Rrrlrcnvr AcnvrrY FoR

Same Old Dog, New Tricks:

Lesson Planning as Friend, Not Foe
By Dauid Propst

K
(What I know about this subject)
w L
(What I want to know about this subfect ) ffiat I just learned about this subject)

I believe lesson planning (rick dl thar apply):

Helps me cover the curriculum material
- necessary
Serves as a guide for the class, but isnt a

- strict list of items to complete

Isnt ncessary as I can just follow the book
- Is more useful for newer teachers
- Is not worth the time it takes ro write up
- Serves as a record ofthe class

- Helps ensure focus on student development

- and progress
Other:
-
My lesson plans (tick all that apply):
Are in mv head
Are on a scratch piece ofpaper
- Are in bullet-point form
- Include approximate timing
- Include student performance objectives
- Include optional activities
- Follow a detailed format
- Other:
-
My lesson plan objectives are worded witl a focus
on (tick all that apply):
Material I will cover
- Discrete skills students will practice
- Functions students will practice
- Grammar specifically
- Other:
-
After a lesson,I (tick all that apply):
Discard the lesson plan
Save my lesson plan in a file

- Compare how activities went with the plan

- I wrote
'Write notes
on my lesson plan to
- improve the lesson for next time
Share ideas that worked well with colleagues

- Other:
-

Reflective Activity for "Same Old Dog, New Tiicks: Lesson Planning as Friend, Not Foe" created by Maria Snarski

z
Same Old Dog, New Tricks:
Lesson Planning as Friend, Not Foe
By Dauid Propst
\Triting lesson plans is an integral part of teaching. Un-
fortunately, too many beginning teachers and teachers in
training consider writing lesson plans a tiresome and un-
necessary chore with which they will quickly dispense
once out from under the watchful eyes of their supervisors.
And once in the "real world," in their own classrooms, they
resort to this horrible chore only when they know their les-
sons will be observed.
Perhaps this negative image of lesson planning is the fault
of teachers, professors,and teacher trainers the world over
who give trainees a simple lesson plan format with one or
t'wo examples and then require that the trainees produce
a certain number of their own plans in order to pass a
course. Instead ofbeing presented as a heuristic, as an aid
in times of preparatory trouble, lesson planning is present-
ed as a requirement, a loathsome task that "real teachers"
do not bother with anyway.
In my experience working with teacher trainees, I have no-
ticed that their frustrations with lesson planning usually
stem from three main sources. First, they do not under-
stand why lesson planning is necessary and exactly how it
can help them; the purpose and rationale behind it are not
adequately explained and discussed. Second, there is often
no consensus among the trainees (nor among the trainers,
for that matter) about what constitutes an objective and
how to write one. Third, the trainees find the lesson plan
forms they are given too vague and of little help in prepar-
ing a lesson. In other words, first they decide what they
want to do in class and then struggle to make their ideas fit
the format rather than letting the format serve as a guide.
\Mhile working with a group of Peace Corps volunteers in
Poland, I found that they felt the same frustrations as those
mentioned above. In an effort to clarify the role of lesson
planning in teaching and to counteract these frustrations,
I designed a lesson planning instrument that I will pres-
ent in this article. This instrument can be used by teacher
trainers in a workshop setting to introduce trainees to les-
son planning or by teachers who are looking for a change
of pace.
The instrument consists of three main parts: 1) a list of
benefits derived from lesson planning; 2) a lesson plan
form with space for objectives and an outline of the lesson;
and 3) a set ofquestions to consider about the objectives,
the structure of the lesson, and the lesson after it is present-
ed. (See Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure l, Figure 4, Figure 5,
and Figure 6 below.)
The first part of this instrument (Figure 1), the list of ben-
efits, is by no means exhaustive. The items on this list are
self-explanatory, so I will not elaborate on them here, but
they do provide a good starting point for a discussion on
the merits of lesson planning. In a training program, it is
important for trainees to understand these benefits and to
be encouraged to add their own to the list. Lesson plan-
ning should be presented as a creative, imaginative, and
ongoing process that helps teachers become more profes-
sional and better at their jobs.
Next we move to the lesson plan form (Figure 2). There is
nothing innovative or new about this form. It resembles
others in that it elicits from the teacher basic information
such as date, materials needed, lesson objectives, an outline
of the lesson, etc. In that regard, it is indeed a familiar "old
dog." But I have included a variety of categories under the
heading of objectives. As mentioned above, trainees and
trainers often have a hard time deciding on exactly what
an objective is. Many trainers teach ffainees to write "per-
formance" or "measurable" objectives, i.e., objectives that
can be stated: "The student will be able to..." The problem
with teaching only this rype is that there are many worthy
objectives that cannot be stated in these terms (e.g., "the
students will speak English during the entire class period,"
which could be considered an "aim"). And there are still
other objectives which simply do not need to be stated
in those terms (e.g., structures and functions that will be
covered during the lesson).
The trainees, therefore, become frustrated because they
spend a good portion of their time trying to figure out
how to put all of their objectives into these terms, ofren
analogous to trying to fit square pegs into round holes. By
broadening our concept of objectives, we free the trainee
to look at the lesson from different angles. And once some
of the other types of objectives have been identified, the
trainee is more likely to write good performance objec-
tives. (Here it should be noted that rarely would one be
able to list objectives in each ofthe categories on this form
for a single lesson. Indeed, a lesson might include only one
of these rypes.)
A set ofquestions about lesson objectives (Figure 3) helps
the teacher dete rmine exactly what they should be . There is
no one starting place; rather, the questions can be used to
help guide a teacher who already has an idea or rwo in mind.
For example, if a teacher knows that the lesson will include
a certain function (e.g., giving directions), then s/he can
fill in the function category on the objective sheet and then
look at the questions regarding functions to help him/her
decide about other aspects of the lesson. Using these ques-
tions, s/he might then decide on an appropriate situation
and structures to teach. Then s/he can fill in those sec-
tions on the objective sheet, look at the questions regard-
ing them, and identify more objectives of different rypes.
These questions will
also help the teacher in planning the
structure of the lesson, which we turn to next.
I into five main phases (Figure 4).
have divided the lesson
I decided on these phases based on lesson plan formats I
have used in the past, ideas culled from various sources,
and classroom experience. There is nothing sacred about
this format, but I believe that it represents a solid ESL/
EFL lesson. Beginning teachers are often taught that they
must include dl of the phases identified on the lesson
David Propst is an English Teaching Fellow at the University of the
4
planning format in each lesson. This causes frustration be-
cause it is not always possible (or advisable) and results in
artificial lessons. One must keep in mind that all five of
these phases (or the phases in any lesson planning format)
do not always need to be completed in every single lesson.
One lesson, for example, might begin with "preparatiori'
and end with "communicative practice" with the next les-
son devoted to "evaluation" and "follow-up," or any other
combination.
As with the lesson objectives, a list of questions regarding
the structure of the lesson helps rhe teacher to consider
carefully each phase of the lesson (See Figure 5). \t(hile
these questions might seem obvious, the old adage that
some things are obvious only after they are pointed out
holds true here. Sometimes a teacher has a great activity
that can be used during the "communicative practice"
phase but forgets to consider how the students need to be
prepared to handle the activity and how to evaluate them
afterwards. These questions help the teacher to consider all
angles before s/he enters the classroom.
The final part of the instrument is a list of questions for
the teacher to consider after the lesson (See Figure 6).
Teachers, especially those starting out, should be encour-
aged to keep journals in which they record their successes
and failures in the classroom. If teachers do not refect
on what they did, they will condnue to repeat the same
mistakes or will fail to see what made a particular lesson
excellent.
There is nothing revolutionary about this lesson planning
instrument. fu the title suggests, it simply serves to put a
new slant on an age-old process. In my sessions, I found
that it helped to clarify the reasons for lesson planning,
helped the trainees to write better objectives, effectively
guided them through the lesson planning process, and
helped to foster a more positive view of lesson planning.
Like everything in teaching, this is a work in progress, and
I would welcome any criticism, comments, or discussion
about these ideas.
North in South Africa. He also taught English in Slovakia, Poland, and Yemen.
Lesson planning will:
I Focus you

2 Provide you with a plan

3 Force you to consider the purpose of the lesson and the reason for each step

4 Establish clear goals for the lesson that are understood by both you and the learner

5 Establish clear goals for the lesson that are understood by both you and the learner

6 Help you design a coherent and cohesive lesson

7 Help you make a smooth tiansition from one lesson to the next

8 Provide you with a written record of the course

9 Encourage you to examine the lessons critically and make improvements

10 Addyour own

Lesson Plan Form:

Course: Date:
Teacher: Time:
Recent information covered:
Materials needed:
OBJECTIVES
Theme/Topic

Aims

Skills

Vocabulary

Structures

Functions

Phonetics

Learner Tiaining

Affective

Performance
Behavior
Conditions
Standards

Other
Questions to Answer about Lesson Objectives:
Theme/Topic/ l. \Vhy have I chosen this topic? 'Was it dictated by the text?
Situation(s) 2. Is it ofinterest to the students?
3. How can I personalize the material (i.e., make it relevant to the students)?
4. \7hat is the best way to present this topic initially (e.g., reading, pictures, music, etc.)?
5. Does this topic suggest certain suggest situations?

Aims 1 \7hat is the general purpose ofthis lesson?

'What
2 do I want to encourage the students to do?
3
t{/hat do I want the students to get out of this?

Skills 1. Does the topic of this lesson suggest a particular skill(s) that should be focused on?
2. Does the material I have chosen to use in class pre-determine a particular skill(s)?
3. For which skills do native speakers use the structures and functions presented in this lesson?
4. How can (should) I integrate all four skills into this lesson?

Vocabulary 1. Is there any new/unfamiliar vocabulary in the material?

2. Are there any idioms suggested by the topic/situation(s) chosen?
3. \X4rat is the best way to present the vocabulary items (e.g., cloze test, quiz, pictures, etc.)?
4. How can I get the students to practice using this new vocabulary?
5. In what "real life" situations does one find these vocabulary items?

Structures 1. V4rat structure(s) would a native speaker use in this context?

2. How can I present this structure(s) in context?
3. 'il4ratare some functions commonly performed using this structure(s)?
4. Do the students already know the structure(s)?

Functions 1. V4rat structure(s) is used to perform this function(s)?

2. 'il4rat skillG) is suggested by this function(s)?
3. In what situations do native speakers use this function(s)?
4. Sfhat activities would allow students to use this function(s) in a communicative way and for a real
purpose?
5. Are there any topics suggested by this function?

Phonetics l. Are there any phonetic aspects ofthe structures that should be addressed (e.g., "what do you do?"
becomes hatdyado?")?
2. Are differences between American and British English relevant here?

Learner Tlaining 1. Are there any skills, apart from language, that I can train my students in (e.g., note-taking, oudining,
study skills, self-evaluation, etc.)?
2. Can I help my students find out more about their personal learning sryles?
3. How can I help my students improve their learning?

Affecdve 1. \7hat type of atmosphere do I want to create and what is the best way of doing this?
2. How can I help the students feel comfonable?
3. Can Ghould) the students have fun with the activitis I have planned?

Performance I. \What do I want the students to be able to do at the end of the lesson?
2. How can I determine whether rhis is accomplished (i.e., how can I evaluate their performance)?
3. Under what conditions will I evaluate their performance (e.g., role-play, test, etc.)?
4. tVhat standards will I use to evduate the students?
Lesson Structure:

Phase Time Activity Grouping Comments

Preparation

Presentation

Communicative Practice
Evaluation

Follow-up

\X{hat potential problems can I identifr?

What can I do about them?

Questions to Answer about Lesson Objectives:

Preparation I \ff4rat is the best way to introduce the topic?
2 How can I get the students interested in the topic?
3 How much time should I spend on this phase?
4 How can I get the students to contribute to this part of the lesson?
5 Can I use the students' previous knowledge or prediction abilities?

Presentation 1. Does my presentation depend on the materials I have (e.g., a song, textbook, travel brochure,
newspaper, etc.)?
2. Vhat do my students need to know in order to perform the tasks I have set for them?
3. tVhat is the best way to present this?
4. How can I make the students actively participate in this phase?
5. \(hat can I elicit from the students and what do I need to "teach"?
6. Do I need to review/preview vocabulary?
7. \fill they be working with structures of functions they dont know?
Communicative 1. Are the tasks, activities, and/or experiences I have chosen based on what was presented in the
Practice previous phase?
2. Are the tasks communicative? Are they learner-centered?
3. \7hat should my role as teacher be during this phase (e.g., facilitatot resource, participant, etc.)?
4. What rypes of activities would work best here (e.g., information-gap, jigsaw, interview, etc.)?
5. What sort of classroom arrangement would best fit the learning experiences I have chosen
(e.g., discussion circle, small groups, etc.)?

Evaluation 1. How can I best determine whether the students have learned what I wanted them to?
2. Is this part of my lesson student-centered?
3. \7hat is the best way to arrange the class for this phase?
4. Can I help the students learn to evaluate themselves?
5. \X4rat rypes of learning experiences would be best for this phase of the lesson (e.g., a general discussion,
student presentations, group projects, role-plays, etc.) ?

Follow-up 1. \7hat can I have the students do that will reinforce what they have learned in this lesson?
2. Should this be done as homework or in class (-"yb. for the next lesson)?
Refecting on the Lesson:

\fhat was the best thing about the lesson?

\Vhat did I enjoy most? \7hat did the students enjoy most?
How did the students react? \fhy?
tVhat would I change about the lesson if I used it again?
At what points in the lesson could I have engaged the students more? How?
'W'ere
the students able to do what I wanted them to do? V/hylwhy not?

Add your oan questions.

Article reprinted uith permission: Propst, D. 1997. Same Old Dog New Tiichs: Leson Pknning as Friend, Not Foe. English Teaching Forum 35 (4).

B
Rerlrcrrvr AcnvrrY FoR

Change in the Language Classroom:

Process and lntervention
By Joy Reid

K
(What I know about this subject)
w
(What I wmt to know about this subject
L
(What I just learned about this subject)
)

I have made changes in the way I teach in

the last year:
None -
_
- 1-3
4--,

-5*
Something I have changed in my reaching in the
last year is (tick all that apply):
The arrangement ofthe students'seats
- Reducing the amount of Ll I use in the class
- Usins more oair/srouo work
Reducine the amount of teacher ralk
Incorporating technology in the class
- Having students take responsibiliry for their
- learning
Having students create learning materials
- Other:
-
ti(rhen making a change in the classroom, I (tick
all that apply):
Implement the change without warning the
- students and see how the change is received
that day
Explain the change to the students before
- implementing it
Discuss how the change benefits the stu-
- dents (before or after)
Do not repeat the change if it isnt fully
- successfirl the first time
Other:
-
I believe making changes in the classroom (tick all
that apply):
Is dificult
- Can only be done by recent graduates
- Should happen at the beginning ofthe
- school year
Takes time
- Goes throush stases
Other:

Reflective Activiry for "Change in the Language Clmsroom: Process and Intervention" created by Maria Snarski
Change in the Language Classroom:
Process and Intervention
b Jol Reid
Change is a predictable and natural response to evolving
needs (Stoller l99l). But that does not mean that change
is easy, and it does not mean that change occurs in the
foreignJanguage classroom just because teachers teach. Yet
change is at the basis ofeducation; change in the language
classroom is continuous and ongoing. In fact, education
is change. Specifically, foreign-language students who
are learning how to use noun clauses or to guess a wordt
meaning from context or to request a librarian's help or
to structure a paragraph are constantly making changes in
their background knowledge and experience, and in their
learning styles and strategies. This article discusses the pro-
cesses ofchange that occur in the language classroom and
suggests that teachers who consider the integral relation-
ship between education and change can better assist their
students in the learning (that is, the change) process.
In our everyday lives, change occurs constantly. \7e choose
ro eat a different food for breakfast, to take a different route
to work, to read a book we haven't read before. Sometimes
the change is larger or more complex: we decide to marry;
we choose to take a new job; we plan the curriculum for a
new class. Choice is a key word in change; when we choose
to change, we recognize the benefits of the change, and
we realize that our choice involves both responsibiliry and
consequences.
But even choosing to change does not mean that change is
easy or fun. In fact, research shows that even small changes
can leave us tired and irritable. For example, as you de-
liberately take a different route going home, observe the
amount of time and energy such a small change takes.
As you eat dinner, eat in a different sequence. Tomorrow
morning, consciously choose to comb your hair or shave
in a different pattern, and refect on your feelings about
even this single discrete change. Then consider the ways in
which you might make one of these changes permanent.
You would need to remember, to practice, and to mztiaate
10
yourself with the idea that the change will be beneficial
1[21, for example, a different route to your home will
-be quicker, easier, or more beautiful. Finally, think about
how you would feel if any of those small changes had been
imposed on you (rather than freely chosen).
The Change Process
Research about change (Goldenberg and Gallimore 1992;
Gresso and Robertson 1992 Kirkpatrick 1987; Schloss-
berg7987) has shown the following:
l. Educational change occurs in individuals first. That is,
change is a highly personal experience, and only after
individuals change does change occur in larger groups:
classrooms, institutions, and nations.
2. Individuals change only if the change will benefit them.
There are, of course, many kinds of personal benefits:
financial, intellectual, social, psychological. One ben-
efit is a good grade on a test; another might be a word
of praise from the teacher.
3. People may appear to change even when they have not.
V/hile imposed change can make individuals appear to
change, real change comes only if individuals determine
or are persuaded that the change is in their best
-interest. -
4. Change takes time, patience, and resources, and the
more complex or difficult the change, the more time,
patience, and resources it will take.
5. Significant change (that is, complex change) is neither
fun nor easy.
6. Significant change is not an event. Rather, it is a pro-
cess, and that process includes several stages.
The research model I find most applicable to change in the
classroom, the Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM)
(Hord et al. 1987), has shown that there are seven stag-
es of concern in the change process. These stages occur
when students encounter a new concept in the classroom
(or when teachers, parents, or citizens encounter change
in their lives). tble l, below, defines the seven stages of
concern.
Change in the classroom
Of course, not everyone begins the change process at the
6rst stage (awareness). Rather, individuals enter the change
process at different stages one person in class may be at
-
the information stage, while another may have concerns at
the personal stage. The stage ofconcern depends on:
. The nature and complexiry of the change: How
much does the student aheady know? How dif-
ficult is the change? How complicated is the
change?
. The nature and situation of the student who is
changing: Is the student open to change? Moti-
vated to change? Able to change?
. The ways in which the teacher implements and
supports the change: How experienced is the
teacher in the change process? Is the teacher sensi-
tive to the needs of the students who are facing
the change? Are there appropriate resources to
give the students practice opportunities and ap-
propriate feedback?
Moreover, the stages of concern are not necessarily lineaq
but rather are deuelopmental and recursiue. Students may,
for instance, move from the information to the personal
stage, then step baclsvard again into the information stage.
The first two stages and informatisn- arc1hs
ones we teachers are most familiar with. It is often our re-
sponsibility to introduce topics raise awareness and
- -
give information to our students. \7e initiate learning and
answer the questions as we establish credibiliry and trust
in our classrooms. Part of our job as language teachers is to
have the necessary information and to be able to interest
the students in learning that information. The students'
responsibility is somewhat limited at these first two stag-
es; they need only to be interested and willing to learn.
For both teachers and students, these stages ofthe change
process are well known.
Itis the middle rwo stages of concern Qtersonal and man-
agement) that ESL teachers are most likely to encounter in
their classes, and that they may not recognize. Of these,
the more crucial is the personal stage, which occurs after
the individual has learned about change but before the
individual has committed to that change. Vhy crucial?
Because it can be and usually is a stage filled with
- -
reluctance, frustration, even resentment. Think for a mo-
ment about culture shock those feelings of I hate the
I hate tbe country), I - the people, I hate the language
hate
food,
that travelers have, to a greater or lesser extent, when they
6rst live abroad. If we think about culture shock in light
of the change process, we could say that these travelers are
going through the personal stage of change, during which
they feel reluctance, resentment, and even anger about the
imposed changes they are experiencing changes that
-
they have not yet committed to and for which they have
few or no coping strategies.
Students in our language classrooms may probably do
have the same kinds of feelings when-they musr, for
-instance, memorize verb tenses, write an essay, or read
and summarize a book in English (whether or nor rhey
articulate those feelings to their teachers). They may
say or at least think X worbed fne for me in my
- -
Preuious education. Why should I change? or How will
this change make my life better? or Is this going to be on
the test? Notice that all of these comments are personal.
They all say Tbll me exactb how this change is going to beneft
me. As these students learn more about the topic (for ex-
ample, noun clauses, idioms, or transitions), and as they
have opportunities to practice and receive feedback on
their work, we hope that they will find the acquisition of
new knowledg. the change beneficial and thereby
-
will commit to that change. -
Of course, the teacher can impose change forcing stu-
-
dents to write English paragraphs with topic sentences or
to practice dialogs for the doctort office or to fill in blanls
with correct verb tenses, for example. But imposing change
is, at best, a last resort that we can only hope will evenru-
ally result in the students' commitment to the change. For
without commitment, real change doesnt take place. Stu-
dents may perform, but they will not become.
Once students have committed to the change, they have
entered the management stage of concern. These concerns
involve time- and effort-management, and they are com-
parable to a teachert first week of teaching, or rhe first
month with a new textbook in a class. The amount ofwork
seems overwhelming, the time spent doing the work seems
endless, and there is an inabiliry to prioritize or ro com-
plete work. Our language students are often in the same
predicament: overloaded with many changes in their lives,
11
having very little perspective about long-term objectives
and even less understanding of the prioritizing of work
and skills, they feel helpless, and, as a result, they may
even retreat to the personal stage of concern. As students
learn more about the change and have opportunities to
practice that change, they begin to gain more control over
their efforts. Many students end a language class in the
management stage: they have learned and can manage the
change within the classroom, though they may not be able
to modify the change in ways that will allow them to use it
outside of the classroom environment.
The consequences stage of concern involves a shift
from teacher responsibiliry to student responsibiliry;
it can have a significant impact on the class, since the re-
sult is a commitment by the students to independent and
long-term learning. Students who have moved out of the
management stage have taken control of their work and
identified successful learning strategies. They have the
self-confidence to embark, individually, on work within
the specific change area and, importantly, to evaluate how
well their skills, strategies, knowledge, and the products
associated with the change work. Students who are in the
consequences stage are the teachert delight, with their in-
dependent discoveries, their perceptions, and their growth.
Those who are in the consequences stage have learned:
they can apply the change in a variety of situations, and
they know how to initiate and implement their own work.
These students are often excellent group leaders and peer
coaches in the classroom. If the change is small and rela-
tively discrete (for example, using the past tense correctly,
or specific vocabulary words, or appropriate roleplay), the
teacher is likely to be able to observe the consequences
stage: the student using the past tense correcdy outside
of class, or reporting the ways in which learning certain
medical vocabulary and practicing it in roleplay situations
enabled him/her to communicate successfully with the
doctor. But certainly not all students enter this stage before
they leave the class; indeed, most students reach only the
management stage during the 4-6 months of a language
course. This is unfortunate for both the teacher and the
students: the teacher is not confident that s/he has been
successful, and at least some of the students are certain
they have not been successful.
The last two stages of concern, collaboration and refocus-
ing, show that, as students progress through the stages of
change, their responsibilities grow. These last stages are al-
most entirely the responsibiliry of the students. These are
tz
the stages in which the student puts his/her new knowl-
edge to work, adapts it to fit specific situations outside the
classroom, and modifies it to fit his/her own needs. S/he
evaluates possibilities and implements changes that benefit
him/her. Unfortunately for teachers, these stages almost
always occur after the students have left the class, when
they use the information and skills they have learned in
order to work successfully in other classes, and/or to com-
plete other work. As teachers, we would be delighted to be
able to stand back and watch these processs take place,
but we rarely have that opportuniry because the class has
ended.
Teachers and Change in the Language Classroom
Learning about the processes of change is educational for
teachers in several substantial ways, and knowledge about
the stages ofconcern can lead to change in a teachert class-
room approach. First, because students as well as teach-
ers should understand that learning is integrally related to
change, and that learning (which is change) takes time,
patience, and resources, teachers will spend some time at
the beginning of the course explaining the basics of the
change process to their students. Moreover, students must
be made aware that change involves process stages through
which other students also pass. Therefore, later in the
course, when many students seem to be struggling with
the material, small-group discussions about the stages of
concern can allow students to share their feelings, their
problems, and their possible solutions with fellow stu-
dents. \X/hile teachers need not spend large amounts of
time teaching the change process, the topic does provide
content about which students can write, read, and speak.
In order to use the change process successfully in the lan-
guage classroom, teachers must next establish a mindset.
'We must understand, for example, that the more complex
the change, the more time, patience, and resources such
as lectures, field trips, readings, and collaborative projects
the change will take. In addition, we must believe that
personal concerns about change are normal, shared, and
even expected. And we must understand that the stages of
concern do not exist in a vacuum; they are influenced by
students feelings about the change, by their percepdons
of their abilities to use itldo it, by the number of other
changes they are involved in (the more changes a student is
experiencing, the less willing that student will be to accept
new change), by the classroom environment, and most im-
portant, by the kind and level of support and assistance
they receive as they move through the stages of concern.
The teachers' responsibilities in helping their students
through the stages ofconcern begin at the awareness stage.
First, early in the change process, as part of introducing
the topic (for example, skimming and scanning in the
reading class, or the use ofverb particles, or the use ofthe
infinitive) and providing information, the teacher should
have persuasive evidence to present svidsn6s that shows
-
why the change is necessary and beneficial. This is the sell-
ing part of teaching we must be able to convince our
-
students that what we are teaching is important and in-
teresting and valuable for them personally, and we must
make clear the positive short- and long-term benefits of
such learning (that is, changing).
At the same time, the teacher should be informing the
students about their responsibility in the learning process:
students must decide whether or not to learn to commit
to the change. And students must understand- that choos-
ing either to commit or not to commit to a change involves
both responsibility and consequences. Il for example, stu-
dents choose not to read and learn certain material, or learn
how to spell certain words, or practice the syntax of certain
sentence forms, they risk failing an examination or being
embarrassed in class. If students in a writing class choose
not to adapt their writing sryles to fulfill the expectations
of an English-speaking academic audience, they must un-
derstand that certain hardships can occur. They will, at the
very least, spend more time explaining their writing sryles
and strategies to their professors. They will have to learn to
endure a level of confusion or misunderstanding from their
teachers. At worst, they risk not succeeding in their studies.
But it is their choice; the choice is therefore their respon-
sibiliry. If, in contrasr, srudenrs decide to learn about the
expectations of their academic audience, and to adapt their
styles accordingly, the benefits are clear: easier and more
successful communication.
Next, we teachers should be prepared for student reac-
tions during the personal stage (which may not be actu-
ally spoken or even visible in class), reactions that range
from reluctance to resentment. Moreover, we should not
take these personal reactions personally. Because even
small, incremental, deliberate change can be time-con-
suming and frustrating, we must expect the reactions of
our students to complex educational change to be quite
negative, at least at first. And we must be accepting of
students who regress to rhe personal stage, as we recog-
nize the validity of the problems and the developmental
quality of change.
Finally, as our students move through the process of
change, we can help them to become aware of their prog-
ress. For example, at the beginning of a module or an as-
signment, we might ask our students to reflect on why we
are studying the structure of a comparison/contrast para-
graph or vocabulary about earthquakes or the pronuncia-
tion of those vocabulary words. Students might discuss in
pairs or groups (or write in their journals, or discuss with
the teacher) what they expect to learn in this module or as-
signment. In the middle of a class or a lesson, we could ask
students to discuss what they are learning, and have them
write questions about the material that needs answering.
At the end of a single class or a series of lessons, we might
ask students to write on the chalkboard or in their journals
(or discuss with a group of peers) what was easy or dif-
ficult about the class or module, what problems they en-
countered and how they solved those problems, and, most
important, what they learned.
Researchers call this approach to learning metacognition:by
writing about and discussing what they are learning, how
they learn best, what they do not understand, and how to
apply their learning in a variety of situations, students are
becoming aware not only of what they are learning, but
that they are learning they are changing. Metacognitive
-
activities demonstrate to students that they are responsible
for their own learning that only they can choose to
-
change. Teachers in a metacognitive classroom can help
their students through the stages ofconcern by designing
metacognitive opportunities and by offering positive com-
ments that show the students that they are learning: "I'm
pleased with what youve learned by doing this essay," or
"You have learned this very well!"
Teacher Intervention
By talking with students about the change process, by ad-
dressing the stages of concern as we plan our awareness
and information lessons, and by demonstrating to our stu-
dents that they are capable of learning and changing, we
are already intervening indirectly in our students' stages
of concern. But intervention can also occur more directly.
Teacher intervention in the change process can assist stu-
dents in moving through the stages of concern more easily
and quickly.
Such intervention involves using techniques that are ap-
propriate to each individual stage of concern. That means
that teachers must become skilled in identifying the stages
of concern in their students and assessing the immediate
13
needs of those students. Table 2, below, shows rypical re-
sponses to each ofthe stages ofconcern.
In general, appropriate responses to the two most crucial
stages, personal and management, include the following:
PERSONAL STAGE: \7e must be able to say, in truth,
that we understand how hard change is, that we appreciare
the hard work, and that, with time and effort, the students
will succeed.
MANAGEMENT STAGE: Here is the perfect place for
sryles and strategies training, and for coaching in time
management and priority setting. Being able to identify
their learning strengths and to practice overcoming their
weaknesses empowers students at this stage.
One caution: teachers must be careful, during this stage,
not to get too far ahead of their students in the change
process. As teachers, we can see the next stages (conse-
quences, collaboration, refocusing), but the students may
have not yet moved beyond the struggles of the personal
or the management stage of concern. Students who have
intense personal concerns will have litde or no receptivity
to solutions to management or collaborative concerns, and
inappropriate responses to the needs of the students may
actually hinder their progress. The intervention of the
teacher in the change process should, therefore, be focused
on reducing concerns at a specific stage.
Conclusion
This article has recommended that foreign-language teach-
ers investigate and then promote the integration of the
change process into their classes. Of course, the decision to
incorporate change in the language classroom will not be
easy. Teachers committed to this change in their teaching
approach need time to plan the explanations and discus-
sions. They need to become more responsible for provid-
ing students with the long-term objectives and rationales
for teaching and learning that will allow their students to
take charge of their own learning. Atrd they need to de-
velop explicit criteria for evaluation and the consequences
surrounding student choice, so that their students can
Joy Reid teaches and coordinates the ESL support program in the English department at the University ofrVyoming in Laramie. Her interests include computers and
composition, discourse analysis, and contrastive rhetoric. She has written several ESL composition textbooks; her newest 6ook is Tbaching ESL Vriting.
r4
become aware of and understand the expectations of the
class.Only then can students become responsible for an-
ticipating and fulfilling those expectations.
In order to facilitate these changes, teachers will need pa-
tience with themselves and their students, time to develop
their ideas, and the necessary resources to implement the
changes. They will need to remember, to practice, and to
motivate themselves with the idea that these changes will
be beneficial for their students.
The principal benefit for foreignJanguage students in a
change-process classroom is the formation of independent
Iearning skills. For example, students who understand the
relationship berween education and change, and who real-
ize that the stages of concern are shared by other learn-
ers, may be able to move through the crucial personal
and management stages more easily. In addition, teaching
students about their choices in the learning (the change)
process can give students a sense ofresponsibiliry for their
own learning. \X&ile students may initially find this re-
sponsibiliry burdensome, it will, with time, patience, and
resources, benefit and empower them.
References
. Goldenberg, C. and R. Gallimore. 1992. Changing teaching
takes more than a one-shot workshop. Educational Leader'
ship, 47 ,7 , pp. 69-71.
. Gresso, D. V. and M. B. Robertson. 1992. The principal as
process consultant: Catalyst for change. NASSP Balletin,76,
540, pp. 44-47.
. Hord, S. M.,1W. A. Rutherford, L. Huling-Austin and G. Hall.
1987. Takingcharge ofchange. Nexandria, Va.: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
. Kirkpatrick, D. L. 1987. How to ntanage change ffictiuely.
San Francisco, Calif. : Jossey-Bass.
. Schlossberg,N. K. 1987. tking the mystery out of change:
By recognizing our strengths and building on them we
can learn how to master transitions. Pslchology Today,21,
pp.74-76.
. Stoller, F. 1991.IEP administrators perceptions of program-
matic innovation. Doctoral dissertation, Northern Arizona
Universiry.
 CBAM Stages of Concern
Awareness: This initial stage might be called unawareness; it occurs before a student knows much
about the idea or the issue (the change).

Information: This is the stage during which the student wants to know more about the idea or the
issue, and the teacher has the opportunity to give information about the change.

Personal: During this crucial stage, the student makes a commitment to the change.

Management: This is the period during which the student struggles to accommodate the change.

Consequences: The person in this stage of the change process has successfully implemented the change
in one area and is now able to apply what s/he has learned in other areas, and to evaluate the results.

Collaboration: During this stage, the student reaches outward, beyond him/herself, to see how others
have managed the change.

Refocusing: The student now has adapted the change to fit his/her needs, actually making changes
within the change to make the change work better for him/her.

Responses to the Stages of Change

Awareness "I'm not very interested."
"'$7'hat?"

lnformation "I d like to know more about it."

"-What does it mean?"

Personal "How will it affect me?"

"It looks very hard."
"I dont think I'll be very good at doing it."
Management "I'm spending all my time trying to do it."
"It's taking too much time."
Consequences "How will my other professors evaluate it?"
"\(/hat will happen when I do it for others?"
Collaboration "How are others doing it?"
"I'd like to share what I'm doing with others."
Refocusing "I have some ideas about it that would make it work better."
"If we changed this part, it would be more successful."

Anicle reprinted with permission: Reid, J. 1994. Change in the Language Clasroom: Proces and Interuention. EnglishTeachingForum 32 (1)

t5
Rrrlrcnvr AcnvlrY FoR

What Works in the EtT Classroom?

Using Robust Reasoning to Find Out
By Lisa Harshbarger

K
(What I know about this subject)
w
(What I want to know about r{ris subject )
L
(lVhat I just learned about this subject)

I take the following into consideration when

preparing for class:
The students' levels
- Th. classroom
- The different learning sryles among the
- students
My comfort level with the material of the
- d^y
The learning/teaching theory behind each
- activity
Other
-
If something goes wrong in the classroom, I:
Hope it doesnt happen again and am
- thankful it wasn't worse
Complain about it to a colleague
- Talk to a colleague to try to understand
- why it happened
Plan never to do that exercise again
- Think critically about what went wrong to
- prevent the bad experience again

After a class finishes (or at the end of the day),

I stop and think critically about how the
class(es) went:
Alwavs
Sometimes
- If something really went wrong
- If something reallywentwell
- Almost never; I have no time.

My teaching sryle refects:

The wav I was taueht
The wav I like to be taueht
Current practices in the field
- Th. sryle best suited to my students' learning
-
My focus on the classroom is:
Getting through the material in the time
- I have
On what I'm doing activity by activiry
- On how my students are experiencing the
- activity

Reflective Activiry for "\(hat Works in the ELf Classroom? Using Robust Reasoning to Find Out" created by Maria Snarski

l6
What Works in the ELT Classroom?
Using Robust Reasoning to Find Out
By Lisa Harshbaryr
English teachers are known for asking a lot of questions.
One of the questions we ask ourselves every day is, "Did
my students benefit from what happened in class today?"
If the answer to this question is "yes," we can start prepar-
ing for our next day of classes. However, if it is "no," most
of us try to determine how best to remedy the situation.
We usually carry out this daily evaluation of the effective-
ness of our teaching privately, unless we feel the need to
ask a sympathetic colleague or supervisor for help with a
particular teaching issue.
Sometimes, however, this evaluation is public. This hap-
pened to me during my first year of teaching, at a uni-
versity intensive English program in the early 1980s. The
communicative approach was becoming popular, and
many of us teachers were experimenting with what were
then new methods and activities. Terminology such as
"authentic materials," "Natural Approach," "communica-
tive language teaching," and "learner-centered teaching,"
could be heard in the staff room every day. \(e debated
whether using these new methods improved the language
proficiency of our students. \7e all had students who
participated eagerly in any communicative activity, but
showed very little improvement on tests. \We also had
students who preferred teacher-fronted instruction and
participated reluctantly in any form of learner-centered
activity, but who did better on tests than their more en-
thusiastic classmates.
Because of this problematic relationship between the new
methods that we were trying out in our classes and the
progress our students made, some of us began to won-
der if the claimsmade about the effectiveness of the
new methods could withstand major scrutiny. Most of
us found the concepts that underpin the communicative
approach attractive, and the activities that were recom-
mended effective in motivating students to use English
in interactions resembling real communication outside
the classroom. However, we were not very confident that
this approach, or any other approach, would "work" in
our classrooms.
English teachers all over the world have been engaged in
similar debates in staff rooms and in private soul search-
ing at the end of a day of teaching. At times it can feel
as if we are caught in a perpetual cycle of questioning
the effectiveness of anything we try in our classrooms. I
believe that most of us engage in this questioning pro-
cess throughout our careers because we feel responsible
for the effectiveness of our teaching. \7e are motivated
to look for the best language teaching method that will
provide our students with the English language skills
they need.
This article is not intended to resolve anyonet search for
an ideal method that will work in all teaching contexts.
Instead, my purpose is to explain the benefit of using
"robust reasoning" (Johnson 1999) to discover what
"works," that is, what is effective and appropriate in our
classrooms.
A plethora of methods
In the past, the definitive answers given to teachers' re-
quests for something that "worked" were specific ap-
proaches and methods. Now, there are almost too many
approaches and methods to choose from. Richards
(1999:34) points out that there are concurrent models of
effective teaching, each with "specific assumptions about
what the essential knowledge base, skills, and attitudes
[for effective teachingJ are." FollowingZahorik (1986), he
classifies these models, or conceptions, and their under-
lying assumptions into three categories: science-research,
theory-philosophy, and art-craft .
S ci en c e-res earc b c oncep tio ns
Science-research conceptions of teaching, according to
t7
Richards, "view teaching as a type of scientific activiry...
that is formed and validated by scientific research and sup-
ported by experimentation and empirical investigation"
(1999:34). He presents the audiolingual method (Fries
1945) as an example. Proponents of this method consid-
ered it a scientific sysrem of teaching foreign languages
based on the incorporation of behaviorist learning theory
and structural linguistics. Th.y actively discouraged teach-
ers who used the audiolingual method from modifying the
recommended instructional activities in any way, so as nor
to interfere with this scientific process of teaching.
Thsk-based instruction and learner training, according to
fuchards, are two current science-research conceptions of
teaching. Thsk-based instruction, or the use of interactive
tasks to encourage language learners to negotiate meaning
in the target language, is, according to Long and Crookes
(1992:27), based on "second language acquisition re-
search, particularly descriptive and empirical studies com-
paring tutored and naturalistic learning." Learner training
relies on research in the learning sryles and strategies used
by successful language learners both to develop learner
training techniques to be used in the language classroom
(O'Malley and Chamot 1990) and to raise learner aware-
ness of the importance of these styles and strategies in their
own learning processes (Oxford 1990). These two con-
ceptions are based on the assumption that what "works"
in the language classroom has already been identified by
researchers. The job of language teachers, then, is to use
these findings in their own classrooms.
Th eory -p hilos op hy conceptions
Theory-philosophy conceptions of teaching, in con-
trast, are "built not on empirical research, but on gener-
ally data-free theories and principles...justified on logical,
philosophical, political, moral, or other grounds" (Rich-
ards 1999:38). Richards claims that communicative lan-
guage teaching, possibly the most infuential approach
in our profession today, is a theory-philosophy concep-
tion of language teaching. Because so many studies have
been done, and articles wrirten, about the relationship
between CLT and language learning, it is often assumed
that the effectiveness of this approach in language class-
rooms, regardless of their context, has been proven by re-
search. Richards points out that the development of the
communicative approach was only indirectly related to
formal research findings. Theorists such as \Widdowson
(1978) and Savignon (1983) drew upon Hymesb theory
of communicative competence (1971) and theories of
18
second language acquisition, such as Krashent (1981), in
their development of new definitions of language profi-
ciency that were not based on rhe mastery of a specific
set of grammatical and phonological components. Instead,
they defined language proficiency as the abiliry ro use rhe
grammatical, discourse, functional, sociolinguistic, and
strategic components of the target language appropriately
in order to communicate effectively.
This new definition of language proficiency led to the de-
velopment of new language learning objectives as well as
new classroom activities and techniques that would enable
students to meet these objectives. Teachers were no lon-
ger required to lead students in lock-step fashion through
textbook exercises designed according to principles of be-
haviorist learning theory or structural linguistics. It was
assumed that a language learning environment that en-
couraged students to "engage in the pragmatic, authen-
tic, functional use of language for meaningful purposes"
(Brown 2001:43) would facilitate development of com-
municative competence. Therefore, teachers were expected
to replicate this environment in their classrooms. In other
words, students were to be encouraged to interact with
each other freely through acdvities that were motivating
and resembled language use outside the classroom. The
primary responsibilities of the teacher in this environmenr
became monitoring on-going student interactions and
providing feedback to students on the effectiveness and
appropriateness of their interaction.
fuchards (1999:45) observes that both science-research
and theory-philosophy conceptions of teaching have a
strong top-down perspective. These conceptions view
teachers as the recipients of research findings and theo-
ries about effective language teaching that have been de-
veloped for them by researchers. Teachers are expected to
understand the implications of these findings and theories
and to develop lesson plans and activities that incorporate
them. However, they are not necessarily encouraged or
held responsible for doing their own research or determin-
ing what is effective in their own classrooms.
Art-crart concE tions
Art-craft conceptions of effective teaching, in contrast,
do encourage teachers to determine what "works." These
conceptions, according to fuchards, place great emphasis
upon the skills and personality of the individual teacher.
They avoid prescribing particular approaches or methods,
but instead promote processes of self-discovery that enable
teachers to develop our own definitions of effective teach-
ing. They also encourage us to discover our own strengths
and weaknesses through professional development activi-
ties and refection (Fanselow 1987).
Art-craft conceptions of effective teaching frequently use
metaphors and analogies to help teachers develop their
own perspectives as to what "works" in their classrooms.
This use of metaphor and analogy is based on the assump-
tion that giving teachers tools to help them refect on what
constitutes effective teaching is more productive than hav-
ing them consider the implications of research results or
theory. One recent teacher training course, using the art-
craft conception of effective teaching, asks course partici-
pants to reflect in writing on the simile of "teaching as an
art" (Adams and Brewer 200112:15).
Having the freedom to develop our own definitions of ef-
fective teaching can be exhilarating, because it credits us
with having valid perceptions of what "works" in our own
classrooms. However, most of us have little time or en-
ergy to engage in active reflection. A heavy teaching load,
a crowded curriculum, and the pressure of standardized
final exams leave many of us with limited time in a rypi-
cal day to thoroughly prepare our classes, let alone refect
on them. This problem is compounded if we work in an
environment where sharing insights with colleagues is not
encouraged. In addition, some of us may find this freedom
a little frightening. If we have been told for years that only
the researchers have solutions to problems we encounter
in teaching, we may find it difficult to trust our own in-
stincts. Others of us may be interested in developing our
own definitions of effective teaching, but dont see how
reflection activities, such as journals, can contribute to that
goal. \We hope to see more concrete results from our ef-
forts, such as increased student achievement and higher
test scores.
"Robust reasoning" and effective refection
Refection on onet own teaching is much more than an
amateur form of personal therapy. It is actually a logical
extension of the question, "Did my students benefit from
what happened in class today?" Refection is an effective
way of fine-tuning our evaluative skills to the point that
we feel confident in our own abiliry to define what "works"
in our own classrooms. Its effectiveness increases if it is
done critically using a focused set of questions. Johnson
(1999:1-2) defines reflection as "reasoning... [that] repre-
sents the complex ways in which teachers conceptualize,
construct explanations for, and respond to the social inter-
actions and shared meaning that exist within and among
teachers, students, parents and administrators, both inside
and outside the classroom." Although each teacherb rea-
soning is based on informal knowledge and personal be-
liefs, Johnson makes a clear distinction between teacher
reasoning that focuses solely on subjective perceptions of
teaching and "robust reasoning...when teachers expand
their understandings of themselves, their teachings, their
classrooms and their schools" (1999:139).
To ensure that our reasoning is robust and not just a rehash-
ing ofour own personal concerns, Johnson (1999:139) en-
courages us to repeatedly ask ourselves the following guid-
ing questions:
. \Who am I as a teacher?
. \7ho are my students? How do they experience my
teaching?
. 'S7hat do I know about my teaching context?
. \il/hat do I know about the subject matter content
that I teach?
. \il/hy do I teach the way that I do?
. \il/hat are the consequences of my teaching prac-
tices for my students?
. How do I make sense of theoretical knowledge?
. 'Who
is my professional community?
. \What sort of change do I see as fit for my own
teaching?
Johnson encourages teachers to ask themselves these ques-
tions "again and again throughout ftheir] professional
careers. By doing so, teachers remain lifelong students of
teaching... [and] are able to articulate why they teach the
way they do" (Johnson 1999:139). Thking a closer look
at how best to ask and answer these questions can enable
us ro see how each is intended to help us develop robust
reasoning.
"Who
arn I as a teacher?
As teachers, we need to look closely at all of the teach-
ing and learning experiences we have had. V/hich of these
experiences has had the strongest impact on how we
teach today? For example, does the way we teach strongly
resemble the way we were taught, or have we consciously
tried to teach in a different way? Thoughtful and honest
answers to these questions can provide insight into how
past educational experiences have had an impact on onet
identiry as a teacher.
T9
Who are nzy students? Hou., do they exlterience my
teaching?
Most of us ask ourselves a version of this question every
day. However, our answers often tend to focus more on
the responses of our students to our teaching, and less on
broader issues such as the learning sryles of our students.
Johnson urges us to "focus less on what you are doing as
a teacher, and more on what your students are experienc-
ing in your classroom...determining what causes difficul-
ties for them, what challenges them...what they get out of
participating in your instructional activities" (1999:140).
To avoid relying solely upon their subjective impressions of
what "works," many teachers involve their students in this
evaluative process. Students can give us helpful feedback
on their perceptions of different aspects of our teaching,
such as the purpose or effectiveness ofcertain class activi-
ties. Some teachers obtain this information by distributing
evaluation forms to students at the end of a course, but
student feedback on a particular aspect ofa course can be
done whenever we feel the need for more formal feedback.
Murphey (1998) oudines a journal acdvity that provides
a way for students to give ongoing feedback. Unlike free
writing journal assignments, the primary focus of his jour-
nal activity is to ask students for feedback on a daily basis
about what they perceive the objective of the lesson to be
and their overall reactions to it. Students are asked to write
a short description of and comments about the class every
day in a notebook. These descriptions can be general a dents'needs.
simple outline of what happened that day
-
or they can
-
include detailed observations about a task or activiry that
the teacher has asked them to complete. The teacher col-
lects the logs from the students each week and reads them,
writing only short appreciative comments in response and
perhaps saving particularly relevant student comments for
later reference during lesson planning.
Students can also help us determine which language learn-
ing methods are most effective for them, what motivates
them to study English, which learning styles they use to
process language input, and the strategies they use in class
and at home to promote their own learning. Reid (1998)
has a collection of surveys that can be administered in class
to help students investigate how they learn languages and
which classroom techniques would be most beneficial to
them. Before passing out these student surveys, teachers
should first lead a group discussion about learning styles
and strategies to help students understand why an aware-
z0
ness of onet own styles and strategies can make language
learning easier. Some textbook series, such as Thpesny
(1992), incorporate language learning sryle and stratgy
awareness activities into each unit. Using these or similar
activities throughout the course can motivate students to
exploit their language learning styles and strategies.
rl(hat do I hnow aboat my teaching context?
For Johnson, this means being aware of the relationship
between the courses you teach and the larger educational
environment (including administrators, orher reachers,
and parents), as well as the expectations that are placed
upon your students. One component of this awareness
concerns school politics, both overt school policy and the
chain of command, and the decision-making processes
that determine how things really function in a school.
Holliday (1994:130), in his discussion of English language
project management, calls these two sets of administrative
and decisionmaking behaviors "surface" and "deep" ac-
tion. He defines surface action as the official, documented
elements of any educational institution, such as "official
agreements, contracts, job descriptions and official re-
sponsibilities, artendance registers, textbooks, teaching
hours, examinations and students assignments" and deep
action as the "tacit rules...unspoken recipes... traditions...
[and] micro-politics" of that same institution (1994:130).
Teachers who are unaware of the effects that institutional
deep and surface actions have on their students are much
less likely to develop courses that are relevant to their stu-
A caveat about context
Holliday (1994) oudines a sociocultural distinction that
has a tremendous impact upon the effectiveness of lan-
guage teaching methodologies in various educational
contexts. He divides all language teaching contexts into
two categori es: BANA (private or university-based British,
Australian and North American) and TESEP (national
Tertiary, Secondary and Primary). The overriding distinc-
tion between these two categories of teaching context is
not geography, cultural background of the students, or
teacher comfort with the communicative approach, but
the firnction of the language course in the view of the edu-
cational institution rhat offers it.
The primary function of a BANA institution, according
to Holliday, is to provide English language training to
clientele who are either paying for the course themselves
or are funded by another institution to learn English.
The purpose of the courses a BANA institution offers is
to provide clients with the English language skills they
need to fulfill personal or professional objectives that they
themselves have identified, or that have been identified for
them. TESEP institutions, in contrast, have a very differ-
ent function because they are governmental. Graduates
of these institutions are expected to find their places in
sociery so the purpose of courses offered by TESEP insti-
rutions is to socialize students in the national norms and
mores of the educated populace of their country or region.
The abiliry to use English well is often considered a sign
that this process of socialization has been successful, but
other knowledge and skills are also considered important.
Therefore, English language courses in TESEP institutions
are normally just one component of a larger educational
whole, instead of the primary reason for the institution's
existence.
The qype and amount of educational resources available to
teachers in BANA as opposed to TESEP institutions also
differs substantially. Because many BANA institutions are
self-supporting, they can afford to provide students with a
state-of-the-aft language learning environment. This en-
vironment is intended to meet the professional needs of
individual clients, so every student is given individual at-
tention. In practical terms, this means that BANA students
are often assigned to small classes where instructional tech-
niques that promote frequent small group interaction in
the target language are used. In addition, BANA teach-
ers are often given the training and resources they need to
teach effectively in this environment. Holliday (1994:54)
calls this the establishment of a "learning group ideal...
[with] conditions for a process-oriented, task-based, in-
ductive, collaborative, communicative English language
teaching methodology."
Many classrooms in TESEP institutions, in contrast, suffer
from a lack of adequate resources. This is compounded by
the fact that English departments in TESEP institutions
are frequently forced to compete with other departments
for limited educational resources. In addition, TESEP
teachers are much less likely to have access to the profes-
sional materials and training that their BANA counterparts
receive. Frequently it is impossible for TESEP teachers to
replicate a BANA learning environment and "learning
group ideal" in their classrooms.
Another looh at the learning group idzal
Is the BANA learning group ideal truly the most effec-
tive environment for learning English, regardless of the
context in which the language is taught? Holliday
(1994:96) notes that the learning ideal is often promoted
as more "democratic" because of its focus on students as
individuals. The activities of a rypical BANA classroom
appear to give students more individual freedom than
traditional teacher-fronted methods, which seem to pro-
mote uniform student behavior under the watchful eye
of the teacher. But, as those of us who try to implement
the learning group ideal in our classes know, ensuring that
small group interaction among students is effective actu-
ally requires more control over student interaction than
does traditional teacher-fronted instruction.
During group work, if the teacher does not check how
successfully the groups complete their tasks, some of the
groups or individual students within groups are likely to
go ofltask. If a number of students are permitted to re-
main ofltask for even a short period of time, group work
becomes less focused for the entire class. \7hen this hap-
pens, the lesson plan and any follow-up activities that are
dependent upon the group work run the risk of suddenly
becoming irrelevant. Then the teacher is forced to impro-
vise alternative ways to keep the entire class focused on
the point of the lesson, which was not covered successfully
during the group work. If the teacher is unable to do this,
the lesson itself loses its purpose, and everyone, includ-
ing the teacher, may feel that the entire class was a waste
of time. In short, maintaining the BANA learning group
ideal requires that the teacher constantly strive towards the
continuous involvement of all students in all of the activi-
ties selected for the lesson.
What TESEP teachers can do
Holliday argues that, because TESEP and BANA teach-
ing contexts (including teacher responsibilities) are so dif-
ferent, it is imperative that TESEP teachers be allowed
to develop methodologies that are appropriate to their
educational institutions. These methodologies may incor-
porate some modified BANA techniques, such as group
work and learner-centered interaction in English, while
retaining culturally appropriate roles of TESEP teachers
and students. Such methodologies could develop out of
the answers that teachers provide to the nine questions of
robust reasoning.
Hollidays distinction between the BANA and TESEP
teaching contexts, while very usefirl, is still an overgen-
eralization. There are ESL classrooms where the language
2t
teaching philosophy parallels those of many TESEP insd-
tutions, and many private EFL language schools through-
out the world offer their students BANA-sryle English lan-
guage instruction. Perhaps the differences berween BANA
and TESEP contexts reflect the economic and cultural dif-
ferences berween the public and private educational sec-
tors. Nevertheless, the recognition that such a difference
does exist is the first step for teachers to be able to de-
velop their own definitions of what really "works" in their
teaching contexts and why. It will lead us to recognize that
the effectiveness of using methods developed for private
schools in a public school teaching context will be contin-
gent upon how well these methods have been adapted to
the new context. A direct transfer of private school meth-
ods into the public school context is likely to lead to inef-
fective teaching.
Vhat do I hnow about the subject maner that I teach?
Answering this question involves more than being able to
recite the rules of English grammar. \7e need to consider
what content we teach and how we present it to students.
If we emphasize one aspect of the content, we may exclude
other aspects. Critically analyzing how we presented the
lesson content is more useful than asking a question such
as, "\7hy was today's lesson so terrible?" because it focuses
on what we actually do in class, rather than how we feel
after class. Questions about subject matter and lesson con-
tent can motivate us to develop alternatives to teaching
choices we have made in the past, which is an essential step
in the development of context-appropriate methodology.
\Vhy do I teach the utay I do?
After the prior questions of robust reasoning have been
addressed, this question, which concerns the decisions a
teacher makes every day, will be much easier to answer.
In fact, the answer is a personal justification for why we
teach the way we do. In paraphrasing the question, John-
son asks, "\fhat instructional considerations figure most
prominently in your reasoning?" (1999:l4l). One way to
answer begins, "The way I teach on any given day depends
on...." This shows that you take into account all of the fac-
tors that have an impact on your teaching when you plan
lessons.
There is an additional advantage to having a sound justifi-
cation for why you teach the way you do. Once you have
articulated the reasons for your day-to-day teaching deci-
sions, explaining those decisions to other interested parties
such as students, parents, colleagues, and supervisors or
72
school administrators will be much easier. A well-thought-
out explanation of your teaching practice is often enough
to convince others that both the day-to-day and long-term
decisions about what should happen in your classroom are
based on your best professional judgment.
The final four questions focus on broad personal and pro-
fessional issues that affect a teacher and her students.
-What
are tlte consequences of *y teaclting practices
fo, *tstudcnts?
The purpose of this question is to focus on how a teach-
er handles her students' personal problems and conflicts
among students. Academic concerns, such as competitive
exams, and social concerns, such as unemployment, can
have major impacts on students and their relationships
with each other. Sometimes these issues will have a direct
impact on the teacher as well. Planning how you will re-
spond to these issues and developing supportive ways to
handle classroom relationships and confict before prob-
lems occur will enable you to demonstrate that you respect
your students as people and that there are parameters for
appropriate behavior in your classroom. It is impossible to
prevent classroom conflict, but it is important to be pre-
pared for it.
Hou do I rnahe sense of tlteoretical hnowledge?
Some of us have fond memories of our student years, when
we were preparing for a teaching career. \7e may have had
comparatively few responsibilities at that time, so we were
able to enjoy the opportunity to learn about and discuss
theoretical issues related to the English language and lan-
guage teaching. Others may remember those years as an
extensive period of probation, when our academic abilities
'W'e
were under constant scrutiny. may have been forced
to take examinations in a multitude of subject areas, some
of which, in retrospect, were only distantly related to the
skills we needed to teach effectively.
'W'hatever
our memories of our pre-service training are,
they are likely to come to the fore whenever we attend
in-service training or a professional conference, and when
we discuss language teaching trends with our colleagues.
'We are not in school anymore, and no one will be evaluat-
ing how current our theoretical knowledge of the English
language or language teaching is. As practicing teachers,
our relationship to theoretical knowledge should be that
of consumers. Before buying anything, wise shoppers learn
as much about the available products as they can. 'Wise
consumers of theoretical knowledge should learn as much
as possible about new theories, approaches, and methods
before deciding whether to incorporate them into their
teaching.
Many of us, however, are not given the option of choosing
which approaches or methods to use in our classrooms.
Our educational institutions or a larger government au-
thority makes this decision for us. Despite this, it is still
our responsibility to find out as much as we can about the
approaches or methods that we are required to use and to
determine ways to make them relevant to our classroom
contexts. This suggestion is not revolutionary because
most methods and approaches are implemented in very
different ways in actual classroom practice. Richards and
Rodgers (200I:157) note that "the wide acceptance of the
Communicative Approach and the relatively varied way in
which it is interpreted and applied can be attributed to the
fact that practitioners from different educational traditions
can identifr with it, and consequently interpret it in dif-
ferent ways." Our own interpretation of a method may be
perfectly acceptable. However, we need to become familiar
with its components so that we can show a clear relation-
ship between the method and what we do in our classes.
Again, if we can explain to ourselves why we do what we
do, it will be much easier for us to articulately explain our
decisions to others.
rVho is my professional community?
Answering this question involves looking closely at how
colleagues within your department and throughout the
school view their work and their students. Johnson points
out that "the underlying values, norms, and expectations
shared by the teachers and other professionals with whom
you work will shape, in part, the way you understand and
respond to the actions and interactions that go on around
you" ( I 999: 1 42). Your relationship with your professional
community may be productive and cooperative, or polite
but distant, or overtly antagonistic. No matter what the re-
lationship is, it will have an effect on what you do in your
classroom. Refecting on the qualiry of your interactions
with colleagues may lead you to recognize how and why
your views and theirs differ substantially. It will also help
you define in what ways your teaching "works" for you and
your students, regardless ofhow others see it.
'What
sort of change do I see asftfor m! own teaching?
This question cannot be asked or answered until you have
answered the previous questions. Once you have defined
the elements that have an impact upon your teaching and
how you rypically respond to them, you are ready to change
what you do in your classroom so that it "works" more ef-
fectively for you and your students. As Johnson points out,
"The process ofchange occurs when teachers articulate to
themselves and others what they want to change and why,
when they identif' the factors that inhibit change, and
when they develop strategies to implement change over
time" (1999 143).
This holds true regardless of the magnitude of the change
that you are contemplating. For example, if you have used
robust reasoning to determine why your afternoon classes
don't respond well to pair work, you may uncover one of
these possible situations:
. The seating in the room where you teach in the
afternoon makes pair work difficult.
. The pair work tasks you have selected for your af-
ternoon classes are boring and need to be modified.
. Students who come to your classes in the afternoon
are exhausted after a full day ofschool work and can t
concentrate on pair work.
. Students in your afternoon classes are worried
about final exams and dont see pair work as rel-
evant.
No matter which of these causes is the most pertinent,
there is probably more than one way to handle any of
them. Continuing to engage in robust reasoning to de-
termine the most appropriate solution will enable you to
decide on which changes to make and how these changes
can be implemented.
Conclusion
Robust reasoning involves much more than keeping notes
in a diary on how well classes go. It involves looking at
the past, present, and future of every component of your
work in the classroom, plus evaluating new research and
methods in terms of whether or not they would "work"
with your students. In addition, it includes making con-
scious decisions as to the most effective ways to reinforce
the positive and respond to the negative elements of class-
room interaction.
Using robust reasoning to answer the question, "Did my
students benefit from what happened in class today?" will
lead us to definitions ofeffective teaching that are context-
appropriate and applicable to our classrooms. This in turn
L)
will enable us to develop teaching methods and activities . Long, M. H. and G. Crookes. 1992. Three approaches to task-
that "work." It will also make it easier for us to explain to basedsyllabus design. TESOLQuarterly,26, l,pp.27-56.
others why we do what we do in our classrooms and why . Murphey, T. 1998. Multiple assessment action logging. In
we believe that what we do "works." In an age when there Neut uays in classroom Astetsment,ed. J.D. Brown. Alexandria,
are very few instant solutions to the teaching issues rhat VA: TESOL.
confront us when we enter a classroom, robust reasoning . O'Malley, J. M. andA. Chamot. 1990. Learningstrategies in
is an effective way to generate our own solutions to class- Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
second hnguage acquisition.
room realities. siry Press.

Oxford, R. 1990 Learningsh'ategies: IVhat euery teacher should

References hnow.Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
. Adams, E. and H. Brewer. A
200712. Teaching creatively: . Reid, J.M., ed. 1998. Understanding learning styles in the
symbiotic process. IATEFL Issues, 164, pp. 14-15. fuver, NJ: Prenrice-
second language classroom. Upper Saddle
. Brown, H. D. 2001. Tbaching h1 principles: An interactiue Hall Regents.
approach to language pedagogl. rVhite Plains, NY Addison . fuchards, I. 1999. Beyond training. Cambridge: Cambridge
'Wesley
Longman. University Press.
. Fanselow, J. 1987 . Breahing rules. New York: Longman. . fuchards, J. and T. Rodgers . 2001. Approaches and methods in
. Fries, C. C. 1945 . Tbaching and learning English a: a foreign knguage teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-
language. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. siry Press.
. Holliday,A. lgg4.Appropriatelnethodologlandsocialcontext. . Savignon, S. 1983. Communicatiue competence: Theory and
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. classroom practice. Reading, MA: Addison-\?'esley.
. Hymes, D. 1971. On communicatiue competence. Philadel- . Scarcella, R. C. and R. L. Oxford, eds. 1992. Thpestry.Bos-
phia: Universiry of Pennsylvania Press. ton: Heinle and Heinle.
. Johnson, K. 1999. Understanding language teaching: Reason- . Viddowson, H. G. 1978. Tbaching language as communica-

ing in action. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. tion. Oxford; Oxford University Press.
. Krashen,S. 1981. Secondknguageacquisitionandsecondkn- . Zahorik, J. A. 1986. Acquiring teaching skills. Journal of
guage learning. Oxford: Pergamon. Teacher Education,37, pp.21-25.

Lisa Harshbarger is the Regional English Language Officer assigned to the American Embassy in Trhkent, Uzbekistan. She also wrote the anniversary secrion,
A View of the Past, in the July and October issues of English Teaching Fomm.

Artich reprinted uith pemision: Harshbarger L. 2002. lYhat Worhs in the ELT Clnsroom?: Uing Robust Reasoning to Find Out. EnglishTeachingForum 40 (4).

24
Rrrlrcnvr AcnvlrY FoR

The Communicative Approach:

Addressing Frequent Failure
By Glenn Deckert

K w L
(What I just learned about this subject)
(What I know about this subject) (What I want to know about tfiis subject )

The average percentage ofteacher talk to student tdk in

my class is:
TT:90 ST: l0
- TT:80 ST:20
- TT:70 ST 30
- TT 60 ST:40
- TT 50 ST:50
- TT:40 ST 60
- TT' 30 ST 70
- TT' 20 ST:80
- TT, l0 ST:90
-My students are exposed daily to purposefirl exchanges
in English outside the classroom.
Strongly agree
- Asree
Neutral
- Disaqree
Strongly disagree
-My classroom features which of the following (pick the
most common lhree):
Teacherled drills
- Quizzing memorized material
- Extended explanation ofEnglish rules
- Low-profile teacher role
- Frequent pairlsmall group workproblem solving.
- Students responding to authentic samples ofEnglish
-I would use Commrnicative Approach nore iS
I tausht a hieher level
\7e had more authentic materials available
- We had exams to match the skills of CLI
- I had smaller clmses
- I had a lighter teaching load
- I had better clmsroom equipment
-I have surveyed my students to find out their preferences
in class regarding:
Exercises

- Drills
- Pair/grouo work
Exolmations
Level of correction provided/preferred
-I would welcome someone to observe my class and log
the degree ofteacher t"lk and student tdk, etc.
Yes, definitely

- Yes, but Id like some advanced notice.

- Maybe
- Not sure
- I dont think I d like an obsener.
- No. My class is my class.
-
Reflective Activiry for "The Communicative Approach: Addressing Frequent Failure" created by Maria Snarski

z5
The Communicative Approach:
Addressing Frequent Failure
By Glenn Deckert
Reports abound on the practical difficulties of imple-
menting a communicative approach when teaching
English in English-as-a-foreign language (EFL) settings.
These settings are the environments in which students
have little exposure to English outside the classroom.
Some reports attribute the failure of the approach to
inadequacies of the teachers themselves. Karavas-Dou-
kas (1996), in her study of 101 local secondary school
teachers of English in Greece, concludes that part of the
problem stems from the instructors' misunderstanding
of the very nature of communicative language teaching
(CLT). Thus, she found that even when using textbooks
designed for communicative activities, teachers tended to
revert to traditional teacher-centered routines. Kumara-
vadivelu (1993), drawing on teaching experience in India
as well as North America, concludes that teacher trainers
sometimes simply fail to equip teachers with the skills
and techniques they need for implementing CLT in their
classrooms.
Often the difficulty is attributed to the EFL environ-
ment. Focusing on cultural values that may interfere
with CLT in Japan, Stapleton (1995) points out how
Confucianism as a belief system is in tension with un-
derlying notions of CLT. For example, Confucianism
establishes the superior status and knowledge of the
teacher over that ofthe students, thus elevating the role
of the teacher above the students. Similarly, Ellis (1996)
raises questions about the basic compatibility of CLT
with Vietnamese learners, who have deeply rooted no-
tions about social uses of language. That is, in Vietnam
knowing and using the acceptable linguistic forms in
interpersonal exchange is highly important. Li (1998),
with observations from South Korea, and Leng (1997),
reflecting on teaching and learning in China, each re-
port local conditions that are detrimental to CLT meth-
odology. Li observes the scarcity of relevant authentic
materials, lack of student prerequisite skills, continued
76
use of traditional examinations, and the absence of new
forms of assessment to match CLT priorities. Leng re-
fers to the economic problems that account for overly
large classes, teachers' healy teaching loads and out-
moded classroom equipment. She also points out how
administrative practices in teacher assessment may even
penalize teachers who use communicative techniques in
their classes. Thus, it appears that even instructors who
are well versed in the theory and fundamentals of com-
municative language teaching face an uphill battle in
EFL settings.
Frequent challenges to classroom communication
In spite of the many challenges to implementing a com-
municative approach in EFL conrexrs, there remains a
strong rationale for pursuing CLT methodology, espe-
cially when instruction envisions learners moving on
to use English for further education or career advance-
ment. That is, in EFL settings, most learners outside
the classroom lack daily exposure and inclusion in pur-
poseful exchanges in the English medium. These EFL
learners are far more dependent upon whatever guided
communicative practice they can get in the classroom.
It is mainly in the classroom that they can learn, in the
words of Larsen-Freeman (2000), "when and how to
say what to whom" in English (l2l). Accordingly, pro-
ponents of the CLT approach argue that EFL students
are in need of CLI methodology in order to gain facil-
ity and confidence in using English. Based on student
centeredness, the CLT approach features low-profile
teacher roles, frequent pair work or small group prob-
lem solving, students responding ro aurhenric samples
of English, extended exchanges on high interest top-
ics, and the integration of the four basic skills, namely
speaking, listening, reading, and writing. The CLT ap-
proach discourages extensive teacher-controlled drills,
quizzing of memorized material, and extended com-
mentary on forms of English.
In the face of the many adverse conditions that militate
against significant and authentic communication among
students in EFL classrooms, my own observations in EFL
settings have led me to conclude that the most frequent
obstacle to CLT is excessive talk on the part of the teach-
er. This teacher tendency possibly rsts upon teachers'
own contrary beliefs about how language learning takes
place. There may be failure to appreciate the way CLT
methodology aims to track the known processes of sec-
ond language acquisition. Alternatively, excessive teacher
talk may simply be the reassertion of old habits that resist
change in spite of teacher acknowledgements about the
value of CLI activities. Conceivably, lack of preparation
time may lead some teachers to fill the class hour with ex-
'\V'hatever
temporaneous talk about the target language.
the cause, students end up doing less talking. That is, ex-
cessive teacher talk hampers the emergence of sustained,
purposeful student talk.
This is not to deny that the breakdown may indicate
a lack of a ready repertoire of CLf techniques, or that
classroom conditions are often limiting. I also recognize
that some instructors may harbor doubts about their own
abiliry to model the complex sociolinguistics of spoken
English. Over time, however, much can be done to allevi-
ate these drawbacks. On the other hand, the teacher talk
variable is most immediately accessible to change and
clearly under the command of the teacher. I maintain
that as teachers self-impose a reasoned and disciplined
control of their own talk in the classroom, classroom ac-
tivities, with a few basic techniques, will move in the di-
rection of meaningful exchange between learners.
Case Study on EFL Classrooms
My recent semester teaching EFL as a Fulbright Schol-
ar at a university in one of the emirates on the Persian
Gulf gave me fresh opportunity to investigate the no-
tions and practice of EFL instructors. Here most of the
75 instructors giving English instruction to both male
and female Arabic-speaking students were from sur-
rounding countries, most having obtained their highest
qualification from \Testern institutions. I was privileged
to be an observer of many of these colleagues' classes
and an informal interviewer about my observations.
Also, while teaching my own two English classes, I was
able to administer questionnaires to my colleagues and
a large number of students to gain further insight into
local perspectives on teaching and learning English in
this EFL context. The questionnaires were exploratory
and wide-ranging. They were but one means of explor-
ing local notions and habits regarding teaching and
learning English.
The 75 instructors were based in two different divisions
of the university. The majoriry were instructors in the
English Teaching Unit that provided approximately 15
hours of English instruction per week to sections of first-
year students over a period of rwo or three semesters. All
entering students, except a few that had already obtained
a score of 500 on a practice TOEFL exam, had to com-
plete these courses. The classes in the English Teaching
Unit were composed of students of similar majors. Text-
book materials were chosen for topical relevance for the
students planning to study engineering, science, social
studies, and business. Other instructors were members
of the English department and taught the courses consti-
tuting a major in English. The major consisted of both
language and literature, although my in-class observation
was limited to the language courses. I personally taught
and observed classes in both the Teaching Unit and the
English department.
As reported from other EFL situations, I found even in
my own classes an initial pull toward what seemed to be
a default position of traditional teacher-fronted, form-
focused instruction, with the result being a more passive
student role. That is, students' customary reliance upon
teacher initiative countered my efforts to make them
independent learners. Although the students had had in
secondary schools several years of English lessons from
curricula with a distinctly CLI orientation, they seemed
restless and distracted in the roles I assigned. Classes I
observed, taught by both native and non-native English
speakers, while displaying the instructors' able facility
in English, largely assumed teacher-centered activity.
For example, I witnessed large portions of class time
devoted to the instructor's analysis and commentary
on students' written errors, extended explanations on
usage and vocabulary, and volleys of teacher-initiated
exchanges yielding only short responses from students,
often in chorus.
Often while observing my colleagues' classes, after ev-
ery 30 seconds I ticked on a worksheet whether the
communication at that instant was coming from the
instructor or the students, whether there was silence,
or whether other kinds of activities were taking place.
Doing rhis for periods of 30 minutes or more at a time
z7
provided an approximation of the amount of class time
consumed by instructors' talk versus that of the students.
Upon adding up these norarions on class activities, I
found that, typically, instructors were speaking an)'where
from rwo to five times more often than all their students
combined. I also observed that in whole-class activiries,
student utterances more often consisted of just one-,
rwo-, or three-word utterances. Occurrences of extended
student discourse of several sentences or more were in-
frequent except in the case of their asking quesrions or
delivering prepared speeches. In eleven observed classes,
each lasting either 60 or 90 minutes, eight classes gave a
portion of the time to group activity. The group activity
in 6ve of these cases averaged just five minutes; other
classes devoted 12, 20, and 35 minutes to group work.
Spontaneous student communication dramatically rose
when class activity shifted to these small groups albeit
not always in the target language. - by the students themselves." Just 15 of the 41 respond-
Exploring instructor beliefs
In an effort to uncover some of the instructors' operating
beliefs, I administered a questionnaire to which instruc-
tors responded anonymously. The questionnaire consist-
ed of 24 statements about beliefs and practices followed
by Likert scales to elicit respondents' Ievel of agreement
or disagreement with each statement. The questionnaire
was distributed to 75 instructors of English, nearly all of
whom had at least a Mastert degree in English, educa-
tion, or applied linguistics. Of the 41 who completed
and returned the questionnaire, 20 identified themselves
as native speakers ofArabic, 14 as native speakers of Eng-
lish, and 7 chose nor ro specify their first language. Of
the 4l respondents, 30 taught in the Teaching Unit, and
l1 worked for the English department. On average, these
41 instructors had taught at the university for nearly 6
years.
Responses to two questionnaire items directly pertain
to the instructort understanding of his/her classroom
role. First, instructors were asked to respond to the
statement, "Generally, instructors must correct most
errors students make in speaking and writing so that
the errors do not become a permanent habir." In re-
sponse, 9 chose "I strongly agree," 15 "I tend to agree,"
14 "I tend to disagree," 2 "I strongly disagree," and I
claimed to be uncertain. Thus, 24, or 59o/o, indicated
they agreed to some extent that they must correct most
student errors. Second, the instructors expressed their
level of agreement with the statement, "In first-year
28
courses, an English language instructor should devote
most of the class time to giving explanations, examples,
and error correction." Here, 5 chose "I strongly agree,"
9 selected "I tend ro agree," l9 indicated "I tend to dis-
agree," and 5 answered "I strongly disagree." The other
3 respondents indicated theywere uncertain. Therefore,
on this item, 14, or 34o/o, revealed that they believed
they must use most of the class time for giving expla-
nations, examples, and correction. Ten of the 24 who
indicated they ought to correct most of their students'
errors were among the 14 who saw their role as that
of giving explanations, examples, and error correction.
One other questionnaire item explored the instructors'
use of group work in their lessons. The statement was
as follows: "Most of the lessons I teach for enhancing
students' English language proficiency include at least a
10-minute period of paired or sub-group activities led
ing instructors claimed that this was their own practice,
That 59o/o and 34o/o of the 41 respondents admittedly
hold positions on their classroom roles that translate into
extensive teacher talk is consistent with the teacher-cen-
teredness I observed in the classrooms. In fact, the most
common class activities I observed were reinforcement of
textbook explanations and analysis ofstudent errors. Re-
garding teachers' focus on student errors, Stevick (1996,
I55,200) concludes from past studies, that constant cor-
rection inhibits students and constrains both the content
and forms of students' expression. In summarizing a con-
'W'ay
cern of Silent proponents, Stevick writes "the more
the teacher talks and explains, the less internal work the
learner is likely to do" (221).In my study I suspected the
scarcity of authentic communication among learners in
the classrooms stemmed in part from instructors' beliefs
about handling student mistakes.
One can conclude that teacher talk, a variable obviously
subject to teacher control, and the beliefs that sustain
this activiry are the primary variables to focus on in
helping teachers implement CLT methodology in their
classrooms. Unquestionably, teacher talk is essential for
initiating learning acrivities, setting standards, assessing
performances, and providing some forms of feedback. In-
structors, however, too often seem compelled to promote
learning by their own extended talk. One can only guess
rhe extent to which this variable of teacher talk limits the
realization of authentic communication among students
in the classrooms.
The students' perception
Data from a similar questionnaire administered to stu-
denrs in the same context were even more decisive. A
total of 181 Arabic-speaking students, mostly in their
6rst year at the universiry were administered another
Likert-scale questionnaire on perspectives and habits
in language learning. One statement of immediate rel-
evance was as follows: "If English instructors do not
correct most of the errors students make in speaking
and wriring, the students will not make much progress
in English." In response, 86 students indicated that they
strongly agreed; 50 responded that they tended to agree;
just 12 indicated a tendency toward disagreement; and
eight replied that they strongly disagreed. The other 25
claimed not to know. Thus, 136 of 181, or75o/o ofthese
students, appear to believe that their teachers ought to
regularly corlect most of their mistakes. Interestingly,
there was a srriking statistical difference (p<.0005) be-
tween males and females in the replies to this item,
with 87.5 percent ofthe 104 women agreeing with the
srarmentJ versus just 58.4o/o of the 77 male students.
Vharever the reason for that diffe re nce , a clear majority
of these students believe it is the duty of the instruc-
tor to identifr and correct most of their errors. With
many instructors inclined to think similarly, the shared
perspectiye perperuates an atmosphere in which the in-
structor is the dominant speaker, So, on the one hand,
the questionnaire revealed a major obstacle to meaning-
ful communication in the classroom.
On the other hand, the questionnaire uncovered the fact
that the majoriry of participating students had a positive
view of grouped activiry in the classroom. In response to
the statement, "It is usually a waste of time to be put in
small groups to do group assignments during class," 103
of the 181 srudents disagreed, 48 agreed, and 30 indi-
cated they did not know. Also, in response ro the state-
ment "Small group work in class with classmares (e.g,
for 20 or 30 minutes ar a time) is usually a good use of
class time for improving my English," 128 of the 178 re-
spondents agreed' 27 disagreed,, and,23 said they did not
know. Clearly, most students viewed small group work
with little involvement of their instructor as a beneficial
experience.
Suggested response
The reported observations and questionnaire data sug-
gest a need for teachers to reflect on their own past
second-language learning and that of their own second-
language learners. Teachers must strive to sift through
the many claims they have encountered about Ianguage
learning and determine what in fact they themselves
hold to be most descriptive of the process. As Pajares
(1992) points out, it is beliefs more than mere knowl-
edge or awareness that establish the roles teachers as-
sume in the classroom. Teacher acknowledgements abott
CLT are not necessarily what inform their classroom
behavior. Rather, their classroom conduct rests on their
beliefs. once teachers idenri$' their operating beliefs
about how a second language is learned, they can com-
pare those formulations with prevailing theory on the
matter.
One widely shared portrayal of second language ac-
quisition for teachers to consider is often referred to as
learner interlanguage. This refers to the learnert imper-
fect but evolving representation of the target language
at any point in the acquisition journey. Brown (2000)
summarizes this acquisition process as "the creative con-
struction of a system in which learners are consciously
tesring hypotheses about the target language from a
number of possible sources of knowledge..." (215).
tJThat teachers say in class about the target language or
about mistakes is only one ofthe sources and not neces-
sarily the most important one. Btown further explains,
"By a gradual process of trial and error and hypothesis
resting, learners slowly and tediously succeed in estab-
lishing closer and closer approximations to the system
used by native speakers..." (215). lhis trial and error
process, according to the theory, pertains to all aspects
of second language mastery, that is, the phonology, syn-
rax, lexis, and social conventions oflanguage use. Thus,
while there remains a place for formal linguistic expla-
nation and correction on the part of the teacher, the
CLT approach assumes that a student's interlanguage
development is benefited most by uninterrupted trial
and error, along with aftentiveness to the responses of
interlocutors. It is through all ofthese acts ofcommuni-
cation and feedback in the target language that students
gain facility in the language. Inevitably, students will
exhibit shortcomings, ups and downs, unpredictable
sensitivity !o contextsr and only gradual improvement
on the road to mastery. It is, however, this experience
with the target language that ensures progress.
Teachers inclined to talk excessively in the classroom
may benefit from in-service training to facilitate their
introspection and experimentation and to reorient their
29
beliefs. However, as Pajares (1992) points out, some
teachers are more inclined to question and alter their be-
liefs in the face of firsthand classroom evidence rather
than in response to secondhand acquisition theory given
them by trainers. For such teachers, having them experi-
ment with basic CLT techniques and urging them to re-
duce their teacher talk and observe the resulting student
performance might help them reconsider their beliefs
about how students learn.
In-service training can also broaden teachers' reper-
toires of techniques for furthering in-class communica-
tion between students, and it can help teachers explore
how some ESL/EFL textbooks can be adapted to serve
as a springboard for communicative activities. \With less
proficient learners, for example, teachers can explore
ways to use magazine pictures, personal photographs,
cancelled postage stamps, and even road signs, bumper
stickers, and advertisements for communicative pur-
poses. At the intermediate level, as in my own classes,
teachers can have students explain some frequently mis-
understood aspects of their culture. Or they can have
students report on both the process and findings of as-
signed internet searches. They can have students brain-
storm controversial topics for class discussion and pre-
pare pro or con positions as part of moderated panels.
They can have students prepare two-minute oral news
reports from notes on assigned topics and reply to their
classmates' questions. Teachers can have small groups of
students formulate solutions to real local social prob-
lems and present their ideas to classmates orally or in
writing. Teachers working with advanced students can
challenge them to draw upon their own experience and
specialties to teach each other. \7ith all these activities,
the teacher's role is to select or design appropriate class-
room tasks that contain relevant topics and to serve as a
resource as needed.
A final area of in-service assistance to teachers who wish
to move closer to a communicative approach is to have
them consider ways to reorient their students as to the
roles they and their teachers should assume in the class-
room. Results of the student quesrionnaire indicate that
most students are fond of small group activities in the
classroom and feel they are beneficial. However, as re,
ported earlier, some studenrs may view a good teacher
as one who constantly corrects the spoken and written
errors of students. Thus, as Deckert (1987) points out,
teachers face the challenge of helping srudenrs adjust
30
their expectations about who does what in the class-
room. This negotiation between teacher and students
promises a high level of classroom interaction in its own
right.
In conclusion, CLT in EFL settings need not be elu-
sive; teachers can take the first critical step toward rais-
ing the level of authentic classroom communication by
sharply reducing the amount of talking they do. To take
this step, however, presupposes the belief on their part
that real communication promises a greater payoff than
extensive teacher commentary and frequent corrective
intervention. The teacher, of course, needs to acquire
facility for adapting textbooks, creating communicative
tasks, and providing selective, useful feedback to stu-
dents on their performances. Granted, the reorientation
may come slowly as students overcome old expectations
and new insecurities and as entire programs accommo-
date to the changes being made in the classroom. Dur-
ing this process of gradual pedagogical and curricular
change, however, teachers can find encouragement in
knowing they are not expected to attain some ideal CLI
standard. Lesson by lesson, activity by activity, teachers
can gradually increase the degree of meaningful inter-
action between their students. 'W'hat English teachers
need, however, is administrative assurance that their less
dominant role in the classroom is not a sign of negli-
gence or loss of control, but rather a sign of informed
belief that students learn best by using language for
purposeful communication.
References
. Brown, H. 2000. Principles of language learning and teach-
ing,4rh ed.'$7hite Plains, NY Addison \fesley.
. Deckert, G. 1987. The communicative approach: Helping
students adjust. English Tbaching Forum 25 (3): 17-20.
. Ellis, G. 1996. How culturally appropriate is the communi-
cative approach? ELTJournal 50 (3):213-218.
. Karavas-Doukas, E. 1996. Using attitude scales to inves-
tigate teachers' attitudes to the communicative approach.
ELT Journal 50 (3): 87-197. Kumaravadivelu, B. 1993.
Maximizing learning potential in the communicarive class-
room. ELT Journal 46 (1): 12-21.
. Larsen-Freeman, D. 2000. Techniques and principles in lan-
guage teaching,2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
. Leng, H. 1997. New bottles, old wine: Communicative
language teaching in China. English Tbaching Forurn 35 (4):
384r.
. Li, D. 1998. It's always more difficult than you plan and
 imagine: Teachers' perceived difficuldes in introducing the tional Rescarch 62 (3)z 307-332.
communicative approach in South Korea. TESOL Quar- . Stapleton, P. 1995, The role of Confucianism in Japanese
terly 32 (4): 677-703. education. Tbe Language Tbacher 19 (4): 13-16.
. Pajares, M. 1992. Teachers' beliefs and educational re- . Stevick, E. 1996. Memory rneaning and method, 2nd' ed'.
search: Cleaning up a messy construct. Revieu of Educa- Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

Glenn Dcckcrt is an Associate Professor oFESL/TESOL at Eastern Michigan Universiry where he has taught ESL and MATESOL courses since 1993

Artich repinted uith permission: Dcckcrt, G. 2004. Ihe Comm*nicatiae Appmach; Addrcssing Frequnt Failura. English TeachingForum 42 (I).

3L
 This actiui4t inuolues students preparing a nAme tent u.tith
additional detail: on it (one item in each corner) to prompt When to Use lt
o 'fi1 build rapport
conuersation for a get-to-know-7ou/warm-up actiuit!. The r fi1 get participanx familiar with one
goal is
for participants to get to know one another, ?ractice another in a class or training
asking and answering questions, and warm up for the ses- . the facilitator learn names of par-
lo.help
sion ahead. Tlte additional information that is requestedfor ucrPants

the name tent is flexible and therefore can be tailored for the
r J[ informdly assess level of learners/
particiPants
focus of the session.

Preparation
Facilitators can prepare their name tents ahead of the session or do
Lever agV
them along with the participants. Distribute the papers (8.5 x 11 or
A.4 will work) and markers (do not distribute hard-to-read 661e15
-
skirrs &!
red, orange, yellow, etc.). NB: Your name should be in large letters
for all to read from a distance. The goai is to learn one another's Practice @ .*
names, and having large letters is helpful.
Materials
Procedure Paper for rram tents, markers, tape
l Distribute the papers and markers.
2. Explain to participants that they will make name tents with sev-
Preparation Time
5-10 minutes
eral items oFinformation. They should wait for full instructions
before beginning.
ActivityTime
3. Explain what should go on the name tent. Give an overview of
15-30 minutes, depending on interaction with
all items before they start to write/draw Then go through each
participants during mingling portion
item one by one, giving clear instructions.
4. Allow time for participants to complete each corner. Other
5. When participants are finished, they should turn to the Corner Name Tents can be folded and put in
person sitting closest and ask and answer questions about the pic- front of a participant if they are seated at a table
tures/words on the name tent. Give them five to seven minutes to or taped onto the front ofthe desk. They can be
swap information. saved for use in subsequent sessions until names
6. Have participants introduce their partners to the group and say are known.
something about one of the corners on the name tent.

Variations
1. Ifparticipants are from only a few locations (cities/institutions), mix them up by not allowing participants from the same
institutions/cities sit next to each other during step #5 above.
2. As the facilitator, you can participate in the pair work portion and model the introduction.
3. Depending on the length of the training, you can mix participants up later and have them swap name tent information
with someone else.
4. You can add to the name tents other items throughout the training and turn them into a type of evaluation of the work-
shop. E.g., Draw/write the activiryyou are most likely to use as a result of the training; the activiry that you won't use and
why; whether you achieved the purpose of this training, etc.
5. Be sure to revisit the corner that relates to the goals of the training near the end of the event to see if the goal was reached.
This can be part ofthe evaluation at the end.

( ontr;butor: Maria Snarsli, RFLO Brazil

34
Roll call does not always haue to be a tedious actiai4r in
which precious classroom time is spent on administratiue is- When to Use lt
o J[ take amendance and get feedback from
sues. (Jse it to enhance the teaching point that day or to
students
reuiew something that was discussed or learned preuiously. . To help learners become more
responsible/accountable for learning
Making instructional use of the roll call makes euery student
. To keep track ofparticipation in class
accountable for giuing input. It can also prompt students to
become more dctiaeb inuolued in the classroom.
Level VVV
Preparation
Selcct rype and manner of feedback desired (vocabulary, content,
language point, etc.).
skills & $ lD

Procedure Practice :;:

rat

1. lnstruct students on feedback required and call roll rcquesting

that feedback.
Materials
Type of "markers" for atendance (cards,
2. If used as a Bell Activity (see page37), write directions for the
clothespins, magnets)
feedback on the board or have them ready on PowerPoint or a
projector so students will see them upon entering.
Preparation Time
5 minutes
Variations
Srudent Responsibiliry for Attendance: Activif fime
Use laminated name cards/magnets/clothespins with students' Throughout class time 5-15 minutes; e.g., feed-
names on them. Have an in/out area for these cards/magnets/ back request
clothespins. Students are to be responsible for moving their name
from the "out" side to the "in" side, indicating their attendance. Beginning level:
Give a command with a familiar verb; students
The instructor can also use cards/magnets/clothespins to ensure s/he
act it out. "Stand," "Sit," "Open your book," etc.
hears from each student during a class, moving the marker as s/he
has an interaction with each student (answering a question/asking
High beginning levet:
an appropriate question, etc.)
Each student must say a vocabulary word
related to a specific category (food, colors,
clothing, narionalities, etc.)

Low intermediate level:

Give a verb; the student gives the past participie
(or mix up with different subject pronouns, etc.)

lntermediate leveh
Act out a verb; studen$ guess the word in the
target language

Contributor: David Malatesta, Spanish teacher, Niles West High School, Chicago, lllinois lvith additional ideas from the Office of English
Language Programs

15
 The Entrance/Exit actiuity can d.ouble a.s a wa! to get infor-
mation/feedbach frorn students and to tahe roll,

Preparation
Prepare the question you will use for the Entrance/Exit activiry ahead
of time. This should be based on the feedback or the topic you'd like
the students to respond to; .g., tVrite the activity you liked best to-
day and explain why. W'rite a question about today's topic that youd
like to learn more about.'Write one thing you learned today that you
didnt know before class.'Write five past participles, etc.

Procedure
1. Hand out slips of paper if necessary.
2. Give the instructions for the feedback requested for that day.
3. Students write their name and feedback on the paper.
4. Studenrc hand the slip of paper in as they leave the classroom.
Variations
Use laminated name cards/magnets/clothespins (as described in Roll
Call/Attendance on page 35) with students' names on them. Stu-
dents can put their feedback in their clothespin and drop it into a
basket or slip it under their name magnet.

The feedback can also be collected verbally before students leave the
room.

Contributor: David Malatesta, Spanish teacher, Niles West High School, Chicago, lllinois with additional ideas from Maria Snarski, RELO
Brazil and Monica Wiesmann-Hirchert, Senior English Language Fellow, Brazil,2011

36
 This actiuity should be ready so that students can begin
worhing As sozn as the! enter the classroom. It should be When to Use lt
r '' J! transidon sudents inro English
a light actiuity to get students thinhing and interacting in r li1 warm up a class
English. It can be a puzzle, a riddle, a word game, etc.; e.g., o Jf ser the schema of the students
copies of the same puzzle placed around tlte classroom be- r f[ focus srudenrs after a break
fore the class begins (could be at group tables, one for pairs,
projected, on the board, or taped on the taalls around the VVV
Level
room). Instructions should be on a screen or tlte board, en-
couraging students to get started on the puzzle As soon as the!
enter tbe room.
skills ry.P
Depends on activity

Preparation
The instructor prepares whatever the activity is ahead of time (selects
Practice
the riddle, prepares copies ofthe puzzle, etc.). Ifnecessary, the an-
swer key should also be prepared to show to the class. Instructions
Materials :

Depends on activiry: copies of puzale; *elected

should be displayed on the board.
riddle used
Sample instructions on board:
. 'Work alone or in groups to complete the activiry (puzzle, rvord Preparation Time
game, etc.). 5 minutes
. Vlhen you have completed the task, the individual or all group
members should raise their hands.
Activity fime
. The first group to complete the activiry correctly will win a prize. 5-15 minutes
(The prize could be a srarla point for completing it first, or a
Other
round ofapplause! It need not be a concrete prize.)
See puzzles From TIte Lighter Sidz ofTEFL
http: //exchanges.state. govlenglishteaching/
Procedure
resfoneachlpubcat/teach- res-rnat/teachtech/
1. Before the students enter and the class begins, pre-position the
ls-tef.html
puzzles for the groupings/pairs. Put them on the desk with some
colorful highlight so it stands out.
2. Have the instructions up on the board or on the screen for
students to view upon entering (see sampie above).
3. Tiy to keep quiet about the instructions on the board; students should notice the instructions on their own and start
working.
4. As groups begin working, walk around to provide any needed encouragement/support.
5. \7hen the first group completes the puzzle and indicates this with raised hands, bring the class together and go over the
answers.
6. Distribute the prize if applicable.

Variations
1 . Depending on the number of students in class, rhe ptzzle could be combined with the "Four Corners" (page 78) activiry by
having one puzzle in each corner (taped on the wall or available on a table) for the students. Students could be pre-divided
(by color/number) to go to a designated corner to work on the puzzle with others.
2. The activiry could be as easy as a one-line riddle or puzzle on the board that students could do at their desk. lt need not be
something as formal as a long, involved group activiry.

Contributor: Maria Snarski, RELO Brazil, with additional variations by frain theTrainers participants in Brazil

J7
 Thh is dn oral actiuiyr that gets students out of their seats
and talhing to each other. Tlte goal is to fnd someone in the
When to Use lt
r J[ serve as an icebreaker
class w/to ctn Answer a giuen suruqt question affirmatiuely. r J[ practice asking and responding to
It is commonly used as an icebreaker but is also a good utay questions
to Practice Particular grammar forms and, of course, t0 prac- . To practice a particular grammar point
tice speahing. (verb tenses, etc.)

Preparation
A list of ten to rwenty questions (teacher- or student-generated) is
Level W VV
needed to start. These questions should be related to the charac-
teristics and experiences of the particular class (e.g., Do you speak
more than rwo languages? or Have you ever traveled by plane?). All
Skiils & $ ry.t
students are given rhe handout with these questions on it. It may be
useful to go over the questions with the students to prepare them
Practice @ Si
with pronunciation or vocabulary. There could be some sort of prize Materials
for whoever finishes first. Handouts

Procedure Preparation fime

1. Students are instructed to walk around the room and find one 5-15 minutes
classmate to respond positiveiy to each question on the list.
2. Students ask any of the questions to a classmate. The questions
Activity Time
10-20 minutes
need not be asked in any particuiar order.
3. Students are allowed to ask only one or nvo questions of the
Text
salne Person.
Questions
4. Students must actually ask the question and not just point to the
question on the handout.
5. If the students being asked can answer in the affirmative,
the interviewer writes the intervieweet name next to that question. If the interviewee answers negativelv, then
nothing is written down, ar.rd the interviewer will need to look lor someone else who might be able to answer
afFrmatively.
6. More advanced students can be instructed to ask follow-up questions.

Variations
1. The questions can be put into a Bingo grid. (See the Bingo activity on page 68 for more infbrmation.) If this option is
chosen, it is recommended that the questions be placed in different squares on each Bingo card so that students don't all
call "Bingo!" at once.
2. The questions can be written out for the studenrs exactly as they should ask them, or they can be given simple sentence
stems or vocabulary items so that they construct their own question practicing a particular grammar point.

e.g., Presenttenseihabitquestions exercise every day '* Do you exercise every day?
Simple past speak English n+ Did you speak English yesterday?
Prcscnt perfecr questions eat apple pie rr* Have you ever eaten apple pie?
3. Have pairs of students create the questions using information prompted by the teacher (past tense, daily routines, etc.).
Give a tin.re limit to pair instead of question limit. Collect the papers and redistribute them for pairs ro use.
4. Have students report/write what they found out about their peers.

Contributors: Staif at Harvaii Pacific University, Katie Ryan and Caralyn Bushey from the Office of English Language Programs, and David
Ma latesta, Span ish Teacher, Chicago, i noi s
I I I

38
Example
Find Someone Who...

Circukte around tbe room and fnd someone who can ansuter 'yei to each of the folhwing questions. If the
answer is yes, haue him/her sign your sheet. Try to get as man! signatures ds you can. Change the uerb to the
?ast ?articiPle xuhere necetsary.

Have you ever...

1. (to live) overseas for more than one year?

J (to sing) karaoke?

3. (to be) without a shower for more than two weeks?

4. (to ride) a horse?

5. (to eat) frogs' legs?

6. (to be) vegetarian?

7. (to swim) in three or more different oceans?

B. (to fly) an airplane?

9. (to break) a bone?

10. (to do) volunteer work?

11. (to climb) a tree more than 20 feet vertically?

12. (to have) a close relative who lived to over 100?

13. (to cook) a meal by yourself for more than 20 people?

14. (to keep) a hamster as a pet?

15. (to lump) out of a plane?

16. (to see) a polar bear in the wild?

17. (make your own question!)

39
 As this actiuity focuses on similarities and dffirencet it is
useful in introducing, consolidating, or reuiewing the use of
When to Use lt
o J[ find out more about classmates
certdin key words and expressions suclt as both, and, bur, r J[ practice comparing and conrrasting
and however. It is also useful in getting students to know using real data
each other better and build class rapport.

Preparation
rever v v
There is virtually no preparation needed for this activity if the gram-
mar has already been introduced. To exploit the practice of but and
howeuer, students should be prompted to use them in conrrasring.
skiils & $ .p
Practice @l
Procedure
1. Put students in pairs. Materials
2. Pairs work together to determine five things they have in None
common and five things that are different berween them.
3.Students write the ten items down and later report to the class or Preparation Time
a larger group. None
NB: Students should be prepared to report the similarities using
both, and, but, and howeuer.
Activity Time
20+ minutes
We both like...
She likes. , but I like..
r[/e are both tuearing..

He /iues in... , bur I liue in...

Ve both haue (math).. with.

We both saw (mouie)..

Variations
I . This activitv gives students great practice in asking questions. It works best if the question format and topics are brain-
stormed ahead of time. Students workwith partners initially and then report to a larger group or the whole class.
2. With more advanced students, you can play this as "Uncommon Commonalities," where easy subjects (such as rravel or
food you both like) are off limits. An uncommon commonality might be a food that both of you have never tried or the
sum ofthe ages ofyour parents.
3. Have students find commonalities using a Venn diagram. Students read the list of activities and take turns asking about the
items on the list. If neither of the students does the activiry they write that activiry outside the circle. After they go through
the list, the activity can become a mixer. Pairs of students stay together and interact with other pairs of students trving to
fir.rd others who do an activity that they have listed at the bottom. \7hen they find others who do that activity, they write
the nrmes next to the activity.

40
 Ve do not...

My partner...

\We...

But these people do...

" tVe do nor. . . , but these peopk do."

I walk for exercise. I I want to learn how to speak a

I go swimming in the summer. I language besides English

I play soccer. I I exercise almost every day
I go to see professional soccer I I often ask my parents for
games. I advice.
I help my parents do the I I play video games.
housework. I I like to watch rhe Olympics.
I know how to play badminton. I I know how to ice skate.
My favorite sport is tennis. I I use a cell phone often.
I watch English TV programs.
I watch golf on TV.

Contributor: David Malatesta, Spanish teacher, Niles West High School, Chicago, lllinois

4r
 This actiui4t focuses on getting students to fnd information
using reading or speaking skills. It is useful for introduc-
When to Use lt
r Jf give an overview of something to the
ing a uariety of topics or themes jiom something "big," such students (location, institution, class,
as a neighborhood, to something more particular, such as textbook)
rules and regulations of a class or institution, or euen getting . To build teams
to hnow a textbook. Scauenger Hunt is typically played in . To provide critical thinking practice

teAms, so it is also useful as a team-building exercise.

Preparation
Level 9 VV
Depending on questior.rs chosen
The instructor prepares the list of questions on a worksheet based
on the theme of the scavenger hunt. Room should be left fbr the
Skills r"t
'
answcrs. For a sample of a scavenger hunt based on this book, see
page 43.
Practice f,i =#=
Procedure
1. Put students in groups (by counting off, those wearing similar
Materials
\?'orksheet for each group
color of clothing, etc.).
2. Groups work together to find the answers to the questions on the
Preparation fime
worksheet. To facilitate rvorking together, groups should share
10-20 minutes
one worksheet.
3. The first group to complete the worksheet with the correcr an- Activity fime
swers wins. 15-30 minutes

Variations
This activity can be made with very straightforward questions or
turned into a ptzzle to make it more challenging and tap into critical thinking. For the latter, an answer can be the next clue
to the follorving answer.

Straightforward: What is the number of the classroom? (e.g.,415)

More difficult: tVhat is the sum of the digits of the classroom? (10)
Even more difficult: The number ten is the sum of this location number. (415)
Answer bccomes another clue: What is the title of the page that equals the sum of the classroom?

Contributor: Maria Snarski, RELO Brazil

47
 SAMPLE SCAVENCER HUNT

1 . How many chapters are in this book?

2. ln what chapter can you find ideas about using songs in the classroom?

3. ln what year was the book published?

4. What is written on the spine?

5. How many pages are in the book?

6. Who is David Malatesta?

7. What website is written on the back cover?

B. Who is the intended audience of the book?

9. What page is the table of contents on?

10. Where is the Appendix?

s tZ'01 '6 qupul 1o sraqreal 'g

to3',ksequasn'pzetqtolqsyBua '1 sronq!4uo)
^ aqt lo auo '9 9SZ '9
sagllnglry tugqreal a8entuel ,o loog ralsuow aql 't ZtqZ 's , 'Z ltl 't
:SUlMSNV

4J
 This actiuity is a good controlled speahing actiui4t, whicb
When to Use lt
uses A worksheet that can be tailored
for the students in the . To "break the ice"
class. I Ji1 begin a discussion of a particular ropic
o Ji1 review marerial
Preparation
Make the student worksheet. Depending on the size of your class,
you will have one or more even-numbered groups (at least six per Leve, gvv
group works best). \Write enough questions for all but one group Deperrding on quesrions chosen
member. (So, if you have groups of six, you will r.reed five different
questions.) These can be getting-to-know-you quesrions or ques-
tions related to a specific topic or language point. On the left side of
skills & t
lD

the worksheet, number one through six (or the number of students
per group) followed by a blank line. On the right side, write the
Practice
five questions (for example, if there are six group members) srarring
Materials
across from number nvo. See sample below. \Worksheet for each studenr

Procedure Preparation fime

1. Divide the class into groups with equal numbers in each group. 10-20 minutes
2. Give each student a worksheet that has been folded down the
middle. (So, the students can only see rhe numbers and the Activity Time
blank lines, not the quesrions.) l5-30 minutes
3. Each student should write his/her name on line number one,
then pass the sheet to his/her left to a group member. That per-
son will write his/her name on line number two. Continue as
such until each student receives his/her paper back. (Note: You can play some upbeat music during this paper-passing, as it
fow of the actiuiry.)
keeps rhe
4. Students open their papers and mingle in their groups, asking each quesrion to the student whose name is to the left of the
question on their sheet.
5. After the students have had a chance to "make the rounds," ask them to rerurn ro rheir seats for a whole-group discussion,
depending on the intent of the exercise. What did you find interesting? What did you learn? Vhat did you want to talk
more about?, etc.

Variations
During the question phase, you can choose to leave the responses oral or have students take notes on the answers ro reporr
back. With larger groups, especially, it may be helpful to take notes.

e.g., Unit on Food

1.

2. \what are
r.r. rnr;;;;Y;;;;,. ..0r,
J. Do you know how to cook? If so, what?
4. What's your favorite resrauranr?
5. Who's the best cook in your family? What does this person like to make?
6. What food or dish would you recommend to a foreigner? \X4ry?

Contributor: Elizabeth Crockett, English Language Fellow, Urazil, 2010

44
This actiuity takes no preparation and is a good ua! to get
students up, mouing, and participating in an early ,:lass When to Use lt
. fb "break the ice"
for the semester. Ahernatiuely, the question can be changed . 'lo- begin a discussion of English
slightly to prouide practice during A czurse. r f[ launch a class
Preparation
This activity has no preparation and takes very few resources. It capi- Level gVV
talizes on student participation. Look ar variations to mix it up

Procedure
1. Start with a clean board or at least enough space on the boald Skills ?
ir :l:
to
l|t
2.
make lists.
Set a time limit to challenge the students to race against the
Practice d\ ml

clock.
Miiterials
3. Give one of the students a piece of chalk or a pen to write on the
Board, marker
board.
4. The student goes to the board and writes any word that s/he Preparation Time
knows in English and then returns to give the pen to the next None
student.
5. When the time is up, you count the words, erasing the ones that Activity Time
are repeated or wrong. 5-15 minutes
6. Show students that they already know a lot, but as a group thev
always know more. Make them talk about how they can learn
from each other.

Variations
1. For more advanced groups, you can ask them to write words whose first letter is the last letter from the last written word,
or limit it to a category such as food, furniture, fads, etc.
2. For large groups you can divide the board into rwo parts and the class into rwo teams.
3. Do this activity in the beginning and at the end of the semester to see if they have learned more and if they are more com-
fortable with group work.

Contributor: Julie Holaway, English Language Fellorv, Brazil, 2010

45
 This actiuity helps bring young learners together to stop
on the teacber and-get ready
what they are doing andfocus
When to Use lt
r f6 warm up the class
for the next actiuit!. It's a plaffil, neatiue, participatoryt . To practice vocabulary
wd! to get learneri attention. Tlte game is similar to "Simon I 16 get students'attention
Says" in that students should copy arm mzuements while the
instructor is saying This but not cop1 the arm mouement Level g VV
when tbe instructor says That.

Preparation Skills &

None 9. 1
Practice I-{
Procedure
I. Start saying This several times and make a different movement Materials
None
with your arm for each This said.
2. The children should copy the movements demonstrated.
Preparation Time
3. After several arm movements with 'Ihis, make a movement and
None
say That. The children will follow your movement and you
should point out next time you say That they should nzt copy ActivityTime
your movement. Once you have their attention, you can move 3 minutes
on to the next activity.

Variations
1 . Use alte rnative intensiq'
and ways of body or voice use. For example, make smaller move ments or use a finer or deeper tone
of voice.
2. Have a learner conduct the game or cvcn play it in small groups or in pairs.

(,ontributor: Matias Ansaldo, Argcntina, Buenos Aires, Beth School

46
This is more of a technique than full actiuity. The point of
a

this actiuity is to get secret responses fom students about a ..ii.':,:,,:,Ib:,e*1$r{,!f

ii .: ..:.:*l.i,:.
Adeqf$ii.'&i{tCin,:|}eeid:$ein:,
question things lihe tuhether they dld their homeworh or
-
liked an actiuity, or if they understood the grammar point
something

or want to change seats. It's an ed$l-to-ase wa! to get secret

:i::,r&r$ii,.$e&i,,ifl- hic.i, itli :il
sometJ'ring
answers from students. ..t.r.::.:Jb..&l{i i&&.a!{:,klilndit&q${,,' :,:'..;rl,:r,
.:.,.,'..::....'!l@l$!qt4 .. :i:,..r;:..,r.....,.rr,i:,,1
Preparation
None
revel SE W
Procedure
1. Tell students you will ask a question, and they are to put up one
finger for true and two for false.
skills &
2. Students are to keep their eyes closed during the activity. Check-
ing that eyes are closed can be done in a fun, lighthearted way
3. The first couple of questions can be "fake" questions, with the
instructor asking things like "Is it \(ednesday today?" Raise one
finger if true; rwo fingers if false. "Is this English class?" etc.

Variations
I . If the class is small enough,you can have students line up in one
row so that others cannot see their fingers up in the air while they a itity:liirE
are looking straight ahead. 5,:itlilitttdi l,i:i::..,,it :'::,r

2. Have students ask questions.

Contributor: David Malatesta, Spanish teacher, Niles West High School, Chicago, lllinois

47
 This actiuity comes from a garne hids used to pky. h is really
gredt as a warm-ap or get-to-hnou-lou actiuit!. Tlte main
airn is to get the participants to mahe staternents using "Ibe
neuer" in ordzr to fnd out a little about others. It's a great
wa! to add a llttle bit of laughnr and energy at the begin-
ning of a ckss and the participants learn a lot about hou
conseruatiue or aduenturous their peers or colleagues are.

Preparation
None

Procedure
1. Put students into groups ofabout five or six.
2. One student in each group begins by creating a truthful state-
ment beginning with " Ibe neaer. . ." e.g., Ibe neuer eaten sushi; or
Ibe neuer clirnbed a mountain.
3. Each group member who has done the activity in the statement
must put a finger down. The nexr group member says hislher lbe
neael statement.
4. 'I1r'e game continues until there is only one member with one or

more fingers still up.

5. Remind the participants that the goal is to say things you think
others have done.

Variations
1. Depending on the level, this can be used with the following srrucrures:
a. Last week/month/yeaa I didnt... (go to a resrauranr, exercise, take a bus)
b. I like sushi, jazz, swimming in the ocean.
2. Information from the activity can be used to build personaliry profiles of peers or surprising comments could be revealed
during a report session.

Contributor: Scoft Chiverton, Senior English Language Fellow, Brazil,2011 and20'12

4B