International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention ISSN (Online): 2319 – 7722, ISSN (Print): 2319 – 7714 www.ijhssi.org ||Volume 5 Issue 10||October. 2016 || PP.32-36 www.ijhssi.org 32 | Page English Language Teacher Knowledge and the Classroom Practices Prof. Dr. Biren Tütüniş 1 , Diran R.G. Chedid 2 1 Head of Foreign Language Department of Istanbul Kultur University, Istanbul, Turkey, 2 English Language and Literature Department of Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Turkey, ABSTRACT: This paper previews the research about teacher knowledge and cognition among English Language Teachers and presents a pilot study resting upon the assumption that a gap between teacher professional knowledge and classroom practices exists.10 teachers from a language center volunteered to become the subjects of this study. A sample Teaching Knowledge Test (TKT) part 2, classroom observations, teacher interviews and student feedbackformed the data for this study. Keywords: EFL, ELT,teachers’ cognition, teachers’ knowledge, classroom practices. I. INTRODUCTION Teachers‟ cognition, their professional knowledge and its impact on classroom practices has attracted many scholars. Borg (2009) for example, is interested in teacher cognition which covers what teachers think, know and believe and also the relationship of these mental constructs to what teachers do in the language teaching classroom. Teachers‟ cognition, knowledge, techniques, methods and styles are the sources behind the understanding and learning process of their learners. The teacher is the key facilitator between learners and the knowledge. If teachers do not apply their knowledge into their classroom practices, the gap between what they know and what they do in classes might easily lead to failure. II. LITERATURE REVIEW The primary concern of teacher cognition lies with the unobservable dimension of teaching - teachers‟ mental lives. The notion is not new and the historical background goes back to 1945 (Borg, 2006). The professional coursework and the teaching experience which could be possessed during pre-service and in- service phases of the field have a significant effect on the formation of teacher cognition. Since teacher cognition is linked to teacher knowledge, it is important to know what scholars say about it: Teacher knowledge became the main concept related to teacher cognition. The types of knowledge defined in the literature can be categorized as; pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1987) and practical knowledge (Elbaz,1981). Shulman brings in the importance of the process of pedagogical content knowledge formation which lasts longer than anybody can think of. Elbaz, on the other hand, focuses on the practical knowledge of teachers. Elbaz has conducted a case study examining the practical knowledge of an experienced high school teacher to find out how this practical knowledge was held and how it was used. He also wanted to find out how this practical knowledge grew and changed in time. Elbaz (ibid,1981), categorizes knowledge in three areas: teacher‟s practical knowledge which comes from instructional routines, classroom management and others; personal knowledge about self and professional self, and interactional knowledge which derives from the interactions with others in the environment (p.48 ). In their review of what “knowing” is, Mason and Spence (1999) find teacher knowledge as a dynamic and evolving phenomenon and they call it “knowing” They categorize it into three types: the fact of knowledge itself, knowing how to teach that knowledge by using the necessary techniques, and knowing how to organize actions. Mason and Spence believe in distinguishing knowing from other kinds of knowledge because its absence disables teachers (or learners) from responding and acting (pp.136-138). Indeed, it is the know- how that brings knowledge and practice together. Teachers‟ knowledge is valuable so long as it is practiced. Mason and Spence also bring in the idea that understanding and acting should be distinguished. They believe that understanding or knowing does not mean that teacher is able to perform this in his/her classroom practices or vice versa (pp.142-143). The authors of this paper found this dilemma rather attracting for the present study. Munby, Russell and Martin (2001), claim on this issue that our understandi ng of teachers‟ knowledge has turned from prescriptive to practical since we cannot judge on teachers until we see their practices in their classrooms. However, they point to the fact that we lack empirical studies concerning teachers‟ knowledge.