Bridging Belief Gaps in ELT Teacher Education in Cross-cultural Settings
by Qing Gu
This article first appeared in the IATEFL TTEd SIG Newsletter Issue 2, July 2003
The increasing demand for English as an international language is no longer a new topic in the ELT profession (Kachru 1992, Crystal 1997, Widdowson 1997, Nunan 2001). In the "global village" (Mok 2000: 148), improving the quality of ELT in developing countries through teacher training programmes with the input of expatriate teacher trainers has attracted intensive attention for some time (Prabhu 1987, White 1987, Kennedy 1988, Holliday 1994 & 2001, Kennedy 1999, Markee 1997 & 2001). Interest mainly focuses on cross-cultural professional communication. This paper demonstrates that in such programmes the observed differences in perception on issues in ELT arise not only across cultures - between ELT professionals with different sociocultural backgrounds but also arise within cultures as a result of expatriate teacher trainers holding different perceptions within the same aid projects. It draws upon case studies of Sino-British institutional development projects carried out by the author to investigate the implementation of English language teaching innovations at tertiary level Chinese institutions.
A programme of eventually twenty-seven Department for International Development (DFID) programmes of assistance to China in ELT aimed at institutional strengthening, was initiated in the late 1970s, jointly administrated by the British Council and the Chinese Ministry of Education (British Council 1999). These projects were intended to introduce 'more effective communicative language teaching methodologies' (British Council Webpage 1999) in Chinese ELT, and all included a teacher training component. The projects ended in July 2001 when the last ELT teacher training programme was completed in Gansu province. As well as teaching materials and other ELT resources, most projects enjoy the input of British ELT specialists based in the English departments of selected Chinese universities as teacher trainers (The British Council 1999).
Belief gaps across cultures
In spring 2001, the author carried out a field study of these Sino-British ELT projects. The study involved an interview and questionnaire research conducted in 24 Chinese universities that were involved in the projects. Analysis of these data strongly suggests that a substantial degree of common ground exists between British teacher trainers and Chinese teachers of English on some crucial issues concerning English language teaching in China:
On the whole British teacher trainers have presented a quite legitimate picture of Chinese ELT, which bears striking similarity to Chinese teachers' descriptions. A strong criticism expressed by British teacher trainers was that 'English was being taught like a dead language' in some places. This accords with a finding of the study that the large majority of Chinese respondents take a sceptical attitude towards the efficiency of Chinese ELT methods as Figure 1 below shows.
Figure 1: Effectiveness of Chinese ELT methods with the majority of students
There are shared views between British and Chinese ELT teachers on the general advantages provided by CLT, such as learner autonomy, its meeting of learners' needs, its cultivation of students' abilities to use the language in real-life situations. Such shared views provide common ground on which the two groups, despite their different sociocultural backgrounds, may work together towards a shared goal.
The critical belief gap between the British teacher trainers and the Chinese teachers of English appears to lie in their interpretations and understandings of the local context and its impact on language teaching and learning. The following two quotations from the Chinese respondents interviewed in the author's fieldwork reveal the local voice.
British specialists should think about the cultural appropriacy of the
methodology he/she proposes. They need to work out what CLT is like in
the Chinese context. If they don't know much about our own context and
abstractly sell their theories, I would not listen or use them at all.
… We should like to work with experts who think for us and who understand
and know our expectations."
Cortazzi and Jin (1996) introduce the notion of culture of learning to explain the difference in behaviour in language classrooms. They maintain that a culture of learning has its roots in the educational and, more broadly, cultural traditions of the society, and that the 'Western and Chinese cultures of learning sometimes weave past each other without linking' (1996: 10). The way to establish a bridge between the different cultures is through dialogue. Kennedy (1987: 167) argues that the success of change programmes is likely to rest on the extent to which any different attitudes to language teaching and learning can be openly discussed and resolved.
In a cross-cultural setting, the recognition of shared views between the expatriate teacher trainer and the indigenous teacher may serve as the starting point for ELT professionals from different cultures to begin to establish mutual understanding and a collaborative working environment. Failure to recognise the common ground will lead to an over emphasis of differences and difficulties and may establish an impossible barrier to the implementation of change.
Belief gaps within cultures
The study identified two clusters of British ELT specialists differing in their understandings of language teaching and learning. Table 1 below sets out the differing beliefs and views of English language teaching held by these two clusters, as summarised from the interview data.
Figure 3: Observation of two clusters of British specialists - beliefs and views of ELT
The following quotations from two British interview respondents, one taken from the first cluster and one taken from the second cluster, exemplify the views listed in Table 1 and demonstrate contrasting observations.
Cluster One - Interaction
had been taught Latin in a similar way, sort of Grammar-Translation methods.
I found that in some places English was being taught like a dead language.
… People still are memorising vocabulary, memorising dictionaries,
thinking that that would improve their English, and absolutely no concentration
on communication. … So Intensive Reading was something that I did
not understand at all."
Cluster Two - Contextual needs
Figure 3 below summarises the two clusters' emotional feedback on their experience in China as teacher trainers. Among the first cluster of nine people, only one thought of the experience in China as 'wonderful'. In comparison, five out of ten people in Cluster Two enjoyed their professional experience in the Sino-British ELT projects. There are no confused faces in Cluster Two as in Cluster One who appeared to have had some demanding time in the projects. Cluster Two people tended to regard their experience in China as a professional investment that had led to the progression of their academic careers.
Table 1: Two clusters' feedback on their experience in Sino-British projects
The belief gaps across and within cultures observed in this study both emphasise sociocultural and contextual factors underlying language teaching and learning. The main disparity lies in the awareness and extent to which ELT professionals realise and perceive the influence of contextual and personal factors on language teaching practices. Pennycook (1989) argues that
Pennycook's argument presents a complex picture of teacher personal knowledge. It implies that any teaching method, say CLT, cannot be an abstract label to a teacher. What the teacher has learned from theorists about the teaching method will have to be used and tested in practice before the theoretical knowledge is conceptualised and constructed as part of the teacher's personal knowledge. This is a dynamic, on-going process that interplays with the teacher's contextualised beliefs about teaching and learning. The teacher's educational and professional experience, knowledge of learners' interests, motivation and learning strategies, and understanding of teaching context including the classroom context and the institutional culture play a crucial part in this process.
The ultimate personal knowledge creation is accomplished by the 'complimentary processes of assimilation and accommodation' (Williams & Burden 1997: 22). According to Williams and Burden (1997), the process of assimilation refers to the methods whereby teachers change and modify the incoming information (say, theories of CLT) in their minds so that it will fit in with what they already know. The process of accommodation, on the other hand, refers to the process whereby they modify and adapt what they already know to take into account new information. Elsewhere, Eraut (1994) addresses a similar point on the construction of personal knowledge:
knowledge and using knowledge are not separate processes but the same
process. The process of using knowledge transforms that knowledge so that
it is no longer the same knowledge. But people are so accustomed to using
the word 'knowledge' to refer only to 'book knowledge' which is publicly
available in codified form, that they have developed only limited awareness
of the nature and extent of their personal knowledge.
Eventually, teachers' knowledge of the teaching method is anchored in the practical circumstances in which they work and is based on personal understandings of classroom knowledge as well as knowledge of students (Carter 1990, cited in Munby et al 2001). The theoretical claims of CLT will be integrated and reconstructed into individual teacher's schemata or knowledge structures on language teaching and learning, and no longer be the same knowledge in theorists' publications, but of distinctively individualised and contextualised characteristics.
An awareness of the nature of teachers' personal knowledge may help to lift the veil of the belief gaps across and within cultures observed in this study. The identification of two clusters of British specialists highlights the importance of understanding the meaning of sociocultural factors in language teaching and learning. British specialists who tended to mediate CLT to fit in with the local context were more likely to rate their experience in the projects positively than those who held more rigid views on the universal applicability of CLT.
Hofstede's (1986: 301) suggests that in bridging the cross-cultural teaching gap - 'The burden of adaptation in cross-cultural learning situations should be primarily on the teachers'. It is argued here that in the case of INSET programmes in cross-cultural settings the burden of adaptation should be rest primarily on the expatriate teacher trainers. They may need to take one step back from their values and 'cherished beliefs' and get 'intellectually and emotionally accustomed to the fact that in other societies,' people teach and learn in different ways (Hostede 1986: 316). In Kennedy and Kennedy's words (1998: 458), no matter how good or logical some ideas might seem in the generating culture, they cannot be automatically transferred into another culture that may hold different values.
The key to bridging the belief gap between ELT professionals across cultures lies in a realisation of the contextualised nature of professional knowledge, an appreciation of a different teaching and learning culture, and a willingness to establish dialogue. It is of crucial importance to understand that teacher change is a slow cognitive process that involves the reconceptualisation of teaching theories and the establishment of 'a sense of plausibility' (Prabhu 1990: 161). In order to achieve long-term change in teachers' performance, as Richardson and Placier (2001) argue, teacher training should give way to teacher education, focusing on helping teachers to develop ways of thinking. The ultimate aim will be to enable teachers to develop from the competence-oriented end on a professional development continuum to the meaning-building end that requires rationalised reflection of teaching practice and professional empowerment.
British Council 1999. DFID English language teaching partnerships. Retrieved 17 November 1999 from http://www.britishcouncil.org.cn/english/work/Deve/DFID.htm
Cortazzi, M. & Jin, L. 1996. Cultures of learning: language classrooms in China. In Coleman, H. (ed.) Society and the Language Classroom, pp.169-206. Cambridge: CUP.
Carter, K. 1990. Teachers' knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teacher education, pp. 291-310. New York: Macmillan.
D. 1997. English as a Global Language. Cambridge: CUP.
Feiman-Nemser, S. & Floden, R. 1986. The cultures of teaching. In Wittrock, M. C. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, 3rd ed., pp.505-525. New York: Macmillan; London: Collier Macmillan.
Hofstede, G. 1986. Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10: 301-320.
Holliday, A. 1994. Appropriate Methodology and Social Context. Cambridge: CUP.
Holliday, A. 2001. Achieving cultural continuity in curriculum innovation. In Hall, D. & Hewings, A. (eds.) Innovation in English Language Teaching: A Reader, pp.169-177. London: Routledge.
Kachru, B. B. 1992. Introduction: the other side of English. In B. Kachru (ed.) The Other Tongue: English Across Cultures, pp. 1-15. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Kennedy, C. 1988. Evaluation of the management of change in ELT projects. Applied Linguistics, 9/4: 329-342.
Kennedy, D. 1999. The foreign trainer as change agent and implications for teacher education programmes in China. In Kennedy, C., Doyle, P. & Goh, C. (eds.) Exploring Change in English Language Teaching, pp.29-37. Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann English Language Teaching.
Kennedy, J. & Kennedy, C. 1998. Levels, linkages, and networks in cross-cultural innovation. System, 26/3: 455-469.
Markee, N. 1997. Managing Curriculum Innovation. Cambridge: CUP.
Markee, N. 2001. The diffusion of innovation in language teaching. In Hall, D. & Hewings, A. (eds.) Innovation in English Language Teaching: A Reader, pp.118-126. London: Routledge.
Mok, K. H. 2000. Impact of globalisation: a study of quality assurance systems of higher education in Hong Kong and Singapore. Comparative Education Review, 44/2: 148-174.
Munby, H., Russell, T. & Martin, A. 2001. Teachers' knowledge and how it develops. In Richardson, V. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, 4th ed., pp.877-904. Washington, D. C.: the American Educational Research Association.
D. 2001. English as a global language. TESOL Quarterly, 35/4: 605-606.
N. S. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: OUP.
Richardson, V. & Placier, P. 2001. Teacher change. In Richardson, V. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, 4th ed., pp.905-947. Washington, D. C.: the American Educational Research Association.
R. 1987. Managing innovation. ELT Journal, 41/3: 211-218.
M. & Burden, R. 1997. Psychology for Language Teachers - A Social
Constructivist Approach. Cambridge: CUP.
Copyright 2000-2014© Developing Teachers.com