Even though transformative and transmissive education models carry distinct characteristics, each possess elements necessary for teaching English as a second language, or any other dialect. While educators frequently draw a hypothetical dichotomous line separating the idea of education into the two categories, many choose to take an “either-or” approach selecting only one to feature within particular curriculum. While works like Paulo Freire’s The Pedagogy of the Oppressed urge educators to explore the sociological factors affecting a student’s education, the literature tends to suggest professionals adopt a single school of thought. Enthusiasts of traditional approaches to education publish works consistently as well. While there may be academic value in separating the two concepts for examining particular conditions, the ideas should fuse when discussing the process of a teaching a student a second langue. Therefore, educators applying the qualities of both transformative and transmissive education carry the essential educational tools for teaching students a second language.
While many educators engage in modern discussions regarding the two concepts, many societies within the context of history have made contributions to the ongoing academic discussion. Many ancient Greek philosophers, for example, understood the importance of separating knowledge into two distinct categories: theoretical and practical. Each type of knowledge held a special significant to both the instructor and student during the articulation of concepts. The same holds true when applying the principles of transformative and transmissive education for teaching a second language. Education can observe transformative education as a theoretical concept, while viewing transmissive as a practical one. Consequently, educators can ensure students retain information regarding the second language by providing the appropriate theoretical and practical knowledge within curriculum.
One of the greatest obstacles to incorporating both educational approaches remains the stigma of implementing transformative curriculum into modern educational settings. A major criticism of the transmissive education highlights the concept’s inability to provide a flexible, engaging form of education to participating students. Critics assert the challenges to student retention as a leading argument against the adoption of a transmissive curriculum. Conversely, consistent opposition to transformative education entails the disagreement with the commitment of an idealist approach to education. However, when teaching second language educators must carry characteristics of both concepts in order to ensure students learn and engage with the new content both cognitively and socially.
The paradigm of learning Spanish as a second language in the United States exemplifies the necessity of incorporating both strategies within education. Since the 1990s, American educational initiates under the Busch and Clinton Administrations sought to increase the rate of children having exposure to a second language. As a result, some state educational systems choose to implement Spanish, German and French as optional academic electives for elementary to high school students. While the policies have given students greater access to learning a second language, many still can not fluently speak it even after taking several years of elective classes. Since linguistic education typically only includes the transmissive forms of teaching in many cases, students can not engage with the material enough to apply the knowledge. Students frequently engage in a more interactive study of language at the collegiate level than at any other stage. In order to increase the number of bilingual students in a variety of regions, educators should include elements of both strategies in order to give students a comprehensive strategy for applying the language.