In the essay which opens this issue, Brenton Doecke returns to three texts that provide insights into the learning that is accomplished in the interactions of students and teachers within the social space of the classroom. His re-reading of the Newbolt Report (Board of Education 1921), Marjorie Hourd’s (1949) The Education of the Poetic Spirit and John Dixon's [1967] 1972) Growth through English constructs a history of English as a school subject that has at its centre a conception of ‘literary sociability’ which cannot be assimilated within currently fashionable notions of ‘knowledge’. Doecke’s claim that the history of English teaching is a history of praxis, of a dialectical relationship between theory and practice, might be seen to be instantiated in the following contributions by Sarah Newell, Rae Hancock and Hannah Philp. Each of these essays involves careful reflection on and analysis of the ‘interplay between a teacher’s knowledge and the complexities of students’ use of language in classroom settings’, to borrow the words with which Doecke characterises the significance of Dixon’s approach in Growth through English. In all of these cases, too, there is nothing cosy or easily achieved about the forms of sociability that are enacted. Words and meanings are subject to contestation within the classroom – and much is at stake in these struggles, for all of the participants involved. For each of these contributors, too, questions of linguistic register are sharply posed. What kinds of language are appropriate in the classroom? How, and by whom, should such matters be determined? The moments explored all involve what might be construed as more or less serious breaches of classroom etiquette: the Bible is ‘a book with a load of fairy tales’, Hamlet is a ‘rapist’, and Priestley’s Mr Birling is a ‘cunt’. But, as Hancock, Philp and Newell demonstrate as they attend to the complexities of their students’ use of language, what is going on in these moments is much more complicated than a problem of classroom discipline. These pieces might also be regarded as instances of ‘teachers learning to insert the impossibilities and the incongruities of their teaching narratives into the academic discourses which have ignored them’ (Miller 1995, 24). Contested questions of language, appropriacy and authority are also at the heart of Tanya Manning-Lewis’s account of Jamaican high school students’ creation of graphic novels. The project enables the students to flourish as makers of multimodal meaning; crucially important in what happens, however, is the fact that they are able to draw on the full resources of language they have as speakers of Jamaican Creole – resources that are marginalised within the regime of high-stakes testing that privileges the use of Jamaican Standard English. Michelle Miller explores Alison Bechdel’s (2006) remarkable graphic memoir, Fun Home. Miller considers a rather different form of literary sociability, the sharing of CHANGING ENGLISH 2019, VOL. 26, NO. 4, 337–338 https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2019.1661702

中文翻译：

---

社论

在打开这个问题的文章中，布伦顿·多克 (Brenton Doecke) 返回了三篇文章，这些文章提供了对课堂社交空间内师生互动所完成的学习的见解。他重新阅读了 Newbolt Report（教育委员会 1921）、Marjorie Hourd（1949）诗精神的教育和 John Dixon [1967] 1972）通过英语成长，构建了英语作为学校学科的历史以“文学社会性”的概念为中心，这种概念不能被当前流行的“知识”概念所吸收。Doecke 声称英语教学史是实践史，是理论与实践之间辩证关系的历史，可以在 Sarah Newell、Rae Hancock 和 Hannah Philp 的以下贡献中得到实例化。这些文章中的每一篇都涉及对“教师的知识与学生在课堂环境中使用语言的复杂性之间的相互作用”的仔细反思和分析，借用 Doecke 描述狄克逊在英语中成长方法的重要性的话。在所有这些情况下，也没有任何舒适或容易实现的社交形式。词汇和意义在课堂上会受到争论——对于所有参与者来说，这些斗争都处于危险之中。对于这些贡献者中的每一个，也都尖锐地提出了语言语域的问题。什么样的语言适合在课堂上使用？如何，由谁，是否应确定此类事项？探索的时刻都涉及或多或少严重违反课堂礼仪的情况：圣经是“一本充满童话故事的书”，哈姆雷特是“强奸犯”，而普里斯特利的伯林先生是“婊子”。但是，正如汉考克、菲尔普和纽厄尔在关注学生使用语言的复杂性时所展示的那样，在这些时刻发生的事情比课堂纪律问题复杂得多。这些作品也可能被视为“教师学会将他们的教学叙述的不可能性和不协调性插入到忽视它们的学术话语中”的实例（Miller 1995, 24）。有争议的语言问题，适当性和权威性也是 Tanya Manning-Lewis 对牙买加高中生图画小说创作的描述的核心。该项目使学生能够成为多模态意义的创造者；然而，在发生的事情中至关重要的是，他们能够利用他们作为牙买加克里奥尔语使用者所拥有的全部语言资源——这些资源在优先使用牙买加标准的高风险测试制度中被边缘化英语。米歇尔米勒探索艾莉森贝克德尔 (2006) 非凡的图形回忆录，有趣的家。米勒考虑了一种相当不同的文学社交形式，即 CHANGING ENGLISH 2019, VOL. 的分享。26，没有。4、337–338 https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2019.1661702 该项目使学生能够成为多模态意义的创造者；然而，在发生的事情中至关重要的是，他们能够利用他们作为牙买加克里奥尔语使用者所拥有的全部语言资源——这些资源在优先使用牙买加标准的高风险测试制度中被边缘化英语。米歇尔米勒探索艾莉森贝克德尔 (2006) 非凡的图形回忆录，有趣的家。米勒考虑了一种相当不同的文学社交形式，即 CHANGING ENGLISH 2019, VOL 的分享。26，没有。4、337–338 https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2019.1661702 该项目使学生能够成为多模态意义的创造者；然而，在发生的事情中至关重要的是，他们能够利用他们作为牙买加克里奥尔语使用者所拥有的全部语言资源——这些资源在优先使用牙买加标准的高风险测试制度中被边缘化英语。米歇尔米勒探索艾莉森贝克德尔 (2006) 非凡的图形回忆录，有趣的家。米勒考虑了一种相当不同的文学社交形式，即 CHANGING ENGLISH 2019, VOL 的分享。26，没有。4、337–338 https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2019.1661702 事实是，他们能够利用他们作为牙买加克里奥尔语使用者所拥有的全部语言资源——这些资源在高风险测试制度中被边缘化，而这些资源优先使用牙买加标准英语。米歇尔米勒探索艾莉森贝克德尔 (2006) 非凡的图形回忆录，有趣的家。米勒考虑了一种相当不同的文学社交形式，即 CHANGING ENGLISH 2019, VOL 的分享。26，没有。4、337–338 https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2019.1661702 事实是，他们能够利用他们作为牙买加克里奥尔语使用者所拥有的全部语言资源——这些资源在高风险测试制度中被边缘化，而这些资源优先使用牙买加标准英语。米歇尔米勒探索艾莉森贝克德尔 (2006) 非凡的图形回忆录，有趣的家。米勒考虑了一种相当不同的文学社交形式，即 CHANGING ENGLISH 2019, VOL 的分享。26，没有。4、337–338 https://doi.org/10.1080/1358684X.2019.1661702