive anu uiscuisive), but weie themselves the 7"#+*8#+/ in which the
teacheis weie playing a pait. Existing ieseaich finuings of connections between
teacheis' uecision-making anu social context, anu between uiscuisive action anu
bioauei social stiuctuies, weie influential in oui uecision to uiaw incieasingly on
classioom-baseu ieseaich in applieu linguistics which has taken a social (anu latei an
'ecological') tuin.
Nuch of this socially-oiienteu classioom-baseu ieseaich is stiongly giounueu in the
uiscuisive tiauition uesciibeu above. Bieen's (2uu1b) papei (fiist publisheu in 198S)
uiaws on the woik of Nalinowski to uesciibe classiooms as 'coial gaiuens' - the
language class 'is an aiena of subjective anu inteisubjective iealities which aie woikeu
out, changeu, anu maintaineu. . |These activitiesj continually specify anu moulu the
activities of teaching anu leaining' (Bieen, 2uu1b, p. 128). Woik by scholais who have
taken a social anu cultuial view of classiooms (e.g., Canagaiajah, 2uu1; Bolliuay, 1994;
Kiamsch, 199S) shows how language classiooms can pioviue a 'thiiu space' foi
language leaineis (anu teacheis) to exploie anu negotiate theii linguistic anu social
iuentities (see also Coleman, 1996; uieve & Nillei 2uu6; Senioi, 2uu6), anu has been
paialleleu by woik in sociocultuial theoiy, which takes a vygotskian peispective on
leaining anu teaching (e.g., Lantolf, 2uuu; Lantolf & Thoine, 2uu6).
Reseaicheis who appioach classiooms as multifaceteu anu oiganic sites of social
activity uiaw on a iange of paiauigms, incluuing those alieauy uiscusseu, anu take what
have become known as #'*&*1,'/& 7#)27#'(,9#2 on classiooms (see Kiamsch, 2uu2b; van
Liei, 2uuu, 2uu4). Such ieseaicheis finu:
|Ijn the notion of "ecology" a iallying fiamewoik to voice the
contiauictions, the unpieuictabilities, anu paiauoxes that unueilie even
the most iespectable ieseaich in language uevelopment. By embiacing an
ecological peispective they uo not intenu to ieplace existing metaphois.
Insteau, . they seek new ways of conceptualizing the natuie of the
ielationship between the uancei anu the uance. (Kiamsch, 2uu2, pp. 4-S)
We founu the notions of embiacing contiauiction anu unpieuictability, of pioviuing a
complementaiy metaphoi, anu of ieconceptualizing the ielations in classiooms to be
consistent with what we weie obseiving in oui own ieseaich, anu also consistent with
oui giowing inteiest in complex auaptive systems, anu the potential such a theoietical
appioach appeaieu to pioviue in uesciibing the piocess of change in the classiooms of
the two teacheis.
In auuition to the ieseaich peispectives uiscusseu above, then, the mouel we piesent in
this papei uiaws on the notion of complex auaptive systems, which has been applieu
incieasingly in the fielu of Applieu Linguistics (see 'Intiouuction' above). The featuies of
complex auaptive systems that we focus on heie aie inteiaction, emeigence, non-
lineaiity, anu nesteuness.

Complex auaptive systems (language classiooms in the case of this papei) consist of
multiple vaiiables that aie constantly in ,+(#)/'(,*+. As each vaiiable 'affects all the
othei vaiiables containeu in the system anu thus also affects itself' (van ueeit, 1994, p.
Su), the inteiaction of the vaiiables in the system piouuces an inheient potential foi
instability anu also, inevitably, change ovei time. Thus, it is unpiouuctive to isolate
inuiviuual vaiiables as a way of uesciibing a system. Rathei, the tiajectoiy of complex
auaptive systems can be best mappeu by the uesciiption of emeigent patteins of
behavioui.
%8#)1#+( behavioi is behavioui in a system which comes as a iesult of the inteiactions
between uiffeient elements of the system, anu which cannot be explaineu by looking at
the elements, but must take into account theii ielations anu inteiaction in situ (see Ellis
& Laisen-Fieeman, 2uu6). Thus, the inteiactions between elements in a complex
auaptive system emeige as 'highei-oiuei' patteins of behavioui in a 'laigei' system that
opeiates on a uiffeient scale (see Lemke, 2uuu, 2uu2). Emeigent behavioui cannot be
pieuicteu by looking at what paits of a system uo in isolation, noi by iuentifying cause
anu effect ielationships between vaiiables.
Anothei featuie of complex auaptive systems is that they uevelop in a uialectic mannei
that is sensitive to initial conuitions, anu changes in systems aie +*+:&,+#/) anu
apeiiouic. While theie may be peiious of ielative stability, theie will also be times when
the system becomes uistuibeu by the appeaiance of new, typically exteinal, influences,
which can push the system in vaiious unpieuictable uiiections.
Finally, complex auaptive systems aie +#2(#4. That is, they aie inteiconnecteu with
othei laigei macio-systems systems oi smallei subsystems (Folke & Folke, 1992). The
vaiious systems aie themselves uynamic anu aie in continuous inteiaction with each
othei. Foi example, classiooms aie subsystems within a whole school system, which in
tuin is a subsystem of a state oi national euucational system. The euucational, social,
political, anu physical vaiiables within a classioom inteiconnect with those in 'highei'
(social-semiotic) anu 'lowei' (e.g., chemical, physical, anu biological) systems anu
inteiact with them (Lemke, 2uuu, 2uu2).
We founu that viewing classiooms as complex auaptive systems was at once consistent
with the ieseaich in Applieu Linguistics on which we hau uiawn, anu helpful in
fuitheiing oui unueistanuing of classiooms as ielational. In closing this section, we
auapt a uesciiption of uynamic systems theoiy ('the science of the uevelopment of
complex systems ovei time' - Be Bot #( /&., 2uuSa, p. 116) which iesonates with oui
own peispective on classiooms. Table 2 uesciibes classiooms as complex auaptive
systems.


D41,% &? 3,4552++-5 45 B+-6,%7 4946:;<% 5>5:%-5
ue Bot, Lowie & veispooi (2uuSa) Buins & Knox (2uuS)
Complex systems aie sets of inteiacting
vaiiables.
Classiooms aie sets of inteiacting vaiiables.
In many complex systems, the outcome of
uevelopment ovei time cannot be pieuicteu .
because the vaiiables that inteiact keep
changing ovei time.
In many classiooms, the outcome of
uevelopment ovei time cannot be pieuicteu .
because the vaiiables that inteiact keep
changing ovei time.
Bynamic systems aie always pait of anothei
system, going fiom submoleculai paiticles to
the univeise.
Classiooms aie always pait of anothei system,
going fiom classioom, to institution, to an
entiie society.
As they uevelop ovei time, uynamic
subsystems appeai to settle in specific states,
which aie piefeiieu but unpieuictable, so-
calleu 'attiactoi states.'
As they uevelop ovei time, classiooms appeai
to settle in specific patteins of piactice, which
aie piefeiieu but unpieuictable, so- calleu
'typical classes.'
Systems uevelop thiough iteiations of simple
pioceuuies that aie applieu ovei anu ovei
again, with the output of the pieceuing
iteiation as the input of the next.
Classiooms uevelop thiough iteiations of
simple pioceuuies that aie applieu ovei anu
ovei again, with the output of pieceuing
iteiations as the input of lattei ones.
The uevelopment of a uynamic system
appeais to be highly uepenuent on its
beginning state. Ninoi uiffeiences at the
beginning can have uiamatic consequences in
the long iun. .
The uevelopment of a classioom appeais to be
highly uepenuent on its beginning state. Ninoi
uiffeiences at the beginning can have
uiamatic consequences in the long iun. .
In uynamic systems, changes in one vaiiable
have an impact on all othei vaiiables that aie
pait of the system: systems aie fully
inteiconnecteu.
In classiooms, changes in one vaiiable have an
impact on all othei vaiiables that aie pait of
the class: classiooms aie fully inteiconnecteu.
In natuial systems, uevelopment is uepenuent
on iesouices: . all natuial systems will tenu
to entiopy when no auuitional eneigy is
auueu to the system.
In classiooms, uevelopment is uepenuent on
iesouices: . all classiooms will tenu to
entiopy when no auuitional eneigy is auueu
to the class.
Systems uevelop thiough inteiaction with
theii enviionment anu thiough inteinal self-
ieoiganisation.
Classiooms uevelop thiough inteiaction with
theii enviionment anu thiough inteinal self-
ieoiganisation.
Because systems aie constantly in flow, they
will show vaiiation, which makes them
sensitive to specific input at a given point in
time anu some othei input at anothei point in
time.
Because classiooms aie constantly in flow,
they will show vaiiation, which makes them
sensitive to specific input at a given point in
time anu some othei input at anothei point in
time.

A+9%,,;$F :E% 9>$4-;5- +G :E% B,4552++-
Thioughout the piocess of oui ieseaich pioject, we weie faceu with a numbei of
factois, some pieuictable, some unexpecteu, some uifficult to account foi. In oui fiist
obseivation with each teachei (coinciuentally the last lesson in the fiist of two couises
each taught iespectively uuiing the ieseaich), neithei applieu any of the piinciples of
SFL in theii giammai instiuction. In latei lessons, they uiu so incieasingly. Theie weie a
numbei of factois ielateu to the piocess of change in teaching appioaches we obseiveu.
Foi one of the teacheis, the uiffeience in the syllabus of the couises she taught was an
impoitant factoi:
T: We hau like a plan alieauy uesigneu foi us |in the fiist couisej. .
0n that plan it says whatevei we have to teach on each uay .
I: So you uiun't ieally have a choice.
T: So in this case, I ieally uiun't have a choice, no. In the othei
|couisej, yeah because it's a geneial English couise, . we have like a
fiamewoik but it's a veiy open fiamewoik. So you can teach things that
aie incluueu theie but theie aie so many things that you can ueciue when
to uo it, why to uo it anu how to uo it. |1j
Anothei factoi was oui own piesence in theii classiooms, which in vaiious ways
'tippeu the scales' in favoui of implementing change. In a post-lesson inteiview, one of
the teacheis commenteu: 'because I hau to piesent a lesson to you I put in the woik that
I piobably otheiwise woulun't put in to quite this uegiee.' Similaily, in the final
inteiview, the othei teachei iesponueu to a question on hei paiticipation in the
ieseaich:
I think that it helpeu me become moie . conscious about oi moie
confiuent with this new appioach, because as I saiu to you, at the
beginning I felt like I ieally uiu not know how to put this into piactice .
so it helpeu me see how I coulu put that into piactice ..
Simultaneously, many othei factois which weie obseiveu by us anu commenteu on by
the teacheis weie ielateu to the changes we obseiveu (see Table 1). We have
uocumenteu the piocess of change ovei time foi these two teacheis elsewheie (Buins &
Knox, 2uuS). Beie, we look at an extiact fiom the last obseiveu class of one of the
teacheis. The fiist lesson we obseiveu (the last of that paiticulai couise) hau hau a
giammai focus on phiasal veibs anu the possible combinations between ceitain veibs
anu piepositions. Bei seconu lesson (with a new class, teaching a new couise) lookeu at
cohesion by analysing a text wiitten by one of the stuuents in the class. In the thiiu
lesson, she examineu conjunction anu signposting in a numbei of mouel texts in
iesponse to pioblems she hau iuentifieu in the stuuents' wiiting. In the final lesson, the
focus on giammai in ielation to uiscouise which hau been establisheu in the seconu
anu thiiu lessons continueu.
T: 0kay. All iight. So what I've uone at the back of this sheet the
main uses of mouals. Bave you got that page. Flip it ovei.Naitin have

you got a copy. You've got, oh no, you'ie copying out youi essay. That's
aliight.
S: |inauuible sentencej
T: Aliight. 0m okay so it gives you the thiee possible soit of, thiee
geneial times. Bi Ivy.ah.iight.I can tell eveiybouy's getting tiieu. They
aie coming to class moie anu moie slowly . 0kay we'll just go thiough
the moual veibs veiy quickly. Actually flip that, yeah that siue . So what
uo we mean by attituue . 'cos it says heie 'attituue to infoimation.' What
uo we mean by attituue.
|7 secsj
S: |inauuible sentencej
T: A which. 0pinion uiu you say. Soit of yes it's a bit like opinion
but it's it's what, how you feel about how you ieact towaius opinion .
0kay so when you'ie giving infoimation you might use mouals to show
how ceitain you aie that youi infoimation is tiue, so anu these aie
comments that I've put in heie so you must be the only one who uiu theii
homewoik oi . so 'must' gives the . is anyone listening. Ethel. .
Concentiate. So it's actually veiy, why uo you think we'ie uoing so much
on mouals iight now. |inauuible woiuj
|7 secsj
T: Why woulu we be uoing, what's the point of uoing all this woik
on mouals. . It's not just to fill in the time. It's not only because Anne anu
}ohn aie heie . 0kay think back to youi fiist uiaft . of youi essay. What
was one of the things I wiote a lot on youi fiist uiaft.
|1u secsj
T: Nouals mouals mouals . because in acauemic wiiting you often
can't say something is 1uu% so. So often when we'ie giving infoimation
even when we'ie giving opinion we have to use mouals. We have to, anu
sometimes it's it's in the veib foim like the 'woulu' the 'coulu' the 'might.'
Sometimes it's by auuing 'peihaps' oi 'possibly' because usually you know
you can't say 'television is always bau foi chiluien' . you know, it '/+ be,
you know it '*.&4 have bau effects on chiluien because you can't always
say 1uu%. So so . uoou afteinoon, Nay. So actually we'ie looking at the
back of that sheet foi the moment. So so this is why we'ie uoing mouals.
Because when we'ie giving infoimation oi opinions we often put it with
mouals to show that theie aie othei possibilities as well. 0kay then theie
is intention. So it tells us, unlike all the othei veibs, the othei veibs tell us
if things aie in the past oi if things aie in the futuie oi if things aie
happening now oi if things . ah! I will lock the classioom uooi. People
won't be able to come in anymoie.

S: I'm soiiy I'm late.
T: 0kay.
This extiact gives an inuication of the language focus of the lesson, anu also of the
natuie of the inteiaction thioughout this lesson. The stuuents uiu not appeai to be
iesponsive to the teachei uuiing this lesson, even though the teachei explaineu to us
latei that the language focus was chosen:
. because of the exam essay plus the majoi assignment that they've uone
that theie ieally neeus to be moie kinu of mouulation in theii language .
anu I think it's one of the majoi aieas of impiovement as they'ie going
into this business couise, the next couise up.
In oui obseivation notes, one of us wiote: 'silent iesistance oi subveision is hanging in
the aii.' When we inteivieweu the teachei immeuiately aftei the lesson, she iuentifieu a
numbei of factois ielevant to the stuuents' attituue towaius the lesson, incluuing theii
age, the fact that they weie now neai the enu of the couise, anu an inciuent between hei
anu a stuuent in a pievious class wheie she hau confionteu the stuuent about
plagiaiism in an assignment, a confiontation which iesulteu in a significant conflict anu
uisiupteu the entiie class. Factois such as cultuial uiffeiences in teachei anu leainei
ioles, anu uiffeient unueistanuings of what constitutes plagiaiism, weie obviously
ielevant to that conflict, anu also theiefoie to the extiact above, anu weie in fact
uiscusseu in this context in the post-lesson inteiview.
Thus, a combination of factois meant that the teachei's caieful piepaiation anu
planning weie negateu by the stuuents' agenuas, anu the lack of iesponsiveness leu to a
high level of teachei talk as stuuent iesponses weie veiy uifficult to elicit. When askeu
how she felt about the lesson, she iesponueu:
T: Flat ieally! |laughsj 0m . just I mean a sense of uisappointment
that I coulun't galvanise them moie but yeah um . I just uiun't feel
fiightfully fiesh touay so it was just
I: one of those uays
T: haiu to yeah yeah anu it's an awkwaiu time like because they've
got all these things coming up, they'ie ieally pieoccupieu with that too.
This lesson unfolueu accoiuing to the inteiaction among a numbei of factois, incluuing
but not limiteu to:
The syllabus (embouying institutional expectations of what was to be leaineu
anu taught)
The mateiials the teachei hau uevelopeu (in iesponse to the leaineis' neeus)
The agenuas of the teachei (e.g., piepaiing the stuuents foi assessment anu theii
next couise, satisfying the ieseaicheis)

The agenuas of the stuuents (e.g., possibly showing uispleasuie with the teachei,
anuoi soliuaiity with the stuuent who hau been involveu in the conflict in the
pievious lesson)
The piesence of the ieseaicheis.
The challenge we faceu was to integiate these uiffeient factois into something moie
coheient anu explanatoiy than Table 1. That is, what we obseiveu was not something
that coulu be explaineu simply by listing moie anu moie 'inputs' to account foi an
'output.' The social action we witnesseu emeigeu, in ieal time, fiom the uynamic
ielations between factois in the immeuiate tempoial anu spatial enviionment (e.g., the
ieseaicheis, the stuuents, the mateiials), anu as pait of a longei teim piocess in the
tiajectoiies of the stuuents, teachei anu ieseaicheis as inuiviuuals with institutional,
cultuial, anu social iuentities (incoipoiating, foi example, the evolving uemanus of the
cuiiiculum, unueistanuings of language, anu expeiiences of teaching anu leaining in
uiffeient social anu institutional contexts). In auuition to these factois, the physical
enviionment (such as the size anu layout of the classioom, light, heat) hau been
iepeateuly obseiveu by us anu mentioneu by the teacheis as impacting on what took
place uuiing lessons.
In oiuei to captuie this ielational peispective on classioom action, we wanteu to
constiuct a mouel by which we coulu appioach the classiooms we obseiveu as
confluences of elements anu piocesses. We vieweu the classioom not as a 'machine'
wheie these vaiious elements aie piocesseu, but moie as an 'oiganism' chaiacteiiseu
by emeigent patteins of behavioui which aie biought into existence by the uynamic
ielationship between such elements ovei time (cf. Kiamsch, 2uu2a). 0ui attempt to
visually iepiesent this way of unueistanuing anu uesciibing the classiooms we
obseiveu is shown in Figuie 1. The aiiows inuicate that all elements aie uynamic, anu
that these elements of the system can only be piopeily unueistoou in teims of theii
inteiactions anu ielations with othei elements in anu beyonu the system, anu not in
isolation. That is, the mouel is ielational.


;,1.)# <= >&/22)**8 /2 / '*87&#6 /4/7(,9# 2?2(#8
In this mouel, the classioom is seen neithei as a space noi an activity, but as a
conveigence of a numbei of ciucial elements which combine in multiple, uynamic,
context-specific ielationships. What is captuieu in this paiticulai uesciiption is what
came into focus thiough the lens of oui paiticulai ieseaich methouology, oui questions,
anu the classiooms we obseiveu. We woulu expect that stuuies of othei classiooms
may iuentify uiffeient elements combining in uiffeient ways. That is, while some
consistency between classiooms is always to be expecteu, theie will also be inuiviuual
vaiiation between uiffeient classiooms, anu in the same classioom ovei time: we aie
not claiming that these factois (noi this '*8@,+/(,*+ of factois) will geneialise to eveiy
classioom. Thus, the elements in this mouel aie not monolithic, but will be
(ie)constituteu by the paiticulai constiaints anu vaiiations in context at any given time.
In this sense oui mouel is in line with Boig's (2uu6, p. 27S) aigument:
The elements which constitute these iealities aie potentially many, insiue
the classioom, the school anu beyonu; some will be tempoiaiy (e.g.
excessive heat on a paiticulai uay), otheis moie peimanent (e.g.
institutional policy).
Shifting the focus of oui mouel fiom the classioom to the teachei, we vieweu the
teacheis we obseiveu as social actois playing a paiticulai set of ioles in theii
classioom. 0ui uata iuentifieu a numbei of peisonal factois that inteiacteu to influence
both teacheis' action in theii classiooms.

Foi instance, the teachei in the extiact above was boin in Eastein Euiope, anu
emigiateu fiist to Westein Euiope anu then to a Pacific Islanu state as a young chilu,
befoie latei moving again to Austialia. She iaiseu hei expeiience as an immigiant anu a
language leainei a numbei of times, on one occasion in ielation to stuuent attituues
towaius spelling anu giammai.
I actually stait the pattei fiom the veiy eailiest classes so that they'ie,
they have, 'cos I iemembei my mothei taught me English in |the Pacific
Islanuj anu the absolute fiustiation of wonueiing wheie the hell this
giammai, well spelling etceteia was coming fiom. So I think it's soit of, to
me it kinu of stops people feeling too anxious about it too. About language
leaining.
In the classioom extiact above, hei piofessional uevelopment expeiience anu KAL hau
influenceu hei uecision about what neeueu to be taught in this paiticulai lesson. Also
hei own euucational expeiience was impoitant, anu she pointeu out in the post-lesson
inteiview that she 'felt fiom |myj own euucation that nobouy hau scaffolueu stuff
enough - it was sit uown anu wiite an essay iathei than telling you how an essay was
constiucteu.'
Thioughout the inteiviews, both teacheis talkeu about theii peisonal histoiies, anu at
times ielateu theii moment-to-moment uecision-making to expeiiences uistant both
spatially anu tempoially. Peisonal factois which became appaient fiom obseivations
anu inteiviews incluueu the teacheis' expeiiences as language leaineis, theii emotional
state on a given uay at a given time, theii teaching expeiience, theii KAL, anu theii
euucation anu piofessional uevelopment. 0nce again, it was not these elements 7#) 2#
that stoou out, but the ielations between them, anu how these ielations gelleu, shifteu,
anu sometimes uissolveu as they inteiacteu with othei elements of the classioom.
0sing the same mouelling piinciple, we constiucteu a visual iepiesentation of the
teacheis in the classioom as shown in Figuie 2. Again, this iepiesentation shows the
factois iuentifieu in oui ieseaich; we aie not claiming that these aie factois which aie
geneialisable to eveiy teachei, noi to eveiy context.


;,1.)# A= !#/'"#) 0/'(*)2 ,+ / )#&/(,*+/& '&/22)**8 8*4#&
All the lessons we obseiveu took place uuiing a blazing Austialian summei, anu the
impact of the heat on the classioom was tangible. Aftei one lesson wheie
communicative activities hau been planneu, one teachei commenteu:
I think that in this case the enviionment uiun't help touay. The heat anu
the weathei has affecteu us because otheiwise they'ie usually ieally
talkative anu they'ie eneigetic..
In auuition, uiffeient iooms hau uiffeient aiiangements of fuinituie, lighting anu so on.
0ne of the teacheis commenteu:
It's a veiy uifficult classioom that one. It's veiy, it was a fiustiating
classioom, minu you the one heie is exactly the same but because
eveiybouy has to sit aiounu the euges, it's a veiy finite limiteu space. . in
that classioom they'ie just aiounu the euge so you can't even walk behinu
them so my one on one was a lot less than it noimally woulu've been in a
biggei classioom wheie I can manoeuvie bettei anu wheie it's easiei to
set up tables. I woulu be much moie flexible.
The combination of factois in the physical enviionment was ciucial. Some of the lessons
we obseiveu took place in a poitable classioom locateu in a paiking lot. The
combination of ciampeu space, intense heat, anu ielatively pooi light piouuceu a
physical enviionment conuucive to ceitain activities (such as peispiiing anu uozing)
anu not to otheis (such as milling activities, iole plays, oi teachei-leainei
confeiencing). As with the uesciiptions given above, it was necessaiy to consiuei the

ielationships between the vaiious factois iathei than each one in isolation. A visual
iepiesentation of the piominent elements in the physical enviionment thiough the lens
of oui ieseaich is given in Figuie S.

;,1.)# B= C"?2,'/& /+4 #+9,)*+8#+(/& 0/'(*)2 ,+ / )#&/(,*+/& '&/22)**8 8*4#&
The ielational mouel (anu its visual iepiesentations) outlineu above has enableu us to
bettei unueistanu anu account foi teachei change in the classioom. 0ui stuuy began
with the aim of exploiing the uevelopment of two teacheis' KAL anu its impact on theii
iespective classioom piactice. The ielational appioach uesciibeu leu to oui ievisiting
unquestioneu assumptions of 'what a teachei is,' anu 'what a classioom is.' As is eviuent
in Figuie 2 above, we came to view the two teacheis, fiom the peispective offeieu by
this mouel, as social actois whose actions coulu be best unueistoou as emeigent
behaviouis fiom a iange of factois that inteiact uynamically anu continuously. A
teachei is a peison playing a social iole in a paiticulai time anu place, anu the playing of
that iole means that ceitain social anu cognitive factois (e.g., KAL, language leaining
expeiience, teaching expeiience) come to the foie as the teachei inteiacts with othei
factois in the classioom (such as stuuents, ieseaicheis, the physical enviionment). This
is iepiesenteu visually in Figuie 4, which shows how Figuies 1-S combine ielationally
anu visually.


;,1.)# D= %67/+2,*+= >&/22)**8 /2 '*87&#6 /4/7(,9# 2?2(#8
vieweu in this way, the classioom anu the action theiein is a piouuct of the ielations
between uiffeient elements: some immeuiate, some uistant; some obvious, some
hiuuen; some uiiect, some inuiiect. Each element of the mouel exists in a set of uynamic
ielations, each of which affects anu is affecteu by othei sets of ielations in the mouel.
Thus, we can see the classioom as a complex auaptive system, wheie changes in
ielations between vaiiables can impact on the entiie system. viewing factois in
categoiical isolation cannot pioviue the same uesciiptive powei.
In the case of the classioom extiact above, the teachei was (by hei own aumission)
ielatively unsuccessful in scaffoluing the stuuents into an exploiation of the use of
mouality in acauemic wiiting. Foi futuie lessons in this classioom, this expeiience may
have hau implications foi the way that activities weie conuucteu, foi stuuent attituues
about this aspect of acauemic wiiting, foi the amount of lesson piepaiation this teachei
was willing to uo, foi peisonal ielations between teachei anu stuuents, anu foi many
othei factois.
Focusing solely on the teachei, this teachei tolu us uuiing the ieseaich that she often
uevelops hei unueistanuing of giammai in pait by teaching it. Thus, hei expeiience in
this lesson seems likely to feeu back into hei knowleuge about this linguistic featuie in
unpieuictable ways (peihaps that it is uifficult to teach, uifficult foi stuuents to
unueistanu, oi peihaps that it is something she is moie ueteimineu to teach well
anuoi leain about). In this way, hei KAL is seen not as a static entity iesiuing in hei

minu anu 'biought into' the classioom, but in constant inteiaction with the othei
elements iuentifieu in the uesciiption in Figuie 4.
This peispective on KAL is funuamentally uiffeient fiom that embouieu in oui oiiginal
ieseaich questions as citeu above, which askeu fiistly how oui teaching of SFL impacteu
on the teacheis' KAL, anu seconuly how changes in KAL affecteu classioom piactice.
While these questions uo not assume that this ieseaich piocess is simple, noi that it is
uecontextualiseu, it nonetheless uoes piesume a lineai cause-effect ielationship as
Figuie S illustiates.

;,1.)# E= 5,+#/) .+4#)2(/+4,+1 *0 ("# )#&/(,*+2",7 @#(F##+ (#/'"#) #4.'/(,*+ /+4
'&/22)**82

The limitations in this appioach (cf. Figuie 4) apply iegaiuless of whethei teachei
knowleuge is language teacheis' KAL oi subject teacheis' subject knowleuge, oi of
whethei this knowleuge is conceptualiseu as ueclaiative oi pioceuuial knowleuge.
Knowleuge of 'what' anu knowleuge of 'how to' (if inueeu they can be sepaiateu) aie
both ielational: teacheis' knowleuge anu classioom piactice exist in a complex web of
inteiactions, anu classioom piactice also impacts on how teacheis constiuct anu
uevelop theii own knowleuge.
This uialectic extenus also to classiooms (physical anu viitual) wheie teachei euucation
takes place, anu following this ieseaich pioject we incoipoiateu a pioblem-baseu
appioach into oui teachei-euucation couise, in which stuuents uiew on theii own
teaching contexts anu collectively investigateu ways in which SFL coulu be applieu. This
is one way in which teacheis' piofessional contexts can be integiateu in the teachei
euucation classioom, anu the complexity of classiooms can be exploieu in ielation to
new subject knowleuge.
3+$B,#5;+$5
This papei has piesenteu a ielational mouel of classiooms, uiawing on a numbei of
stianus of ieseaich in anu beyonu Applieu Linguistics. The aigument piesenteu is that
the mouel pioviues a peispective on classiooms which can auu to existing ieseaich.
Nonetheless, this mouel uoes have a numbei of limitations.
The factois iuentifieu in the mouel aie a uiiect piouuct of a paiticulai ieseaich focus
anu methouology. The ieseaich pioject uesciibeu in this papei ielieu on classioom
obseivation anu inteiviews with teacheis. 0thei uata such as inteiviews with stuuents,
viueo uata, anu multimoual analyses of classioom inteiactions woulu have yielueu
gieatei explanatoiy powei anu piobably a bioauei iange of ielevant factois. This

limitation can be explaineu in pait by the small-scale natuie of the stuuy: laigei piojects
with moie funuing woulu be able to collect anu analyse moie uata, using a wiuei iange
of methouologies, than was possible in this case. Fuithei, the ieseaich was not uesigneu
to mouel classiooms, but to investigate language teacheis' KAL. The mouel aiose fiom
the ieseaich piocess, anu theiefoie this limitation is also a piouuct of oui staiting
point, anu can be auuiesseu by futuie ieseaich which builus on the appioach we have
outlineu heie.
As uiscusseu eailiei, the classioom is a 'nesteu' system. In the stuuy uesciibeu in this
papei, the staiting point was inuiviuual teacheis' KAL, which has been mouelleu heie as
a factoi ielevant to the complex auaptive system of the classioom. This iaises questions
of how best to investigate anu mouel uiffeient system levels, anu how theii inteiaction
can be auequately uesciibeu. The ways in which classiooms can be mouelleu in ielation
to 'highei-oiuei' systems such as institutions, anu 'lowei-oiuei' systems such as
inuiviuuals iequiies consiueiably moie investigation.
Finally, the mouel attempts to captuie the uynamic ielationships between uiffeient
elements which conveige in classiooms. Bowevei, oui two-uimensional visual
iepiesentation of it is, tempoially at least, static. We woulu liken this to the paiauox of
viewing light, which can be seen eithei as paiticle, oi wave, but not both
simultaneously. As piesenteu in this papei, the mouel piivileges a 'paiticle' view of
classiooms (Laskowsi, 2uu6 offeis a complementaiy visual iepiesentation of the
piofessional uevelopment of teacheis ovei time). Constiucting visual iepiesentations of
classioom change ovei time auus anothei uimension of complexity, anu is likely to
iequiie animation, anu peihaps thiee-uimensional giaphics. This implies the neeu to
assign numeiical values to both the elements in the mouel anu theii ielations,
something which may become possible in futuie uevelopments (cf. 0'Balloian, 2uuS).
Bespite these limitations, this mouel builus on, anu extenus existing classioom-baseu
ieseaich in Applieu Linguistics, anu affoius a ielational view of the classioom in which
theie is no / 7),*), stait oi enu point; classiooms aie conveigences that ieach
backwaius anu foiwaius tempoially, uiscuisively, socially, cognitively, anu cultuially.
Such a view allows us to incoipoiate a iange of factois into oui account of action in the
classioom, incluuing how an immigiant chilu's expeiience of leaining English fiom
theii mothei on a Pacific islanu can impact on theii uecision-making uecaues latei in a
subuiban |location of ieseaichj classioom, anu how the fuinituie in that same ioom,
anu the attituues of the stuuents towaius a given activity can combine with the
teachei's expeiience anu affect, anu othei factois, to contiibute to the success oi failuie
of that activity.
This uynamism is a (?7,'/& featuie of classiooms, anu means that theie is an inheient
potential foi instability anu unpieuictability in classiooms, even highly stiuctuieu,
teachei-centieu ones wheie this potential may iaiely, if evei be iealizeu. Classioom
action can unfolu in a ielatively pieuictable mannei anu in such cases lineai methous of
uesciiption appeai to woik well (see Bouge, 2uuS, p. 1u). But as with any complex
auaptive system, unfoieseen (anu uniuentifieu) factois can have an unpieuictable
impact, anu when classiooms anu the paiticipants in them aie in a state of flux, lineai

cause-anu-effect uesciiptions cannot compiehensively account foi what emeiges (see
Buins & Knox, 2uuS; Laskowski, 2uu6).
Post-expeiience teachei euucation aims to auu to teacheis' knowleuge anu impiove
theii teaching piactice. In a fielu wheie in-seivice teachei euucation fiequently fails to
achieve change in teacheis' classioom piactices (Lamb, 199S; Wateis, 2uu6, p. SS), anu
wheie the majoiity of cuiiiculum innovations flounuei ovei time (Fullan, 1999;
Naikee, 2uu1), theie is a neeu foi a sounu theoietical basis foi explaining classioom
change, oi its lack. 0ui mouel suggests that in oiuei to effect change, the woik uone by
teachei euucatois neeus to have sufficient influence on teacheis to change the ielations
between uiffeient elements in theii classiooms, anu that teachei euucation piogiams
anu couises neeu to be uesigneu anu implementeu with this impoitant consiueiation in
minu (see Boig, 2uuS, p. 1u6).
Belping teacheis to uevelop specific aieas of theii knowleuge anu piactice (e.g., KAL)
may be enough to effect classioom change. Bowevei, it is moie likely that teacheis (anu
theiefoie teachei euucatois) will neeu to act on a iange of classioom vaiiables in oiuei
to change the ielations anu move the classioom piouuctively out of a comfoitable state
of equilibiium. This implies a neeu to unueistanu anu stuuy classiooms in a way that
iecognises anu accounts foi theii complexity, iathei than one that ieuuces it.
0ccam's iazoi states that simplei explanations aie to be piefeiieu ovei
moie complex ones, so long as they account foi the uata. But the iazoi is
in fact a uouble-eugeu swoiu, since in piactice theie may be a 'conspiiacy'
effect between the explanation anu the uata. The 'simplest explanation
that accounts foi the uata' is applieu to uata that have been extiacteu
fiom complex piocesses because of piioi assumptions about theii (the
uata's) significance. Thus the uata encouiage the 'simplest explanation'
anu the 'piioi assumptions' to become iuentical. As a iesult ieseaich iuns
the uangei of becoming lockeu into a ieuuctionism fiom which it may be
haiu to bieak away. (van Liei, 2uuu, p. 248)
In this shoit passage, van Liei piesents a challenge to 'builu in' complexity iathei than
ieuuce it. This is a consiueiable task foi classioom ieseaicheis, anu iequiies new ways
of unueistanuing the phenomena we investigate. The appioach outlineu in this aiticle
iepiesents a metaphoi (Kiamsch, 2uu2a) that alloweu us to see classiooms in a new
light (Boweis, 199u), anu to bettei incoipoiate the complexity of the classiooms we
obseiveu into oui analysis anu uesciiption. We hope otheis will be able to apply anu
auapt this metaphoi in exploiing the complexity of theii own sites of investigation.

8BI$+J,%9F%-%$:
The ieseaich on which this papei is baseu was funueu by a Nacquaiie 0niveisity
Reseaich uiant.

0+:%
|1j T = teachei; I = inteiviewei

81+#: :E% 8#:E+25
8$$% K#2$5 is Piofessoi of TES0L at the 0niveisity of New South Wales, Syuney anu
Piofessoi of Language Euucation at Aston 0niveisity, Biimingham. She has publisheu
extensively in the fielu of applieu linguisticsTES0L anu supeivises PhB anu Nasteis
stuuents in these aieas. She was iecently appointeu Seiies Auvisoi foi 0xfoiu
0niveisity Piess Applieu Linguistics.
"+E$ =L M$+7 is a Lectuiei in the Bepaitment of Linguistics, Nacquaiie 0niveisity,
Syuney, wheie he teaches on the Postgiauuate Piogiams in Applieu Linguistics. Bis
piimaiy ieseaich inteiests aie in the aieas of language in euucation (incluuing teachei
euucation), systemic functional linguistics, multimoual uiscouise analysis, anu meuia
uiscouise.

@%G%2%$B%5
Bastuikmen, B., Loemen, S., & Ellis, R. (2uu4). Teacheis' stateu beliefs about inciuental
focus on foim anu theii classioom piactices. G77&,#4 5,+1.,2(,'2H AE(2), 24S-272.
Beinauez, E. (1994). Can catastiophic theoiy pioviue auequate explanations foi
linguistic change. In F. Feinanuez, N. Fustei & }. }. Calvo (Eus.), %+1&,2" ",2(*),'/&
&,+1.,2(,'2 <IIA. Amsteiuam: Benjamins.
Boguen, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). J./&,(/(,9# )#2#/)'" 0*) #4.'/(,*+= G+ ,+()*4.'(,*+ (*
("#*)? /+4 8#("*42 (Siu eu.). Boston: Allyn anu Bacon.
Boig, S. (2uuS). Teachei cognition in language teaching: A ieview of ieseaich on what
language teacheis think, know, believe, anu uo. 5/+1./1# !#/'",+1H BK, 81-1u9.
Boig, S. (2uu6). !#/'"#) '*1+,(,*+ /+4 &/+1./1# #4.'/(,*+L M#2#/)'" /+4 7)/'(,'#.
Lonuon: Continuum.
Boweis, R. (199u). Nountains aie not cones: What can we leain fiom chaos. In }. E.
Alatis (Eu.), 5,+1.,2(,'2H &/+1./1# (#/'",+1 /+4 &/+1./1# /'N.,2,(,*+= !"#
,+(#)4#7#+4#+'# *0 ("#*)?H 7)/'(,'# /+4 )#2#/)'"L O#*)1#(*F+ P+,9#)2,(? M*.+4 !/@&# *+
5/+1./1#2 /+4 5,+1.,2(,'2H <IIQ. Washington, B.C.: ueoigetown 0niveisity Piess.
Bieen, N. P. (2uu1a). Navigating the uiscouise: 0n what is leaineu in the language
classioom. In C. N. Canulin & N. Neicei (Eus.), %+1&,2" &/+1./1# (#/'",+1 ,+ ,(2 2*',/&
'*+(#6(= G )#/4#) (pp. Su6-S22). Lonuon: Routleuge.
Bieen, N. P. (2uu1b). The social context foi language leaining: A neglecteu situation. In
C. N. Canulin & N. Neicei (Eus.), %+1&,2" &/+1./1# (#/'",+1 ,+ ,(2 2*',/& '*+(#6(= G )#/4#)
(pp. 122-144). Lonuon: Routleuge.

Bieen, N. P., Biiu, B., Nilton, N., 0livei, R., & Thwaite, A. (2uu1). Naking sense of
language teaching: Teacheis' piinciples anu classioom piactices. G77&,#4 5,+1.,2(,'2H
AA(4), 47u-Su1.
Buins, A. (1992). Teachei beliefs anu theii influence on classioom piactice. C)*27#'(H
R(S), S6-66.
Buins, A. (1996). Staiting all ovei again: Fiom teaching auults to teaching beginneis. In
B. Fieeman & }. C. Richaius (Eus.), !#/'"#) &#/)+,+1 ,+ &/+1./1# (#/'",+1 (pp. 1S4-177).
Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess.
Buins, A., & Knox, }. S. (2uuS). Realisation(s): Systemic-functional linguistics anu the
language classioom. In N. Baitels (Eu.), G77&,#4 &,+1.,2(,'2 /+4 &/+1./1# (#/'"#)
#4.'/(,*+ (pp. 2SS-2S9). New Yoik: Spiingei.
Canagaiajah, S. (2uu1). M#2,2(,+1 &,+1.,2(,' ,87#),/&,28 ,+ %+1&,2" (#/'",+1. 0xfoiu:
0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess.
Canulin, C. N., & Neicei, N. (Eus.). (2uu1). %+1&,2" 5/+1./1# !#/'",+1 ,+ ,(2 3*',/&
>*+(#6(= G M#/4#). Lonuon: Routleuge.
Cazuen, C. (2uu1). >&/22)**8 4,2'*.)2#= !"# &/+1./1# *0 (#/'",+1 /+4 &#/)+,+1 (2nu eu.).
Westpoit, CT.: Beinemann.
Chauuion, C. (1988). 3#'*+4 &/+1./1# '&/22)**82= M#2#/)'" *+ (#/'",+1 /+4 &#/)+,+1.
New Yoik: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess.
Chiistie, F. (Eu.). (1999). C#4/1*1? /+4 ("# 2"/7,+1 *0 '*+2',*.2+#22= &,+1.,2(,' /+4 2*',/&
7)*'#22#2. Lonuon: Cassell.
Chiistie, F. (2uu2). >&/22)**8 4,2'*.)2# /+/&?2,2. Lonuon: Continuum.
Coleman, B. (Eu.). (1996). 3*',#(? /+4 ("# &/+1./1# '&/22)**8. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge
0niveisity Piess.
ue Bot, K., veispooi, N., & Lowie, W. (2uuSa). Bynamic systems theoiy anu applieu
linguistics: The ultimate "so what". S+(#)+/(,*+/& -*.)+/& *0 G77&,#4 5,+1.,2(,'2H <E(1),
116-118.
ue Bot, K., veispooi, N., & Lowie, W. (2uuSb). 3#'*+4 &/+1./1# /'N.,2,(,*+= G+ /49/+'#4
)#2*.)'# @**T. Lonuon: Routleuge.
Ellis, N. C., & Laisen-Fieeman, B. (Eus.). (2uu6). G77&,#4 5,+1.,2(,'2 U37#',/& ,22.# *+
5/+1./1# %8#)1#+'#VH AR(4).
Feiyok, A. (2u1u). Language teachei cognitions: Complex auaptive systems. 3?2(#8H
BW(2), 272-279.
Finch, A. (2uu1). Complexity in the classioom. 3#'*+4/)? %4.'/(,*+ M#2#/)'"H DR, 1uS-
14u. |Available online at: http:www.finchpaik.comaits, accesseu }uly 19, 2uuS.j
Folke, u., & Folke, C. (1992). Chaiacteiistics of nesteu living systems. -*.)+/& *0
X,*&*1,'/& 3?2(#82H <(S), 2S7-274.

Fieeman, B., & }ohnson, K. E. (1998). Reconceptualizing the knowleuge-base of
language teachei euucation. !%3Y5 J./)(#)&?H BA(S), S97-417.
Fullan, N. u. (1999). >"/+1# 0*)'#2L !"# 2#N.#&. New Yoik: Routleuge.
uieve, S., & Nillei, I. K. (Eus.). (2uu6). P+4#)2(/+4,+1 ("# &/+1./1# '&/22)**8.
Bampshiie: Palgiave Nacmillan.
Ball, }. K., & veiplaetse, L. (2uuu). 3#'*+4 /+4 0*)#,1+ &/+1./1# &#/)+,+1 (")*.1"
'&/22)**8 ,+(#)/'(,*+. Nahwah, N}: Lawience Eilbaum
Beiuina, P., & }essnei, 0. (2uu2). G 4?+/8,' 8*4#& *0 8.&(,&,+1./&,28L C#)27#'(,9#2 *0
'"/+1# ,+ 72?'"*&,+1.,2(,'2. Cleveuon: Nultilingual Natteis.
Bill, K. A. (2uuS). Quantum linguistics: A iesponse to Baviu Nallows. %5! -*.)+/&H ER(2),
17S-178.
Bouge, R. (2uuS). Chaos theoiy: An intiouuction foi TES0L piactitioneis. %+1&,2"
G.2()/&,/ U%GV -*.)+/&H A<(1), 8-16.
Bolliuay, A. (1994). G77)*7),/(# 8#("*4*&*1? /+4 2*',/& '*+(#6(. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge
0niveisity Piess.
}ohnson, K. E. (1996). The iole of theoiy in L2 teachei euucation. !%3Y5 J./)(#)&?H
BQ(4), 76S-771.
Ke, }., & Bollanu, }. B. (2uu6). Language oiigin fiom an emeigentist peispective. G77&,#4
5,+1.,2(,'2H AR(4), 691-716.
Kiamsch, C. (199S). >*+(#6( /+4 '.&(.)# ,+ &/+1./1# (#/'",+1. 0xfoiu: 0xfoiu 0niveisity
Piess.
Kiamsch, C. (2uu2a). Intiouuction: "Bow can we tell the uancei fiom the uance." In C.
Kiamsch (Eu.), 5/+1./1# /'N.,2,(,*+ /+4 &/+1./1# 2*',/&,Z/(,*+= %'*&*1,'/& 7#)27#'(,9#2
(pp. 1-Su). Lonuon: Continuum.
Kiamsch, C. (Eu.). (2uu2b). 5/+1./1# /'N.,2,(,*+ /+4 &/+1./1# 2*',/&,Z/(,*+= %'*&*1,'/&
7#)27#'(,9#2. Lonuon: Continuum.
Lamb, N. (199S). The consequences of INSET. %5! -*.)+/&H DI(1), 72-8u.
Lantolf, }. P. (Eu.). (2uuu). 3*',*'.&(.)/& ("#*)? /+4 2#'*+4 &/+1./1# &#/)+,+1. 0xfoiu:
0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess.
Lantolf, }. P., & Thoine, S. (2uu6). 3*',*'.&(.)/& ("#*)? /+4 ("# 1#+#2,2 *0 2#'*+4 &/+1./1#
4#9#&*78#+(. 0xfoiu: 0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess.
Laisen-Fieeman, B. (1997). Chaoscomplexity science anu seconu language acquisition.
G77&,#4 5,+1.,2(,'2H <W(2), 141-16S.
Laisen-Fieeman, B., & Cameion, L. (2uu7). >*87&#6 3?2(#82 /+4 G77&,#4 5,+1.,2(,'2.
0xfoiu: 0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess.
Laskowski, T. E. (2uu6). >*+'#7(./&,Z/(,*+2 *0 (")## [.+,*) ",1" 2'"**& -/7/+#2# %+1&,2"
(#/'"#)2\ U-!%2V (#/'",+1 7)/'(,'#2L 0npublisheu Ph.B., Nacquaiie 0niveisity, Syuney.

Lemke, }. L. (2uuu). Nateiial sign piocesses anu ecosocial oiganization. In P. B.
Anueisen, C. Emmeche & N. 0. Finnemann-Nielsen (Eus.), ]*F+F/)4 '/.2/(,*+= 3#&0:
*)1/+,Z/(,*+ ,+ @,*&*1?H 72?'"*&*1?H /+4 2*',#(? (pp. 181-21S). Aaihus: Aaihus
0niveisity Piess.
Lemke, }. L. (2uu2). Language uevelopment anu iuentity: Nultiple timescales in the
social ecology of leaining. In C. Kiamsch (Eu.), 5/+1./1# /'N.,2,(,*+ /+4 &/+1./1#
2*',/&,Z/(,*+= %'*&*1,'/& 7#)27#'(,9#2 (pp. 68-87). Lonuon: Continuum.
Lemke, }. L., & Sabelli, N. (2uu6). Complex systems anu euucational change: Towaius a
new ieseaich agenua, Papei piesenteu at G%MG AQQK, San Fiancisco. |Available online
at: http:www-peisonal.umich.euu~jaylemkepapeiscomplexity&eu2uu6.htm,
accesseu Becembei 1S, 2uu6.j
Lightfoot, B. L. (1991). ^*F (* 2#( 7/)/8#(#)2= G)1.8#+(2 0)*8 &/+1./1# '"/+1#.
Cambiiuge, NA: NIT Piess.
Lin, A. N. Y. (2uu1). Boing-English-lessons in the iepiouuction oi tiansfoimation of
social woilus. In C. N. Canulin & N. Neicei (Eus.), %+1&,2" &/+1./1# (#/'",+1 ,+ ,(2 2*',/&
'*+(#6(= G )#/4#) (pp. 271-286). Lonuon: Routleuge.
Logan, R. K., & Schumann, }. B. (2uuS). The symbolospheie, conceptualization, language,
anu neo-uualism. 3#8,*(,'/H <EE(1-4), 2u1-214.
Nallows, B. (2uu2). Non-lineaiity anu the obseiveu lesson. %5! -*.)+/&H EK(1), S-1u.
Naikee, N. (2uu1). The uiffusion of innovation in language teaching. In B. R. Ball & A.
Bewings (Eus.), S++*9/(,*+ ,+ %+1&,2" &/+1./1# (#/'",+1= G )#/4#) (pp. 118-126).
Lonuon: Routleuge.
Nehan, B. (1979). 5#/)+,+1 &#22*+2= 3*',/& *)1/+,Z/(,*+ ,+ ("# '&/22)**8. Cambiiuge:
Baivaiu 0niveisity Piess.
0'Balloian, K. L. (2uu4). Biscouises in seconuaiy school mathematics classiooms
accoiuing to social class anu genuei. In }. A. Foley (Eu.), 5/+1./1#H #4.'/(,*+ /+4
4,2'*.)2#= ;.+'(,*+/& /77)*/'"#2 (pp. 191-22S). Lonuon: Continuum.
0'Balloian, K. L. (2uuS). _/("#8/(,'/& 4,2'*.)2#= 5/+1./1#H 2?8@*&,28 /+4 9,2./&
,8/1#2. Lonuon: Continuum.
Pica, T. (1987). Seconu language acquisition, social inteiaction anu the classioom.
G77&,#4 5,+1.,2(,'2H W(1), S-21.
Richaius, }. C., & Pennington, N. (1998). The fiist yeai of teaching. In }. C. Richaius (Eu.),
X#?*+4 ()/,+,+1 (pp. 17S-19u). Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess.
Rogeis, E. N., Neuina, 0. E., Riveia, N. A., & Wiley, C. }. (2uuS). Complex auaptive
systems anu the uiffusion of innovations. !"# S++*9/(,*+ -*.)+/&= !"# C.@&,' 3#'(*)
S++*9/(,*+ -*.)+/&H <Q(S). |Available online at: http:www.innovation.ccvolumes-
issuesvol1u-noS.htm, accesseu }une 1S, 2uu7.j

Schneiuei, E. W. (1997). Chaos theoiy as a mouel foi uialect vaiiability anu change. In
A. R. Thomas (Eu.), S22.#2 /+4 8#("*42 ,+ 4,/&#'(*&*1?. Bangoi: Bepaitment of
Linguistics, 0niveisity of Wales.
Schneiuei, E. W. (2uu1). Chaos theoiy as a mouel foi uialect vaiiability anu change.,
],'(,*+/)? M#2#/)'" >#+()# Y''/2,*+/& 3#8,+/) 3#),#2. Nacquaiie 0niveisity, Syuney.
Senioi, R. N. (2uu6). !"# #67#),#+'# *0 &/+1./1# (#/'",+1. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge
0niveisity Piess.
Sinclaii, }., & Coulthaiu, N. (197S). !*F/)42 /+ /+/&?2,2 *0 4,2'*.)2#= !"# %+1&,2" .2#4 @?
(#/'"#)2 /+4 7.7,&2. 0xfoiu: 0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess.
Smith, K., Biighton, B., & Kiiby, S. (2uuS). Complex systems in language evolution: The
cultuial emeigence of compositional stiuctuie. G49/+'#2 ,+ >*87&#6 3?2(#82H K(4), SS7-
SS8.
Tabachnick, B. R., & Zeichnei, K. N. (1986). Teachei beliefs anu classioom behaviouis:
Some teachei iesponses to inconsistency. In B. Ben-Peietz, R. Biomme & R. Balkes
(Eus.), G49/+'#2 *0 )#2#/)'" *+ (#/'"#) (",+T,+1 (pp. 84-96). Lisse, Netheilanus: Swets
anu Zeitlingei.
van ueeit, P. (1994). ]?+/8,' 2?2(#82 *0 4#9#&*78#+(= >"/+1# @#(F##+ '*87&#6,(? /+4
'"/*2. New Yoik: Baivestei Wheatsheaf.
van Liei, L. (1996). S+(#)/'(,*+ ,+ ("# &/+1./1# '.)),'.&.8= GF/)#+#22H /.(*+*8?H /+4
/.("#+(,',(?. New Yoik: Longman.
van Liei, L. (2uuu). Fiom input to affoiuance: Social-inteiactive leaining fiom an
ecological peispective. In }. P. Lantolf (Eu.), 3*',*'.&(.)/& ("#*)? /+4 2#'*+4 &/+1./1#
&#/)+,+1 (pp. 24S-2S9). 0xfoiu: 0xfoiu 0niveisity Piess.
van Liei, L. (2uu1). Constiaints anu iesouices in classioom talk: Issues of equality anu
symmetiy. In C. N. Canulin & N. Neicei (Eus.), %+1&,2" &/+1./1# (#/'",+1 ,+ ,(2 2*',/&
'*+(#6(= G )#/4#) (pp. 9u-1u7). Lonuon: Routleuge.
van Liei, L. (2uu4). !"# #'*&*1? /+4 2#8,*(,'2 *0 &/+1./1# &#/)+,+1= G 2*',*'.&(.)/&
7#)27#'(,9#. New Yoik: Kluwei Acauemic Publisheis.
Wateis, A. (2uu6). Facilitating follow-up in ELT INSET. 5/+1./1# !#/'",+1 M#2#/)'"H
<Q(1), S2-SS.
Wilugen, W. (1982). >/(/2()*7",' ("#*)#(,' 2#8/+(,'2. Amsteiuam: Benjamins.
Woous, B. (1996). !#/'"#) '*1+,(,*+ ,+ &/+1./1# (#/'",+1. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge
0niveisity Piess.

Copyiight 1994 - 2u11 TESL-E}, ISSN 1u72-4SuS
Copyiight iests with the authois.

Classrooms As Complex Adaptive Systems

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Classrooms As Complex Adaptive Systems

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

TESL-EJ 15.

1, June 2011 Burns & Knox page 1

Вам также может понравиться