cation from teacher training to teacher development with ... · cation from teacher training to...

5

Click here to load reader

Upload: doandung

Post on 10-Jul-2018

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: cation from teacher training to teacher development with ... · cation from teacher training to teacher development with teacher educators arguing that training methods only provide

The last decade has witnessed a shift of emphasis in teacher edu-

cation from teacher training to teacher development with teacher

educators arguing that training methods only provide teachers

with ritual teaching behavior (Maingay 1988) instead of prepar-

ing them to cope with the ever-demanding profession of teaching

in an ever-changing world. This paper describes how lesson observation can be used for

ESOL teacher development at both the preservice teacher education stage as well as at

the inservice stages.

First, a distinction will be made between teacher training and teacher development

with special reference to Cameroon. Second, an observation model for ESOL teacher

development will be suggested. Third, a new role—that of teacher developer through les-

son observation—will be assigned to the ESOL inspector.

Teacher training and teacherdevelopment

A distinction has been made betweenteacher training and teacher developmentwith respect to their conceptual frameworkand implementation. Teacher development isviewed as a continuous process that beginswith preservice teacher preparation andspans the entire career of the teacher (Sitham-param and Dhamotharam 1992). Teachertraining involves giving novices and experi-enced teachers alike “ready-made answers” asopposed to “allowing them to discover theirown alternatives” (Lucas 1988:42). Accordingto Davis and Plumb (1988:40) training entailsa “pre-planned” agenda set by the workplaceor syllabus as opposed to an “impromptu, flex-ible agenda set by groups;” “needs of work-place” as opposed to “personal needs;” “qual-ification” as opposed to “career development;”“leader and experts” as opposed to “peergroup;” and “standardization” as opposed to“innovation.”

Irvine-Niakaris and Bacigal (1992:42) see“the trainee passively undergoing a period ofconditioning during which the ‘dos’ and the‘don’ts’ of classroom practice are inculcated.Only after this basic training does the teachertrainer become concerned about empowering

trainees to become agents in their own devel-opment, much in the same way that the scalesmust be mastered before a would-be pianist isable to interpret a sonata.”

Freeman (1989:39) defines training as astrategy for direct intervention by the collabo-rator in the teacher’s teaching. “The interven-tion is focused on specific outcomes achievedthrough a sequence of steps, within a specificperiod of time…. It is based on the assump-tion that through mastery of discrete skills,teachers will be effective in the classroom.”Freeman considers development as a strategyof influence and indirect intervention thatcomes with complex, integrated aspects ofteaching. These parts are idiosyncratic andindividual. The purpose of development is forthe teacher to generate change throughincreasing or shifting his/her awareness.

Lesson observation

Some of our practices regarding lessonobservation for training were handed down fromour colonial master. We need to change them.

What is lesson observation, and how doesit relate to teacher development? Simply put,lesson observation means sitting in on a classand observing a teacher in action. Maingaydivides lesson observation into four categories:observation for training, observation for

30 O C T O B E R 2 0 0 3 E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M

Page 2: cation from teacher training to teacher development with ... · cation from teacher training to teacher development with teacher educators arguing that training methods only provide

development, observation for assessment, andobserver development.

Observation for training1. Student teachers (STs) are taught to pro-

duce elaborate, step by step, rigid lessonplans, which they usually abandon as uselessand time consuming once they leave school.Typical examples include the preservice pri-mary school format designed by our primaryschool teacher training colleges and theAmerican Peace Corps “six-point-lesson.”

2. There is usually no meeting between theobserver and the teacher prior to the observa-tion. Sometimes there is a non-structured,post-observation meeting and where thisexists, data collected during the lesson maytouch on everything the observer could see.The feedback is often uni-directional inwhich the observer is the expert who tells theST what s/he did well and what s/he did poor-ly. Some observers, often the teacher trainer,take delight in dishing out observation data indevastating language—negative, judgmentalfeedback that only discourages the neophyte.

3. The trainer-observer usually pops inand out of the classroom at will; s/he seldom(if ever) observes a full lesson.

4. Often the trainer-observer stands out-side looking in on more than one lesson at atime by shuttling from one classroom windowto another. When the observer does enter aclassroom, s/he either takes the ST’s lessonplan and walks out or sits in briefly beforewalking out.

5. The trainer-observer may interruptongoing lessons at will without any prioragreement with the ST as to when and hows/he may intervene.1

6. There are generally no records/reportskept on STs during teaching practice (TP).Evaluation is based solely on one or twolessons taught under examination conditionswith one or more examiners determining thefate of the candidate. There are few clearlydefined objective criteria for grading theselessons.

7. Demonstration lessons, a vital elementof training, often given by the trainer or thecooperating teacher (COOPT) are meant to be

1. As a pupil in a practicing school some 35 yearsago, I saw, to my greatest astonishment, a teacher trainerseize chalk from a trainee after shouting insults at him ina manner typical of a haughty colonial inspector, contin-ue the lesson, leaving the trainee utterly flabbergastedbefore us, his pupils.

imitated by the ST resulting in what Maingaycalls “ritual teaching behavior.”

8. STs are rarely given a chance to try outtechniques that are unknown to the COOPTor the trainer-observer especially when thisobserver is another one of the teachers in theinstitution.

9. There is generally no COOPT to observelessons on a lesson-to-lesson basis as theclass teacher is often away “having other fishto fry.”

10. COOPT teachers instruct STs andensure that instructions leading to condi-tioned behavior are carried out without dueconsideration to initiatives that the ST maywant to take.

11. Generally feedback in training is judg-mental, firm, and directive.

Observation for teacher developmentHaving outlined the features of lesson

observation for training in the Camerooniansetting, I will now turn to those that charac-terize lesson observation for development.

1. The ST is not instructed to reproduce aprescribed lesson plan. Instead the ST is pro-vided with broad guidelines and explanatorynotes justifying the inclusion of certain activ-ities based on lesson objectives.

2. Lesson observation is cyclical consist-ing of a pre-observation meeting, the observa-tion itself, and a post-observation meeting.

3. There is always a COOPT—usually theclass teacher—fulfilling the role of a teachingpartner.

4. The lesson observer is a full partner inthe TP exercise; s/he is punctual, sits in dur-ing the entire lesson, taking notes (data) onthe goals/targets set at the pre-observationdiscussion.

5. The observer does not intervene duringthe lesson unless the whens and the hows havebeen agreed upon during the pre-observationmeeting.

6. The observer, if a COOPT, writes a sum-marative report on the ST, counting toward thefinal assessment of the ST.

7. The observer and ST hold pre- and post-observation meetings. Pre-observation meet-ings are held well ahead of the lesson so as toprovide enough time for the ST to make nec-essary lesson plan adjustments, additions,and refinements. Post-observation meetingsare held (preferably) immediately after thelesson has been observed.

31E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M O C T O B E R 2 0 0 3

Some of our

practices regarding

lesson observation

for training were

handed down

from our

colonial master.

We need to

change them.

Page 3: cation from teacher training to teacher development with ... · cation from teacher training to teacher development with teacher educators arguing that training methods only provide

8. Demonstration lessons are given when-ever the need is felt. Such demonstrationlessons, especially in inservice programmes,are considered as options/alternatives amongmany. In that sense, they are consideredmodel lessons to be imitated.

9. Feedback is given in the most objec-tive manner possible as the observer tries toavoid being judgmental.

10. The COOPT is a facilitator andremains supportive and a full partner in theeducation process.

11. The observer, if a COOPT, hands overhis/her entire class to the ST as early as pos-sible and continues to work with the ST asdescribed in 4.

12. The COOPT encourages the ST toexperiment with new techniques or ideas.

13. A record file is kept on the ST’s gener-al conduct and work during the TP and con-stitutes the core of the summarative report tobe written by the COOPT at the end of thepracticum. The report is of paramount impor-tance in determining whether or not the ST isqualified for certification. Where a practicalteaching examination is required, the ST iscalled upon to teach several lessons and isexamined by a panel comprising the COOPT,the teacher trainer, and a person from theMinistry of Education, the school board, orthe department of teacher education. Clearlydefined criteria are used by the examiners forthe assessment of the ST.

The cyclical supervisory model of lesson observation

The cyclical supervisory model (see dia-gram above) consists of the same three phasesof the teacher development model. During thepre-observation meeting, the observer (whomay be the ST’s colleague, the ESOL inspec-tor, or a teacher educator) and the teacherhimself/herself set a limited number of profes-sional targets. These may be any aspect(s) ofthe lesson that the ST inservice trainer wouldlike the observer to target. Depending uponthe needs of a particular ST/teacher, both theobserver and the teacher may choose to runthrough a checklist established for this pur-pose consisting essentially of the following:lesson topic, lesson content, objectives, mate-rials, prerequisite learning, lesson develop-ment, closure, student evaluation, etc. It isvital to hold this meeting well in advance ofthe observation to enable the teacher or ST to

revise the lesson plan or other aspects of theclass before the lesson is taught.

Pre-observation meetings are the timewhen the teacher and the observer can agreeupon issues such as the observer’s interven-tion during the lesson proper. Some teachersdo not want intervention but others do. Peerteaching roles can also be discussed andassigned. The observer may refer the ST torelevant literature that may help in lessonplanning and execution. S/he may also helpthe ST get access to specialized librarieswhich would otherwise have been impossible.

The second phase of the clinical supervi-sory model is the observation of the lessonitself. At this stage, the observer focusesstrictly on the targets set at the pre-observa-tion meeting and collects relevant data for theteacher’s attention. The data thus collectedconstitute a vital part of the content of the ST’steaching profile.

The third and final phase of the cyclicalsupervisory model is the post-observationmeeting at which the teacher and observerlook back at the lesson and the data gathered.Another controversial issue is how feedbackshould be given during this phase of observa-tion. Some teacher educators suggest thatdata should be presented in the most non-judgemental manner possible giving theteacher the opportunity to analyze the dataand to make decisions as to its significance.

32 O C T O B E R 2 0 0 3 E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M

1 Pre-observation meetings: devoted to setting targets for thelesson observation.

2 Observation proper: devoted to collecting data on set targets.

3 Looking back at the lessons taught through data collectedand planning for future action.

Page 4: cation from teacher training to teacher development with ... · cation from teacher training to teacher development with teacher educators arguing that training methods only provide

Others suggest that positive feedback shouldbe given to create a good climate for furtherdiscussion of the lesson, and to give the ST asense of accomplishment. Still, others say thatthe good points of the lesson should be point-ed out to the teacher while the bad onesshould be given in the form of suggestions forimprovement. There are some who say thatthe trainer/observer should not be hypocriti-cal and should tell the trainee what s/he didright or wrong in a direct manner.

My own position on giving feedback to STsduring post-observation meetings is simply tobe eclectic for the simple reason that no sin-gle procedure will cover all teaching situa-tions across all cultures. In some situations,telling the ST directly and firmly what to doand what not to do may be the only acceptableway, but in others this may be rejected for fearof encouraging dependency. In some contexts,dialogue journals kept by the ST and sharedwith the observer are the most efficient way ofgiving feedback.2

Whatever the approach adopted, the goalis to make the teacher an independent deci-sion maker at all times. The means to achievethis ideal may differ from setting to setting butthis goal is primary.

The role of the ESOL inspector

In Cameroon, the Inspector of Education isthe direct representative of the Ministry ofEducation. The inspector’s responsibility is toensure the strict implementation of laws andregulations on educational matters and policyas stipulated by the state, country, board, com-munity, etc. Inspectors write reports whichdetermine whether or not teachers deservepromotion, salary increment, suspension, oreven dismissal. The inspector’s reports sayunequivocally what s/he considered theteacher did right or wrong, and state what theteacher should do in subsequent lessons. Thereport usually carries a grade. The inspectoris respected by some and dreaded by many.

What I see as necessary in inservice develop-ment programs is for the inspector to take ona more humane role.

In some countries of Francophone Africa,the Ministry Education prescribes the text-books for use at primary and secondaryschools. It is usually the subject inspectorwho selects these texts from among the manyavailable on the academic market. Thesetexts and their methodologies should be intro-duced to the teachers through national andregional seminars by the ESOL inspectors.Where demonstration lessons are needed theclinical supervision model is recommended.Since the participants would normally beinservice teachers, post-observation discus-sion may explore alternative procedures, ortechniques.

The ESOL inspector should go to theschools where teachers have no formal profes-sional education. In such schools, workshopsand demonstration lessons can be given, andreal lessons should be observed under theleadership of the inspector. Where this is notpossible, the inspector should invite or rec-ommend such teachers to attend seminars ontopics that would be of particular interest tothem.

Lesson observation by peers

In some school systems, there exist sub-ject heads or department chairpersons whoserole includes coordinating examinations andkeeping official records. This official role canbe extended to embrace teacher developmentas well. Colleagues less fortunate in terms ofprofessional training can be helped withinthe department with the chairperson playingthe roles of coordinator, demonstrator, orga-nizer, etc.

It is within ESOL departments that teacherdevelopment through peer train-ing/development/observation can be effec-tively carried out. In this regard, the proce-dure for peer observation, recentlyrecommended by Richards and Lockhart(1991–1992), may be adopted.

This procedure is patterned, in part, on theclinical supervision model. At the pre-observa-tion orientation session, teachers meet and dis-cuss exactly the kind of lesson, methods,techniques, classes, etc. they would like towatch, whether in groups or on a teacher-to-teacher basis. Once these preliminaries aredecided upon, then the teachers discuss what

33E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M O C T O B E R 2 0 0 3

2. Dialogue journals can be directed or non-directed/open. In a non-directed or open dialogue journal, the stu-dent teacher pursues any topic of his/her choice. Ques-tions on suitability of materials, class participation, spe-cific techniques, etc. can be asked by the student teacherand answered by the supervisor/trainer. In directed jour-nals, students are assigned topics to explore. The assign-ment may be traditional, in which the trainer gives thetopics, and student-teachers produce texts. Sometimesthe topics are set by the student teachers themselves(Winer & Steffensen 1992:23.)

Page 5: cation from teacher training to teacher development with ... · cation from teacher training to teacher development with teacher educators arguing that training methods only provide

13E N G L I S H T E A C H I N G F O R U M O C T O B E R 2 0 0 3

Lesson Observation… Tenjoh-Okwencontinued from page 33

the teacher observer has to look for during alesson. The teacher to be observed thenassigns the observer a goal for the observa-tion. At the post-observation meeting, theobserver reports on the data collected anddiscusses them objectively.

In settings where inspectors are appointedon the basis of some nepotistic, tribal, region-al or linguistic criteria, development isseverely handicapped. But in settings whereinspectors and school administrators areappointed from among the most qualified andexperienced professionals—where teachers,student-teachers, inspectors, pupils, andschool administrators are considered equalpartners in teacher development—the frame-work for teacher development presented inthis paper can contribute immensely to thequality of English language teaching.

ReferencesBrinton, M. D., G. A. Holden, and T. M. Goodwin.

1993. Responding to dialogue journals inteacher preparation. What’s effective? TESOLJournal, 2, 4, pp. 15–19.

Davis, P. and K. Plumb, l988. Teacher develop-ment for teachers not trainers. IATEFL Newslet-ter, 100, p. 40.

Freeman, D. 1982. Observing teachers: Threeapproaches to in-service training and develop-ments. TESOL Quarterly, 16, 1, pp. 21–28.

———. 1989. Teacher training, development anddecision-making. TESOL Quarterly, 23, 1, pp. 27–47.

Irvine-Niakaris, C, and S. C. Bacigal. 1992. Howcan the trainer promote teacher development?English Teaching Forum, 30, 1, pp. 42–43.

Lucas, C. l988. A model for teacher developmentin a large EFL institution. IATEFL Newsletter,100, p. 42.

Maingay, P. 1988. Observation for training, devel-opment or assessment? In Explorations inteacher training: problems and issues, ed. by T.Duff, London: Longman Group UK LTD.

Richards, J. C., and C. Lockhart, C. 1991–1992.Teacher development through peer observation.TESOL Journal, 1, 2, pp. 7–10.

Sithamparam, S., and M. Dhamotharam, 1992.Peer networking: Towards self-direction inteacher development. English Teaching Forum,30, 1, pp. 12–15.

Tenjoh-Okwen, T. l992. Teaching practice: A part-nership. Paper presented at the University ofRegional University of Yaounde.

Winer, L., and M. S. Steffensen. 1992. Cross-cul-tural peer dialogue journals in ESOL teachereducation. TESOL Journal, 1, 3, pp. 23–27.

Woodward, T. 1992. Ways of training: Recipes forteacher training. Singapore: Pilgrims Longman.

This article was originally published in theApril 1996 issue.