TEFL
An Outsider’s Training Visit – Reflecting on the Approach and Experience
(1428 Words)
For one week, our language centre was going to have a trainer visit to provide us, the teachers, with a chance to have this an outsider from the head office observe our teaching and be, himself, observed by us. This would allow the teachers to take a look at their teaching and hopefully benefit and develop ideas and new teaching methods as well as learn from this person’s teaching. Of course, as a professional teacher, it is always advantageous to take a step back and observes other teachers as well as ponder some of your teaching techniques. For me, the experience sounded a pleasant change and a chance to improve my teaching. We were initially given some information regarding the visit. This explained that the process would ‘provide teachers with support to reflect on and develop their own teaching’ and ‘freshen up the branch atmosphere’. It sounded like a great new approach. I was also buoyed by the fact that this outside trainer would be providing the feedback. I say this because I completed a teaching course with him (he was a trainer) at the head office and found him to be a person who could evaluate your teaching and give constructive criticism without making you feel you failed in any way.
So, day one, I walked into the office and met with our centre manager and had a chat with him and said ‘hello’ to the outside observer/trainer. I explained to him that I would have to speak with him about my class which he would take over and teach for one lesson. This was fine. That day was fine he passed me in the office nothing was said. The next day, I said ‘hello’ again nothing much was said. That day, he walked in and out of our teachers’ room without saying anything. The following day, I was on the computer, and I remember this trainer coming in the teacher’s room. I did not see him, and I remember he basically walked past me and sat on the computer next to me and never said anything. I got the feeling that he was being a bit absent. I thought to myself ‘oh, hello Neil’. It seemed a bit strange he had not actually said anything to me from day one or had not made any attempt. From this point on, I remember thinking that he was not being that familiar. It seemed he was not really trying to be friendly and make this ‘outsider’ experience pleasurable. If anything he was fitting the role as an ‘outsider, a hired in professional you could say. Generally, it was after these experiences that I noticed that this guy was in the manager’s office most of the time or on the computer never really coming into the office. For myself, I thought I knew the man and we were familiar with each other from the teaching course although I think, at that point, I was mistaken. I found him to be very cold and not willing to participate with our team of teachers or get involved. It was then that I had the feeling that he must think he is superior in some way, and we are only teachers; he does not want to associate with us. I was confused I had read the initial information about this professional development process given to us to read telling us about ‘empowering the teachers’. My experiences so far were not telling me this.
So, the trainer was now going to teach my class. The time came for him to teach my class, he went in and taught the class. Again, I was confused I had read that the outsider would ‘meet before class so that the visitor can explain the day’s lesson objectives and contextualise the lesson’. I was at my desk all the time before the lesson and nothing was said. I was in the dark. My feelings during his lesson from all the happenings I had had, I must admit, I was not inspired to take a positive look at his lesson. For myself, I felt that he thought he was a bit above us teachers. So, it prevailed that when we had the feedback session I made a point of showing that he was not above us and his lesson had certain aspects where he had moments as not to be so perfect.
Once I had observed the outside observer/trainers teaching, it was now time for me to be observed. I thought I was being observed by this outsider although I realised later that it was actually the manager, although the trainer was in the room observing me and writing down notes which meant he was observing. The observation of me was on Sunday at 9.00am. I arrived at 8.20pm that day and spent 35 minutes getting ready to make sure I could do my best. Once all this preparation was done I sat down for two minutes just before I was to go into the classroom; then just before I was to go in the class, the manager came up to me and started to ask questions about what I was to do in the class. I felt as this was not the time to be discussing objectives and procedures. This was not planned and not an appropriate time I thought. My reaction to the manager’s questions was one of ‘give me a break’, I need a couple of minutes to relax and contemplate before a 3-hour class and you could have picked a better time.
The class I thought went fine. Of course, there were aspects that I would have changed but on the whole, I was satisfied. That Sunday afternoon, I had the feedback meeting regarding the lesson with the two observers. My experience of the whole week had not been as I had thought so by this time I was not relishing speaking with the outsider. The thing was, he was not going to do the feedback. It was the manager as he was learning from the trainer, and it was his chance to show what he had learnt from the trainer from other feedback sessions. The manager asked me to describe my experience of teaching while being observed for 1 hour. I said I thought I was okay and, of course, there were some aspects I may have changed but I think the manager wanted me to be more descriptive so we could generate a meaningful feedback session. I was not really in the mood for this, if I may say ‘interrogation’. I let the manager explain to me. This was the point that I found strange, the manager started using all this technical language like the outside trainer was putting words in his mouth. It felt very unusual for me as I knew the manager very well and have had a lot of conversation where we have discussed teaching in a meaningful way, where I think both us benefited. The problem was that this time it was the manager was saying the trainer’s words. It actually made me think that this was just the same as the teaching course I had done with the trainer a while back. I thought to myself this is just the teaching course again talking about ‘objectives’, ‘SWBATs’ and ‘challenges’. I must admit that I was not as open as I should I have been, and I may have come across as being a little obstructive although I had the feeling that this ‘outsider training’ could have had a new innovative approach that would inspire teachers not just regurgitate old methods from the teaching course.
There are many factors that I have talked about in this reflection, and I cannot say I am not at fault for being part of the process that went wrong. I do feel that some team bonding would have been beneficial, a chance for all the teachers and staff to be familiar with the trainer and for this outsider to feel relaxed with our whole teaching team. I also think if you are going to come into another working environment and do anything you have to create an atmosphere that whole staff feels relaxed, able to contribute and not feel they are not being dictated to. I also feel that if you are going to develop people/teachers by coming into their working environment you should use new ideas and new methodologies that show you put some thought into what you are doing and people can be motivated by your efforts to improve them.
Presenting Communicative Activities (lesson example)
| Presenting Communicative Activities |
Activity: Describing the future
Lesson Planning (Lesson objectives)
Students will be able to:
1. talk about the future using
Present continuous – for future events or situations
Future continuous – for ongoing actions in the future
Future perfect – for actions that will be completed by a certain time in the future
2. think about and discuss the future to be able to present a constructive vision (in a group) of the future.
3. presents their ideas to a class of students and answer questions on their presentation.
Lesson Planning (Sample Dialogue)
People will be using this spaceship to fly to the moon.
Everybody will have this in their house.
This robot will have sold a million by 2020.
Resources
Pictures of the future drawn by children, whiteboard pens, worksheets, student book
LESSON
Stage 1: Questions to initially engage the students
FUTURE
How will life be in 100 years?
What will scientists be able to do?
Stage 2: Pictures
Give each student (pairs) a copy of the children’s pictures. Tell the students that a group of young children was asked to draw pictures of how they imagine things will be in one hundred years and what scientists will be able to do. The students’ task is to work out what the child has tried to draw and what his/her reasoning might have been.
Questions on the white board
What have they tried to draw?
What was their thinking about the future?
Get class feedback and then give them the actual answers.
Stage 3: Drawing
Students are given a blank piece of paper and asked to sketch a vision of the future (like the children did in their pictures beforehand). The students mustn’t write or say anything about their picture.
Stage 4: Drawing Reflection
Teacher takes everybody’s drawing and swaps them around so each student has a new picture to look at. Each student’s task is to work out what the other student has tried to draw and what his/her reasoning might have been. Again, they must answer the focus questions on the board.
Questions on the white board
What have they tried to draw?
What was their thinking about the future?
Stage 5: Giving Opinions
Once students have an idea (or timed) of what the other person was thinking about the future he/she must go to that person and explain in English what they thought he/she was thinking about the future. The other students must reply in English as to whether he/she was right or wrong. Once sat back down, a few students are asked about their classmate’s picture as feedback to the whole class.
Stage 6: Grammar Focus (Describing the Future)
Students are guided to the student book (worksheets) to check understanding of future tenses. Examples are given on the board for further understanding. Students then complete the statements in the student book with the correct verb form. Checking for understanding is paramount.
Stage 7: Writing a Presentation
Students (or groups) are told to prepare a speech using future tenses already studied to explain their drawing further and try to convince the other students that it is a great idea. The teacher must go around the class helping students (groups) and correcting to make their presentation presentable. Students must talk for about 2 to 3 minutes.
Stage 8: Presentation
Each student (or group) must speak for two to three minutes in front of the class showing their picture. At the end, he/she/they must answer questions from the other students.
Stage 9: Winner of Presentation
After every student (group) has finished a draw can be made for the idea that the students think is the best.
Mention the features of Community Language Teaching
The Community Language Teaching (CLT) model has many features. A lot of these features are completely opposite to a traditional school model of learning. It is true that teachers like to stand in front of the class and take control. This is what anyone would think of as a normal approach and what most students expect. This allows the teacher to be the instigator of most topics while the students sit passively at their desks. CLT goes against the traditional grain and tries to make the learning experience more group structured. In this essay, I will show that the learning experience is based more on a type of counseling learning where the use of counseling techniques are used to develop language for all concerned. Everybody has a part to play and a community is born where students can empathize with each other.
This CLT method was developed in the early seventies by Charles Curran. It involved recognizing the affective and the emotional factors as paramount in a classroom. It is always hard for a student to feel relaxed in a new class let alone having confidence in speaking let alone a second language. There is a consensus that views community language as learning that can help reduce anxiety. This is, of course, one of the main factors in learning (a language) where the students feel anxious about expressing their feeling in a class full of people that in the main they do not know. There is a move towards the interpersonal contact between student and teacher as well as student and student. The teacher should have the skills that involve counseling and bring the students together through their techniques. If the class can have a good relationship language and confidence should flow better. One way to get the students to be more familiar with each other is to get the learning group into a circle. There is less turning of heads and the shy people can not be stuck in the corner. In all of this, the teacher is more of a facilitator and tends to sit outside the circle. This format is fine if the group is of a smaller size that helps everyone to be seen and heard. A desirable amount of students would be about 10. This gives the students more time to speak, less time to get distracted, the teacher also has more time to cater to all the students.
The process of the CLT pertains to a pervading tone in the classroom where the students can take control and build their skills and language with the help of others. The students become active learners in their own right. It has been said that the teacher should not control the conversation in CLT, but let students talk about whatever they want to talk (Rardin et al., 1988). Firstly the group can sit in a circle and think about what they want to say. If ideas are flying around they can be written on the whiteboard and brainstormed to see which is liked the best. Students are allowed to use their mother tongue and the teacher translates this language and the building process starts. Students are made to feel more comfortable talking in the conversation circle. This allows them to express their feelings. The student can mention something in their own language. This is then put into small phrases by the teacher and then the students can work with the teacher before they open up to the rest of the class. There is not so much error correction.
Even though the layout of the class and the relaxed atmosphere may bring on some anxiety at first, the students through the CLT feel less stress as goes on and begin to work with their peers which is the goal. This highlights the awareness of community which is in a non-competitive atmosphere with a sense of involvement. The students also take responsibility for their learning and make themselves become active learners that are inquisitive of language and each other.
Once the class has finished a reflection session is essential in the CLT approach. Trust between the teacher and learners or among learners is established by sharing their feelings, anxieties, frustrations or demands. By sharing anxiety, learners may build a sense of unity to do one task together (Rardin et al., 1988). The teacher also uses less error correction during the class as not to stop the flow. If any correction is used it should not be intrusive as the method is to let the students express their meaning. The teacher’s job is to try and extract as much information as can be without pressuring the student. There is a focus on meaning over accuracy. After class, the teacher’s job is to write up a report of the students’ language during the lesson as to be a reflection of all that went on and give the students some resources to look back on. This shows all the key structures and vocabulary they used.
To conclude, the CLT method certainly helps promote better communication in the class. The classes will succeed if the students get used to taking part in their learning. It also focuses on the teacher’s ability to promote this working relationship with all involved.
(869 Words)
Classroom based report on language acquisition
Abstract
Learning any second language can be challenging. Lower level students, who are new to learning, are those students that need all the support and understanding for their acquisition of a new language. For this paper, I have produced a research plan for a new class of lower level students. This was devised to create thinking on how students were learning their second language. I wondered how I could facilitate their learning and their classroom experience that would help make English language easier for them to comprehend. My initial thoughts were on using as many different ways to reinforce a language point. My thinking was that if the students get to look at a specific grammar/language point, whilst using it and thinking about it, in different ways, the language will stay in their memory that much easier. I felt that if you used the language in various ways such as activities, methods of teaching and games, their possession of the language could be helped.
I looked at my ideas for lesson plans and checked how I planned to use the time in class to vary my methods. I also looked on the internet for any information that would correspond with my area of interest. I tried reading as much material that honed in on my specific area of interest. This was the material that was related to different methods and activities. It was while I was acquiring my new knowledge that I got to read about an interesting theory where different activities were used regarding multiple intelligences. This I found on a website called ‘developingteachers.com’. The article in question that took my interest was called ‘Starting with multiple intelligences – activities for foreign language teachers’ by Rolf Palmberg. I immediately realised this article was very much linked in with my ideas, that I had proposed. I did a lot of preliminary reading on the subject until I felt that I should put my old and new ideas about how to get the students speaking more into effect. This paper and the theories within is helped by what I found from the initial article by Rolf Palmberg and increasingly by reading about American psychologist Howard Gardner who developed ‘The Theory of Multiple Intelligences’.
Process Learning in Language Teaching and Acquisition
(words 660)
My first thoughts are to say that Process Teaching seems a more relaxed attitude to teaching. It is encouraging that with this teaching method, a material light approach is advocated. From my own point of view, I try to be a proficient teacher and have worksheets to help the students as well as use material to stimulate the students throughout a lesson. The materials-free approach goes against what is seen day in day out in the staff room (there is always a cue at the photocopier) and classrooms although the opportunities are there to create better learning.
The Process Teaching method of learning English, although being competent and wanting to do their best, teachers can feel more relaxed and appreciate more clearly that it is the students who are the ones who should be speaking and helping each other. The teacher acts as a facilitator. Thus, it makes teachers take a look at themselves; standing in front of the whiteboard, projecting grammar, and doing lots of writing (using handouts) albeit in their own way teaching proficiently. However, this being said, any teacher still can think that for two and half hours the students have got have a chance to freely talk and have an attitude that they are as much a part of the class as the teacher. I sometimes find that for some students, it is hard to get them to talk, especially where some foreign language systems of learning English do not facilitate the conversational aspect of learning such that Process Learning could fall short of achieving its aim.
As for my classroom performances, I try to put various processes into practice (helped by the Dogme teaching book). For example, one lesson was a Task-Based exercise where I tried to bring in elements of Process Learning where the students would ask me questions or sometimes just say one word during the task. I would try and use this as a building block for more language. I think teachers should provide the scaffolding for the students to build their language and even if they say one word it has to be remembered that any word has a thought behind it that can be expanded.
Referring more to my lesson, I set up the students with some pictures of people doing sports. I asked some focus questions for each sport. I got the students to write the questions on the whiteboard and elicited the answers. The students gave me the answers and showed they were capable of answering the questions. I then gave each group a set of seven pictures showing sports. There were two groups and I sat between them. I let them answer the questions for each of their sports. Now some students did not know the answers to the questions and as a helper/facilitator, I encouraged them to ask me questions and to use their language by any means possible. Thus, Process Learning was being used. As such the students seemed at ease to speak even if it was one or two words. As previously mentioned, I said before sometimes that one word was enough to get some students started. The whole group joined in, this was great as I felt they were trying to use their language.
Once they had answered every question about the sports, I then had a competition where one team explains a sport and the other has to guess what it is. Again, looking at Process Learning, the stage was set and they knew what to do. For myself, I sat in between them and just facilitated the process, encouraging them to open up. This exercise went on for more than an hour. I think the students enjoyed it.
To finish this reflection on Process Learning, I think this method has been beneficial and can be used in lessons even though using it completely would be a wide-ranging change that many students would need a bit of time to get used to.
