our in a case-by-case basis rather than to establish consistent guidelines for the students, as well as specific consequences for the breaching of these guidelines... In the foreign language classroom the teacher cannot assume that students who have grown up in a different culture have "common sense": what is common or reasonable in one culture may be regarded as bizarre or even ridiculous in another. To the dismay of Western teachers, for example, Japanese students routinely whisper answers to their classmates who, as they perceive it, have been put on the hot seat by the teacher. To these students, sharing an answer when a teacher has called upon a particular student is an integral and honourable part of their common membership in class.
Where, then, does authority lie? And where does accountability for learning output lie?
Champeau de L=pez (1989:3) reminds us that "while the emphasis of education today is on the student as the focus of learning, it must be remembered that the teacher is still the person specially trained to guide the student, help him select appropriate learning materials, and create a positive classroom environment."
Stevick (1980) contrasts control with initiative and claims that they should be kept distinct and adjusted independently one from the other. In the name of classroom control, teachers should not monopolize students' initiative. As he explains:
In exercising control, then, the teacher is giving some kind of order, or structure, to the learning space of the student. In encouraging him to take "initiative", she is allowing him to work, and to grow, within that space. The trick, for the teacher, is not only to preserve this distinction, it is also to provide just the right amount of learning space. If there is too little, the learner will feel that the teacher has abandoned him.
Marshall (1970:74-5) suggests that "If classroom individual and group conduct is to be structured, guided, ev...