Locating Continuing Professional Development within a Proposed Complex Dynamic Systems Model for Today's English Language Teaching Profession. (2024)

Introduction

The terms complex and dynamic are frequently and rightly used todescribe many aspects of English language teaching (ELT) andlearning--from the language, to the learners, to the teaching andlearning processes, to the classroom (Larsen-Freeman, 1997; De Bot,Lowie, & Verspoor, 2007; Van Geert, 2008; and Verspoor, de Bot,& Lowie, 2011). That many, if not all, components of the ELTprofession are both complex and dynamic is a stance accepted byacademics and practitioners alike. What is absent in the conversation,however, is a practical discussion of how ELT professionals are toanalyze, understand, and then navigate this ever-changing complexity asthey launch, build, and live out their careers. How are they to make effective and rewarding continuing professional development (CPD) choicesor stay relevant, engaged, and motivated amid this dynamic complexity?

An understanding of the importance of context is a good startingpoint. CPD does not take place in a vacuum; it is situated in acontext--a specific space existing at a specific point in time (Young,DePalma, & Garrett, 2002; Stelma, Fay, & Zhou, 2013). Thisdistinctive context results from the on going interaction of multipleelements and, as such, can be described as one or more complex dynamicsystems (CDS). An eff ective way to understand the concept of a CDS isto break it into its component words. A system is a group of elementsthat together create a unified whole. A complex system is one in whichthe relationships among the components of the system are mutuallyinfluencing, unpredictable, and changeable. A dynamic system is acomplex system characterized by constant or varying change over time.Putting these together, a complex dynamic system is one in which thesystem components are mutually influencing, unpredictable, andchangeable, and in which the nature of component interactions andcorresponding outcomes changes over time in a non-linear manner(Larsen-Freeman, 1997; De Bot et al., 2007; Larsen-Freeman &Cameron, 2008; Dornyei, 2014; Mercer, 2016).

There are additional conceptual layers to CDSs, particularlyrelated to change. For example, the change that CDSs undergo can besmall, slow, and gradual or large, rapid, and sudden or any combinationof these descriptors. Furthermore, CDSs, despite being continually in astate of change, are not necessarily chaotic. Rather, the systemsself-organize into dynamic stability, constantly finding balance amongall interacting and evolving factors within their boundaries. In tryingto achieve and maintain this dynamic stability, CDSs may gravitatetoward select patterns of balance called attractor states. Attractorstates are essentially the CDS's preferred states of being,regardless of the factors at play, states where only the most intenseforce will elicit change. This stands in direct contrast with repellorstates, where even the slightest force will initiate change. Thesefluctuations in and out of stable states within and across CDSs are thetriggers of new development and evince a system that is dynamicallyactive in its complexity. These additional conceptual layers deepen ourunderstanding of the nature of change within CDSs and provide additionalinsight into our ELT contexts (Dornyei, 2014; Mercer, 2016; Kostoulas,Stelma, Mercer, Cameron & Dawson, 2017).

Viewing the context in which CPD takes place as one or more CDSs isimportant because it allows us to understand that our CPD needs areequally complex and dynamic. There is no single, simple CPD need;rather, there are many interwoven, complicated needs. Understanding thedynamic characteristic of our context is also important because itenables us to understand that, as ELT professionals, we cannot remainstagnant. We have to continually learn, evolve, and change direction tostay eff ective and relevant in our dynamic context.

There are many theories of CDSs, each of which emphasizes differentaspects of a system, from the nature of the interactions, to theunpredictability, to the non-linearity, to the resulting outcomes. Thereare also different growing bodies of research on the application of aCDS lens to deepen our understanding of ELT (Hensley, 2010; Dornyei,2014; Mercer, 2016). In looking at CPD through a CDS lens here, however,we do not adhere to any one specific CDS theory or seek to apply CDSmethodologically. Rather, we use the CDS lens to shed light on theimportance of context to the CPD choices available to ELT professionals.Our model is intended as a practical, analytical tool with whichprofessionals can gather information about their contexts, analyze theinformation, and use it to craft intentional and strategic professionaldevelopment pathways.

A greater understanding of our context helps us locate ourselveswithin the dynamic complexity of the ELT sector, the first step inplanning our CPD. A starting point to this discussion is to consider themultiple CDSs at play in our daily work as ELT professionals and tounderstand how they intersect and influence each other and change overtime. Possible professional development choices then emerge to help usstrategically forge a personally meaningful and rewarding CPD pathway.

In this article, we first present a proposed CDS model for the ELTsector, describe its components, and (most important) suggest howprofessionals can locate themselves within it. We then discuss theimplications of the model in the practical decisions that teachers,administrators, and funders make with respect to CPD.

A Complex Dynamic System Model for English Language Teaching andContinuing Professional Development

The need for CPD in the ELT profession is no longer up for debate.The exponential growth in the profession, the constant changes inprogramming, technology, and resources, and the infinite variety ofstudents and their corresponding learning needs, all point to emerginggaps in professional knowledge and skills that have to be bridged on anongoing basis. It is impossible for individuals to know everything thereis to know and do everything that can be done in the profession. Asprofessionals, then, we have to purposefully develop the knowledge andskills relevant to our contexts and our personal and professional goalswithin those contexts. Using a CDS model as the starting point, we canbuild individually relevant CPD plans for the knowledge and skills wewill learn and the channels through which we will learn them.

As illustrated in Figure 1, our proposed model identifies five CDSswhose interactions create the overall context of English languageteachers: the Socioeconomic CDS, the Profession CDS, the Program CDS,the Class CDS, and the Individual CDS. In Figure 1, the arrow representsthe dynamic element of the model, the passage of time.

These CDSs are not hierarchical, however, and they are not siloed;they are equal, intersectional, and mutually influencing. In Figure 1,this intersectionality and mutual influencing is represented by shadedrather than solid lines. That said, CDSs vary in size, from theinfinitely small to the infinitely large. Smaller CDSs can be what arecalled nested complex dynamic systems, in that they exist within or arenested within larger systems (Hensley, 2010; Dornyei, 2016; Mercer,2016). For example, every Program CDS is nested within the largerProfession CDS, and every Class CDS is nested within a larger ProgramCDS.

In addition, some CDSs partially overlap other CDSs. For example,the Profession CDS, while part of the Socioeconomic CDS relative to thelocation where the ELT professional is situated, also expands beyondthat one Socioeconomic CDS to literally span the globe. Given thatEnglish is taught internationally, the profession likewise existsinternationally. The Profession CDS, thus, exists at multiple andincreasingly larger levels, from local, to regional, to national, tointernational.

The Socioeconomic Complex Dynamic System

The model first places ELT within a Socioeconomic CDS, the verybroad context in which English language programs, professionals, andlearners exist. Given English's current global reach, ELT takesplace in almost every country in the world. Each country has a uniqueSocioeconomic CDS created by the ongoing interaction of thecountry's economy, political system, history, geography, religion,society, technology, language, and culture. This system influences howEnglish is perceived, why and how it is used, and when and how it istaught. In the past, when ELT was described, the Socioeconomic CDSs weredivided into English-speaking systems (which yielded the term"Teaching English as a Second Language") andnon-English-speaking systems (which yielded the term "TeachingEnglish as a Foreign Language"). Subsequent terms attempted to movebeyond the colonialism, economic imperialism, and other biases inherentin these labels: "Teaching English to Speakers of OtherLanguages," "Teaching English as an Additional Language,""Teaching English as a Lingua Franca," and "TeachingEnglish as an International Language." None of these terms,however, acknowledge the uniqueness of each Socioeconomic CDS in whichELT takes place. An alternative approach is to investigate, understand,and acknowledge the elements that interact in each specificSocioeconomic CDS to make it distinct, particularly with respect to ELT.Our need to function eff ectively within this broad Socioeconomic CDSforms the first layer of possible CPD needs that we have as ELTprofessionals.

The Profession Complex Dynamic System

The Profession CDS describes the ELT profession resulting from itsfoundational theory and practice, educational qualifications,professional development channels, professional standards, andprofessional organizations. It is set against the historical context ofELT that has witnessed varying degrees of influence from a range oforganizations since its birth, from nongovernmental organizations, togovernments, to educational institutions, to for-profit companies bothlarge and small. Over the past century, ongoing shifts in contentpriorities, learner demographics, and perspectives, and the agendas ofmainstream culture have exerted influence on both the theory andpractice of ELT (Burnaby, 1998).

Theory and practice refer to the knowledge and skills that theprofession deems necessary for success, acquired either throughpre-service education or CPD. The ongoing tension between theory andpractice creates significant dynamic complexity in the Profession CDS.Both current and evolutionary conceptualizations of theory and practicein the field intersect simultaneously with the other elements withinthis CDS and across other CDSs in the model. Early understandings of ELTfocused on concrete sets of knowledge that teachers were to impart usingspecific methodologies. Later, the profession developed its identity asone rooted in linguistics, applied linguistics, and psychology. This wasfollowed by the exploration and creation of language acquisitiontheories and classroom methodologies, leading to today'spostmethods era that balances theory and practice through theimplementation of teaching principles (Brown & Lee, 2015).

In our model, we identify theory as what we need to know aboutlanguage (pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar, discourse, reading,writing, listening, speaking, linguistics, applied linguistics), firstand second language acquisition, language teaching (methodologies,activities, resources, language assessment), and teaching (classroommanagement, behaviour management, education technology, learningdisabilities, mental health, trauma, social justice, socialintegration). For practice, we identify the skills we need, includingteaching skills (the four language skills, the four language systems,culture, lesson planning, materials development, classroom management,language assessment), technology skills (Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, andExcel; audio/video applications; Internet searching; social media;hardware, such as laptop or desktop computer, SmartBoard, projector),soft skills (verbal and nonverbal communication, written communication,interpersonal and intercultural communication, negotiating, advocacy),administrative skills (time management, record-keeping, organization,decision-making), and professional skills (teamwork, collaboration,change management).

The second element in the Profession CDS, educationalqualifications, developed in tandem with the evolution of ELT theory andpractice to give traction to the professionalization of the field.Qualifications include undergraduate degrees, short certificates anddiplomas, and postgraduate degrees. Within this element, there isongoing debate about the merits of educational qualifications that areviewed as short-term skills development exercises versus those thatattend to the long-term development of English language teachers overtime.

The next element, professional development channels, providesmultiple choices for pre-service and CPD: formal learning, non-formallearning, and informal learning. Formal learning is intentional andgraded learning, structured around a hierarchical curriculum. It isoffered by accredited institutions and results in a recognizedcredential. Non-formal learning is also intentional and organized insome way but does not result in a recognized credential. Informallearning is unintentional, unorganized, incidental, and random (OECD,n.d.).

Within these professional development channels, there are otherpertinent questions to be answered, including what formal CPD do we needor have access to? (e.g., certificate, diploma, undergraduate degree,postgraduate degree); what non-formal CPD do we need or have access to?(e.g., attending or presenting at workshops, webinars, conferences;mentoring; peer coaching; conducting research); what informal CPD do weneed or have access to? (e.g., interacting with colleagues, social mediaposting and reading, participating in social media chats, blogging,writing articles, participating in professional learning networks,reading journals and books); and how do we track our professionaldevelopment? (e.g., professional portfolio, e-portfolio,micro-credentialing).

The next element in the Profession CDS, professional organizations,exerts varying degrees of influence on English language professionalsand their professional development choices. This influence is mediatedby the scope of the organization (international, national, provincial,local), its focus (academic, community-based, intercultural, adulteducation, K-12), the level of engagement a professional has within theorganization (member, director, committee member, advocate), and thevibrancy of the organization (extent of professional developmentofferings, status in the professional community, political engagement).Closely aligned with professional organizations is the element ofprofessional standards that includes professional certification, bestpractice frameworks, and teacher training program accreditation.

The Program Complex Dynamic System

Within the Profession CDS, each ELT professional functions within aspecific ELT program, termed the Program CDS in our model. The ProgramCDS is not just our classroom or the institution at which we work. TheProgram CDS is created by the intersection of elements, such aslocation, institution, program, curriculum, methodology, resources,professional role, and program delivery modality. Our day-to-dayexperiences within the mutually influencing intersectionality of theseelements create a unique set of CPD needs (Kostoulas, 2018).

The location describes the region (province or state), the type ofcommunity (rural area, small town, city, large urban area) and thecharacteristics of the region and community that may impact our ELT. Theinstitution describes the type of institution (publicly funded schoolboard, private language school, community college, private careercollege, university, nonprofit organizations [e.g., settlement centres,multicultural centres, religious centres, and community centres],privately owned businesses), the institution funding (federal,provincial or state, local, private, learner fees), the institutionmanagement (organizational structure, stakeholders), and the ELTservices offered ( instruction, assessment, publishing or distributing,teacher education, other consulting services).

The program element generally describes the types of learners weteach ( international learners, international professional groups,visitors, immigrants, temporary foreign workers, refugees, residents,citizens), the age of our learners (pre-primary, elementary school, highschool, college, university, working adults, seniors), their languageproficiency levels (literacy, beginner, intermediate, advanced), thelanguage proficiency framework used (Canadian Language Benchmarks,Common European Framework of Reference, Global Scale of English,in-house proprietary language proficiency framework), and the courses orprograms we teach (Literacy and Basic Skills, General English,Conversation Circles, Citizenship, English for Academic Purposes,Workplace English, Professional English, Occupation Specific Language[e.g., health care, aviation, oil and gas, finance, and InformationTechnology or IT], Business English, Academic Bridging, English forSpecial or Specific Purposes [e.g., parenting, camping, the arts, publicspeaking, and computer literacy]). Along with each program, there arecorresponding curricula, methodologies, and resources.

Another element within the Program CDS is the professional role.This describes the different roles in the organization and theresponsibilities associated with each role (teacher, assessor,curriculum developer, materials developer or author, teacher trainer,program reviewer and accreditation auditor, counsellor, employmentcounsellor, learner advocate, recruiter, manager or administrator,marketing manager, entrepreneur, owner) and the level of experience inthe role (pre-service, novice, experienced, expert).

Finally, program delivery modality refers to how we deliver theEnglish language instruction (face-to-face in a classroom or sharedspace, such as a workplace, library, cafe, or childcare centre; blendedface-to-face and online; synchronous online video conferencing;synchronous or asynchronous telephone or online audio; virtual reality).

All elements of the Program CDS require that English languageteachers have different knowledge and skills. As they move around in theProgram CDS and from one Program CDS to another, the requirements forknowledge and skills change. The requirements also change over time aseach Program CDS changes.

The Class Complex Dynamic System

Within a Program CDS, there are multiple Class CDSs in whichteaching and learning occur, for the language classroom is also a CDS(Tudor, 2001; Dornyei, 2014; Kostoulas, 2018). The Class CDS is not justa physical space; it refers very broadly to the learners who aregathered together in a particular physical or virtual space for thepurpose of learning English. Most teaching still occurs in traditionalclassroom spaces, but there are also community locations and rapidlyincreasing online platforms that are also classrooms. The elements inthe Class CDS include class size, individual language levels, learnerdemographics, learner life experience, and learner motivation.

Class size refers to the number of learners interacting with theteacher. This can vary from a single learner with a tutor, to onlineasynchronous teaching to hundreds of learners. The number of learnersdefines the number of interrelationships that occur among learners,peers, and teachers. Learners themselves can be considered CDSs (Mercer,2011b, 2016); a class is, thus, a group of learner CDSs that programadministrators attempt to group together based on defined commonalities.This group of learner CDSs is a significant contributor to thecomplexity and unpredictability of the Classroom CDS.

Whereas language level comes into play in a broad sense in theProgram CDS, the individual language levels of each learner, as well asthe degree of variance in the language levels, are elements that act inthe Class CDS. Similarly, learner demographics are an element in theClass CDS as the characteristics of the individual learners in a classinteract. This includes characteristics such as race, ethnicity, gender,age, education, profession, occupation, income level, and maritalstatus. The element we have termed learner life experience encompasses awide array of cultural, social, economic, and psychological factors,including pre- and post-migration experiences, family relationships,cultural connectedness, trauma, and post-traumatic stress. Anotherimportant element in the Class CDS is learner motivation. What motivatesthe learner to learn English, and what end goal do they want to reach?These goals vary immensely from wanting to learn basic practicallanguage for conducting daily life to passing high-stakes examinations.

The complexity of the Class CDS becomes obvious when we start toconsider the myriad combinations of language level, demographics, lifeexperiences, and motivations that can occur in one single class. Thesepermutations, combined with the elements in the other intersecting CDSs,impact what optimal teaching would look like, and consequently whatprofessional development choices a conscientious teacher might make.

The Individual Complex Dynamic System

Given that individuals can be considered CDSs (Mercer, 2011a), thefinal CDS in our model is the individual ELT professional. For thepurposes of our model, the Individual CDS--the ELT professional--iscomprised of three main elements: the extent and nature of theteacher's education and training, the extent and nature of theteacher's professional experience, and the self. All three elementsare exhibited in the specific role that the teacher has in the program.

A teacher's level of education and training determines thestarting point for next steps in professional development. In Canada,for example, there is variation in the education backgrounds of ELTprofessionals. An increasing number of professionals hold specific ELTdegrees, but many hold university degrees in related fields, such asK-12 education, adult education, psychology, and sociology; in somecases, ELT professionals have degrees entirely unrelated to teaching.Similarly, many teacher training programs exist, some that offerlengthy, detailed training and others that are introductory. Finally,because the professionalization of the field is a relatively newphenomenon, and because there are communities where the need for Englishlanguage classes has preempted the capacity of the community to accessqualified professionals, there are many ELT professionals with little tono formal training working in many programs and classrooms. Therefore,it is important for individual professionals to assess their owneducation and training when determining their CPD needs. It is alsoimportant for those delivering CPD opportunities to consider theindividual differences that may exist within their schools or programs.

The same dynamism emerges when we consider professional experience.Length, breadth, and depth of experience are factors that impact anindividual's overall level of experience. Certainly, professionalexperience yields many transferable skills that allow individuals tomigrate across programs. However, there are significant differences inwhat is required to teach, for example, in an English for academicpurposes class in a university setting compared with a community-basedEnglish program held in a settlement agency. Years of experience in onesphere will only minimally prepare us for work in the other, and, thus,professional development needs may shift with a change in employment.

The final element in the Individual CDS, self, includes multipleindividual qualities, such as personality traits, personality type,learning preferences, motivations, critical thinking skills, personalautonomy, and assumptions. These all interact to define a uniqueindividual teacher with distinct CPD needs and tendencies. It is beyondthe scope of this article to comprehensively explore the element of selfand how this impacts an educator's professional developmenttrajectory. A thorough exploration of this topic can be found inPatricia Cranton's book Professional Development as TransformativeLearning: New Perspectives for Teachers of Adults (1996). In the text,she explores educators' professional development using severaltheoretical frameworks: Jungian psychological type theory (Jung &Hull, 1971), Brookfield's (1987) critical thinking theory,Candy's (1991) theory of self-direction, and Mezirow's (1991)theory of transformative learning (Cranton, 1996; Marrocco, 2009).

In a subsequent work, Cranton (2006) advocates taking the time tomuse about ourselves as educators and lists a series of reflectivequestions to prompt this: How would I describe my learning and teachingstyle? What is my philosophy of practice? What do I like and dislikeabout being an educator? What do my learners think an educator should belike? What inhibitions or fears do I have about my work? Questions suchas these serve as a valuable guide to selecting a CPD pathway. Taking afresh look at transformative learning theory using a lens that placesthe ELT professional as the learner reveals the significance of theindividual difference in professional development and the symbioticrelationship between the individual and the Socioeconomic CDS.

Implications of the Complex Dynamic Systems Model for ContinuingProfessional Development

The CDS model of the ELT profession has multiple implications forCPD. First, because CDSs are complex, non-linear, and unpredictable, theCPD for teachers also needs to be complex, non-linear, and--yes--evenunpredictable. There is no one single, simple, magic wand for CPD thatwill miraculously address all learning needs. Instead, CPD needs to bemulti-faceted and multi-channelled, approaching issues and needs fromdifferent angles and perspectives.

The complexity of CPD is evident in the sheer scope of knowledgeand skills to be learned by English language teachers that a CDS lensuncovers, with new knowledge and skills added every day. In our work, weoften encounter experienced teachers who tell us, "I have beenteaching English for twenty-five years. There is nothing that I need tolearn." The CDS model shows how misguided this perception is.Instead of this limited view of the profession and what needs to belearned, the CDS model uncovers a plethora of CPD needs andopportunities across all CDSs in the socioeconomic, profession, program,class, and individual realms. Beyond that, there are needs andopportunities where the Profession CDS extends globally, yielding needsand opportunities locally, regionally, nationally, and globally. It alsoyields opportunities formally, informally, and non-formally, throughmultiple channels. CPD has never been so needed, and its opportunitiesmore numerous or accessible.

Second, because of the dynamic nature of all the CDSs thatintersect in ELT, the CDS model highlights the need for continuingprofessional development, not just professional development. Our choiceof the term CPD rather than PD is intentional. As conscientiousprofessionals, we must regularly evaluate the relevancy and currency ofour knowledge and skills by scanning all of the CDSs. We need to beself-aware and identify gaps that have emerged in our knowledge andskills based on the changes we see. Keeping in mind that we areourselves a CDS, we also need to be aware of how we have changed overtime, for better or for worse. A CDS lens focuses our attention onchange; with this lens, we see that our CPD is never complete, nor is itpredetermined. We need to be both open to new learning, and flexible andagile as to what that new learning might be.

Third, the model allows us to understand what makes our ELT contextparticularly unique and identify the specific knowledge and skills thatwe need to be eff ective and successful in this unique context. Giventhe infinite knowledge and skill possibilities that exist for our CPD,using this contextual information to strategically select how we spendour CPD time and money makes our decision-making more efficient and ourCPD more relevant.

Fourth, the CDS model refutes another misguided perception: thatthere is only one right way to teach English. If there are thousands ofteachers, in thousands of classes, in thousands of programs, inthousands of socioeconomic contexts, all intersecting uniquely andchanging over time, then suffice it to say that there is more than one"right" way to teach English. To fully appreciate therichness, complexity, and impact of ELT, we need to see our professionthrough a lens that is not confined to our individual ELT contexts. Weneed to get beyond the judgemental position of "I believe thisabout my profession and everyone should believe as I do" to anunderstanding that what we believe as individual ELT professionals isbased upon our experiences in the contexts in which we teach. This thenallows for the beliefs of other ELT professionals, derived from othercontextual experiences, to be validated. Rather than pursuing CPD tolearn the one "right" way to teach English, we should build upour repertoire of approaches, methods, techniques, and activities, sothat we can strategically select the most eff ective and efficient wayto teach at a specific point in time with a specific group of learners.The larger the repertoire, the greater the likelihood of success.

To further expand on this implication, within ELT, there are manydifferent kinds of teaching resulting from the intersectionality of thedifferent CDSs in our contexts. Rather than taking a myopic, insularperspective on ELT, thinking there is only one way to teach English, andthus limiting our professional development and our career options, weneed to take a larger, more inclusive view of the profession. Taking amyopic perspective diminishes the profession and our roles as ELTprofessionals within it. Understanding that there are multiple ways toteach expands the importance of the profession and makes the impact thatthe profession has as an agent of change in a society very clear.

The final implication of the model initially appears to be acontradiction. On one hand, the situated, context-specific nature of theELT profession suggests that we should aspire to a very narrow CPD focuscustomized to a unique context. On the other hand, the richness of theinterrelated factors, ongoing change, and subsequent learningopportunities in the intersecting, nested CDSs with which we interactsuggests that we should aspire to wideranging CPD that connects us tothe knowledge and practice of the entire constellation of the ELTprofession. The resolution to this contradiction is not"either/or" but "all." We must strategically balanceour need to build our expertise for teaching in a particular contextwith our need to simultaneously interact with and learn from all of theknowledge growth and change in practice taking place in all of the CDSsto which we are integrally linked.

Conclusion: A Unique Continuing Professional Development Pathway

To fully appreciate our profession, and the career opportunitiesand rewards within it, we must engage with its complexity rather thancling to a narrow and simplified understanding of it based upon thesingle limited ELT context in which we work. Reflecting on the CDSs inour proposed model of the ELT profession and their correspondingintersectionality will support effective decisions with respect to thepersonal CPD pathways that each of us, as ELT professionals,strategically construct for ourselves. Understanding the uniqueness ofour teaching realities, as well as the interconnectedness and interplayamong the CDSs of which we are a part, allows us to engage inintentional and strategic CPD that is itself complex and dynamic. Allstakeholders in the ELT profession can use the CDS model applied to CPDto identify, support, and build an impactful vision for their future andthe future of the profession.

The Authors

Dianne Tyers has 30 years of experience in English languageeducation as a teacher, teacher educator, manager, program developer,program evaluator, and researcher. She has a PhD from the OntarioInstitute for Studies in Education (OISE), University of Toronto, aswell as a Master of Arts in Applied Linguistics from the University ofQueensland. She currently runs Advance Consulting for Education,providing teacher education and consulting services across Canada andinternationally.

Judy Sillito holds a Master of Education degree from the Universityof Alberta. For 38 years, she has worked in English language educationin a variety of capacities-teacher, program developer, manager-inprograms ranging from Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada toEnglish for the Workplace to English for Academic Purposes to arts-basedand literacy-focused community based-learning initiatives. She isemployed at Multicultural Health Brokers Cooperative in Edmonton, AB,where she designed and now manages an English for Employment program forimmigrants and refugees facing multiple barriers to employment.

References

Brookfield, S. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: Challengingadults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Brown, H. D., & Lee, H. (2015). Teaching by principles: Aninteractive approach to language pedagogy (4th ed.). White Plains, NY:Pearson Education.

Burnaby, B. (1998). English as a second language for adultimmigrants. In S. Scott, B. Spencer, & A. Thomas (Eds.), Learningfor life: Canadian readings in adult education (pp. 283-295). Toronto,ON: Thompson Educational Publishing.

Candy, P. (1991). Self-direction for lifelong learning: Acomprehensive guide to theory and practice. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

Cranton, P. (1996). Professional development as transformativelearning: New perspectives for teachers of adults. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

Cranton, P. (2006). Understanding and promoting transformativelearning: A guide for educators of adults (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.

De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systemstheory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Languageand Cognition, 10(1), 7-21. DOI:10.1017/S1366728906002732

Dornyei, Z. (2014). Researching complex dynamic systems:"Retrodictive qualitative modelling" in the languageclassroom. Language Teaching, 47(1), 80-91.DOI:10.1017/S0261444811000516

Hensley, J. (2010). A brief introduction and overview of complexsystems in applied linguistics. Journal of the Faculty of GlobalCommunication, 1, 83-95. http://hdl.handle.net/10561/678

Jung, C, & Hull, R. (1971). Psychological types (Vol. 6).Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Kostoulas, A. I. (2018). A language school as a complex system:Complex systems theory in English language teaching. Bern, Switzerland:Peter Lang Publishing Group. DOI:10.3726/b11892

Kostoulas, A. I., Stelma, J., Mercer, S., Cameron, L., &Dawson, S. (2017). Complex systems theory as a shared discourse spacefor TESOL. TESOL journal, 9(2), 246-240. DOI:10.1002/tesj.317

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and secondlanguage acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141-165.DOI:10.1093/applin/18.2.141

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems andapplied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Marrocco, M. J. (2009). Understanding and promoting transformativelearning: A guide for educators of adults. Canadian Journal ofUniversity Continuing Education, 35(1), 67-69. DOI: 10.21225/D5Z59X

Mercer, S. (2011a). The self as a complex dynamic system. Studiesin Second Language Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 57-82.DOI:10.14746/ssllt.2011.1.1.4

Mercer, S. (2011b). Understanding learner agency as a complexdynamic system. System, 39(4), 427-436. DOI:10.1016/j.system.2011.08.001

Mercer, S. (2016). Complexity and language teaching. In G. Hall(Ed.), The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (pp.473-485). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development/Organisationde Cooperation et de Developpement Economiques (OECD). n.d. Retrievedfrom http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/recognitionofnon-formalandinformallearning-home.htm

Stelma, J., Fay, R., & Zhou, X. (2013). Developingintentionality and researching multilingually: An ecological andmethodological perspective. International Journal of AppliedLinguistics, 23(3), 300-350. DOI:10.1111/ijal.12040

Tudor, I. (2001). The dynamics of the language classroom.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Van Geert, P. (2008). The dynamic systems approach in the study ofL1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. The Modern Language Journal,92(2), 179-199. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00713.x

Verspoor, M. H., de Bot, K., & Lowie, W. (2011). A dynamicapproach to second language development: Methods and techniques.Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Co.

Young, M. F., DePalma, A. & Garrett, S. (2002). Situations,interaction, process and aff ordances: An ecological psychologyperspective. Instructional Science, 30(1), 47-63. DOI:10.1023/A:1013537432164

https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v35i2.1297