








































From the Editors 
 

Teaching with Intentionality: 
Language Educators as 
Transformative Intellectuals and 
Reflective Practitioners  
 

 

GATESOL Journal 
2022, Vol. 32(2), pp. 1–2 
doi:10.52242/gatesol.178 

ISSN: 2331-6845 

David L. Chiesa 
University of Georgia 
 
Robert A. Griffin 
University of West Georgia 

Abdulsamad Y. Humaidan 
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 
 
Ethan T. Trịnh 
Georgia State University 

 
 
The fall 2022 issue of GATESOL Journal provides its readers with insights into how language 
educators could create meaningful learning experiences for their students. The papers are 
connected with the core idea that language educators are vested in intentionally using pedagogical 
approaches that could have an impact on how and what students are learning. The papers position 
language educators as both transformative intellectuals (i.e., educators who strive not only for 
educational advancement but also personal transformation) and reflective practitioners (i.e., 
problem-solvers possessing “the ability to look back critically and imaginatively, to do cause-
effect thinking, to derive explanatory principles, to do task analysis, also to look forward, and to 
do anticipatory planning” [Kumaravadivelu, 2003, p. 10]). This issue will showcase teachers’ 
intentions through their roles as transformative intellectuals and reflective practitioners. 
 
Language Educators as Transformative Intellectuals 
The primary goal of a language educator who can be seen as a transformative intellectual is one of 
a change agent, who strives to maximize sociopolitical awareness through problem-posing 
activities. In the opening article, Day and Prado ask their readers to reconceptualize advocacy in 
TESOL to take the focus off the educator and onto the learner so students gain a sense of ownership 
and empowerment through self-advocacy. They explain that it is our “job as teachers and 
practitioners [to] not only teach language development, but to lead students to find their own voice, 
so they can speak up, to be their own advocate, and change the world” (p. 12). In doing so, Day 
and Prado utilize Test et al.’s (2005) framework for self-advocacy, which consist of four primary 
components for instruction: knowledge of self, knowledge of rights, communication, and 
leadership. From Test et al.’s (2005) framework, Day and Prado develop four lessons as a unit plan 
to be utilized in promoting self-advocacy. They take transformative roles as language educators 
because they view pedagogy not only for language learning but also as opportunities for 
transforming students’ lives both inside and outside the classroom space. 

Language educators as transformative intellectuals not only support their students to gain 
a sense of ownership of their learning, but they also think in terms of developing both the emotional 
and logical sides of their students. Holman addresses these different sides in her article “Theatre 
as a Means for Teaching a Second Language.” She explains when we teach language through 
theatre, educators create a classroom that mimics the real world, which can provide a safe rehearsal 



2 GATESOL Journal 32(2)  
 

for real world scenarios that is as close to reality as possible: “This creation of a rehearsal space 
eases fears about using the [target language] in interactions with more proficient speakers and 
encourages them to take risks in this safe space. The creative nature of drama also establishes a 
more relaxed class environment where the rest of the class (the audience) may reward risk-taking 
that results in playful, humorous language or mistakes with laughter” (p. 24). Holman’s discussion 
emphasizes how theatre can create a supportive environment that could allow for risk-taking to 
occur. 
 
Language Educators as Reflective Practitioners 
The primary goal of a language educator who is seen as a reflective practitioner is one of a 
facilitator, where the primary orientation to teaching is grounded in an integrated approach within 
classroom spaces. The remaining three articles in the fall 2022 issue showcase language educators 
as reflective practitioners because the authors examine, frame, and attempt to solve the dilemmas 
of classroom practices in TESOL. Vicentini, de Oliveira, and Gui’s pedagogical practices piece 
reflects upon the vast amount of online learning tools available to language educators since the 
emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly tools that support a genre-based approach to 
writing instruction using the Teaching-Learning Cycle (TLC): Deconstruction, Joint Construction, 
Collaborative Construction, and Independent Construction. By presenting specific technology for 
each of the phases of the TLC, Vicentini, de Oliveira, and Gui aim to discuss how technology can 
be integrated into genre-based writing instruction in both face-to-face and online environments. 
Their discussion and technological suggestions are grounded in their research in elementary, 
secondary, and tertiary classrooms. 
 Liu’s article entitled “Have you TILTed? Promote Student Success by TILTed 
Assignments” and Beard’s “Using a Modified Jigsaw Strategy in the Sheltered Multilingual 
Learner Classroom to Teach Genetics Vocabulary” are teaching technique manuscripts that reflect 
upon the learning experiences of the multilingual population and how to better support them to 
complete assignments and tasks. Liu introduces Transparency in Learning and Teaching (TILT), 
which is a teaching technique aimed to promote student success. In doing so, Liu not only explains 
the technique but provides guidance on creating TILTed assignments. Similar to Liu, Beard 
explains ways that science content teachers can support the multilingual population. She highlights 
a successfully implemented modified jigsaw vocabulary activity, which utilizes cooperative 
learning, graphic organizers, and peer-to-peer engagement in a sheltered multilingual secondary 
science class. In addition, Beard argues that “this strategy can be modified and used across content 
disciplines and grade levels, and abilities” (p. 51).  
 
References 
 
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Beyond methods: Macrostrategies for language teaching. Yale 

University Press. 
Test, D. W., Fowler, C. H., Wood, W. M., Brewer, D. M., & Eddy, S. (2005). A conceptual 

framework of self-advocacy for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special 
Education, 26(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260010601 

___________________________________________________________________ 
 

Published: October 26, 2022 

https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260010601

	GATESOL Journal2022, Vol. 32(2), pp. 1–2
	doi:10.52242/gatesol.178
	ISSN: 2331-6845

