Teacher
Training
In a teacher training approach teachers or trainee teachers are
given procedures and advice to follow. This approach assumes
a relationship of experts to novices
and characterises many pre-service courses in which the
participants are trained to teach a particular textbook, methodology
or
curriculum. In the best type
of teacher training courses, the participants are provided
with a range of options to choose from; in the worst they are
given
a set script to follow. The result
is often teachers who know what to do but who do not know
when and how not to do it. In other words, conformists who
have little
initiative or creativity
of their own and who find it difficult to respond to the unexpected.
Teacher training helps institutions and countries
to achieve convergence and uniformity, but ultimately it is not
very useful for learners, who need teachers
who can respond to their divergent needs and wants. Training
teachers to write materials might help them to become a little
more organised and to write clearer
instructions but it is not going to lead to increased confidence,
creativity, flexibility or self-esteem.
Teacher Education
In a teacher education approach, teachers are given new knowledge
and the means to discover new knowledge for themselves. In the
best type of teacher education
course, the teachers are given sufficient relevant and comprehensible
knowledge to help them to apply it to their own teaching situations.
In the worst type
they are given irrelevant and incomprehensible knowledge
and are not helped to apply it to themselves. The result is often
that teachers feel empowered
by their new knowledge but frustrated at their inability
to apply it and sometimes that they feel disempowered by a new
sense of inadequacy from finding
out how much they do not know.
In my experience, teacher education is of potentially
more value than teacher training but it is inevitably inadequate
in that it overrates what teachers
know and under-values what they think and do. Giving teachers
new knowledge about materials development might provide them with
some interesting new insights
into teaching and learning, but it would not help them to develop
expertise in actually developing materials themselves and would
be unlikely to have a
positive effect on their confidence, creativity, flexibility or self-esteem.
Teacher Development
In a teacher development approach, teachers are given new experiences
to reflect on and learn from. Their prior experience and expertise
is valued but they
are encouraged to add to their repertoires and to develop
their awareness of the processes of learning and teaching. The
emphasis is not on finite,
articulated knowledge coming from outside, but on dynamic,
multi-dimensional awareness developing in the mind, and on the
ability to apply this awareness
to their actual contexts of teaching.
In the best type of teacher development course, the
teachers are helped to decide what to think and do for themselves
and are encouraged to develop novel
approaches themselves. In the worst type of teacher development
course, the teachers are surreptitiously pushed in pre-determined
directions.
Teacher development is potentially more valuable than teacher education or
teacher training (even for trainee teachers) because it can lead to the development
of teachers with confidence, creativity, flexibility and self-esteem who can
respond to the actual needs and wants of their learners. Providing teachers
(and even trainee teachers) with the opportunity to develop expertise for themselves
as materials developers can quite definitely help them to develop and grow.
The Aims of a Teacher Development Course
I think the main objective of a teacher development course is simply to help
the participants to become good teachers. But what is a Good Language Teacher?
Are the characteristics of a Good Language Teacher self-evident or is there
disagreement about them? Are they universal or are they culture specific?
In a workshop which I ran at the MELTA 2003 Conference in Subang, I asked
the participants to complete a questionnaire about their view of the Good Teacher.
What do you think were the five main characteristics of the Good Language Teacher
which were specified by this group of 30 Malaysian teachers and teacher trainers?
In his PhD thesis on learner reticence in Vietnam,
Bao Dat characterised the Good Language Teacher as "cheerful,
approachable and dedicated" (Dat,
2002). I have taught in seven countries and visited classrooms
in 40. I basically agree with Dat and think his definition
is universally
true. The 30 Malaysian
respondents to my questionnaire seemed to agree too. When asked
to say
what they think is the main characteristic of the Good
Language Teacher there were
many different answers. Those responses receiving more than one
mention were:
The Good Language Teacher
| |
Characteristic |
Grade
|
| 1 |
has positive self-esteem |
92%
|
| 1 |
takes initiative |
92%
|
| 1 |
bases their teaching on the needs, wants and responses of
their learners |
92%
|
| 4 |
is flexible |
88%
|
| 4 |
is creative |
88%
|
| 4 |
is patient |
88%
|
| 7 |
has a good sense of humour |
84%
|
| 7 |
is well-organised |
84%
|
| 7 |
is an expert on the target language |
84%
|
| 10 |
has a large and varied repertoire of pedagogical procedures |
80%
|
| 11 |
makes principled selections from their repertoire in relation
to their own personality, beliefs and teaching style preferences |
72%
|
| 12 |
provides thorough preparation for exams |
71%
|
| 13 |
times their lessons well |
70%
|
| 14 |
has authority |
68%
|
| 15 |
is able to cover the coursebook in the time allocated |
52%
|
The respondents were also asked to rate 15 characteristics
of the Good Language Teacher on a scale of 1-5, in which 1 indicates
complete disagreement and 5 indicates complete agreement. This
is how they responded:
Adaptable (5)
Knowledgeable about the target
language (5)
Innovative
(3)
Positive (3)
Motivating (3)
Proficient in the
target language (3)
Enthusiastic (2)
"Enjoyable" (2)
Creative (2)
My own characterisation of the Good Language Teacher
(which I listed before the MELTA Conference) is that the Good Language
Teacher:
is patient and supportive
has a good sense of humour
is enthusiastic about
teaching and positive towards their learners
is a confident teacher with positive
self-esteem
is interesting, stimulating and creative
is a good communicator
is flexible
takes initiative
is sensitive to the needs and wants
of each of their learners
teaches responsively
is critically
aware of current theoretical
and methodological developments
has a large and varied
repertoire of pedagogical procedures
makes
principled and modified selections from their repertoire
in relation to the needs, wants,
learning style preferences and expectations of their learners,
their own personality, beliefs
and teaching style preferences,
and the social and educational cultures of their teaching
context
is
a proficient user of the target language
is
positively aware of how the target language
is used for communication
is
positively aware of the cultures of the learners and of
users of the target language
Would you add to, delete or
modify any of these characteristics?
Notice how many of them relate to personal attitudes and characteristics
rather than
to expertise in the theory and practice of language teaching.
In my view, such attributes cannot be given to teachers through
training or education
approaches; they can only be nurtured and supported through
a teacher development approach.
Materials Development for Teacher Development
There are many useful ways of giving teachers new experience to reflect on
in order to achieve personal and professional development (for example, through
peer teaching, experimental teaching and focussed observation of other teachers).
In my experience though, by far the most effective way to achieve this is
through a course in materials development.
What Materials Development Can Achieve
I have found that materials development can help teachers to develop the following
characteristics of the Good Language Teacher in the following ways:
Characteristic |
|
| Is patient and supportive |
Asked to:
write
materials in which learning points are recycled, the effects
of instruction are assumed to be delayed and only partial
achievement is expected
be
supportive and realistic in the way they write task instructions
and give
advice
|
| Has a good sense of humour |
Asked to find and exploit texts which might make students
laugh |
| Is enthusiastic, positive and confident |
Helped to achieve challenges which result in innovative materials
likely to engage both teacher and learners |
Is interesting, stimulating
and creative |
Challenged to develop original materials in novel ways |
| Is a good communicator |
Frequent peer and mentor feedback leading to improved clarity,
cohesion and coherence |
| Is flexible and takes initiative |
Asked to use a flexible framework variably in relation to
different target needs and wants and to develop flexible frameworks
for themselves |
| Is sensitive to the needs and wants of each of her learners
and teaches responsively |
Is asked to:
conduct
learner needs and wants analyses
anticipate
learner responses to texts and activities and to advise teachers
how to respond to them in Teachers’ Guides |
| Is critically aware of current theoretical and methodological
developments |
Asked to evaluate articles and chapters and to make use of
them in evaluation, adaptation and production tasks |
| Has a large and varied repertoire of pedagogical procedures |
Introduced to many novel task types and asked to develop
materials based on them
Makes principled selections from her repertoire
in relation to:
the
needs, wants, learning style preferences and expectations
of her learners
her
personality, beliefs and teaching style preferences
the
social and educational cultures Given varying learner
profiles and asked to design and justify differing materials
for them |
| Is a proficient user of the target language |
Rich exposure to language in use + focussed attention on
the features being ‘taught’ |
| Has awareness of the realities of the target language and
of the L1 and L2 cultures |
Given awareness tasks to do themselves prior to developing
awareness tasks for learners |
The Principles of Materials Development
for Teacher Development
In the ten years that I have been running materials development
courses for teacher development, I have come to the conclusion
that for a materials development
course to contribute to the development of Good Language
Teachers it should:
provide
rich and varied experience so that the teachers have concrete experience
to base their developing principles,
conceptualisations and theories on
provide
a variety of context specific briefs, so that the teachers
are aware of the need for variability in materials
development and in teaching, and in order
to help them become flexible and versatile
set
achievable challenges so that the teachers are pushed into thinking
in new ways, and developing new skills
within a supportive environment which makes ultimate
attainment feasible
encourage
cooperative learning, so that the teachers
can learn from each other and can
learn how to work together in teams
encourage
peer monitoring and feedback, so that the teachers can share
their innovations and can gain from peer insights
encourage
reflection and self-evaluation, so that the teachers can learn
from themselves and can develop the
habit of
positive but critical reflection on
their attempts to help their learners
provide
constructive
feedback, so that the teachers are encouraged
and can
learn from the experience and expertise
of their facilitators
An Example Framework for Materials
Development for Teacher Development
As a result of my ten
years’ experience of running materials
development for teacher development courses I have developed
a number of flexible course
frameworks. Here is an example of the one that I have found
to be the most powerful for longer courses.
1. Experience as learners
of demonstrations
of novel approaches and tasks
I usually start my courses by using some of my own materials
to give the participants experience of approaches and tasks
they are unlikely to have encountered before.
Depending on the actual group of teachers, the approaches
include TPR Plus (Tomlinson, 1994b; Islam, 2003), the Multi-Dimensional
Approach (Tomlinson,
2001; Masuhara, 2003) and Language Awareness approaches
(Bolitho and Tomlinson, 1995; Tomlinson, 1994; Bolitho
et al, 2003). The objective is not to train
the participants to use these approaches, but to give them
new experiences to reflect on.
2. Analysis and evaluation of the approaches and
tasks
After experiencing a novel approach or task, the participants are
asked to analyse it by listing its stages and specifying the principles
and objectives for
each stage. They are then asked to evaluate it in relation
to specified criteria (e.g. the validity of the principles; the
coherence of the principles; the
likelihood of achieving the objectives; the suitability
for a specific context of learning). As they evaluate an approach
or task the participants are encouraged
to suggest improvements.
This procedure helps the participants to become more aware of principles and
objectives and to become more critical and perceptive about the materials and
approaches available to them.
3. Impressionistic evaluation of textbook materials
This stage is usually done in groups and provides a way of helping the participants
to articulate their principles and theories about language learning and teaching.
It is also a preparation for Stage 5.
4. Development of criteria for materials evaluation
This is a long and difficult stage during which the participants are helped
to develop a number of answerable and informative criteria according to the
following categories:
Universal
Criteria (i.e. those applicable to any instance of language learning
material)
Content
Specific Criteria (i.e. those applicable to the type of
materials (e.g. business English; listening skills; extensive
reading)
Medium
Specific Criteria (i.e. those applicable to the medium of the materials
(e.g.
textbook; video course; computer assisted course)
Local Criteria (i.e. those related to specific contexts of learning)
This stage is done in groups and gets the participants to think very carefully
about the characteristics of good language learning materials.
For a more detailed description of the development of evaluation criteria
see Tomlinson (2003b).
5. Criterion referenced evaluation of the same material
as in 3 above
In the same groups as in 3 above, the participants evaluate
the same materials again. This time they evaluate the materials
in relation to a specified context
of learning and they use the criteria they have developed
in 4 above. As they conduct the evaluation, they invariably
add extra criteria and go back to modify
or even delete the criteria they developed in 4 above.
Often the results of the evaluation are very different from those of the impressionistic
evaluation and the participants learn the importance of evaluating materials
and methods in relation to specific contexts of learning rather than in isolation.
6. Reading of relevant articles, extracts
and chapters
The participants are guided towards relevant literature on language acquisition,
on materials development and on language teaching methodology. Because of
their experience of actually considering and applying principles of language
acquisition, the participants are usually able to be constructively critical
of what they read and to really appreciate anything which they had not thought
of before which is of potential benefit to them as teachers and as materials
developers.
7. Evaluation of relevant articles, extracts
and chapters
In groups, the participants formalise the process of evaluation
begun in 6 and note down anything which they think might be useful
for them on and after
the course.
8. Context specific adaptation of materials
The participants are given demonstrations of adaptations of material and work
together to develop sets of principles and procedures for effective adaptation.
They then use them to develop adaptations of specified materials for specific
learning contexts using the following stages of development:
Profile
of target audience
Specification
of evaluation criteria* Evaluation of the materials
Specification
of sections of the materials for deletion, replacement, reduction,
addition, expansion, modification
and supplementation
Adaptation of the materials
Evaluation
of the adapted materials
9. Context specific design and production of materials
The participants are given target contexts of learning (either
related to their teaching contexts or in deliberately divergent
simulations) and are given time
to design and produce principled materials for those contexts.
Normally, this is done in groups and the facilitators are available
to give feedback and advice.
10. Self- and peer-evaluation of the materials produced
At intervals, the writers evaluate their own materials against
predetermined criteria and give their materials for further evaluation
to a peer monitor
group as well.
11. Revision of the materials
The materials are revised in relation to the feedback from the evaluations.
12.
Demonstration and theoretical justification of the materials
The participants demonstrate their materials to their
peers and explain the principles which have driven them.
They also answer questions from their facilitators
and peers and listen to suggestions for improvement. Or
they write up their materials and their theoretical justification
for them and submit them to their
facilitators for feedback. On the MA in Materials Development
for Language Teaching, for example, the participants
produce a complete course of materials
plus a theoretical justification in lieu of a dissertation.
13. Further Revision
Materials are never perfect and the participants continue to revise
their materials for use in the classroom or for publication.
For a more detailed description of the use of this framework see Tomlinson
(2003a).
Conclusion
A 'materials development as teacher development' course can not
only help teachers to develop useful expertise as materials
developers. It can also help teachers
to articulate and develop their own theories of language
learning and teaching, to develop skills which can enable them
to apply these theories to practice,
and to develop personal attributes which can help them
to become more confident and positive people and more effective
teachers too.
Further Reading
Books, chapters and articles which give differing perspectives
on using materials development for teacher development include:
Canniveng, C. and Martinez, M. Materials development and teacher training.
In B. Tomlinson. (ed.) Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London:
Continuum Press.
McGrath, I. 2002. Materials Evaluation and Design for Language Teaching. Edinburgh:
University of Edinburgh Press.
Popovici, R. and Bolitho, R. Personal and professional development through
writing: the Romanian textbook project. In B. Tomlinson (ed.) Developing Materials
for Language Teaching. London: Continuum Press.
Tomlinson, B. 1990. Managing change in Indonesian high schools. ELT Journal,
44/1.
Tomlinson, B. 1995. Work in progress: textbook projects. FOLIO 2/2, 26-31.
Tomlinson, B. (ed.) 2003. Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London:
Continuum Press.
Tomlinson, B. 2003. Materials development courses. In B. Tomlinson (ed.) Developing
Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum Press.
Tomlinson, B. and Masuhara, H. 2003a. Simulations in materials development.
In B. Tomlinson (ed.) Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum
Press.
Tomlinson, B. and Masuhara, H. 2003b Materials Development. Singapore: RELC
Portfolio Series.
References
Bolitho, R. and Tomlinson, B. 1995. Discover English. (New Edition) Oxford:
Heinemann.
Bolitho, R., Carter, R., Hughes, R., Ivanic, R., Masuhara, H. and Tomlinson,
B. 2003. Ten questions about language awareness. ELT Journal. 57/2.
Dat, B. 2002. Understanding Reticence: An Action Research Project Aiming at
Increasing Verbal Participation in the EFL Classroom in Vietnam. Unpublished
PhD thesis, Leeds Metropolitan University. Islam, C. 2003. Materials for beginners.
In B. Tomlinson (ed.) Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum
Press.Masuhara, H. 2003. Materials for developing reading skills. In B. Tomlinson
(ed.) Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum Press.
Tomlinson, B. 1990. Managing change in Indonesian high schools. ELT Journal,
44/1.
Tomlinson, B. 1994a Pragmatic awareness materials. Language Awareness, 3/4,
119-29.
Tomlinson, B. 1994b TPR materials. FOLIO 1/2, 8-10.
Tomlinson, B. 2001. Conecting the mind: a multi-dimensional approach to teaching
language through literature. The English Teacher. 4/2, 105-115.
Tomlinson, B. 2003a. Materials development courses. In B. Tomlinson (ed.)
Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum Press.
Tomlinson, B. 2003b. Materials evaluation. In B. Tomlinson (ed.) Developing
Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum Press.
© Brian Tomlinson, 2003