What talking about improvement requires

I agree with Casanave that any talk about improvement inevitably leads to making decisions about their teaching philosophies, assessment, and measurement. Due to the complexity of the criteria governing these decisions, many teachers choose to base their version of improvement on an easy and simple method, counting errors. In many non-US L2 writing contexts, as implied by Matsuda (2003), it is not that teachers blindly value error count; it is simply because they are not on the same page with teachers who follow the discussion in the field. Because of this disconnect, their students too become so used to this environment that they cannot imagine improvement without having their errors pointed out to them.

There are a number of possible solutions to this controversy. First, any attempt to change teachers’ beliefs, practices, and philosophies, requires a radical revision to the system under which these teachers teach (e.g., types of assignment given, criteria for assessment, etc). This can go as far as making changes to international test systems such as TOEFL and IELTS, the systems that have helped maintain the status quo and determine the way teachers teach especially in EFL countries. Second, establishing new strategies for gate-keeping (if this is important) that will be influenced by this radical change in the system should follow. We know that tests such as the ones mentioned above are there for gate-keeping purposes, unless schools and colleges walk hand in hand and change their policies in relation to their admission requirements, little can be said about bringing changes to teacher’s practices. Teachers and students will keep counting errors and will always be trapped in explicit grammar instruction.