LANGUAGE TEACHING: WHY WE SHOULD (AND SHOULDN T) TRUST THE EXPERTS.

Transcription

1 LANGUAGE TEACHING: WHY WE SHOULD (AND SHOULDN T) TRUST THE EXPERTS. María Elena Llaven Nucamendi Frank Farmer Ismael Ignacio Chuc Piña Universidad de Quintana Roo, Unidad Cozumel Abstract Trust is central to the provision of all expert services, and this paper presents an overview of the conditions for trust that exist in the field of language teaching. A qualified English language teacher, for instance, may hold a certificate representing a week long course with no practical experience, or a certificate gained after 300 hours of study and observed and evaluated practical experience, or a degree at bachelor s, master s or doctoral level. Trust in the service depends on establishing what it is a language teacher needs to know, and how that knowledge is reflected in qualifications for practice. Variations over time in the content and relative weighting of different aspects of teaching in training manuals may indicate that the field of language teaching lacks sufficient stability to be a trustworthy service. An analysis of the sociological and legal bases of professionalism provides an explanation for the relative stability and reliability of professional practice in the delivery of other expert services, and suggests ways in which a language teaching profession may respond to the need for trust in the service. Introduction Governments all over the world spend a significant part of their budgets on education, but they have little control over what happens in classrooms. How can they be sure that policy decisions are really being acted out in schools? How can schools and parents be sure that students are receiving the kind and level of attention they may need? Who decides what kind and level of learning support each student needs? Governments, institutions, parents, students, and society as a whole need to trust the experts who design the educational system and deliver educational services. This paper reviews how far the conditions for trust in the delivery of expert English language teaching services may be met. In order to do so, the origins and development of expertise will be explored, as well as the roles played by experts in our society. Expertise in language teaching Language teaching has been characterized in different ways, so that it is difficult to say exactly what expertise in language teaching may be. For instance, Pennington (1992 p15) suggests that different views of the nature of language teaching can be positioned on a continuum ranging 510

2 from magic at one end to science at the other, with craft placed somewhere between the two extremes. A craft approach to teacher education is dominant in works such as Harmer (2007) and concentrates heavily on the details of how classroom activities may be planned, carried out and evaluated. Tsui s (2003) study explores differences between expert and novice teachers emphasizing the role of context specific craft knowledge and reflective practice in the management of learning. In this view of expertise in language teaching, entry qualifications for teachers are those set by employing institutions, and usually represent the views of senior teachers who through long experience have been entrusted with the recruitment of new teachers. In this process there is an element of market forces in the supply of new teachers. In Mexico, for example, the Programa Nacional de Inglés en Educación Básica (PNIEB) has created a surge in demand for qualified language teachers to teach English in schools, together with a demand for the qualifying credentials recognized by the Mexican government. The government recognizes any degree level course approved by the Secretaría de Educación Pública (department of state education) related to the field of language teaching, and the Teaching Knowledge Test (TKT) designed and administered by Cambridge ESOL. These qualifying credentials as well as the educational policy decision to include language teaching in the national curriculum have been influenced by experts in language teaching, but it remains unclear exactly what language teachers must be competent to do. The TKT, for example, contains no element of supervised and evaluated teaching practice, and measures only theoretical knowledge of aspects of the craft of language teaching. Initial English language teacher education English Language teachers may hold a wide variety of different certifications. There are doctorates, master s degrees and bachelor s degrees based on educational programmes designed by individual universities and validated internally, but subject to external validation by expert peers through accreditation procedures. Certificates and diplomas often incorporate indications that appear to be official, using the acronyms TESOL (teaching English to speakers of other languages) ELT (English language teaching) or TEFL (teaching English as a foreign language. There are diplomas at master s degree level (Cambridge DELTA, Trinity College London Dip.TESOL) which may take up to two years and are often offered as distance learning courses with a compulsory assessed teaching element that requires candidates to attend the test centre. There are certificates at bachelor degree level (in Mexico) such as Cambridge ICELT which require a minimum of 500 hours of experience before taking the course. And there are institutions (UK- TEFL, for instance) that offer a TEFL Certificate after a two day weekend course for those who cannot spare the time to take the standard three day course. A teacher who has completed a two day course is not necessarily a bad teacher and another who has earned a doctorate is not necessarily a good one, but they clearly do not share the same knowledge, skills and attitudes. However, extensive research and proven classroom techniques are available to novice practitioners through books such as Harmer (2007). This book has gone through four editions as well as numerous re-printings, and continues to represent current expert opinion about what novice teachers need to know in order to carry out their duties as English 511

3 language teachers. Table 1 provides a broad summary of the contents of the different editions of the book showing how it has evolved over time. Table 1. Contents of four editions of The Practice of English Language Teaching 1983 ( pp 1991 ( pp 2001 ( pp 2007 ( pp Theory (4 Practice (5 Management and planning (2 Background issues Language (2 (4 Learners and teachers (2 Theories, methods and techniques (3 Practice (6 Managing classes (3 Management and planning (2 Focusing on language (3 Receptive and productive skills (7 Design and planning (2 Evaluation (2 Looking further (1 chapter) Language (2 Learners and teachers (2 Background issues in language learning (2 Managing learning (2 The changing world of the classroom (2 Focusing on the language (4 Language skills (5 Planning and syllabuses (1 chapter) Evaluation (2 Learner autonomy and teacher development (2 Between 1981 and 2007, the book grew to nearly double the original length, increasing little by little in each new edition. This is what might be expected in field where the impact of new technologies and research continue to contribute to informed practice. Other changes between editions are perhaps less predictable. One of these is the nomenclature used for different sections of the book. For instance, the first section starts off as theory, becomes background issues in the second edition, then evolves into a discussion of language, actors in the language learning process and theory, methods and techniques in the third, while the fourth edition returns to background issues instead of theory, methods and techniques. Even this superficial look at nomenclature reveals a certain level of instability in expert opinion on the role and significance of theory and method in English language teaching. 512

4 Another interesting change occurred between the second and third editions. The first and second editions contained nothing on language testing, teacher development or learner autonomy, while the third and fourth editions feature these strongly in separate chapters. In Harmer s preface to the third edition, he explains reasons why a new edition was necessary. He mentions, as might be expected, the impact of new technologies, teaching materials, and research. He also mentions the changing importance of self study, cultural awareness, and teacher development in language teaching, showing that what had previously been specialized areas of theory and research were now to be included in mainstream teacher education. The appearance of 14 pages on testing in the third edition is not explained, but may again reflect the arrival in general teacher education of what was previously considered a specialized area of knowledge. This uncertainty concerning what knowledge, skills and attitudes a novice teacher may need could reflect a field in the initial stages of development, but it may also indicate that expert opinion has not been a particularly reliable guide to how teachers should be educated. However, knowledge of what to do and how to do it should not be expected to be stable, and as the requirements for initial teacher education change over time, experienced practicing teachers need to update their knowledge and skills through continuing professional development. Outcomes of initial education and professional p development in language ge teaching Professional development may be a personal project, or an institutional one, or both. The purpose of professional development is similarly varied. Teachers may have a personal ambition to expand their areas of expertise, or to stop themselves becoming bored with the routine of teaching, or be required to meet changing institutional requirements. In any case, teachers undergoing professional development may reasonably expect to come into contact with the latest findings of research in the field, as well as consolidating awareness of their duties as teachers and their self awareness through some form of reflective practice. Richards and Farrell (2005) provide guidance on professional development both as an individual projects (self monitoring, teaching journals, teaching portfolios, analyzing critical incidents, case analysis and action research) and with others ( in many of the previously listed activities, as well as in workshops, support groups, peer observation and coaching, and team teaching). Expert teachers taking part in their own professional development are not concerned with reaching minimum standards but with making expertise a lifelong personal goal. Other teachers who attend obligatory courses are not necessarily engaging in a process of developing expertise, and. doubts have been raised specifically about the value of reflective practice and a possible lack of focus on making real improvements to learning support. (Akbari, 2007). Initial language teacher education together with the effects of continuing professional development still leaves unclear exactly what it is teachers need in the way of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Even the best teachers lack any guidance on a threshold level of competence while they strive towards a personal goal of continuous improvement. It is appropriate now to look at the systems that exist for ensuring the quality of service in other professions. Professionalism ism and public trust Users of a service are entitled to assurances that the service offered will meet their needs. This is particularly true in professional services, which as typified by Koehn (1994) are high value 513

5 services rarely used more than occasionally by the same individual. In these services, market forces do not apply to the quality of service offered, as withdrawal of repeat custom by dissatisfied clients would have little impact on practitioners. Instead, clients rely on professional qualifications and membership of a professional body in choosing a medical practitioner or an architect, for instance. These professionals are indeed experts in their field, and hold credentials to prove it, but for Koehn (1994) this is not their defining characteristic. After all, astrologers and alchemists give themselves certificates too. For Koehn, experts as such are unreliable, as the duty of experts is primarily to their expertise and not to the outcomes of applying it. Koehn s point may be illustrated by the hypothetical example of experts giving evidence to a government committee on global warming, where politicians questioning the experts have an agenda to meet. If indeed global warming exists, and is caused or exacerbated by human activity, the politicians may have to take economically damaging and unpopular decisions. The politicians will therefore ask the experts whether there is incontrovertible evidence for global warming caused by human activity. The experts, whose responsibility is to their expertise, must answer that there is insufficient evidence. If the public interest is served, it is not because of the contribution of the experts. According to Koehn, what distinguishes expert professionals from other experts is that they make an explicit or implicit public promise (a profession) to dedicate their expertise to some specific overarching human good, such as health or a decent and significant environment for living and working in. The policing of the initial education, the professional development of practitioners and their compliance with the public pledge are carried out by the professions. These professions have a lot of power, as according to Freidson (2001) they control professional education as well as negotiating privileged monopolies of practice. Dingwall and Fenn (1987) have explored the legal framework in which this power is exercised. They hold that the individual and collective vulnerability of professionals to legal actions for negligence ensure both individual attention to protecting their client s interests and constant demonstration of the necessity for the exclusive right of the profession to provide professional services through certification of the professional s declarative knowledge, skills and attitudes. In Dingwall and Fenn s formulation of professional accountability, the client is protected both by ensuring that practitioners hold the credentials necessary to provide a service, and that the practitioner s declarative knowledge, skills and attitudes are in fact dedicated to the client s interests. Dingwall and Fenn point out that there is an informational asymmetry between professional service providers and their clients, where clients cannot possess the knowledge required to protect their own interests in contracting professional services. In addition, clients generally need services only occasionally, but in matters of importance to them, so that any failure by the service provider cannot be effectively punished by withdrawing future custom. It therefore falls to the state to generate the conditions of trust between clients and professionals by ensuring that only competent practitioners are licensed to offer the service. However, the state suffers from the same informational asymmetry as clients in its relationship with the professions, so that it must delegate the matters of professional credentials and education to the professions themselves. The state allows professions monopoly of practice in order to protect the public, but where a profession abuses its monopoly or where another occupation provides a better service, it is in the state s power to withdraw the monopoly. 514

6 An illustration may serve to demonstrate the robustness of Dingwall and Fenn s formulation. The licence to practise permits the practitioner the freedom to take all necessary action to advance the interests of their clients in pursuit of some human good, and if the affair turns out badly, the courts may be called upon to determine whether there is anything the practitioner should or should not have done which affected the outcome. Where licensed practitioners hold the necessary credentials awarded by a professional body, individual failures in the delivery of professional services are deemed to be due to negligence rather than incompetence. In court, expert witnesses will be called by both parties, and credible witnesses can only be members of the profession. It may be thought beneficial to the profession simply to close ranks and testify in favour of the professional, but in fact there is too much to lose both for the profession and for the expert witnesses. If the expert witnesses claim that the accused professional acted correctly in spite of the unsatisfactory outcome, their own potential clients may be lost. At the level of the professional body, to be seen to be unable to protect the interests of clients may result the withdrawal of public confidence and the elimination of the monopoly of practice. On balance, the interests of the profession are best served by allowing an unsatisfactory outcome to be punished under the law as an isolated and atypical case of negligence, and subsequently improve the preparation of practitioners through the professional development of existing members and changes in the licensing requirements for aspiring members. Such an arrangement protects most clients from both negligence and incompetence, and protects most diligent professionals from exposure to legal action. The discussion of professionalism presented here may seem somewhat remote from language teaching, but language teaching is a complex and specialized expert service, rarely used more than once by any individual, and increasingly linked to high-stake evaluations of learning achievement. A professional framework for power and responsibility may in fact be the only workable system for delivering an appropriate learning support service. Language teacher education and public trust In the public sector, the PNIEB programme for teaching English throughout basic education in Mexico sets the entry standard for teachers by recognizing specific credentials. However, these have been determined by experts in the field who have made no professional pledge to society. The entry standard set may really be the best control of quality that can be achieved under the circumstances, and does certainly reflect an expert consensus on what language teachers need to know, but it is necessarily a bureaucratic requirement rather than a professional one, and there is no apparent mechanism other than bureaucracy for monitoring the service delivered. In the private sector, market forces determine the quality of language teaching services. The services offered may be good but expensive, bad but cheap, expensive but bad, or possibly even good and cheap. Claims made about staff qualifications may include those lasting two days or two years or more, so that service users are left to make their choices on the basis of a school s reputation and their own impressions. Even assuming the best of intentions on the part of service providers, neither the public nor the private sector provide the conditions for trust in language teaching as a professional service. 515

7 The fundamental problem is the lack of clarity regarding the knowledge, skills and attitudes which would allow practitioners to deliver a learning support service and be accountable for the outcome. In the USA, the TESOL organization has taken a rather different approach to language teacher education, concentrating less on craft knowledge and more on defining the constituent parts of the service and setting standards for them. The standards for ESL/EFL teachers of adults (TESOL n.d.) became available in 2010 and approach language teaching as if it were a service industry. The document consists of eight lists of performance indicators followed by training material aimed at teachers in different areas of adult education, including English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and university contexts. The standards are organized under the following headings: 1. Planning 2. Instructing 3. Assessing 4. Identity and context 5. Language proficiency 6. Learning 7. Content 8. Commitment and professionalism The divisions between standards are not always clear and there is some overlap of performance indicators between the standards. Nevertheless, the document makes clear that the central objective is student learning, and the specific standards are all intended to reinforce the core teaching activities of planning, instructing and assessing. The document provides a valuable check list of the knowledge skills and attitudes which the authors think all teachers should have, not just in the USA, and gives guidance on how those knowledge, skills and attitudes may be demonstrated. The value of the service industry approach is that it makes explicit much of the tacit knowledge of educators and seeks to use that knowledge to guarantee the quality of service to the learner and to guide both pre-service and in-service teacher education programs. An expert teacher, according to the service industry approach, is one who has attained the standard and maintains it. It may seem logical to tell customers exactly what service they will receive for their money. However, there are problems for the customer in this service industry approach. Concentrating on the service rather than the service provider leaves in doubt the capacity of the service provider. There is no nationally or internationally recognized profession which regulates or takes responsibility for licensing suitably qualified practitioners, so the service promised is necessarily at a level determined by the service provider, and although the service may reflect current thinking on language teaching, there may be little research evidence showing that it really works or is sufficiently comprehensive. One result of the lack of research support combined with a firm contract to deliver a specified service is the rigid delivery of the service regardless of whether or not it is producing the expected results. Further, the contractual approach fails to acknowledge the major part learners play in their own learning, and the customer s role is reduced to paying the fee. (Koehn 1994) Craft based approaches to language teaching, such as Harmer (2007), conceive of the language teacher as a well prepared expert able to plan their teaching and adapt it as circumstances 516

8 require. In many respects this looks more like a professional approach rather than a service industry, but both the scope of the work and the standard of service required are decided by expert opinion within the teaching profession and not, as in the professions, by society through the legal system. Conclusions The practice of language teaching is beset by problems. Research does not and cannot tell us what to do or how to do it, yet teaching, it seems, must be done. Languages are difficult to learn and the promise of expert support is attractive both to learners and the experts who believe themselves competent to provide it. On the analysis presented here, neither craft based nor standards based approaches to language teacher education by themselves create the conditions for public trust in the service offered. However, the standards approach adopted in TESOL (n.d.) has made an important contribution in mapping out the field, while Harmer (2007) and other training manuals disseminate valuable details of the craft of language teaching. Any trend towards the professionalization of language teaching would need to embrace issues of detail as well as a defining the extent of the service within the context of local expectations and legal structures. Meanwhile, language learning will continue with learners justifiably placing their trust in teachers whose personal qualities, knowledge, skills and attitudes they respect. Well prepared and diligent language teachers are entitled to respect for their dedication, but perhaps need to be aware that the basis of their authority is not similar to that of a medical practitioner or an architect. References Akbari, R. (2007). Reflections on reflection: a critical appraisal of reflective practices in L2 teacher education. System 35(2) Dingwall, R. and Fenn, P. (1987), A respectable profession? Sociological and economic perspectives on the regulation of professional services. International review of Law and Economics, 7, Freidson, E. (2001), Professionalism the Third Logic. Cambridge: Polity Harmer, J. (1983, 1991, 2001, 2007) The Practice of English Language Teaching. Harlow: Longman Koehn, D. (1994). The Ground of Professional Ethics. Abingdon: Routledge Pennington, M. C. (1992). Second class or economy? The status of the English language teaching profession in tertiary education. Prospect, 7(3), 7-19 Richards, J.C. and Farrell, T. (2005). Professional Development for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. TESOL (n.d.) Standards for ESL/EFL Teachers of Adults Alexandria Va.: TESOL. Tsui, A. (2003). Understanding Expertise in Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 517