At the least, it is important at to point out that Prabhu's assumption that learning takes place "subconsciously," through a somewhat mystical internalization process has been unchallenged in other second language acquisition research. McLaughlin (1990) finds the discussion of "conscious" and "unconscious" learning "unscientific," and for him, therefore, not very useful in explaining how learning takes place (p. 620). He prefers the terms "controlled" and "automatic" processing and views more of a bridge than a quantum leap between them. If there is a relationship between controlled and automatic processing, perhaps there is a need for patterned drill work in second language instruction. The issue requires a closer examination as McLaughlin's concerns represent a core challenge to Prabhu's assumptions.

A more fundamental concern that I have with Second Language Pedagogy is that it is contains very little supportive case-study evidence. In fact, we do not hear the voices of teachers and students at all, except for some transcribed material placed in the appendix. This is a major shortcoming for a book detailing the results of a project stemming from classroom experience. As LVA begins to orient its ESL program toward the communicative competenc model, such "voices from the field" must play a major role. Any evaluation of ESL theory and practice should draw deeply the experience of students, tutors, and program managers.

From the point of view of adult education theory, another major concern that some readers may have with Second Language Pedagogy is the strong role of the teacher in shaping the instructional program. In Prahbhu's model, there is clearly an authoritative role for teachers mediated by Vygotsky's zone of proximal development. This is defined as "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Gaffney and Anderson, 1991, p. 184).

It is this central role of teachers, which is at least "problematic" in adult education settings grounded in a vigorous participatory ethos where students are the subjects of their own learning. Many adult ESL tutoring sessions in the United States stimulate a traditional classroom setting where students expect to "learn" something from the teacher. The extreme formulation of this is the "banking" model of education condemned so vigorously by Paulo Freire (1970) as an oppressive pedagogy that robs learners of their own authentic voices. Proponents of progressive adult education and adult literacy who argue that the focus of learning emerges from the group, echo this view by sharply condemning authoritarian pronouncements of teachers (Fingeret and Jurmo, 1989; Cheatham and Lawson, 1990). Prabhu, also, condemns authoritarian behavior among teachers, but supports their authoritative role as expressed methodologically through Vygotsky's zone of proximal development.

Thus, there is a tension within ESL programs between the participatory ethos and the scaffolding model of Vygotsky. Clearly there is a powerful desire among many adult ESL students for language mastery that may be stimulated by the authoritative presence of an effective instructor. Simultaneously, students desire active involvement in the learning process in ways that make sense to them. While they may be entertained and captivated by a wide range of instructional content, they will respond with the most compelling motivation, if the content is geared to areas that concern them the most. Thus, they desire to speak of their personal experiences and to learn of those of their colleagues. On this they are interested in cultural as well as purely personal experience. They also desire also to learn how to master basic requirements that they face in their every day lives and more broadly to learn about many facets of life within the United States. In short, they desire a holistic instructional program that contains both teacher-led and participatory opportunities that extends well beyond the cognitive task-based emphasis that Prabhu found effective in India.

The scaffolding methodology of the Bangalore Project may provide a mid-way point between participatory and banking approaches to education. Such a mediating methodology may prove extremely useful in facilitating the critical work of meaning-making, a core objective of the communicative competency theory of second language acquisition. As should be evident by now, there is much for an adult ESL educator to draw upon from Second Language Pedagogy, notwithstanding certain caveats about its limitations.