Planning an engaging ELT syllabus: Key aspects to consider in the training of preservice English language teachers

Leonardo Varela Santamara angelsant76@gmail.com Docente Filologa e Idiomas/ Ingls Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogot

Summary: This article presents key aspects to consider before writing a syllabus for pre-service English language teachers. It invites trainers and teacher trainers to reflect upon the native and non-native varieties of English, blended learning and standard ELT courses and context -based practice in order to offer a more comprehensive approach to English language teaching. Key words: Syllabus, native and non-native varieties of English, blended learning. English Language Teaching and Training has progressively become an intercultural and interdisciplinary activity. Our profession (ELT) has emerged into an area of understanding a vast number of language teaching contexts and purposes and an even larger number of student needs, learning styles and affective traits (Richard & Renandya, 2002). Not surprisingly English users nowadays find themselves learning languages, especially English, via internet websites and mobile applications. Additionally, as Seidlhofer (2005) suggests, the emerging knowledge society and the gradually growing relationship between global and local contexts poses new challenges to the roles of the English Language teachers and trainers alike. This is particularly evident when language is no longer taught as an end in itself i.e. in order for people to

Page 1 of 8

pass exams, courses or training programmes but also as a means whereby people communicate across cultures, perform work-based tasks and pioneer scientific research and social change. Against such background, this article looks into some areas of knowledge and practices that can be included within a syllabus so as to offer a multi-faceted approach to the teaching of English regardless of where the teaching takes place or who the students are. In so doing, I invite ELT trainers to reflect upon some key aspects before embarking on the exciting task of writing a syllabus aimed to train pre-service English language teachers. This is a reflection based on my current practice as an ELT methodology teacher for the Languages Department at Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogot. Writing a syllabus: subverting the order anyone? Writing a syllabus is a thorough activity which requires attention to detail, but perhaps most importantly, attention to the client-learner needs. A wide variety of writers have shed light onto how to define and categorise syllabi the content of language teaching which have been submitted to some degree of structuring or ordering with the aim of making teaching and learning a more effective process(cited in Rajaee, Abbaspour, & J, 2013), from the dichotomised versions of Wilkins Analytic vs. Synthetic syllabuses (Wilkins 1976) and Nunans product oriented vs. process oriented syllabuses (Nunan 1988) to the more nuanced versions of Sterns Cultural Syllabus (as cited in Nunan 1988), Krahnkens Content based syllabus and Johnsons multi-dimensional syllabus (as cited in Rajaee et al, 2013). All such syllabuses are either mutually exclusive or amalgamate different functions and practices of ELT practice into a rather one-size-fits all structure. Most teachers and teacher trainers appear to structure their syllabuses

Page 2 of 8

around them. However, there is little literature on how to structure the course contents of a syllabus to train effectively pre- service English Language Teachers, especially within the context of emerging countries. Areas of ELT training should arguably include the following issues teacher knowledge and beliefs, (a reflection on) the quality and content of teacher education programmes, (a substantial emphasis) on print, multimedia and teacher-developed materials, and public and political perceptions of language teaching (Murray & Christison, 2012). There is no suggested order so readers are invited to gauge the relevance of the items above for their own practice and contexts. The principle behind this practice is to subvert the concept of one-size-fits-all contexts by identifying key areas for consideration and is based on my own practice. The growing gap between native and non-native varieties of English Most pre-experienced teachers are unaware of the political perceptions of language teaching, particularly of the growing varieties of English (Enric, 2004). Terms such as ENL, EIL, ELF, EFL, ESL and EAL1 are still finding their way into the ELT mainstream. The significance behind teaching these terms and concepts lies with the recognition they give to the interdisciplinary character of ELT. Pre-experienced teachers should no longer be trained mainly to deliver a system of language rules, lexis and functions with little attention paid to how to cater for the multicultural variety of students and their concomitant learning styles and backgrounds, how to strike the right balance between being supportive to students and challenging them with tasks they resist, or how to create activities that simultaneously address all learning styles and
1

ENL= English as a native language, EIL = English as an International Language, ELF = English as a Lingua Franca, EFL=English as a foreign language, ESL= English as a second language, EAL= English as an additional language.

Page 3 of 8

racial traditions in a culturally and academically diverse classroom exist in any contemporary institution(Brookfield, 2006). In teaching pre-service teachers in particular, we must ask them to gauge how the different varieties of English have both an immediate effect on the conceptualisation, development and teaching of English, but also, and perhaps most importantly, on their abilities to understand their students backgrounds, reasons, practises and identities as users of English as a global language. Today, English users have more precise learning needs than before. (They are) adults who seek proficiency in a new language for vocational training, or religious purposes, or because they have become related through marriage to speakers of languages other than their mother tongueor tens of millions of people each year forced to learn new languagesbecause they have fled traumatic experiences of one kind or another and other forms of social conflict ..crossing linguistic borders in the process (Long, p.3, 2009). Long thus highlights the importance of understanding which variety of English teachers and teacher trainers need to bring to the fore so as to ensure the differing needs of learners are met. The traditional classroom vs. the flipped classroom Classes in schools funded by taxation tend to be large and plagued with social problems. Teaching tends to be vertical, with the teacher functioning both as a disciplinarian and content provider. Arguably, it is still necessary to train pre-service teachers to deal with the demands of such schools often characterised by traditional educational schemes and with limited access to technology. However, up-to-date instruction is also required in order to empower future teachers so they can use technology strategically in both academic and non-academic contexts. With a combined approach such as Blended

Page 4 of 8

learning (Whittaker & Tomlinson 2013) pre-service teachers can bridge the gap between the traditional and the new, and so be more likely to deliver the best face-toface practice whilst complementing it with computer technology and online materials where possible. Although blended learning is not an altogether new approach to teaching and learning itself (Tomlison, 2013) some of its practices are relatively new in ELT. One of them is called the flipped classroom (hereafter referred to as FC) () a lot of what we traditionally call the input part of a lesson can now be easily done by pre-recorded videos, lectures, screencasts () FC is much more relevant to teacher training and university-level courses where there tends to be lots of academic content that could easily be made accessible online (Russell, 2012). The FC practice may appear to turn the educational system over its head, as it implies that the content of the lesson can be delivered virtually anywhere; however, it also poses the interesting question as to how to best optimise the use of input and maximise the generation of situationally-based output. In my practice as an ELT teacher trainer, I integrate FC activities with in-class tuition. My classes have defined input based sessions that are delivered in situ and are aided by online material. Students then respond to this input by creating computer based material. We then gauge the extent to which FC activities can be transferred to other educational settings i.e. public schools, language institutes, companies, and seek the best alternatives to do so. I would like to think I foster evidence based practice and reflective practice into one by combining blended learning and FC strategies in my training.

Page 5 of 8

Meeting global and basic standards vs. meeting community and personal standards

ELT is an ever growing field attracting professionals of all sorts. This is why schemes to legitimise its practice have emerged over the last decade. Courses such as the TKT: KAL, TKT: CLIL, CELTA, CETYL and DELTA2 are now commonplace and seek to standardise ELT practice and delivery. Although the strengths and weaknesses of such courses for emerging countries is still a matter of debate, some of their information can be adapted to ensure we can cater for the needs of our own communities of practice. The TKT: KAL is useful in drawing attention to aspects of language awareness and difficulties in learning a second language. The TKT: CLIL is suitable when our aim is to instruct students on how to teach curriculum subjects such as science, economics and technology using English as a target language. The CELTA includes a variety of practical tasks that can easily be incorporated to maximise pre-service teachers attention to learners needs, environments and challenges, particularly the sections on how to teach skills can be advantageous. Such materials have to be adapted and progressively incorporated by the pre-service teachers themselves under the guidance of a seasoned trainer. Arguably, it should be done in this scaffolding fashion in order to prevent students from taking material at face value without examining the benefits of selecting, adapting and creating new situationally-based material. In so doing, pre-service teachers are learning about the importance of macro and micro-manage learning processes.

TKT= Teaching Knowledge Test, KAL = Knowledge about language, CLIL = Content and language integrated learning, CELTA= Certificate in Teaching English to Speakers of other Languages, CETYL= Certificate in Teaching English to Young Learners, DELTA= Diploma in Teaching English to Speakers of other Languages.

Page 6 of 8

Teacher trainers are now more committed to offering innovative approaches to instruction. In organising and delivering a thought provoking syllabus to pre- service English language teachers we empower them to become the linchpins in the implementation process (Murray & Christison, 2012. p 65) Bibliography Brookfield, S. (2006). The Skillful Teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Enric, L. (2004). Non-native-speaker teachers and English as an International Language. International Journal of Applied Linguistics w Vol. 14 w No. 3 . Long, M. (2009). Language Teaching. In L. Michael, & D. Catherine, The Handbook of Language Teaching (pp. 3-6). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Murray, D., & Christison, M. (2012). Understanding innovation in English language education: Contexts and issues. In T. Christopher, Managing Change in English Language Teaching (pp. 65-67). London: British Council. Nunan, D., (1988), Syllabus Design. Oxford University Press. Rajaee, N., Abbaspour, E., & J, Z. (2013). A critical review of recent trends in second language syllabus design and curriculum development. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 2(April), 63-82. Richard, J., & Renandya, W. (2002). Methodology in Language Teaching. An anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Russell, S. (2012, January). The flipped classroom or the connected classroom? Modern English Teacher, 21(1), 35-38.

Page 7 of 8

Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. Key Concepts in ELT. Retrived from http://people.ufpr.br/~clarissa/pdfs/ELF_Seidlhofer2005.pdf Tomlison, B. Whitaker C (2013). Blended Learning in English Language Teaching: Course Design and Implementation (pp. 9-24). London: British Council.

Page 8 of 8