And where, in the absence of such hard or even 'soft' evidence, could we look and perhaps find some way of either verifying - at least for the time being - what we believe in, or of rejecting those beliefs as dogmas that can all too easily become dangerous delusions?

I believe that we can and should begin with the kind of research people like Rod Ellis, Wolfgang Klein and Vivian Cook, to name only three, are associated with. The kinds of argument articulated by Henry Widdowson and the practical classroom experiments done by teachers and writers like Dale Griffee are equally valuable. What these people say does not directly support or refute anything I have said so far. This is why it is so important to look at their conclusions and arguments as dispassionately as possible.

Let me begin , then, by referring to the work of Rod Ellis . He suggests that there are eight 'classic facilitators' or, in his own words, 'features ? likely to facilitate rapid development'.

1. A high quantity of input directed at the learner.
2. The learner?s perceived need to communicate in the L2.
3. Independent control of the propositional content by the learner (e.g. control over the topic choice).
4. Adherence to the ?here and now? principle, at least initially.
5. The performance of a range of speech acts by both native speaker/teacher and the learner(i.e. the learner needs the opportunity to listen to and to produce language used to perform different language functions).
6. Exposure to a high quantity of directives.
7. Exposure to a high quantity of ?extending utterances (e.g. requests for clarification and confirmation, paraphrases and expansions).
8. Opportunities for uninhibited ?practice? (which may provide opportunities to experiment with using ?new forms?)

Four of Ellis's eight 'facilitators' (1, 5, 6 & 7) suggest that what I all 'interactive teacher-talk' (which I shall define later) has a positive influence on learner development. . Who is capable of 'directing a high quantity of input at the learner (Facilitator 1) in a class of elementary or even intermediate learners, if not the teacher? The fifth facilitator suggests that interactive teacher-talk helps learners to perform different language functions. The sixth and seventh facilitators also indicate how and why interactive teacher-talk can be useful for learners. Clearly, if learners want to talk, they should be encouraged to do so. Very often, however, they expect not only to be listened to but also to be spoken to by the teacher. Remember. I am talking here about groups of learners who fall into three traditional categories of 'beginner' 'false beginner', and 'lower intermediate'.

My argument is not that teachers and only teachers can do the things Ellis describes in facilitators 1,5, 6 and 7. There are other very important sources of this kind of input,; such as appropriate textbooks, tapes or CDs, and ? if the learners happen to be staying in a country where English is the dominant language ? people outside the classroom such as host families and other 'informants'. However I do not think even these sources - as valuable as they are ? compare with teachers whose experience informs the way they talk to the class. I wish I could also say 'whose training' guides the way they way they talk'. Unfortunately, however, one of the central dogmas that informs their training today is that all teacher-talk is bad.