IELTS (International English Language Testing System...

Inside

Changes and Challenges in the 21st Century

Vo l ume 27 , No .2Summer 2001

(cont'd on page 3)

IELTS (International English Language Testing System):Testing Transferrable Skills

by Carol Trotter

What skills do students require in order to be success-ful at post-secondary studies and how can educators andinstitutions assess candidates� levels in those skills? An-swers to these two questions are critical in helping ESLprofessionals guide their ESL/EAP students to make choicesto ensure their future academic success.

Teaching EAP at a college for the past ten years andhaving the opportunity to observe the progression ofgraduates as they continued through their college anduniversity studies underscored for me the need for rigourat all levels. Students need EAP programs which honetheir skills in listening, reading, writing and speaking.Institutions need language tests which assess those skillscompletely, accurately, and in a manner which reflectsthe types of skills required at a college or university. Withtest results in each of these four areas, institutions canthen determine how a candidate�s ability relates to thelanguage demands of the various programs they offer. It

is also helpful when the language testers are able tooffer institutions some guidelines relating to bandlevels required for acceptance into various programs.

The International English Language Testing Sys-tem (IELTS) is an internationally recognized assess-ment of a candidate�s ability to study or train in themedium of English. Jointly managed by the Universityof Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate, theBritish Council and IDP Education, Australia, IELTShas two versions. The Academic version is used foradmission to undergraduate and postgraduate stud-ies, and the General Training version is used forcandidates completing secondary education, workexperience, training programs or for emigration pur-poses.

The IELTS assesses candidates� ability to useEnglish effectively in the four key skill areas �

Conference Proceedings 2000

Strategies forRetaining andUsing Vocabulary

A Study ComparesTOEFL to CLBA

Working withParaprofessionals

Community AgencyProfile: Toronto�sA.C.C.E.S. and itsESL Cafe

2 Contact, Vol. 27, No. 2, Summer 2001○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

EditorBrigid Kelso

Editorial BoardBob CourchêneUniversity of Ottawa

Jacqueline Jeffers

Jill DohertyOttawa

Contact, the officialnewsletter of theTeachers of English as aSecond Language ofOntario, is publishedthree times a year. It isavailable throughmembership only. Tojoin see the member-ship form at the back ofthis issue.

Contact welcomescopy of general interestto association members,including announce-ments, reports, articles,calls for papers and newsitems. Contributors shouldinclude their full name,title and affiliation. Copyshould be preferably e-mailed to the Editor [email protected] Windows '97 RichText format, or typeddouble-spaced to theEditor c/o The TESLAssociation of Ontario,27 Carlton Street, Ste.405, Toronto, Ontario,M5B 1L2, (416) 593-4243, Fax (416) 593-0164. Deadlines areJanuary 30, March 30and June 30.

Inquiries regardingmembership or changeof address should beaddressed to theMembership Secretaryc/o the above address.

Inquiries regardingadvertising rates andreservation of advertis-ing space should beaddressed to theAdministrative Directorc/o the above address.

The statements madeand opinions expressedin articles are those ofthe authors and do notnecessarily reflect thepolicies of TESL Ontario.Acceptance of theadvertising does notconstitute endorsementby TESL Ontario.

Table of Contents

Page

IELTS (International English Language Testing System): Testing 1Transferrable Skills

TalkEnglish Café at A.C.C.E.S. 9

The CLBA-TOEFL Comparison Study 10

Vocabulary: an Interactive Systems Approach 14

Community Contact Assignments 20

Problems and issues in working with paraprofessionals: Teachers' 22perspectives

The CLBA and the Measurement and Development of Proficiency 29through Language Education

Mutual Expectations: Instructional Supervision and Effective Teaching 32

Five Korean Adult Learners� Propensity for Learner Autonomy 41Revealed in Their Beliefs about Teacher-Student Roles

Teaching Word Stress � a Must at All Levels 44

Materials for Review 46

Book Review 47

Contact, Vol. 27, No. 2, Summer 2001 3 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

From the Editor

As you have probably already noticed, thisissue is somewhat late. I guess we�re still recov-ering from putting out the mammoth SpecialResearch Symposium issue. I apologize if they didnot reach you before you left for summer break.

In our regular Conference Proceedings issue,we bring you write-ups from many of the sessionsyou may have missed. Carol Trotter explains howthe IELTS (International English Language TestingSystem) tests transferable skills and MarinaEngelking offers strategies for teaching vocabularythat make learners remember new words.

Wendy Wang alerts us to teachers� perspec-tives of working with paraprofessionals, whileJulie Chemali suggests how supervisors can offerhelpful advice to bring out the best in theirinstructors. In addition, David Watt and DeirdreLake share results of a study comparing the CLBAwith the TOEFL, and Maria Kim Oh presentsfindings of her study of five Korean adult learnersand their views about teacher and student roles.

Our community organization profiled in thisissue is Toronto�s A.C.C.E.S. (Access to Commu-

nity Counselling and Employment Skills Services).Their unique Talk English Café has provided after-class entertainment and helped a lot of ESLlearners during the past two years since it startedup.

Theresa Hyland responds to a response in ourlast issue of Lee and Hyland�s paper on the CLBApublished last year in Contact, and John Sivellexpresses his dissatisfaction with my article on theOntario College of Teachers� proposed LanguageProficiency testing in the Spring issue. I would liketo point out that I did not write this piece as aneditorial or as the official opinion of TESL Ontario;instead, I chose to present a balanced articlerepresenting several points of view.

We have some great photos of the confer-ence, including the soprano and dancers whoentertained during the dinner. The 2000 confer-ence will be a tough act to follow.

Wishing you a safe and relaxing summer,Brigid Kelso, TESL Ontario Editor

I guess we’re stillrecovering fromputting out the

mammoth SpecialResearch Sympo-

sium issue.

Our communityorganization profiled

in this issue isToronto’s A.C.C.E.S.(Access to Commu-

nity Counselling andEmployment Skills

Services). Theirunique Talk English

Café has providedafter-class entertain-

ment and helped alot of ESL learners

during the past twoyears since it started

up.


Dear Brigid, I must say that I was a little surprised by the approach taken in �College of Teachersand Ministry at odds over teacher language proficiency testing�

(Contact, Spring 2001). Surely, issues around language and culture are central to the expertise ofTESL Ontario, and I would have been more confortable if Contact, our professional organization�s officialvoice, had taken a more active and confident leadership role in this debate.

No doubt it is true that some �associate teachers ... have complained about errors in handouts....�etc. And no doubt, as well, that is a problem. But there is far more to this issue. I do not believe it isappropriate for the TESL profession to restrict its contribution to the debate by seemingly accepting thelimitations of a narrow and potentially self-serving definition of the problem advanced by two groups� the OCT, and a vocal self-selecting minority of associate teachers � neither of which have specificprofessional qualifications to pronounce on crucial language-and-culture policies with such enormousimplications not only for the education of pupils but also for the careers of many teachers.

TESL Ontario would, by contrast, be excellently qualified to offer well-informed, expert in-put.Constructive comments might include questions like �a) why test only for English language proficiency and not, as well, for knowledge of descriptive/

pedagogical English grammar (since, especially in elementary school, all teachers are languageteachers)?

b) indeed, when testing for grammatical knowledge as well as language proficiency, why not test allnative speakers as well?

c) given the high proportion of ESL/ESD students in our schools, why not test all teachers for (or givecredit for) proficiency in a second language, as a measure of empathy and common experience withpupils� own challenges?

d) and, indeed, by the same token why not test for (or give credit for) extended experience in livingabroad and adapting to a foreign culture, once again a measure of empathy and common experiencewith so many pupils� own challenges?

I believe that these pointed questions, and others like them, are what TESL Ontario members shouldbe able to expect from their professional association. Questions like these draw attention to the kindof linguistic and social concerns that TESL practitioners, based on their professional expertise in AppliedLinguistics/TESL Methodology, are the Ontario group best qualified to raise with respect to the language-and-culture dimension of education.

And posing such questions might, into the bargain, begin to lift the veil on the way in which theproposed OCT testing policy systematically focuses on the chief anticipated weakness of second-language teachers while also systematically ignoring that group�s anticipated strengths. Reciprocally, ofcourse, the policy just as systematically values monolingual English native speakers� chief anticipatedstrength while ignoring that group�s anticipated weaknesses.

In other words, it would appear that the �gate-keeping role� recommended by Professor Gagne �as quoted in the Contact article � may be fulfilled in ways that I very much doubt she would actuallysupport. Ms Muir�s remarks � also quoted in the Contact article � come closer to addressing, at leastobliquely, the equity issues that I think are important. But in my view it is the responsibility of the TESLOntario professional organization to speak about these matters forthrightly and directly. We have aleadership responsibility here.

Teacher testing of some sort may perhaps be fine, and in fact more recent news on the OCT proposalseems to indicate that there definitely will be a test of some description. But tests must be well-informedand unbiased.

TESL Ontario, surely, has an interest in promoting the dignity and well-being of ESL speakers beyondhelping them in LINC and other relatively elementary classroom settings. Do we not also have a dutyto stand up for their right to equal treatment in the professional life of Ontario society at large?

John Sivell

To the Editor

Questions like thesedraw attention to thekind of linguistic andsocial concerns thatTESL practitioners,based on theirprofessional exper-tise in AppliedLinguistics/TESLMethodology, arethe Ontario groupbest qualified toraise with respect tothe language-and-culture dimension ofeducation.

But in my view it isthe responsibility ofthe TESL Ontarioprofessional organi-zation to speakabout these mattersforthrightly anddirectly. We have aleadership responsi-bility here.


listening, reading writing and speaking � as well astheir knowledge of grammar and vocabulary in thecontext of language use. There are four modules� all candidates take the same Listening moduleand Speaking modules, but choose to take eitherthe Academic or General Training Reading andWriting modules. Band scores are recorded on aTest Report Form showing overall ability as well asperformance in listening, reading, writing andspeaking. There are 9 bands from:

BAND 1 - NON-USER

Essentially has no ability to use the languagebeyond possibly a few isolated words.

to

BAND 9 - EXPERT USER

Has fully operational command of the lan-guage: appropriate, accurate, and fluent withcomplete understanding.

Test Report Forms are issued within two weeksof the testing date and are valid for two years.

This presentation will discuss the academicversion which assesses whether a candidate isready to study or train in English at the post-secondary level.

LISTENING

The listening module consists of four sectionsplayed on a cassette tape in order of increasingdifficulty. It takes 30 minutes. During this module,time is given for the candidates to read thequestions, enter and then check their answers.Examples of unfamiliar question types are given.When the tape ends, ten minutes are allowed forcandidates to transfer their answers to an AnswerSheet. There are 40 questions in total.

The first two sections are concerned withsocial needs and consist of a conversation be-tween two speakers and then a monologue. Anexample of section one would be a conversationbetween two students discussing a list of authorswhose books have been given to the library andthe need to classify the authors as writers oncooking, sports, or travel. In this section, the IELTScandidate would have to complete a table bywriting C for cooking, S for sports and T for travelbeside the names of the list of authors.

The monologue could be a talk by a studentadvisor who is inviting new students to a welcom-ing party. In this section IELTS candidates would

have to look at the invitation, tick if the informa-tion is correct or write in the changes. Then theywould have to write short answers to questionsconcerning instructions the advisor is giving tostudents who are travelling to the party by car.

The final two sections are concerned withsituations related more closely to educational ortraining contexts. There is a conversation amongup to four people and then another monologue.

An example of part three would be a conver-sation between two students who as part of theirgeneral science course have to describe how alawn sprinkler works. IELTS candidates wouldhave to label the parts of the sprinkler on theirdiagram. They would then hear another conversa-tion between the two students and their instructorand then answer six multiple choice questionsconcerning information discussed in the conversa-tion.

An example of the monologue in part fourwould be a talk about student health issues,particularly about headaches and how to avoidthem. Using the vocabulary list given, IELTS can-didates would have to complete a summary of thetalk.

You can see from these examples that IELTScandidates are required to demonstrate a varietyof listening and note-taking skills including evalu-ating and noting relevant information while adiscussion or talk is in process. These are preciselythe skills they need for success during their post-secondary studies. I do not believe that these skillscan be accurately demonstrated on exclusivelymultiple-choice tests.

READING

From my experience teaching EAP Reading, Ifeel that candidates must have the followingreading skills:

· skimming and scanning for topic or for specificinformation

· identification of thesis, main arguments andsupporting details

· identification and evaluation of different typesof support

· analysis of reading selections for author�spoint of view and bias

The IELTS Academic Reading test takes 60minutes and includes three reading passages with

Band scores arerecorded on a TestReport Form show-

ing overall ability aswell as performance

in listening, reading,writing and speak-

ing.

This presentationwill discuss the

academic versionwhich assesses

whether a candidateis ready to study or

train in English atthe post-secondary

level.


a total of 2,000 to 2,750 words. Texts are takenfrom magazines, journals, books and newspapersand are written for a non-specialist audience.Topics are of general interest and deal with issueswhich are interesting and accessible to candidatesentering undergraduate or postgraduate courses.

At least one text features a detailed logicalargument. A text may contain non-verbal materi-als such as diagrams, graphs or illustrations. If textscontain technical terms, a simple glossary is pro-vided. Texts and tasks become increasingly diffi-cult throughout the paper. The suggested time tobe spent is given in the instructions at the begin-ning of each reading passage.

A variety of questions are used and mayinclude:

· notes/summary/diagram/flowchart/table com-pletion

· sentence completion· short-answer questions· identification of writer�s views/claims - yes, no

or not given· classification· matching lists/phrases· multiple choice

All answers are entered on an Answer Sheetduring the 60-minute test. No extra time isallowed to transfer answers.

An example of the first reading passage wouldbe an article on how researchers are using thechemical compound diethyl zinc (DEZ) to helppreserve valuable library books. Questions in-clude: identifying the writer�s opinions, choosing4 attributes of DEZ from a list, and completing aflow chart on the DEZ method of preservingbooks.

An example of the second reading passagewould be an article on Drugs and Obesity whichcompares the view that obesity is caused by aneating disorder requiring a combination of diet andexercise versus the view that obesity is a geneticdisorder requiring drug therapy. Questions in-clude: matching treatments with disadvantages,completing a paragraph using words and phrasesfrom a given list and four multiple-choice ques-tions.

An example of the third reading passage wouldbe a historical outline on the introduction of the

old-age pension in Australia. Questions for thisreading include: identifying the person associatedwith summaries of opinions on care for the aged,and completing sentences with information ondates and demographics concerning the introduc-tion of old-age pensions.

You can see from these examples that a varietyof reading skills are assessed in a way whichparallels how colleges and universities expecttheir students to be able to perform.

WRITING

The Academic Writing module takes 60 min-utes. There are two sections to complete. TheIELTS candidates are advised to spend about 20minutes on Task 1 which requires them to writeat least 150 words. Task 2 requires at least 250words and should take about 40 minutes. Topicsare of general interest and it makes no differencewhat subjects candidates study. The issues raisedare interesting, suitable for, and easily understoodby candidates entering undergraduate and post-graduate studies.

In Task 1 candidates are asked to look at adiagram or table and to present the information intheir own words. Depending on the type of inputand the task suggested, candidates are assessedon their ability to:

� organize, present and possibly compare data

� describe the stages of a process or procedure

� describe an object or event or sequence ofevents

� explain how something works

Examples of Task 1 could include a diagramshowing nitrogen sources and concentration lev-els in the ground water of a coastal city, or a tableshowing consumer preferences for features ofautomatic washing machines in four differentcountries - Germany, France, Sweden and theUK. In both of these examples, candidates areasked to write a report for a university lecturerdescribing the information shown.

In Task 2, candidates are presented with apoint of view, argument or problem. They areassessed on their ability to :

� present the solution to the problem

� present and justify an opinion

At least one textfeatures a detailedlogical argument. Atext may containnon-verbal materialssuch as diagrams,graphs or illustra-tions.

You can see fromthese examples thata variety of readingskills are assessed ina way which paral-lels how collegesand universitiesexpect their studentsto be able to per-form.


� compare and contrast evidence, opinions andimplications, and

� evaluate and challenge ideas, evidence or anargument

An example of Task 2 would be to present awritten argument or case to an educated non-specialist audience on the following topic:

Are computers an essential feature of moderneducation? What subjects can be better taughtusing computers? Are there aspects of a goodeducation that cannot be taught using comput-ers?

Candidates use their own ideas, knowledgeand experience and support their arguments withexamples and relevant evidence.

In the Writing module, each task is assessedindependently, but the assessment of Task 2carries more weight in marking than Task 1.

You can see that Task 1 requires candidates tobe able to analyse the question making note ofvocabulary which may be useful in the answer.They should identify the topic of the graph ordiagram, determine the measurements being usedin the diagrams, and identify the general trendsand most striking features of the graph. Then usinggood paragraph writing structure, they describethe graph or diagram. A candidate�s opinion is notrequired.

On the other hand, for Task 2, candidates arerequired to write an academic essay which an-swers the posed question convincingly by pre-senting evidence or reasons for their point ofview. Analysing the question and determining theexact task are critical in this task. Since this is anacademic essay, examiners will be looking for anintroduction with a thesis statement or point ofview, a body with main ideas and evidence tosupport them, and a conclusion which reiteratesthe thesis or final opinion.

As noted in the other two sections, these skillsare critical for candidates contemplating a post-secondary career.

Writing scripts are marked by trained andcertified IELTS examiners who are tested andrecertified every two years. Detailed perform-ance descriptors have been developed whichdescribe written performance on the 9-band IELTSscale. These descriptors are confidential. Task 1scripts are assessed on the following criteria: Task

fulfilment, Coherence and Cohesion, and Vo-cabulary and Sentence Structure. Task 2 scripts areassessed on performance in the following areas:Arguments, Ideas and Evidence, CommunicativeQuality, and Vocabulary and Sentence Structure.

SPEAKING

The Speaking module up to June 30, 2001takes about 15 minutes and consists of an oralinterview, a conversation between the candidateand an examiner. There are five sections.

In the Introduction phase the examiner andcandidate introduce themselves. Candidates aremade to feel comfortable and encouraged to talkbriefly about their life, home, work and interests.

During the Extended Discourse phase candi-dates are encouraged to speak at length aboutsome very familiar topic of general interest orrelevance to their culture, place of living, orcountry of origin. This involves explanation, de-scription, or narration.

In the Elicitation phase the candidate is givena task card with some information on it and isencouraged to take the initiative and ask questionswhether to elicit information or to solve a prob-lem. Tasks are based on �information gap� typeactivities.

In the Speculation and Attitudes phase can-didates are encouraged to talk about their futureplans and proposed course of study. Alternatively,the examiner may choose to return to a topicraised earlier.

In the Conclusion the interview is concluded.

The Speaking Module assesses whether candi-dates have the necessary knowledge and skills tocommunicate effectively with native speakers ofEnglish. Detailed performance descriptors havebeen developed which describe spoken perform-ance at each of the 9 IELTS bands. Assessmenttakes into account evidence of communicativestrategies, and appropriate and flexible use ofgrammar and vocabulary.

The interviewer is a qualified teacher andcertified examiner appointed by the test centreand approved by The British Council or IELTSAustralia.

All interviews are recorded.

Based on new developments in language test-ing theory, technological advances, and changes

Candidates use theirown ideas, knowl-

edge and experienceand support their

arguments withexamples and

relevant evidence.

As noted in theother two sections,

these skills arecritical for candi-

dates contemplatinga post-secondary

career.


in perceptions from learners, teachers and testusers, the IELTS partners (the British Council, IDPEducation Australia, IELTS Australia, and the Uni-versity of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndi-cate) regularly review and revise IELTS. The Speak-ing Module has been undergoing a process ofreview and revision since 1998 and the revisedformat will be introduced world-wide in July2001.

The revised Speaking Module will take be-tween 11 and 14 minutes. It will consist of an oralinterview between the candidate and the exam-iner. There are three main parts and each partfulfils a specific function in terms of interactionpattern, task input and candidate output.

In Part 1, the candidate answers generalquestions about themselves, their homes/fami-lies, their jobs/studies, their interests, and a rangeof similar familiar topic areas. This part lastsbetween four and five minutes.

In Part 2 the candidate is given a verbal prompton a card and is asked to talk on a particular topic.The candidate has one minute to prepare beforespeaking at length, for between one and twominutes. Candidates can make notes if they wish.The examiner then asks one or two rounding-offquestions.

An example of the verbal prompt would be asfollows:

Describe a teacher who has greatly influencedyou in your education.

You should say:where you met themwhat subject they taughtwhat was special about them

and explain why this person influenced you somuch.

In Part 3 the examiner and candidate engagein a discussion of more abstract issues and con-cepts which are thematically linked to the topicprompt in Part 2. The discussion lasts betweenfour and five minutes. All interviews are recordedon audio cassettes.

The Speaking Module assesses whether candi-dates can communicate effectively in English.Detailed performance descriptors have been de-veloped which describe spoken performance atthe nine IELTS bands on four analytical subscales:Fluency and Coherence, Lexical Resource, Gram-

matical Range and Accuracy, and Pronunciation.

During the past ten years of teaching EAP, Ihave noticed that while colleges and universitiesstate that entrance requirements for foreign learn-ers include a speaking assessment, candidatesrarely provide one � and are accepted in spite ofthis omission. Once in the institution, they oftenhave difficulty communicating effectively withnative speakers. They also are daunted by theprospect of having to make presentations, contrib-ute opinions in seminars or present case studies.This situation is compounded at the graduate levelwhere candidates may have to lead study groupsor deliver lectures to small groups of nativespeakers.

By including modules in all four skills areas, theIELTS assures candidates (and institutions) thatthey are ready to fulfill all the language require-ments for courses in further and higher educationwhere English is the language of communication.IELTS provides a holistic approach to languagetesting in a way which tests a range of transferrableskills. IELTS is readily available at test centresaround the world which arrange test administra-tions according to local demand. It is recognizedas an entrance requirement by British, Australian,New Zealand, and Canadian universities and forsecondary, vocational and training programs. Afterbeing introduced to the U.S.A. two years ago,IELTS now has 4 tests centres and is recognized by55 major public and private universities.

Examples and information used in this presen-tation have been taken from the IELTS Handbookfrom October 2000 (which is available throughthe Conestoga College website listed below) andfrom the text Prepare for IELTS Academic Moduleswritten by Vanessa Todd and Penny Cameron andpublished by Insearch Language Centre, Univer-sity of Technology, Sydney.

Additional information on IELTS can be foundon the following websites:

www.conestogac.on.ca/ieltswww.ielts.orgwww.cambridge-efl.org.uk

Carol Trotter has taught ESL at ConestogaCollege since 1968 and for the past 10 years hasbeen teaching English for Academic Purposes.She became an IELTS examiner 4 years ago.

The revised Speak-ing Module will takebetween 11 and 14minutes. It willconsist of an oralinterview betweenthe candidate andthe examiner.

Once in the institu-tion, they often havedifficulty communi-cating effectivelywith native speakers.They also aredaunted by theprospect of havingto make presenta-tions, contributeopinions in seminarsor present casestudies.

Contact, Vol. 27, No. 2,Summer 2001 9 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

TalkEnglish Café at A.C.C.E.S.

www.accestrain.com

Since, 1986 A.C.C.E.S. (Accessible CommunityCounselling and Employment Services) has devel-oped expertise in helping newcomers find and main-tain employment.

Both program participants and employers havemade it clear that a lack of facility in English continuesto be one of the biggest work place barriers faced bymany newcomers. Although they regularly attend themany ESL Programs offered citywide, an opportunityjust to �Talk English� is in constant demand.

Good English communication skills are critical tofinding work in Toronto � for cold calling employers;for describing your skills in an interview; for network-ing with contacts and community members. They arealso critical to job maintenance - for formal workplacecommunication; for trouble-shooting and problemsolving with co-workers and supervisors; for moreinformal �water cooler� conversations whereworkplace relationships are often established.

In response, ACCES began offering a unique, fun-filled service called the Talk English Café. EveryThursday night the agency�s resource centre is trans-formed into a café. As soon as participants enter, aqualified ESL teacher and an ACCES employmentconsultant warmly greet them. The night begins withan informal chat and coffee.

Each session includes fun warm-up activities andsmall-group conversations on a variety of workplace-related topics. Participants feel comfortable to prac-tice their English conversation in a safe and encour-aging environment.

�I think the English Cafe is really good for mebecause I need to practice English and I neverthought someone could make this idea.�Carlos Bernail, Participant, Auto Mechanic

�I like the presentation part because I feelcomfortable because no one is judging me andeveryone is trying to learn. I feel I can be part ofthis group and participate.�Cristina Aquino, Participant, Human Resources

In just one year, The Talk English Café has servedover 500 participants. Café participants tell us thatthey gain a new sense of inspiration, a bigger supportnetwork and motivation to optimistically pursue aneffective job search and begin their new lives inCanada.

Allison Pond � Operations [email protected]

Shawn Mintz - Employment [email protected]

Every Thursdaynight the agency’sresource centre istransformed into a

café.

The night beginswith an informal chat

and coffee.


The CLBA-TOEFL Comparison Study

David L.E. Watt & Deidre M. Lake, University of Calgary

Introduction

English Language Proficiency (ELP) and the typesof standardized assessments that are used in deter-mining ELP can play a major role in the life opportu-nities of adult immigrants to Canada. The outcomesof ELP assessments directly affect their right to ac-cess language training programs, their inclusion inprofessional associations and their admissibility tocolleges and universities. ELP and its assessment arecritical to addressing the problem of lost humancapital among Canadian immigrants.

At present, the two most commonly used tests inCanada for determining ELP are the Canadian Lan-guage Benchmarks Assessment (CLBA) and the Testof English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). Typically,the CLBA has been used to determine the eligibilityof recent immigrants for funded language trainingprograms and for employment-oriented skills-basedprograms. It is used most often in the assessment ofindividuals with limited-to-moderate English profi-ciency. The TOEFL, on the other hand, is mostcommonly used in the assessment of individuals withmoderate to advanced levels of ELP and is most oftenassociated with meeting the language requirementsfor admission to universities and colleges or forsatisfying the language requirements for membershipin professional associations.

Despite the polarized uses of the tests, to oppo-site ends of the ELP continuum, both tests are capableof measuring a broader range of abilities. The TOEFLspans an ELP range of abilities from low-intermediateto native-like. The CLBA (Benchmarks 1-8) assessesa proficiency range from beginner to advanced. Whilethe two tests take quite different approaches to theassessment process and the specific language con-structs that they include, there is a significant overlapin the span of proficiencies that each test measures.

Many Canadian immigrants experience both theTOEFL and the CLBA as part of their languageassessment profile, during their first few years inCanada. The likelihood of someone taking both tests,coupled with the potential overlap in the test rangesand the institutional popularity of the two tests fordecision-making purposes provides a strong ration-

ale for research that investigates the relationshipbetween the two assessment instruments.

The goal of our research project was to compareCLBA and TOEFL test performances for an academi-cally and professionally-oriented clientele, in orderto better understand how the two most popularmeasures of ELP relate to each other.

Participants

The research project sought the support of lan-guage programs, colleges, universities, professionalassociations and testing centres in finding partici-pants who had recently completed the TOEFL andwere willing to take the CLBA. From those whoresponded, 121 were identified as taking the TOEFLfor reasons that were compatible with post-second-ary or professional association goals. From this group,90 participants were selected in order to minimizeany negative interpretive effect that might arise froman extended time gap between the two tests. Amedian time of three months was established as ashort enough interval to allow for a meaningful com-parison of the results from the two tests.

Next, inter-correlations of the performances ofparticipants on the various sections of the TOEFLwere compared with similar inter-correlations pro-duced by Educational Testing Service (ETS) for ageneral audience of TOEFL-takers. This was done inorder to verify that the performance of our partici-pant sample was in keeping with the performancepatterns of a more general audience. The resultsshowed a good fit between the two groups, and,therefore, allow for generalization of the findings.

Lastly, personal, occupational and educationalinformation was collected from the participants aspart of their profile. This information identified ourparticipant sample as a highly educated one, equallydivided between those seeking post-secondary ad-mission and those already admitted to Canadiancolleges and universities. It also provided evidence ofthe degree of lost human capital that exists within theparticipant group. More than half had establishedprevious professions (medical, engineering ,etc.), yetthe most commonly reported occupational experi-

Many Canadianimmigrants experi-ence both theTOEFL and theCLBA as part oftheir languageassessment profile,during their first fewyears in Canada.

The goal of ourresearch project wasto compare CLBAand TOEFL testperformances for anacademically andprofessionally-oriented clientele, inorder to betterunderstand how thetwo most popularmeasures of ELPrelate to each other.


ences in Canada were in non-skilled jobs (dishwasher,gas station attendant, office cleaner, etc.).

Test results from the TOEFL indicate that theparticipants in the research were largely able toperform well on that test. Figure 1 illustrates thedistribution of the participants across the TOEFLranges. The 193-219 range is usually associated withEnglish for Academic Purposes programs and is at thecusp of university admissibility. The 220-249 rangecovers the breadth of admission requirements foruniversities in Canada. A cut score of about 220 is acommon admission criterion for Canadianuniverisities. The 250-280 range represents excep-tional performance. Nearly 46% of the participantswere university admissible. Another 34% were at thecusp.

(listening and speaking), whereas the TOEFL meas-ures one-way listening ability, in a non-interviewcontext. It is our belief that the TOEFL tends moretowards a measurement of language knowledge andlanguage ability (the capacity to use language knowl-edge); whereas the CLBA tends more towards themeasurement of language ability and language profi-ciency (the capacity to successfully negotiate com-munication in specific contexts).

Even given these differences, the degree of corre-lation between the two tests suggests that perform-ances can be compared across their overlappingranges of ELP.

Length of Residence and its effect onperformance

Length of Residence (LOR) has been widely rec-ognized as a predictor of communicative ability in asecond language. We investigated LOR as a means ofdetermining whether its predictive power playedany role in the assessment of ELP on either of the twotests. Our purpose for investigating LOR was to shedsome light on a feature that distinguishes interna-tional students (i.e. foreign language speakers) fromimmigrant students (i.e. second language speakers).To determine the effect of LOR on the various meas-ures of the TOEFL and the CLBA, simple regressionanalysis was performed on each of the sections of thetwo tests, including the TOEFL total score. From theeight different sections of the two tests, only theCLBA listening/speaking section was significantlypredicted by LOR � Significance of F=.02.

What this finding suggests is that an individual�sperformance on the TOEFL is not affected by thekinds of communicative language gains that have beenassociated with LOR. Conversely, performance onthe oral interview within the CLBA is directly af-fected by LOR. The importance of this finding is thedegree to which it indicates the need for an oralproficiency interview in order to equitably assess theELP of an immigrant population, since they are thegroup whose ELP is most likely to have been posi-tively affected by LOR and the group who are mostlikely to be negatively affected by ELP assessmentsthat do not reflect the effects of LOR on communica-tive ability.

Establishing statistical concordancebetween the two tests

In order to provide a degree of consistency withETS practices for deriving concordance tables, a

Correlations

As expected, the CLBA and the TOEFL werefound to have a moderate correlation with eachother.

CLBA CLBA CLBAListening/ Reading WritingSpeaking

TOEFLTotal Score .4183 .5102 .6221

This correlation is in keeping with the idea thatthe two tests measure similar, though not identicallanguage constructs, and may privilege them differ-ently. It is also in keeping with the fact that the twotests have a degree of difference in what they meas-ure. The CLBA contains an oral proficiency interview

This correlation is inkeeping with theidea that the twotests measuresimilar, though notidentical languageconstructs, and mayprivilege themdifferently.

Even given thesedifferences, thedegree of correlationbetween the twotests suggests thatperformances can becompared acrosstheir overlappingranges of ELP.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Per

cent

age

of

Par

ticpa

nts

137-169 170-192 193-219 220-249 250-280

Computer-based TOEFL score distributions

Figure 1 Distribution of TOEFL Scores

Computer-based TOEFL Scores by Range


scaled score equation procedure that is used by ETSwas applied to the TOEFL total scores. This pro-duced scaled equation scores for the three sectionsof the CLBA, based uniquely on the interpolation ofreal score comparisons, generated from the study.Table 1 (last page) presents the initial heuristic con-cordance that stems from our research. The table isdivided into shaded ranges. Each range representsthe existing standard comparison set by ETS for itscomputer-based and paper-based scores. Rangesare calculated to coincide with the Standard Error ofMeasurement (SEM) for TOEFL performance. ETSdefines SEM as follows:

�The standard error of measurement (SEM) is anestimate of the probable extent of error inherent in atest score due to the imprecision of the measurementprocess�. (1997:30)

The scaled CLBA benchmarks, which are re-ported in the last three columns of Table 1, aredecimalized, to represent the continuum of scaledscores. The CLBA is not a decimalized scale ofbenchmarks. Therefore, a conservative approach ofupward rounding all decimals is suggested in order toaccount for both the heuristic nature of the scale andthe possible negative effects of future inter-raterreliability. Only scores between 137 and 280 werereported, since these represent the actual scores forthe participant sample.

Conclusions

The findings in this report are of value to a varietyof areas concerned with English Language Profi-ciency standards for academic and professional pur-poses. Foremost among these is the value to univer-sities and colleges in updating admission require-ments to reflect the language proficiency of academi-cally and professionally-oriented immigrants, by in-cluding the CLBA in its admission standards. Theheuristic concordance table provides the basis for aninformed discussion of ELP standards. While thetable represents a preliminary concordance, itpresents a reliable comparison within the limitationsof this study.

Contact information

For a full-length copy of the report in PDF format,please send an email to: [email protected]

Please type �CLBA-TOEFL Comparison Study�in the subject box of your message.

Researcher Information

David L.E. Watt is an associate professor and co-ordinator of the MED. TESL program in the Faculty ofEducation at the University of Calgary. He is anationally certified CLBA assessor and has publishedresearch in the areas of: ESL dropout, EnglishLanguage Proficiency and educational adjustment, andeducational policy in English as a Second Language.

Deidre M. Lake is the ESL/LINC program manager forthe Calgary Mennonite Centre for Newcomers, alarge, community-based ESL provider. She is anationally certified CLBA assessor, who has conductedover 3,000 assessments using the CLBA. She haspublished classroom assessment tasks related to theCLBA and works as a freelance writer/researcher onassessment issues in language and literacy.

The findings in thisreport are of value toa variety of areasconcerned withEnglish LanguageProficiency stand-ards for academicand professionalpurposes.

While the tablerepresents a prelimi-nary concordance, itpresents a reliablecomparison withinthe limitations of thisstudy.


Table 1:Algorithmic Concordance Table � Total Scaled Scores Comparison1

TOEFL TOEFL CLBA CLBA CLBAComputer-based Total Paper-based Listening/ Speaking Reading Writing

137 457 3.52 5.88 4.04140 460 3.64 5.94 4.13143 463 3.77 6.00 4.21150 470 4.05 6.14 4.42157 480 4.34 6.29 4.63160 483 4.46 6.35 4.72167 493 4.74 6.49 4.93170 497 4.86 6.55 5.01177 503 5.15 6.69 5.22180 507 5.27 6.75 5.31183 513 5.39 6.81 5.40187 517 5.56 6.89 5.52190 520 5.68 6.95 5.61193 523 5.80 7.01 5.70197 527 5.96 7.09 5.82200 533 6.09 7.15 5.90203 537 6.21 7.21 5.99207 540 6.37 7.29 6.11210 547 6.49 7.35 6.20213 550 6.62 7.41 6.29217 553 6.78 7.49 6.41220 560 6.90 7.55 6.55223 563 7.02 7.61 6.59227 567 7.19 7.69 6.70230 570 7.31 7.75 6.79233 577 7.43 7.81 6.88240 587 7.72 7.95 7.09243 593 7.84 8.01 7.18247 597 8.00 8.09 7.30250 600 8.12 8.15 7.39253 607 8.25 8.21 7.48257 613 8.41 8.29 7.59260 620 8.53 8.35 7.68263 623 8.65 8.41 7.77267 630 8.82 8.49 7.89273 637 9.06 8.61 8.19277 647 9.22 8.69 8.19280 653 9.35 8.75 8.28

1 The summary table was compiled using an algorithmic procedure from: Summary and Derivation of EquationMethods used at ETS, W.H. Angoff, 1982. In: Test Equation. Holland & Rubin (eds), Academic Press.


Vocabulary: an Interactive Systems Approach

In order to write well in English, students need tohave a broad vocabulary and they need to be able touse precise words, i.e., words that accurately de-scribe what they want to say. Learning vocabulary isvery important and many students (and teachers) donot pay enough attention to it. I believe students needto learn vocabulary in a systematic and interactiveway.

Vocabulary Myths

Students cannot learn vocabulary just by underlin-ing words in a reading and looking up their meaning.They cannot learn vocabulary when the teacher listswords on the blackboard and students copy theminto their notebooks. Students do not learn newwords only by writing a sentence using the word.

Learning Vocabulary

Acquiring a new word means that you not onlyknow its meaning, but that you can also choose theword when you speak and write and manipulate it todescribe exactly what you want to say. In order to�acquire� a new word, you must know more than itsmeaning. You must know:

� how to pronounce the word and how to spell it

� what grammatical forms the word has (i.e., itsnoun, verb, adjective form etc.)

� what social associations the word has

� whether the word is formal or informal

� what collocations the word has

� how frequently the word is used in CanadianEnglish

� the variety of contexts in which the word is used

Students must also interact with the word indifferent ways and often in order to feel comfortableusing the word. When students learn a second lan-guage, they should learn vocabulary in a systematicway.

Interacting with a new word means recognizingit when you hear others say it, or when you read it;it means writing the word and recognizing how itlooks; it means saying the word and hearing its soundsconsciously. How many syllables are in the word?Does the word have silent letters? Does the wordsound pleasing to your ear? Do you like saying theword? Interacting with a word means trying to use it

in different situations, sharing it with friends, askingabout it and so on. When students simply look up themeaning of a word in the dictionary, they are notinteracting with the word in a meaningful way.

Students should have certain steps that theyfollow to learn a new word. First, they can write theword, then look up its meaning, then guess othergrammatical forms for it and check them in thedictionary. Then they need to begin using the wordsin different contexts. They need to connect the wordwith the world outside the classroom. It is motivatingfor students when they find a word they are learningin the newspaper or hear it on the radio.

Students need to interact with others using theword and they need to interact with the word itselfand its forms in order to take ownership of it.

Background

About eight years ago I was teaching business oralcommunications to advanced ESL learners in theFaculty of Continuing Education at Seneca College.Students really wanted to improve their businessvocabulary, both formal and informal. They alsowanted to learn the idioms they heard often in thework place. Until then, I had taught vocabulary in arather traditional way: listing words on the board,asking students to look up the meanings of words andhaving them use the words in sentences or shortwritten dialogues. I also dealt with vocabulary incourse books, as many texts do include some kinds ofvocabulary activities. Because this class demandedmore of me regarding vocabulary acquisition, I beganto reflect on how I was approaching vocabulary andwhether it was really working. It wasn�t.

Why The Traditional Approach Didn�tWork

First, students were not getting enough repetitionin the vocabulary exercises. They didn�t see or use thewords often enough to really incorporate them intotheir personal word repertoire.

Second, I was not encouraging students to lookbeyond meaning. Consequently, they were not ableto use the words in different, appropriate contexts;they could not judge whether a target word could beused in a particular situation. For example, they hadlearned that �remunerate� was a formal word mean-

Students shouldhave certain stepsthat they follow tolearn a new word.First, they can writethe word, then lookup its meaning, thenguess other gram-matical forms for itand check them inthe dictionary.

Students need tointeract with othersusing the word andthey need to interactwith the word itselfand its forms inorder to take owner-ship of it.


ing to pay someone for their work or services. Whenyour superior asks you to work overtime (which theyassumed was a formal boss/subordinate situation),he or she will not say the following: �If you work onSaturday, you will be remunerated at time and a half.�The meaning is appropriate in this situation, but theword choice isn�t.

Third, students were not active enough in thelearning process. We spent more time on developingreceptive language (reading the words, listening tothe words) and not enough time producing the targetwords in a variety of forms and contexts.

Fourth, learning the vocabulary was not system-atic. Students didn�t have a consistent, step-by-stepapproach to acquiring the vocabulary. I felt this wasa weakness.

Finally, many times the target vocabulary camefrom readings or from a variety of contexts; it was notthemed. Not only do I think that vocabulary is moreeasily retained when students can associate it with aparticular theme or context, it�s also more usefulwhen they participate in a communicative functionand can directly draw from a set of vocabulary thatis related to that function.

What Makes This Approach Successful?

Six key features make this approach to learningvocabulary successful.

� SystematicStudents use a consistent approach to learningvocabulary.

� RepetitiveThis process approach encompasses a series ofactivities in which the target vocabulary is usedin different ways, but repetitively.

� InteractiveThe team orientation and the process approachensure that learners are interacting with othersand with the target vocabulary repeatedly.

� FlexibleThe series of steps in the process allow studentsto choose some of the vocabulary they are learn-ing as well as the types of activities they willcreate.

� Motivating

It is in the process of generating vocabulary activi-ties that the �real� learning happens. It is simply notpossible to create a vocabulary activity unless the

student understands and can use the target wordsappropriately.

Steps in the Process

The following description is suited to high inter-mediate to advanced-level students although I havesuccessfully used the system (with some adaptations)at the high beginner level. Students work in teams of3 or 4 over several days.

1. The teacher assigns teams eight words relatingto the current theme.

The words can be generated by themed readingsor brought forth by the teacher. The teacher lists thetarget words on the blackboard and indicates theword form. The teacher models pronunciation of thewords, with special attention to word stress andproblematic sounds (if there are any). Students repeatthe words and mark the appropriate stress once theycopy the words from the blackboard.

2. Teams work in class to discover the meaningsword forms, pronunciation, collocations, fre-quency of use etc. using dictionaries or any otherresources.

This process can take up to an hour. Studentscomplete a series of charts: Vocabulary � Meanings;Vocabulary � Beyond Meaning (see Appendix 1 B - C)to help them focus on the task. If class time is notavailable, the teacher may assign these tasks ashomework. This completes the work of the first classsession. I have done this both as a team activity andas an individual activity. I prefer the individual ap-proach because it takes less class time and allowsstudents to work at their own pace. In some teams,students divided the task, with each team membertaking responsibility for two or three of the eighttarget words.

3. Each team member looks for an additional theme-related word outside of class to bring to the nextteam session.

Students are encouraged to come up with oneadditional word from any source (newspaper, televi-sion, friends, etc.) that is related to the target theme.They must learn the word in the same way as the teamlearned the eight target words assigned by the teacher,so that the student becomes the team expert on thatword.

4. Team members work in class to share informa-tion and new target vocabulary. Each team mem-ber chooses to create a different type of vocabu-lary activity.

It is in the process ofgenerating vocabu-

lary activities thatthe “real” learning

happens. It is simplynot possible to

create a vocabularyactivity unless the

student understandsand can use the

target words appro-priately.

They must learn theword in the sameway as the team

learned the eighttarget words as-

signed by theteacher, so that the

student becomes theteam expert on that

word.


If the students completed the tasks in step 2individually at home or divided up the words tocomplete individually at home, they now share theirfindings, filling in any gaps and clearing up any misun-derstandings. Teams also share their additional words,so that each team now has eleven or twelve targetwords, eight of which are common to all teams. Eachteam member now chooses from a list the specifictype of vocabulary activity (crossword, fill-in-the-blank, meaning match, synonym, word form or col-location activity) that he/she will create individuallyat home. Each team submits a Work Sheet Summary(Appendix 1-A) to the teacher at the end of thissession, listing the teams target words and the namesof team members along with the activity type eachwill create.

Note: students must discuss each type of vocabu-lary activity (as listed above) as a class and mustcomplete each type of activity before attempting tocreate it. I provide students with a paper-basedmodel activity for each type of vocabulary exercise,so that they know exactly what their activity shouldlook like. In lower levels, I also model the process ofcreating an activity by creating a class vocabularyactivity.

5. Each team member creates a vocabulary activityat home.

Again, to save class time and to allow for self-paced learning, I prefer to let students create theirexercises individually and outside of the classroom.

6. In class, teams share their individually createdactivities and team edit the exercises.

Many teams will simply exchange activities forediting, which saves time. Other teams prefer towork on each activity as a team. Both approacheswork well, but because there is a considerable timedifference, it�s best to have all teams follow the sameapproach. I�ve taken two different approaches withedits. At very advanced levels, I ask students to bringtwo typed copies of their activities to the class: onefor the teacher and the other for team review. Be-cause the edits are usually minor, I let student makerevisions in pen on the typed page. With lower-levelstudents, I ask them to bring their activity in legiblyprinted, not typed form. After the editing process,students type the edited exercises at home and bringthem to the next class.

7. Teams exchange their edited activities with an-other team.

Teams exchange their �team package� of vo-

cabulary activities with another team who com-pletes the activities. If there is any misunderstandingor confusion, students go directly to the team whocreated the activity for clarification. The classroomis very active at this point, with students walking backand forth between teams for guidance and clarifica-tion.

Caution: students will often receive another team�spackage and divide the activities so that one teammember completes only one activity. If time is aconcern, this approach is fine. It�s preferable, how-ever, for the whole team to complete another team�spackage one activity at a time.

8. Teams return the �team packages� to the origi-nating team for correction.

Each team now looks at the activities it created,which have now been completed by another team,to ensure appropriate response. This doesn�t usuallytake long because errors and confusing elements havealready been discussed amongst the teams.

These eight steps represent the optimal condi-tions for learning the target vocabulary. �Process� isthe operative word in this approach because stu-dents learn the vocabulary in the process of creating,revising, and completing the vocabulary exercises.The �product� is secondary. That�s why I don�tworry that much about structural errors in the prod-uct, especially at the lower levels. Students acquirethe vocabulary even when the product is structurallyimperfect.

Benefits

After participating in this process students ac-quire language for the following reasons:

� The target vocabulary is repeated in each step ofthe process

� Students interact repeatedly with their peers andthe target words

� There�s an element of self-paced learning whenstudents complete some tasks individually

� Students have choice. They choose words theywant to learn and they choose activities theywant to create.

� The students are actively engaged in the learningprocess.

� Students are encouraged to self-correct and par-ticipate in peer editing.

Again, to save classtime and to allow forself-paced learning, Iprefer to let studentscreate their exercisesindividually andoutside of theclassroom.

Caution: studentswill often receiveanother team’spackage and dividethe activities so thatone team membercompletes only oneactivity. If time is aconcern, thisapproach is fine. It’spreferable, however,for the whole teamto complete anotherteam’s package oneactivity at a time.


� Students are encouraged to collect words from�real -life� sources such as newspapers, broad-casts etc., as well as look for the words they havelearned in class in �real life� contexts.

Cautionary Notes

� Teachers must provide a model activity for eachtype of exercise they expect students to create.

� Teachers must take the necessary time at thebeginning of the process to explain and model theapproach.

� Teachers will have to tolerate a slow start anderrors in the first round of activities. Once theprocess is in place, however, students will nothave problems.

� Students will attempt to use dictionary defini-tions. Insist that they use their own words todefine the target vocabulary.

� Make sure that students understand the differ-ence between a Fill-in-the-blank activity and aWord Form activity: The former will list thetarget vocabulary at the top of the exercise in theexact grammatical form as is required in theblank. The Word Form activity lists the targetvocabulary at the top of the exercise in a gram-matical form other than what is required in theblank. For example, the word listed at the topmight be the noun �liability� but the sentence mayrequire the adjective form �liable�.

Evaluation

I don�t recommend marking the student activitiesbecause due to the extensive team work, I�m not

convinced that a single activity demonstrates thecreator�s ability to use the target words. This systemis a learning process. I suggest that teachers useseparate tests to evaluate a student�s ability to use thetarget vocabulary. I have also tried with little successassigning teams marks. Stronger students resentedhaving the grades deflated by the work of weakerstudents and the marks of weaker students wereunfairly inflated.

One Size Doesn�t Fit All

Teachers often ask me if this approach will workin any situation. I�m not sure that it will, but I believeit will work in most teaching environments even atlower levels, in multi-level classes and in continuousintake programs. However, just as I had to adapt thesystem to work at lower levels, teachers may have toadapt the system to their own teaching situation. Thismay mean doing pair work rather than team work,and creating only two or three types of vocabularyactivities. I believe, though, that the system will work,even with significant alterations, as long as the keyfeatures mentioned in �What Makes This ApproachSuccessful?� remain intact.

Various work sheets and sample vocabulary ac-tivities are included in the Appendix.

Marina Engelking teaches at Seneca College�s EnglishLanguage Institute.

I suggest thatteachers use sepa-

rate tests to evaluatea student’s ability to

use the targetvocabulary.

I believe it will workin most teaching

environments evenat lower levels, in

multi-level classesand in continuous

intake programs.


Appendix 1-AVocabulary – Work Sheet Summary

Date: ________________

Team members:______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

______________________________________________________

Our fourteen words this week are:

1. ________________________

2. ________________________

3. ________________________

4. ________________________

5. ________________________

6. ________________________

7. ________________________

8. ________________________

9. ________________________

10.________________________

11.________________________

12.________________________

13.________________________

14.________________________

Our team members will create the following activities:

Check aone box for each team member.

Student’s Name Meaning Fill in the Word Crossword Synonyms Match Blank Forms

Each student must design a different activity.


Appendix 1-B Vocabulary – Meanings

Word Meaning in the context of our theme/topic

Appendix 1-C Vocabulary – Beyond Meaning

Word – mark syllables Used Used Used Common Social& word stress often ü sometimes ü rarely ü Word Connotations

Partners


Community Contact Assignments

Community Contact Assignments is an integrated-communication teaching approach to promote lan-guage learning beyond the classroom. Learning Eng-lish is not only the skill to write or read, but also theability to use these skills in the many typical situationsthat students face in this English-speaking country.

Community activities expand students� under-standing about Canadian culture and ultimately teachthem about �life skills�. This method of teachingallows students to begin to feel �at home�. They willdevelop strong communication skills that will helpthem become more active citizens in their commu-nity.

Approach

Community Contact Assignments is based on thepremise that language is the key to communication.The goal of this style of learning is to help studentsdevelop communicative competence in English bybeing exposed to real-life situations, not just role-playing in class with their peers.

When students venture to their assignment, theywill experience risk-taking situations but should notbe discouraged because learning is a process ofdiscovery. I have written a book full of resources forteachers of authentic materials of real-life demandsand situations.

Each community contact assignment takes threeweeks to complete. The teacher selects five commu-nity contact assignments, either relevant to the themeof the week or month or selects five from differentthemes. I prefer selecting five from different themes,as the students find it more stimulating and interest-ing.

The information in this book is to help studentssettle in Canadian society.

The themes, topics, and resource materials havebeen carefully researched to satisfy LINC curriculumguidelines and benchmarks.

Teachers may use this book to enhance thelistening and speaking components of the curriculumin order to improve their students� linguistic compe-tence.

COMPONENT 1: RESEARCH, WEEK 1

During the first week, the students get theirassignment task sheet and start their research.

1) Teachers should choose relevant communitycontact topics according to theme(s). Depend-ing on class size, five or six contact assignments,three students per contact, would be ideal.

2) Assignment task sheets are given to the students.Class size can be used to research providing theInternet and publications on themes are avail-able. Students can go to a local library or phoneother contacts to get additional information.

SAMPLE STUDENT TASK SHEET:

Name of Student(s) Community Contact

Igor Academic CredentialsAssessment

Sandra OSAP � student loansLarissa

Yiu Funeral HomeChan

Alfred City Hall CounselJaimie Meeting

COMPONENT 2: THE APPOINT-MENT, WEEK 2

During the second week, the teacher presents thestudents with their contact schedule. On some occa-sions, students may make their own appointmentdepending on the type of contact (i.e., DomesticDisputes, Family Issues, Legal Counseling)

� Teachers should make appointments for stu-dents in advance to ensure success. Making ap-pointments ahead of time alleviates confusionand stress for the students as well as for thecontact. This professional approach is moreproductive for the students.

� Students can make their own appointment as afinal evaluation presentation at the end of thesemester.

� Students are given their appointment and shouldbe prepared to ask questions during the inter-view. Allow approximately one hour for eachappointment.

The goal of thisstyle of learning is tohelp studentsdevelop communica-tive competence inEnglish by beingexposed to real-lifesituations, not justrole-playing in classwith their peers.

Each communitycontact assignmenttakes three weeks tocomplete. Theteacher selects fivecommunity contactassignments, eitherrelevant to the themeof the week or monthor selects five fromdifferent themes. Iprefer selecting fivefrom differentthemes, as thestudents find it morestimulating andinteresting.


SAMPLE APPOINTMENT SCHEDULE: (Multi Task)

Community Contact Contact Information Date of Appointment Student(s) Name

Educational: York University November 30, 2001 PatriciaAcademic Credentials (416) 923-1234 10:30 a.m.Assessment Contact Person:

Ms. Smith

Employment:Skills for ChangeTraining CentresCOSTI

BusinessImport / ExportSmall Business

Finance /BankingRe: OSAP /Loans, Wills /Power of Attorney

Parenting /Family Children /AdolescentsDomestic Issues

COMPONENT 3: PRESENTATION,WEEK 3

The third week, students make a presentation totheir peers on what they have learned. They shouldbe encouraged to bring pamphlets, brochures, busi-ness cards, new vocabulary and expressions to thegroup on the day of the presentation, in order toexpand the learning process.

Evaluation is optional depending on the studentsand the teacher. I prefer evaluations because mystudents like being evaluated and it gives the assign-ment credibility.

� Students get into groups and present their find-ings to their peers. Students must be able to speakabout what was real and interesting about theirassignment. They can explain new vocabulary,idioms, expressions, and, most importantly, Ca-nadian culture.

� Students can write a �thank you� letter to thecontact person to express their appreciation. Italso ensures future contacts and establishes agood rapport within the community.

Rosa Caruso teaches LINC level 5 for the TorontoDistrict School Board.

Evaluation isoptional dependingon the students andthe teacher. I prefer

evaluations becausemy students like

being evaluated andit gives the assign-

ment credibility.

Students can write a‘thank you’ letter to

the contact personto express their

appreciation.


Problems and issues in working withparaprofessionals: Teachers� perspectives

Wendy Wang

I. Introduction

In recent years, there has been an increasing useof paraprofessionals in multicultural classrooms toassist teachers meeting the diverse needs of thestudents, particularly English language learners (ELLs).State education agencies reported that about 150,000instructional paraprofessionals were working in pub-lic schools in 1985 and the number went up to500,000 in 1995 (Pickett, 1996). According to Frenchand Pickett (1997), the dramatic increase in thenumber of paraprofessionals is attributable to fivefactors: 1) the changing demographics in schools.Children whose home language is other than Englishconstitute the fastest-growing segment of the schoolpopulation in the United States. Olsen (1993) re-ported that between 1985 and 1991 the K-12 ELLpopulation increased by 51% and the number of ELLscontinues to rise, widening the language and culturalgap between the teachers and the students. 2) Therehave been increasing demands for support servicesfor the expanding number of economically and otherdisadvantaged students who are at risk of failure. 3)The federal and state legislative mandates requirelocal schools to provide services to all children andyouth who can benefit from individualized educationprograms and personalized assistance. 4) The rolesof teachers have been changing and expanding. In thecurrent education reform, teachers are being urgedto move from teacher-centered to learner-centeredteaching and from transmission of knowledge to aconstructive view of learning. As a result, the roles ofteachers are being redefined from a classroom teacherto a classroom manager. 5) There has been an ongo-ing shortage of professional practitioners, particu-larly teachers from cultural and linguistic backgroundssimilar to those of the students. Genzuk, Lavadenz,and Krashen (1994) observe that recruiting teacherswho share the language and cultural heritage of thecommunity has proven to be difficult.

Paraprofessionals are considered to be a valuableaddition to the existing instructional programs, serv-ing many ends in today�s busy classrooms. However,the use of paraprofessionals has brought with it some

problems and posed challenges to many teachers.The purpose of the study was to create a space forteachers to share their experiences and to exploreissues and concerns related to working withparaprofessionals in the classroom.

II. Method

The study was conducted with 10 classroomteachers, all female, seeking ESL endorsement in anMA-TESOL program in the United States. All re-ported to have worked or were still working withparaprofessionals in their classrooms at the time thestudy was conducted. Four participants reported tohave worked with one paraprofessional and theothers reported to have worked with from two toseveral. Data were collected through a written sur-vey, in which the participants were asked to: 1)identify paraprofessional�s roles and responsibilitieswith reference to their teaching context, and 2)describe their experiences working withparaprofessionals in classroom settings. A contentanalysis of the responses was then conducted toreflect the issues and concerns expressed by theparticipants, using categories that emerged fromrepeated readings of the data.

III. Findings

Table 2 summarizes the roles and responsibilitiesof the paraprofessionals perceived by the partici-pants. Their responses were grouped into six majorcategories: 1) resource support, 2) knowledge/skills,3) instructional support, 4) teacher-paraprofessionalrelationship, 5) personal qualities/attitudes, and 6)class management support.

Table 2: The teachers� perceptions of the rolesand responsibilities of the paraprofessionals.

Paraprofessionalsare considered to bea valuable additionto the existinginstructional pro-grams, serving manyends in today’s busyclassrooms. How-ever, the use ofparaprofessionalshas brought with itsome problems andposed challenges tomany teachers.

The study wasconducted with 10classroom teachers,all female, seekingESL endorsement inan MA-TESOLprogram in theUnited States.


Resource support

� Provide a way for student to �catch up� or makeup work they may have missed because of theopen attendance policy,

� Provide students with the opportunity to hearanother native speaker�s English (besides mine!).This can be done by using them as conversationalpartners for students, or using the volunteer in theclassroom as a speaker, helper, etc.,

� Be a link to the language and culture by being asresource that the students can come to with theirexperiences, questions, etc.,

� Act as liaisons with students� families,

� Translate documents for teachers when neededat meetings,

� Supply an additional personal touch and showempathy and concern for students as they adjustto a new language and culture,

� Be able to help me understand the culture andwhat is going on in the community (holiday,celebrations, etc.) as well as a translator andinterpreter.

Knowledge/skills

� Have an awareness of methods and theories ofteaching ESL,

� Become familiar with students� work and abili-ties, so as to be better able to anticipate theirneeds,

� Be culturally sensitive,

� Be aware of child development,

� Be aware of appropriate management techniques,

� Value children�s independence (a biggie for me).

Instructional support

� Provide instruction with under the teacher�ssupervision;

� Assist me in any activities that relate to studentneeds;

� Work with individual students on as-needed ba-sis;

� Assist the teacher in meeting individual needs ofthe students by following lessons planned by theteacher;

� Assist the teacher with planning of daily routineand education.

Teacher-paraprofessional relationship

� Be aware that there are boundaries between theteacher and paraprofessionals and not to crossthem.

� Be able to work with me as well as the studentsthat I assign to her. There should be no �clash� ofinterest,

� Follow teacher�s lead.

Personal qualities/attitude

� Be honest and responsible,

� Be present in class and not late,

� Be creative and willing to accept the ideas ofothers.

Class management support

� Be able to keep membership record (daily as wellas help do the end-of-the-year records for eachstudent).

It is clear from the data that there is a wide rangeof roles and duties that paraprofessionals are ex-pected to fulfill. Most participants viewedparaprofessionals as resource people. Some expectedthem to be aware of and/or have the knowledge/skillsrequired for the teaching context. A few expected theparaprofessionals to provide instructional support,though the instruction had to be under the teacher�ssupervision. It was interesting to note that someparticipants brought up issues related to the teacher-paraprofessional relationship. The words �bound-ary� and �clash� used by the participants indicatepotential tension between the teacher and theparaprofessional. In terms of personal qualities andattitudes, the participants considered honesty, re-sponsibility, creativity, and good attendance to beessential. One participant expected theparaprofessional to provide class management sup-port, such as record keeping. Considering that �sec-retarial assistance remains the most common teacheraide assignment at all levels� (Haselkorn & Fideler,1996: 11), it was interesting to note that none of theparticipants viewed the paraprofessionals as �secre-taries for teachers�. Instead they expected theparaprofessionals to be part of the instructional team.This finding is consistent with Pickett�s (1997) obser-vation that there has been a shift in theparaprofessionals� role from performing primarilyclerical duties to providing instructional support.

It is clear from thedata that there is awide range of roles

and duties thatparaprofessionals

are expected tofulfill.

The words ‘bound-ary’ and ‘clash’

used by the partici-pants indicate

potential tensionbetween the teacher

and theparaprofessional.


The roles and duties that paraprofessionals areexpected to fulfill may vary from program to pro-gram, but they are a definite asset to today�s busyclassrooms. One participant observed:

With the elementary students, theparaprofessionals play a more basic but vitalrole, helping out with �the tedious work thatteachers get bogged down with�, such as takingattendance, making copies, keeping students inline in the hallway, maintaining students� folders,and making phone calls. At the secondary level,the role of the paraprofessionals becomes evenmore vital. The majority of students have somecapability in English, but this year, 5 studentsentered at zero-level. The paraprofessionals arethe primary teachers for those students, workingwith them at two separate tables while the ESLteacher works with the rest of the class. (RH,May 2000).

Another participant noted:

The paraprofessionals at our school are there toperform a number of different functions. They areplaced in lower grades, especially with newteachers, to assist them. Assisting can meanmyriad different things. Generally, these func-tions are restricted to tasks such as writing latepasses, copying papers, taking children to lunch,bathroom, etc., monitoring the children�sbehavior and/or assisting children alone or ingroup. On occasion, they will actually conduct amini-lesson with small groups in things such asletter, number recognition, audit their reading,etc. (FN, May, 2000)

In a busy classroom where an �extra� hand isneeded, several participants reported having ben-efited from having a paraprofessional in their class atone time or another.

My parapro is a former teacher from Poland. I doall the planning and grading, but we teach to-gether. She works with the lower ability stu-dents, and I work with the higher ability students.She does an excellent job and we get alongwonderfully. (JW, May 2000)

My experience in working with paraprofessionalshas been mixed. One very positive experience Ihave had involved a paraprofessional who wasa 1:1 aide to a Japanese ESL child with autism.Although the young TA had had no specific

training to work with special needs children, shewas devoted, sensitive, creative and gifted in herwork with him. He made great progress in hiswork with her. (CN, May 2000)

I had one paraprofessional who was with me forsummer school, who was very helpful and whohad been at the job longer than I had beenteaching, but we worked together very well. Shewould take groups for some reinforcement workat times and she would also monitor groups withme when the children did partner or group work.It was good. (FN, May 2000)

While many factors may have contributed to thesuccessful experience of these participants, two key�attributes� were identified by a participant that wouldmake someone an �ideal� paraprofessional: 1) theability to manage assigned tasks without any super-vision, and 2) the awareness of what the participantscalled the ̀ boundary�.

There is a paraprofessional in my class. She is atrained teacher from Poland, who has six yearsof experience working with ESL students. She isan ideal paraprofessional for two reasons. One isthat since she is a teacher who has experiencewith ESL students; I can consult with her aboutmethods and planning. The other is that sheknows that there are boundaries, that I am theteacher, and that she is there to help. She neveroversteps this boundary. We have an excellentrelationship, and I am very lucky to work withher. (JW, May 2000)

This participant was lucky to have such an expe-rienced and competent teacher work in her class asa paraprofessional; however, it is simply unrealisticto assume that she is representative of allparaprofessionals working in public schools. In fact,like children coming in all sizes and languages,paraprofessionals come with different experiencesand skills. Some may be well-prepared for the com-plexity of the classroom; others may bring only a�sincere desire to help in the education setting�(Heller, 1997:223). However, the use ofparaprofessionals has not been all positive experi-ence for the participants in the study. Analysis of theirexperiences working with the paraprofessionals invarious teaching contexts revealed a number of issuesthat need to be addressed: 1) the �boundary� issue; 2)the supervision issue; 3) the time issue; 4) the trainingissue; and 5) the random assignment issue.

In a busy classroomwhere an ‘extra’hand is needed,several participantsreported havingbenefited fromhaving aparaprofessional intheir class at onetime or another.

While many factorsmay have contrib-uted to the success-ful experience ofthese participants,two key ‘attributes’were identified by aparticipant thatwould make some-one an ‘ideal’paraprofessional: 1)the ability to manageassigned taskswithout any supervi-sion, and 2) theawareness of whatthe participantscalled the `bound-ary’.


The �Boundary� Issue

The first issue of concern expressed by severalparticipants was what they called the �boundary�problem. One participant noted:

My most painful problems have arisen from work-ing with the two �instructional assistants� I havehad (have) and one 13-year volunteer (�). Twoother volunteers have been wonderful. The as-sistants and I have clashed over �Who is theteacher� problem, mostly. The volunteer and Ihave the same problem. The volunteer told meonce that she �gets her strength to live throughthe students.� (No pressure there!). I plan to askif she can only come on Tuesdays as a compro-mise. (She�s been coming all day, every day). Herneeds outweigh the classroom needs. (AB, May2000)

The clash over �who is the teacher� problemexemplifies what Pickett and Gerlach (1997) havereferred to as �blurred or unclear lines of authority inthe classroom� (p.221). It was clear from the datathat the relationship between the participant and theparaprofessional was a tense one. This may havestemmed from several factors. One of the factors, asone participant pointed out, is that there was a lackof clear-cut roles for the paraprofessionals. In aneffort to establish their classroom authority, theparaprofessionals, due to the open-ended nature oftheir job description, may have lost sight of the�invisible� boundary and diluted the authority of theclassroom teacher. When cases of overstepping the`boundaries� happen, everyone lost: the teacher feltfrustrated, the paraprofessional felt unappreciatedby the teacher, and the students got caught in be-tween and suffered most. Through her painful expe-rience, the participant realized that although she washeld responsible and accountable by the schoolsystem for what occurred in the classroom, she didnot have the authority to define the roles and respon-sibilities of the paraprofessional assigned to workwith her.

The Supervision Issue

Related to the boundary problem is the concernin regards to who is in charge of supervising theparaprofessionals. While paraprofessionals are typi-cally assumed to be working under the supervision ofthe classroom teacher, it appeared to be ironic to theparticipants in the study that they did not feel like asupervisor because they were never formally as-

signed to take on the supervisory role. As one partici-pant noted:

The negative experiences I have had involvedtrying to work within a system in which neitherroles nor responsibilities were defined. Findingmyself in a position of responsibility withoutbeing given the requisite authority has been afrustrating and ineffective place to be. (CN, May2000)

Neither did the participants feel like being treatedas a supervisor. One participant noted that theparaprofessionals in her school were given a hand-book when they were first hired. In the handbook,paraprofessionals are defined as: �work directly ontasks which are of a routine nature, or supplement andreinforce instruction under meaningful direction andsupervision of a certified classroom teacher.� How-ever, as a teacher, the participant never even re-ceived a copy of the paraprofessional handbook as areference and was never given guidelines on how togo about this supervision. What was further puzzlingwas that if teachers were supposed to supervise theparaprofessionals working with them, how comethey were not invited to be part of the hiring andevaluation process? As one participant stated:

My concern would have to be the accountabilityof the parapros� time and efforts. � teachers arein no way allowed to be a part of the evaluationprocess, wasting a precious opportunity to com-municate expectations and constructive criti-cism to improve parapros� job performance .(MC, May 2000).

Without having the requisite authority, the par-ticipants reported that they failed to act like a super-visor. In most cases, they felt powerless.

The absolute truth of the matter is, however, thataccording to most of the teachers in the building,the paraprofessionals are �under-used�. Theysay that in many cases (not all), their assistantsreally don�t assist at all, but just sit in the class-room until their time is up. I�m sure there couldbe a number of reasons for this, perhaps onebeing that the directions from the teacher mayhave been unclear and perhaps theparaprofessional does not want to overstep her/his bounds. Nonetheless, in some cases there isalso the opposite situation, where they are dis-ruptive in the class by continually reprimandingchildren at the wrong times and raising theirvoices to children and in that case, making arowdy class worse. (FN, May 2000)

What was furtherpuzzling was that if

teachers weresupposed to super-

vise theparaprofessionals

working with them,how come they were

not invited to be partof the hiring and

evaluation process?

The absolute truthof the matter is,

however, thataccording to most of

the teachers in thebuilding, the

paraprofessionalsare “under-used”.

They say that inmany cases (not all),

their assistantsreally don’t assist atall, but just sit in theclassroom until their

time is up.


The Time Issue

A good example illustrating the participants� strug-gle in the position of assumed responsibility withoutbeing given the requisite authority is that there wasno planning time set aside for them to meet with theparaprofessionals. In fact, finding time to meet withthe paraprofessionals has been a thorny issue for theover-loaded teachers. In most schools and programs,the paraprofessionals� schedules are often deter-mined by the building principal, who informs them oftime and teachers they would be working withoutprior consultation with the teachers. As a result, theparticipants in the study often found themselves giv-ing directions to the paraprofessionals on the spot. Asone participant noted:

Parapros are not quite sure what is expected ofthem and feel confused and unappreciated by theteachers whose room they share. Adding to thisproblem is the fact that no time is set aside forteachers and parapros to communicate. � (MC,May 2000)

Another participant commented:

� the classroom teacher doesn�t even have timeto explain the paraprofessional�s tasks for theday, let alone show them how to do it!! (AT, May2000)

According to the participants, finding time for asit-down meeting to plan and discuss issues with theirparaprofessional was almost impossible. Oftentimes,their communication was either non-existent or re-duced to a few minutes before or after the class. Lackof planning time appears to be a typical occurrenceamong classroom teachers (French, 1997). In onestudy, French (1997) found that �25% of the teach-ers who supervised paraeducators admitted thatthey never held formalized, sit-down meetings; an-other 25% said that such meetings were rare� (p.129).If, as French maintains, �Giving directions, providingon-the-job training, providing feedback on perform-ance, solving problems, managing conflicts, commu-nicating about goals, and evaluation are functions thatare primarily accomplished when sitting face to face�(p.129), it is hard to image how classroom teacherscan possibly assume the supervisory role when theyare neither given the requisite authority nor the timeto do so.

The Training Issue

A fourth issue of concern is training ofparaprofessionals. As the teachers� roles are expand-

ing, so are the roles and responsibilities of theparaprofessionals. This raises several questions:whose responsibility is it to provide training, bothglobal and specific, to the paraprofessionals? Howmuch familiarity are paraprofessionals required tohave with the student population they are serving?How much do they need to know about educationaltheory and specific teaching strategies? How can weexpect paraprofessionals to do the instructional tasksif they have never been trained how? As mentionedearlier, paraprofessionals are often assumed to beworking under the supervision of a certified class-room teacher. When it comes to the training ofparaprofessionals, teachers are once again expectedto assume the responsibility. As one participant men-tioned, providing on-the-job training toparaprofessionals, proved to be a daunting task.

I also had a girl from Russia helping last year inthe afternoon. The big problem that I had withher was that she wanted the slow students tolearn the content that her son (in 1st grade andvery smart) was learning in school. It took me awhile to get her to understand that adult 2nd

language learners don�t learn in the same way asyoung children do. It was a struggle, but she finallyunderstood! �� (MLC, May 2000)

Providing on-the-job training takes time and en-ergy that has rarely been recognized and appreciatedby the administrators. One participant commentedthat after all these years of working with a number ofparaprofessionals, no one ever came up to her andasked, �How are you doing with theparaprofessional?� (RH, May 2000)

The Random Assignment Issue

Another issue of concern expressed by the par-ticipants is the fact that there seems to be a randomassignment of paraprofessionals to teachers. Therehas been no consideration of matchingparaprofessionals� likes and dislikes, skills, talents,experiences and what duties they are expected toperform and who they would work well with. In mostschools, paraprofessionals are placed in lower grades,especially with new teachers, to assist them. How-ever, neither the teacher nor the paraprofessionalhas a say in the selection and assigning processing.Random pairing of teachers and paraprofessionals,like a blind date, often results in inappropriate matchesthat may impair their performance. One participantnoted:

According to theparticipants, findingtime for a sit-downmeeting to plan anddiscuss issues withtheirparaprofessional wasalmost impossible.Oftentimes, theircommunication waseither non-existentor reduced to a fewminutes before orafter the class.

Providing on-the-jobtraining takes timeand energy that hasrarely been recog-nized and appreci-ated by the adminis-trators. One partici-pant commented thatafter all these yearsof working with anumber ofparaprofessionals,no one ever came upto her and asked,“How are you doingwith theparaprofessional?”(RH, May 2000)


It is a fact of life that we are all human andsometimes personalities clash so much that team-work is the last thing being modeled for thechildren. � From what I�ve heard and/or seen,some paraprofessionals are placed in classroomswhere it is quite evident that the teacher doesn�twant a paraprofessional or a paraprofessional isplaced in a classroom where it is not a desirableplace for her to be. (FN, May 2000)

One participant commented that a better jobcould be done if administration had some room fordiscussion regarding placements and, at least, givethe teacher information about the paraprofessionalsin regard to what they had experience in. In the sameway, paraprofessionals should be given informationon what jobs they are expected to do and if theyprefer to work with anyone. The essence of all this isthat children would ultimately be better served byappropriate matches.

IV. Discussion and implications

The issues and concerns expressed by the partici-pants in the study should be examined at two levels:the classroom level and the administrative level.

At the classroom level, tension between theteacher and the paraprofessional can be attributed tothe nature of the preparation for school professionalsand paraprofessionals. As Pickett (1997) observes,�most teacher education programs have not revisedcurriculum content to prepare teachers to plan for,delegate, or assign tasks, assess paraeducator skillsand performance, and provide on-the-job training�(p.13). In a survey conducted by French (1995) aboutteachers� preparation for the supervisory role theyare to assume, the majority of the teachers (82%)reported that they had received no formal, universitypreparation for working with paraprofessionals. Oneteacher reported:

There really isn�t any training out there. Youknow, when you go through teacher trainingcourses in college, nobody even approaches thesubject, and then you�re put in a situation and youhave a paraprofessional and you tend to learn itby doing, and things hopefully get better in a yearor so. (cited from French & Pickett, 1997: 63)

Without adequate training, many teachers findthemselves working with a paraprofessional beforethey have ever had a serious thought about whatroles a paraprofessional may play in the classroom.The challenge of working with a paraprofessional is

that it changes the concept of classroom autonomyfor the teacher. Once a teacher opens his/her doorto another adult, a paraprofessional in this case, he/she is embracing teamwork that he/she may or maynot be ready for. According to Heller (1997), �Theconcept of �team� is important to an effective profes-sional and paraprofessional relationship; yet, it is adifficult concept to achieve. The team concept re-quires sharing, cooperation, collaboration, mutualunderstanding, shared goals, and a respect for therole(s) of everyone on the team.� (p.221). Obviously,successful teamwork doesn�t happen simply when aparaprofessional is assigned to the teacher. Team-work needs to be built and each team is only as goodas the members who comprise it. Yet, the majorityof the teachers may not have the knowledge and skillsto cope with the extra amount of work needed tomake their team work. Neither do theparaprofessionals. Many paraprofessionals walk intothe classroom with little preparation in terms oflearning about the roles of school professionals.While they bring a sincere desire to help, they oftenhave limited training to perform the tasks they areassigned to. Findings from the study provides em-pirical information, suggesting that if the end goal isto provide quality instruction to meet the diverseneeds of the ELL population, both pre- and in-servicetraining should be made available to teachers. Pro-spective teachers should be required to docoursework in supervision, and mandatory in-servicetraining should be provided to teachers working withparaprofessionals. Since paraprofessionals are partof the instructional team in a school, the training mustbe extended to them as well.

However, providing training to teachers andparaprofessionals is only part of the solution. It wasobvious from the data that many of the dilemmas thatteachers faced could be attributed to the lack ofresponsibility to ensure the effective use of theparaprofessionals at the administrative level. Find-ings from the study indicate that it is problematic toassume that teachers are prepared to take on thesupervisory role without appropriate training. It is ofeven greater concern if teachers continue to be ex-pected to assume the role of a supervisor without aclear mandate and the time needed to provide on-the-job training to the paraprofessionals and do thesupervisory job. It is time for the administrators toaddress the issues expressed by the participants andrecognize that the responsibility of effectively utiliz-ing the paraprofessionals rests just as much with theteachers as with them. Both teachers and adminis-

One participantcommented that a

better job could bedone if administra-

tion had some roomfor discussion

regarding place-ments and, at least,

give the teacherinformation about

theparaprofessionals inregard to what they

had experience in.

Findings from thestudy indicate that it

is problematic toassume that teachersare prepared to takeon the supervisoryrole without appro-

priate training.


trators serve as critical catalysts in effecting changeand improvement in the use of paraprofessionals tobetter serve the diverse needs of ELLs in today�sclassrooms.

References

Haselkorn, D. & Fideler, E. (1996). Who areparaeducators and what are their roles? In D.Haselkorn & E. Fideler, Breaking the Class Ceiling:Paraeducator Pathways to Teaching (pp.9-20).Belmont, MA: Recruiting New Teachers, Inc.

Heller, W. (1997). Professional and ethical responsi-bilities of teacher members. In Pickett, A.L. &Gerlach, K. (Eds.), Supervising Paraeducators inSchool Settings: A Team Approach (pp.207-234).Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

French, N.K. (1997). Management of Paraeducators.In Pickett, A.L. & Gerlach, K. (Eds.), SupervisingParaeducators in School Settings: A Team Approach(pp.91-169). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.

French, N.K. & Pickett, A.L. (1997). Paraprofessionalsin special education: Issues for teacher educa-tors. Teacher Education and Special Education,20(1): 61-73.

Genzuk, M., Lavadenz, M. & Krashen, S. (1994). Para-educators: A source for remedying the shortageof teachers for limited English-proficiency stu-dents. The Journal of Educational Issues of Lan-guage Minority Students, 14(4): 211-222.

Olsen, R.E. (1993). A survey of LEP students and adultESL enrollment in U.S. public schools. Paperpresented at the Language Minority StudentEnrollment Data Symposium, 27th Annual TESOLConvention, Atlanta, GA.

Pickett, A.L. (1997). A Training Program to PrepareTeachers to Supervise and Work Effectively withParaeducator Personnel. The National ResourceCenter for Paraprofessionals in Education andRelated Services, Center for Advanced Study inEducation, City University of New York.

Picket, A.L. (1996). A state of the art report onparaeducators in education and related services.New York: National Resource Center forParaprofessionals.

Pickett, A. L. & Gerlach, K. (Eds.) (1997). SupervisingParaeducators in School Settings: A Team Ap-proach. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.

Salzberg, C. & Morgan, J. (1995). Preparing teachersto work with paraeducators. Teacher Educationand Special Education, 18(1): 49-55.

Wendy Wang is Assistant Professor of ESL/TESOL atEastern Michigan University. Her current work isfocused on TESOL teacher education.


The CLBA and the Measurement and Develop-ment of Proficiency through Language Education

Theresa Hyland

The following is a brief comment on the �Re-sponse to �A Critical Review of the CLBA�� by CarolynCohen and Gail Stewart and �Comments on Hylandand Lee�s �A Critical Review of the Canadian Lan-guage Benchmarks Assessment�� by Marg Fortin.These articles appeared in the Contact, Vol. 27(1)Spring, 2001.

First of all, I would like to thank both Marg Fortinand Gail Stewart and Carolyn Cohen for the meticu-lous reading of the Hyland and Lee Critical Review.I agree with Marg Fortin that the CLB and the CLBAare a good step forward in the creation of a profes-sional set of standards for the assessment and teach-ing of ESL. However, I also believe that it is necessaryto engage in a discussion about the theoretical under-pinnings of the assessment. An examination of theterminology in my article and in the two commentar-ies about it reveals fundamental differences in phi-losophy of second language education. I would like tobriefly explore these differences by contrasting sev-eral pairs of terms that appear both in my article andin the responses to it. They are: proficiency versusplacement assessment, education versus training, andhigh-stakes versus low stakes assessments.

Proficiency assessment/placement assessment:Canale (1988) defines proficiency as analyzed andunanalyzed knowledge as well as a degree of controlover knowledge and skills. Cummins (1984) distin-guishes between the student�s ability to function inEnglish through �surface fluency� and �morecognitively and academically related aspects of pro-ficiency�1 . Proficiency assessment, by these defini-tions, must measure a student�s global ability toperform in English. Proficiency can be assessedthrough the successful completion of certain kinds oftasks, but the nature of the tasks is crucial. Tasks canrequire skills that are generic or transferable, or theycan require discrete skills that are useful in only onesituation. If tasks are to demonstrate proficiency in alanguage (or global ability), they must require trans-ferable skills (i.e. skills that will be used in more thanone language situation). For instance, writing a letterrequires both the discrete skill of letter formattingand the transferable skills of writing coherent sen-tences, creating an argument, addressing a specificaudience, and dividing an argument into paragraphs.

Placement assessment2 is done so that students ofsimilar skill-levels can be put together in a classroom.Placement assessment can be done using tasks thatdemonstrate discrete skills. In fact, it is easier to formclasses of similar skill levels by using discrete skilltasks. Language acquisition is often measured by suchdiscrete-skills tasks: students can or cannot use thepresent perfect, create simple or complex sentences,or fill in forms. Such discrete-item skills do not,however, measure proficiency, and that is where theCLBA has problems. It mixes discrete skill tasks (suchas filling out forms) with generic skills tasks (such aswriting letters) and refers to a student�s ability toperform both sets of tasks as proficiently. Epp andStawychny in the Spring 2001 issue of the TESLCanada Journal make a neat distinction betweenproficiency assessment and placement assessment.�L2 students at any level would perform much betteron the CLB Level 6 task than on the CLB Level 11 task.The TOEFL and the CanTEST, on the other hand,require all students to perform on the same task(writing an analytical essay) regardless of their levelof language proficiency� (42). I take this statement tomean that the TOEFL nad the CanTEST use tasks thatassess a student�s proficiency and not the student�sability to perform discrete skill tasks. Fortin main-tains that �the question here is not whether the CLBAis a placement or a proficiency test, but whether theCLBA, which is a proficiency test, is as useful as itcould be� (19). My argument remains that such a mixof tasks is not able to assess proficiency because notall the tasks on the assessment require transferableskills. Similarly, it is not a good assessment for place-ment because only some of the tasks measure discreteskills.

Education/training: Fortin objects when we(Hyland and Lee) state that language acquisition isdefined as training in the CLB because she sees noreference to the word training in the CLB WorkingDocument. My argument is that the words used in theCLB document are words that are best used todescribe training: e.g. competencies, functions, out-comes, mastery, sets of rules and degree of perform-ance. On the other hand, words that are suitable forthe creation of language education benchmarks arewords like critical analysis, evaluation, problem-

Language acquisi-tion is often meas-

ured by suchdiscrete-skills tasks:

students can orcannot use the

present perfect,create simple or

complex sentences,or fill in forms. Such

discrete-item skillsdo not, however,

measure proficiency,and that is where theCLBA has problems.

My argumentremains that such a

mix of tasks is notable to assess

proficiency becausenot all the tasks on

the assessmentrequire transferableskills. Similarly, it isnot a good assess-ment for placementbecause only some

of the tasks measurediscrete skills.


solving, exploration. I see none of these words occur-ring in either the introduction to the CLB Document,nor in the description of Benchmark competenciesuntil Benchmarks 9-12. Since the CLBA for the presentonly assesses competencies of the first eight bench-marks, the conclusion that I have drawn is that theexclusion of these terms in the CLB Working Docu-ment, and the CLBA by implication, view languageteaching as language training.

Fortin lists an admirable number of tasks that shedoes to ensure that her students are educated ratherthan trained. However, test constructors cannotassume that all teachers will always teach what theybelieve to be good practice, and will remainuninfluenced by the format of the assessment thattheir students will be required to take. For example,if the CLB makes a distinction between tasks forcommunity, study and work, but the CLBA collapsessuch distinctions in some of the assessment tasks,there is the possibility that students will be confusedby the task requirements in the assessment. If thisconfusion takes the form of feedback that studentsgive their teachers, then teachers will be drawntowards teaching to the requirements of the assess-ment rather than to the intentions of the Bench-marks3 .

High stakes/ low stakes: Stewart and Cohenquote Norton and Stewart�s assertion that the CLBAis a �low-stakes work in progress�(qtd. in Stewart &Cohen, 2001, 24), and assert that it was never thetest-developers intention that it be used for high-stakes purposes. A high-stakes assessment is one thathas consequences. The CLBA Website states that thetest should be used for �eligibility determination forlanguage training programmes, needs assessment,referral to appropriate training� (http://www.clba.com/uses%20.htm). If the CLBA is beingused by some administrators to place students inLINC classes, and if Benchmark 8 is considered thecut-off for students to enter academic programmes insome adult high-schools, these are uses which turnthe CLBA into a high-stakes assessment. In contrast,a low-stakes assessment is one that does not affectstudent placement in classes, but is administered togive students an indication of their strengths andweaknesses in performance. Please let me use theWriting Proficiency Assessment that I have helped todevelop at Huron University College as an exampleof a low-stakes assessment. All students must take theassessment on entering the College and again beforethey graduate. Student performance on the assess-ment generates a full page of written comments that

indicate the students� strengths and weaknesses inacademic writing. Students may use the informationto seek out writing instruction if they so choose, butthe results of the assessment do not appear on thestudents� transcripts, nor are they used to forcestudents into writing classes.

Let me close by saying that I am not an enemy ofthe CLB or the CLBA. Since I have been involved infive years of test construction, pilot-tests and admin-istration of the Writing Proficiency Assessment atHuron University College, I appreciate the immenseamount of care and effort that has gone into thedevelopment of the CLB and CLBA. Since we are allmembers of a profession that is struggling to beaccepted as serious and intellectually rigorous, wemust be our own best critics.

In addition to teaching Language and Culture for theHuron-Liaoning North American Studies Programme,Theresa Hyland has helped develop and administerthe Huron University College Generic Skills WritingProficiency Assessment since 1996.

References

Bachman, L. & Clark J.L.D. (March, 1987). Themeasurement of foreign/second language profi-ciency. Annals: AAPSS. 490, 20-33.

Canale, M. (1988). The measurement of communica-tive competence. Annual Review of Applied Lin-guistics 8, 67-84.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada. (1996). Cana-dian Language Benchmarks Assessment Website.http://www.clba.com/uses%20.htm

Cumming, A. (1996). The concept of validation inlanguage testing. In A. Cumming $ R. Berwick(Eds.), Validation in language testing (pp 1-14).Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.

Cumming, A. (1997). The testing of writing in asecond language. In C. Clapham and D. Corson(Eds). Encyclopedia of Language and Education.7 (pp. 51-63). Netherlands: Kluwer AP.

Cummins, J. (1984). Wanted: A theoretical frame-work for relating language proficiency to aca-demic achievement among bilingual students. InC. Rivera (Ed.) LING 452: Second LanguageAssessment. 2-19.

Epp, L. & Stawychyn, M. (Spring, 2001). Using theCanadian Language Benchmarks to benchmarkcollege programs/courses and language profi-

However, testconstructors cannotassume that allteachers will alwaysteach what theybelieve to be goodpractice, and willremain uninfluencedby the format of theassessment thattheir students will berequired to take.

If this confusiontakes the form offeedback thatstudents give theirteachers, thenteachers will bedrawn towardsteaching to therequirements of theassessment ratherthan to the inten-tions of the Bench-marks.


ciency tests. TESL Canada Journal.18:2, 32-44.

Fortin, M. (Spring, 2001). Comments on Hyland andLee�s �Critical review of the Canadian LanguageBenchmarks Assessment�. In TESL Contact 27:1,19-23.

Huron University College (2000). Generic SkillsWriting Proficiency Assessment Website. http://www.huronuc.on.ca/studentserv ices/Welcomegensk.html

Stewart, G. & Cohen, C.(Spring, 2001). A response to�A critical review of the CLBA�. TESL Contact.27: 1, 24.

1. For definitions of language proficiency, please seeCummins (1984) �Wanted: A theoretical frame-work for relating language proficiency to aca-demic achievement among bilingual students�,p.21; Bachman and Clark (1987) �The measure-ment of foreign/second language proficiency.�P.22; and Canale (1988) �The measurement ofcommunicative competence� p. 68-9.

2. For a discussion of single-trait and multi-traitassessment, and its use for assessment of profi-ciency or achievement, please see Cumming(1997) �The testing of writing in a second lan-guage� p.54.

3. For a discussion of the consequential bases ofconstruct validation, on the practice of class-room teachers, see Cumming (1996) Introduc-tion: The concept of validation in Language Test-ing. Validation in Language Testing p.12.

Special thanks toRenate Tilson, ourExecutive Director,

for the countlesshours she committed

to this project. Wesincerely appreciate

the input andsupport Renateprovided as the

brochure developed.

Take a look ... then pass it on!Announcing the NEW TESL Ontario Membership brochure

This membership guide is distributed among government departments, community serviceagencies, language and teacher training institutions, and ESL professionals in order to promote theactivites of TESL Ontario and its members. We�ve updated our brochure in order to reflect the rangeof settings and situations where ESL instruction takes place, be it elementary school, the workplace,or a private institution.

Along with the Mission Statement which affirms our role in English as a Second Language andEnglish Literacy Development (ESL/ELD), the brochure includes an organizational chart to illustratethe structure of TESL Ontario. We have also outlined our working relationship with governmentand advisory groups (such as OTF, MTCU, OASIS) and described the scope and value of our annualconference / technology fair.

New to this brochure is a summary of the Certification process which explains the work of theProfessional Standards Advisory Committee. Perhaps most importantly, the brochure includes asection on the significant work carried out by TESL members in affiliates across the province, whereESL advocacy and professional development are put into practice in myriad ways throughout theyear.

In addition, the publication you are reading, Contact, is described in the brochure since it isincluded with a membership in TESL Ontario. You may notice a similarity between the brochureand the updated masthead of Contact. For these beautiful creations, we congratulate Denyse Marionof ART and FACTS Design. Having based her design on the TESL Ontario logo, Denyse has capturedthe dynamic quality of our organization with her use of colour and graphics.

We feel that the brochure is a reflection of the ability of ESL professionals to nurture and supportour students, as well as the pride we take in belonging to our professional association. We hope youagree, and are willing to share your brochure with your friends and colleagues.

We’ve got a good thing going ... let’s get the word out!


Mutual Expectations: Instructional Supervi-sion and Effective Teaching

�They who educate children well are more to be honoured than they who produce them.�

Aristotle

tion. It holds up a mirror so that teachers can seewhat they are actually doing while teaching.(What teachers are doing may be quite differentfrom what they think they are doing.)

� To diagnose instructional problems. Usingconference techniques and observational records,supervisors can help teachers pinpoint specificdiscrepancies between what they are doing andwhat they need to do.

� To help teachers develop skills in usinginstructional strategies that are effective inpromoting learning, motivating students andmanaging the classroom.

� To evaluate teachers for promotion, tenureor other decisions through systematic class-room observation, the collection of data andconference discussions outside the classroomwhich will provide the supervisor with a basis forevaluating a teacher's competence.

� To help teachers develop a positive attitudetowards continuous professional develop-ment.

� To provide emotional support and reassur-ance by responding to a teacher's anxiety orinsecurity (counselling). Many teachers, espe-cially new and inexperienced ones, have overtanxiety and insecurity about their ability to per-form well in the classroom. Some teachers mayexperience temporary personal problems thatmay affect that classroom performance.

� To give advice and support regarding in-structional materials teachers are using. Arethe materials suitable? How should they be used?What alternative materials should be used? Howmuch should be on each curriculum unit? Whatare the new curriculum policies and guidelines?

Introduction

My direct involvement with many teachers forthe past few years as an ESL program consultanttriggered the idea for a presentation on instructional

Rationale

Many teachers do not approve of the differenttypes of supervisory systems existing today. This isattributed either to the fact that they have never hadthe experience of working in a system that valuesinstructional supervisory practice, or to the fact thatthey had a negative and disappointing supervisionexperience. This paper will discuss the differentmodels of existing supervisory systems and whyteachers are increasingly resentful of them. It will,more importantly, analyse the characteristics of ef-fective supervision and attempt to explore alternativestrategies that are more teacher-centred and conse-quently more acceptable by teachers.

Objectives

� Participants will reflect on the purpose of super-vision and evaluation.

� Participants will discuss the different existingsupervisory models and their effects on teachingpractices.

� Participants will examine an alternative supervi-sory model that will lead to more effective teach-ing.

� Participants will reflect on effective supervisionand effective teaching.

Instructional SupervisionDefinition

What is instructional supervision?

It is a school function that leads to the improve-ment of instruction through direct assistance to teach-ers, curriculum development, in-service training, pro-fessional development and research.

Goals

What are the goals of instructional supervi-sion?

� To provide teachers with objective feed-back on the current state of their instruc-

This paper willdiscuss the differentmodels of existingsupervisory systemsand why teachers areincreasingly resent-ful of them.

Instructionalsupervision is aschool function thatleads to the improve-ment of instructionthrough directassistance toteachers, curriculumdevelopment, in-service training,professional devel-opment and re-search.


supervision. The dissatisfaction with traditional evalu-ation systems has grown steadily with time. Someteachers agree that a supervisory system shouldexist, but it needs to be restructured and modified,while others think that it is futile. They view it as anactive threat to the teacher, undermining his/herconfidence and endangering his/her professionalstanding. Many teachers see supervision as a part ofa system that exists but that does not play an impor-tant role in their professional lives, almost like anorganizational ritual that is no longer relevant. Manyteachers also argue that they are not hostile to theidea of supervision but rather to the style of supervi-sion that does not correspond to their concerns andaspirations.

Teachers often ask about the purpose of supervi-sion and evaluation. All educators seem to agree thatits general purpose is to safeguard and improve thequality of instruction received by students. It alsoserves to supply information that will lead to themodification of assignments, such as placements inother positions, promotions and terminations.

If this agreement exists, why does supervision andevaluation remain controversial and unacceptable byteachers? The problem arises not with what theconcept is but how it is carried out within localprogram settings. Major difficulties were associatedwith developing an effective teacher supervisorysystem:

� Poor teacher/supervisor attitude toward super-vision and evaluation.

� The difficulties in separating or not separatingformative and summative evaluation.

� Lack of reliable data collection techniques.

� General lack of training for teachers and supervi-sors in the evaluation process.

The time has come to look more closely at theexisting supervision and evaluation systems and ques-tion their efficiency. It is time to restructure andconsider a system that is more practical, more teacher-centred, and, ultimately, more effective.

Different Existing Supervisory Models

1 � Traditional Supervision/Evaluation Model:

The supervisor determines the number of visitsfor tenured or non-tenured teachers, and when visitswill be conducted, and completes the required instru-mentation. The supervisor conducts the final evalua-tive conference and completes the evaluation form;

teachers have the option to write comments aboutany part of the evaluation. The drawback of this kindof model is that it promotes �watch dog� attitudesand inspires distrust and unease. It also has lowteacher involvement and minimal contact time be-tween supervisor and teacher outside the classroom.

2 � Product Model:

Another model for evaluating teacher's perform-ance is the use of student achievement to measureteacher's competence (ex. The use of tests at the endof every theme or unit the teacher finishes.) Unfortu-nately this model cannot be applied to all ESL class-rooms due to many factors: difference of age, educa-tional background, erratic attendance, continuousintake of students and many others.

3 � Naturalistic Model:

It stems from the belief that teaching is essentiallyan art. �Teachers, like painters and dancers makejudgements based largely on qualities that unfoldduring the course of teaching. Teaching is influencedby contingencies that are unpredictable and that theends achieved in teaching are often created in proc-ess.� Eisner, Elliot. The Educational Imagination (1979).

With this concept of teaching, institutions, super-visors and teachers must accept a broader view ofeducational objectives and outcomes than is com-mon in more traditional ways of looking at teachingand supervising. A view that focuses on theunpredicted and the unanticipated which also haslegitimate and desirable outcomes. Many systems,supervisors and even teachers do not accept thisview on the grounds that good teaching follows acertain logic that states and pursues specific objec-tives. It requires a high level of expertise on the partof the supervisor, the ability to see what is importantbut subtle, the ability to interpret the meaning of theevents occurring in the classroom and the ability toappreciate their educational import.

4 � The Clinical Supervision

In brief, clinical supervision is a model of supervi-sion that contains three phases: planning conference,classroom observation and feedback conference. It isa supervision that is focused upon the improvementof instruction by means of systematic cycles of plan-ning, observation and intensive intellectual analysis ofactual teaching performances. It is similar to thealternative supervisory model suggested under�TEACHER-CENTRED SUPERVISORY MODEL�with some variations. In this type of supervision, the

Many teachers seesupervision as a part

of a system thatexists but that doesnot play an impor-

tant role in theirprofessional lives,

almost like anorganizational ritual

that is no longerrelevant.

All educators seemto agree that its

general purpose is tosafeguard and

improve the qualityof instruction

received by stu-dents. It also serves

to supply informa-tion that will lead tothe modification ofassignments, such

as placements inother positions,promotions and

terminations.


word �clinical� is not appropriate or acceptable bymany teachers. It implies that the supervisor offersremedies to deficient or ineffective teaching practice.To evaluate, clinical supervision should be conductedby a person other than the supervisor because it callsfor the separation of formative and summative evalu-ation.

Teacher-Centred Supervision A Process

Rationale

The ultimate test in determining the effectivenessof a supervisory and evaluation system is the qualityof what occurs at the bottom of the system: therelationship that exists between the supervisorand the teacher. Experience shows that a support-ive and positive relationship between a knowledge-able supervisor and a committed teacher is the mosteffective way to improve instruction. The relation-ship is reached by implementing an interactive ratherthan a directive supervisory approach, democraticrather than authoritarian, teacher-centred ratherthan supervisor-centred. Teachers are competentprofessionals who desire help if it is offered in acollegial rather than a direct way. Teaching is acomplex process that requires careful analysis.Teacher-centred supervision recognizes the com-plexities involved and attempts to focus on a particu-lar area in the teaching process relying heavily on theteacher's active involvement in analysis and problem-solving. The heart of teacher-centred supervision isan intensive, continuous, mature relationship betweenteacher and supervisor that has the improvement ofprofessional practice as its goal.

The teacher-centred supervisory model is a proc-ess that consists of one or more cycles of supervisiondepending on the teacher's experience and instruc-tional effectiveness. Analysis and goal setting, the pre-observation conference, the observation, and thepost-observation conference.

1 � Analysis and goal Setting (Diagnosing)

�If you�re not sure where you�re going, you�re liable toend up someplace else.�

Robert Mager

The teacher analyses situation in the classroom inthe first week of school, assesses needs and interests,diagnoses levels of students and sets goals and objec-tives at least for the first three or six months (long-term plan) to prepare for the pre-observation confer-ence. Practice teachers, new and experienced teach-

ers, all need to work toward tangible, attainable,important goals.

The supervisor and teacher agree on a date tomeet for the pre-observation conference outside theclassroom setup.

2 � Pre-Observation Conference

�The most important link between a teacher and asupervisor is effective communication .... Teacherssee the justification for supervision and evaluationprograms, but they want to be a partner in theprocess.�

Robert L., Herchberger and James M. Young, Jr.,Teacher Perceptions of Supervision and Evaluation

The pre-observation conference sets thestage for effective supervision:

� It is best held on neutral territory not in theclassroom as it threatens teacher�s au-tonomy and privacy: a cafeteria, a close coffeeshop or any other relaxed place close to theclassroom. At this stage, it is very important tobuild a friendly and collegial relationship be-tween teacher and supervisory which is based onmutual respect, trust and understanding. Unlesssupervisors create this rapport with teachersthe next steps of supervision are futile and ineffec-tive.

� It provides the teacher and supervisor withan opportunity to identify teacher's goals:learner goals (ex. improve a certain skill formotivating learners), teacher goals (ex. work ontechniques to increase the amount of interactionbetween students, or improve lesson planning),organizational and administrative goals (ex. par-ticipate in professional development activities,improve communication skills with staff mem-bers and administration.) program goals (ex.introduce new themes to the program.) It alsoprovides the supervisor the chance to under-stand teacher's concerns and discuss solutions.

� Both teacher and supervisor decide on thearea of teaching to be observed and thinkneeds improvement (ex. teacher and studentinteraction.)

� Both teacher and supervisor agree on amutually convenient time for observation.Teachers are resentful when supervisors go totheir classrooms unannounced. They do not feelrespected or trusted as professionals.

The teacher-centredsupervisory model isa process thatconsists of one ormore cycles ofsupervision depend-ing on the teacher'sexperience andinstructional effec-tiveness.

The pre-observationconference is bestheld on neutralterritory not in theclassroom as itthreatens teacher’sautonomy andprivacy. At thisstage, it is veryimportant to build afriendly and collegialrelationship betweenteacher and supervi-sory which is basedon mutual respect,trust and under-standing.


� Both teacher and supervisor decide thekind of observational instrument to be used.Observational data are needed to provide anobjective feedback and record instructional be-haviour that may have escaped the teacher.Teachers may choose selective verbatim, au-dio or video recording as different techniques forrecording events in the classroom. Selective ver-batim implies a word-for-word transcription ofparticular verbal statements, such as teacher'sinstructions of how to complete an assignment orcarry out an activity which can have a great effecton students achievement. Another example ofselective verbatim is to record the kinds of ques-tions teachers pose while teaching. High cogni-tive questions stimulate students thinking andlearning whereas factual questions, in contrast,require students to recall something they havestudied before and need to apply. Recordingteacher's feedback for students is also importantto prove effective teaching practice. Positivefeedback involves praising and acknowledgingstudents� ideas by reusing, modifying, elaboratingon, summarizing or applying them. In contrast,negative feedback, such as sarcastic criticism,short, and cryptic answers kills enthusiasm in theclassroom.

� Teacher and supervisor agree on the in-structional context in which data will berecorded. This includes the topic to be ob-served � objectives, language, including vocabu-lary, grammar, pronunciation, idioms, resourcesto be used, etc.

� Teacher and supervisor may need to agreewhat is effective teaching and effectivesupervision and discuss the rights and re-sponsibilities of both. Some new teachers mightnot know an organization's policies. Conse-quently, clarifying these issues at this stage helpboth teacher and supervisor reach an under-standing about where they stand.

3 � The Observation

Teacher and supervisor have reached a co-op-erative decision on which data to collect for a specialarea in a teacher�s classroom performance and whatobservation technique or recording system to beused (selective verbatim, audio or video technique,or a combination of any.) The focus is on the teacherin action and the unfolding of teaching practices. It iswhat the teacher says and does, how the teacherreacts, and what actually occurs during a specific

teaching episode that forms the basis for the datacollected. Notes to be taken should be descriptiveand objective rather than evaluative.

4 � The Post-Observation Conference

The supervisor organizes data that is unbiased,accurate and clear to both parties and relevant to theagreed-upon concerns in the pre-observation confer-ence. He/she then prepares a strategy for providingconstructive feedback regarding teacher's perform-ance. The supervisor should open the conference bycomplementing the teacher on positive areas of teach-ing and by offering encouragement and support. He/she invites the teacher to be a partner in theprocess of analysing (without the supervisormaking any value judgments) and interpretingdata by looking for probable causes, possibleconsequences and suggested alternatives. Elic-iting a teacher�s reactions to the data requires skilland patience. There is always the temptation to jumpto conclusions about what has been observed andrecorded before the teacher has had the opportunityto reflect on it. If the data collected are accurate andobjective, but the supervisor immediately drawsopinionated inferences from the data, the teachermay feel compelled to respond defensively ratherthan interpret the data in a self-directed and produc-tive way. It takes self-control and practice to give asubordinate data in a nonevaluative, nonthreateningmanner. The teacher-centred supervision assumesthat most teachers can analyse, interpret and decidein a self-directed and constructive manner when theyare supplied with adequate information and allowedto act on it. It is the means by which to empower theteachers and allow them to recognize their abilities.(see Effective Supervision p. 10 & 11) The post-observation or feedback conference may start a newcycle of observation as it turns into a pre-observationconference where teacher and supervisor agree onnew areas of teaching to be observed. It may also bethe only observation cycle for the experienced andeffective teachers that ends up with writing a positiveevaluation report.

Characteristics of Effective Supervision

� Effective supervision is validation. It is an ac-knowledgement of the teacher�s abilities andvalue for their work. It increases teacher�s con-fidence and sense of security.

� Effective supervision is focused upon the im-provement of instruction by means of systematiccycles of planning, observation and intensive in-

There is always thetemptation to jump

to conclusions aboutwhat has beenobserved and

recorded before theteacher has had the

opportunity toreflect on it.

It takes self-controland practice to give

a subordinate data ina nonevaluative,nonthreatening

manner.


tellectual analysis of actual teaching perform-ances in the interest of rational modification.

� Effective supervision is empowerment. It allowsthe teacher both freedom and responsibility toinitiate issues, analyse and improve his/her teach-ing and develop a personal teaching style.

� Supervision can be perceived, analysed and im-proved in much the same manner that teachingcan. The supervisor is responsible for analysingand evaluating his/her own supervision in a man-ner similar to a teacher's analysis and evaluationof his/her own instruction.

� Effective supervision should take responsi-bility for helping the teachers to develop:skills for analysing the instructional processbased on systematic data, andskills for experimentation, adaptation andmodification of the curriculum.

� Effective supervision�s main focus is not changinga teacher�s personality but emphasizing whatand how teachers teach to improve instruction.

� Effective supervision is based on observationalevidence, not on unsubstantiated value. Judg-ments and the feedback conferences concentrateon constructive analysis and the reinforcement ofsuccessful patterns rather than on condemnationof unsuccessful patterns.

� Effective supervision may include counselling. Itresponds to teachers� anxieties and insecuritieseg. new teachers) by providing emotional sup-port and reassurance. Some teachers might beexperiencing temporary crises in their personallives or emotional problems that may interferewith classroom performance.

� Effective supervision offers advice about curricu-lum materials teachers are using, alternative ma-terial available and length of time to be spent oneach curriculum topic.

Characteristics of Effective Teaching

Some educators claim that effective teachingcannot be defined because it is so complex and socreative that it defies analysis. A list of characteristicsof effective teaching (mentioned below) has beengenerated from different studies and workshops.These characteristics are related to teachers' behav-iour in the classroom, planning and organizing, moti-vating learners, relationships with students, utilizingresources, instructional techniques and teaching strat-egies, learners' performance. It also involves teach-

ers' behaviour outside the classroom i.e., profes-sional growth and responsibility, and relationshipwith colleagues. These characteristics provide indi-cators for teacher observation and evaluation.

� Teacher is warm and understanding versus coldand aloof.

� Teacher has a positive relationship and goodrapport with students and enjoys working withthem.

� Teacher creates a favourable environment forlearning.

� Teacher displays fairness among students.

� Teacher maintains discipline and control.

� Teacher recognizes and provides for individualdifferences.

� Teacher is creative, innovative, flexible and or-ganized.

� Teacher gives students a good self-image andinspires self-esteem and confidence.

� Teacher engages in professional growth activi-ties.

� Teacher knows subject matter very well andcontinues educating himself/herself.

� Teacher is stimulating and imaginative ratherthan dull and routine bound.

� Teacher has an effective teaching methodology;she is clear in presenting instructional content,uses a variety of instructional materials and pro-cedures, strategies and techniques to promotelearning.

� Teacher applies indirect teaching style: asks ques-tions and acknowledges students� ideas, praisesand encourages them.

� Effective teaching is also seen through students�performance and behaviour that indicate a posi-tive attitude towards the teacher and the curricu-lum (eg. students demonstrate interest and activeengagement in learning the curriculum while classis in session.)

� Teacher states his/her objectives clearly. It iseasier to judge the effectiveness of teachers'classroom behaviour when their intent and in-structional objectives are available and clear.

� Teacher's behaviour outside the classroom is animportant criterion to be observed. How theteacher interacts and cooperates with colleaguesindicates the extent to which the teacher�s be-

Effective supervi-sion’s main focus isnot changing ateacher’s personalitybut emphasizingwhat and howteachers teach toimprove instruction.

Effective supervi-sion offers adviceabout curriculummaterials teachersare using, alternativematerial availableand length of time tobe spent on eachcurriculum topic.


haviour conforms to ethical norms. How he/sheengages in professional growth activities alsoindicates the extent to which the teacher isinterested in and loves the profession.

An Appropriate Attitude toward Build-ing a Supervision/Evaluation Program

�A prerequisite for any good supervision/evaluationsystem must be a clear and comprehensive definitionof the rights and responsibilities of each position. It isnecessary that the expectations for all positions bespelled out in detail ... i.e., to have a bill of rights forboth teacher and supervisor or organization.� Strikeand Bull 1981

Rights of Educational Institutions

� Educational institutions have the right to exercisesupervision and to make personnel decisionsintended to improve the quality of the educationthey provide.

� Educational institutions have the right to collectinformation relevant to their supervisory andevaluative roles.

� Educational institutions have the right to act onsuch relevant information in the best interest ofthe students whom they seek to educate.

� Educational institutions have the right to expectcooperation of the teaching staff in implementingand executing a fair and effective system of evalu-ation.

Rights of Teachers

Humanitarian and civil rights:

Teachers have the right to humane evaluationprocedures.

Teachers have the right to have their evaluationkept private and confidential.

Teachers have the right that their private lives beconsidered irrelevant to their evaluation.

Teachers have the right to an overall assessmentof their performance that is frank, honest andconsistent.

Professional rights:

Teachers have the right to reasonable job secu-rity.

Teachers have the right to a reasonable degreeof professional discretion in the performance oftheir jobs.

Teachers have the right to reasonable participa-tion in decisions related to professional and em-ployment aspects of their jobs.

Evidential rights:

Teachers have the right to be evaluated onrelevant criteria and decisions to be made on thebasis of evidence.

Teachers have the right not to be evaluated onthe basis of hearsay, rumour, or unchecked com-plaints.

Procedural rights:

Teachers have the right to be evaluated accord-ing to general, public and comprehensible stand-ards.

Teachers have the right to reasonable notice,before they will be supervised or evaluated.

Teachers have the right to know the results oftheir evaluation.

Teachers have the right to comment or expressa reaction to the results of their evaluation.

Teachers have the right to appear adverse deci-sions and to have their views considered by acompetent and unbiased authority.

(Adapted from Successful Teacher Evaluation byThomas L. McGreal.)

Bibliography

1. Acheson, Keith A. & Gall, Meredith D. Tech-niques in the supervision of teachers. Pre-serviceand In-service Applications (New York & Lon-don: Longman), 1987.

2. Cogan, Morris L. Clinical Supervision (Boston:Houghton Miffin Company), 1973.

3. McGreal, Thomas L. Successful Teacher Evalu-ation (Virginia: Association for Supervision andCurriculum and Curriculum development), 1983.

4. Goldhammer, Robert. Clinical Supervision: Spe-cial Methods for the Supervision of Teachers(New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, Inc.),1969.

Julie Chemali is a program consultant and instructorfor the Toronto Catholic District School Board.

A prerequisite forany good supervi-

sion/evaluationsystem must be aclear and compre-

hensive definition ofthe rights and

responsibilities ofeach position.

Teachers have theright to be evaluatedaccording to general,

public and compre-hensible standards.


Figure 2The Teacher-centred Supervision System

1 � Goal Setting

Teacher examines situa-tions in the classroom,assesses needs andinterests and sets goals.(Ex. 1st week of school)

2 � Pre-observationconference

Supervisor and teacher meetto discuss goals, needs andconcerns, project dates toaccomplish goals, then agreeon a date for observation andwhat teaching area toobserve.

3 � Observation

Supervisor visits classand collects agreed upondata.

4 � Supervisorassesses data

Collects and prepares anobjective interpretationabout teacher�s perform-ance in that area.

5 � Post-observationConference

Supervisor and teacher analyzedata and reach mutual deci-sions for the next step.

Figure 1The Process of Teacher-centred Supervision throughout the School Year


Sessions

Jadwiga Karbowniak addresses participants ather session.

Doug McDougall shows examples of using technologyin distance education in Canada, Greece and Cuba.

Sharon Rajabi (Conference Chair) leadsa session at the Computer Fair.


Dinner Entertainment


Five Korean Adult Learners� Propensity forLearner Autonomy Revealed in Their Beliefsabout Teacher-Student Roles

Maria Kim Oh

�Learner autonomy� has been a popular focus fordiscussion in second/foreign language teaching world-wide and presently it is catching on in North America.Although definitions of learner autonomy have var-ied, the following two central features of learnerautonomy have been agreed on by most theorists: (1)learners take responsibility for their own learning(Holec, 1981), and (2) taking responsibility involveslearners in taking �partial or total ownership of under-taking the management tasks concerned with theirown language learning without the direct interventionof their language teachers.� (Dickinson, 1987, p. 15).

As these two key features of learner autonomy arecentered on learners� responsibility, independenceor freedom from external controls, there have beentwo different views on encouraging learner autonomyuniversally. On the one hand, some theorists arguethat learner autonomy may not be suitable outsideindividualistic Western contexts, specifically in EastAsian Confucian educational contexts1. They pointout that the central concept of learner autonomyappears to contradict the teacher-centered, author-ity-driven educational traditions in East Asia andquestion the appropriateness of the goal of autonomyfor East Asian learners (Jones, 1995; Riley, 1988). Onthe other hand, several other researchers do not seecultural characteristics as being insurmountable (e.g.Esch, 1996; Little, 1996; Nunan, 1996) and someothers claim that the idea of learner autonomy hasroots in East Asian traditional learning practice andcultural traits (e.g. Pierson, 1996). The appropriate-ness of learner autonomy as an educational goal forEast Asian learners is still one of major issues in learnerautonomy. This study deals with this issue of thelearner autonomy applicability for East Asian learn-ers while describing what five Korean adult ESLlearners believe about teacher-student roles andhow these beliefs correspond with their autonomywhen learner autonomy approaches are not adoptedin their ESL class.

Korean beliefs about educational roles help ex-plain the early stages of learner autonomy for Korean

learners. This study states to what extent learnerautonomy can be promoted initially, and how to easethe transition towards more learner-autonomy-ori-ented approaches. This is of interest to languageteachers and researchers, as well as Korean learnerswho want to promote learner autonomy for Koreanlearners.

Based on interviews with five Korean adult learn-ers who studied ESL at a university-based languageprogram in Western New York, this paper revealsthat all five learners had extremely diverse beliefsabout teacher-learner roles. For example, Bobby2, avery passive learner believed that teachers �shouldknow how to force and make their learners tolearn�because human beings are all born lazy,�whereas Rose, a highly autonomous learner believedthat �learners are fully responsible for their learningand they need to make chances to learn all by them-selves.� She practised this belief when she �chose�her own ESL class, and passed a test to get a NewYork State Nursing certificate in the first week of herstay in the US. This study also reveals the diversebeliefs were transformed to a more-student-led modewhile they had opportunities to reflect on theirbeliefs about teacher-learner roles. In addition, thesubject believed that students should respect theirteachers despite the fact that they all showed differ-ent degrees of autonomy.

These three findings of the five learners� beliefs �the diversity, transformation and respectfulness �give a basic ground to answer an overarching ques-tion of this study, �Could learner autonomy ap-proaches be practically applicable to Korean learn-ers?�

Even though their beliefs about teacher-studentroles were varied, their initial beliefs were trans-formed into more self-directed ways at later inter-views while they had the chance to reflect on theireducational role beliefs, although their degrees ofbelief transformation remained distinct. As a result,the researcher argues that if learner autonomy ap-

This study states towhat extent learner

autonomy can bepromoted initially,

and how to ease thetransition towards

more learner-autonomy-oriented

approaches.

Based on interviewswith five Korean

adult learners whostudied ESL at a

university-basedlanguage program inWestern New York,

this paper revealsthat all five learners

had extremelydiverse beliefs aboutteacher-learner roles.


proaches were systematically implemented as teach-ing/learning modes at their language-learning center,the subjects would realize the importance of learnerroles, and they would be more successful secondlanguage users.

The study findings bring some implications toways of preventing or coping with possible conflictswhile Korean students are introduced to learnerautonomy approaches. The first implication fromthis study is that stereotypical prejudgment aboutautonomy levels of all Korean students would beproblematic so on-going communication is betweenteachers and students is crucial to implement learnerautonomy approaches. As we can see in the cases ofBobby and Rose, students� autonomy levels are ex-tremely different individually despite the fact thatthey were from common Korean educational andcultural backgrounds.

Based on the diversity of five Korean learners�basic autonomy degrees, the second implication isthat individually different approaches should be con-sidered depending on students� initial autonomy lev-els, at least, at the beginning stage. If second/foreignlanguage educators and researchers simply labelless-autonomous learners, like Bobby, as learnerswho cannot adapt to learner autonomy, they areignoring one very important primary duty of languageeducators: fostering potential of individual studentsto be successful second language users. The re-searcher believes that the important issue for educa-tors should not be prejudging whether learner au-tonomy approaches are appropriate for certain learn-ers; the more important issue should be to whatextent autonomy can be best introduced to Koreanstudents.

The third implication is that Korean students�respect for teachers should be considered whenlearner autonomy approaches are put into practice,since this respect might be misinterpreted by non-Korean teachers as full dependency. One possibleway for teachers to take the Korean learners� respectinto consideration when they adopt learner autonomyapproaches might be through an open discussionabout this respect. The discussion topic might be�Korean students should take care not to step onteachers� shadows. Do you agree or disagree? Whydo you agree or disagree?� This kind of explicit talkabout teacher and learner role beliefs or expectationsmight lead teachers and Korean learners to reflectKorean learners� tendency to be deferential to teach-ers.

In summary, quite contrary to those who pro-posed that efficiency of learner autonomy approachesfor Asian learners should be doubted based on theirunderstanding of characteristics of Asian learners,this study reveals (1) that five adult Korean learnershad tremendously diverse teacher-learner-role ex-pectations, (2) that their respect for teachers did notlimit their effort to practise out of class what theylearn from teachers, and (3) that they modified theirbeliefs from a teacher-led role to a student-led one.These three findings of this study show the impor-tance of providing ongoing opportunities for learnersand teachers to discuss their respective roles whilethey are engaged in language learning and teaching.Given the crucial role of learner-teacher relationshipin attempts to foster learner autonomy, such dialoguedefinitely would be necessary for effective languagelearning/teaching.

References

Dickinson, L. (1987) Self-instruction in language learn-ing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Esch, E. (1996). Promoting learner autonomy: Crite-ria for the selection of appropriate methods. InR. Pemberson et. al. (Eds.). Taking control: Au-tonomy in language learning. Hong Kong: HongKong University Press, 35-48.

Holec, H. (1981) Autonomy and foreign languagelearning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Johns, J. (1995). Self-access and culture: Retreatingfrom autonomy. ELT Journal 49 (3), 228-234.

Little, D. (1996). Freedom to learn and compulsionto interact: Promoting learner autonomy throughthe use of information systems and informationtechnologies. In R. Pemberson et. al. (Eds.). Tak-ing control: Autonomy in language learning. HongKong: Hong Kong University Press, 203-218.

Nunan, D. (1996). Towards autonomous learning:some theoretical, empirical and practical issues.In R. Pemberson et. al. (Eds.). Taking control:Autonomy in language learning. Hong Kong: HongKong University Press, 13-26.

Pierson, H. (1996). Learner culture and learner au-tonomy in the Hong Kong Chinese context. In R.Pemberson et. al. (Eds.). Taking control: Au-tonomy in language learning. Hong Kong: HongKong University Press, 49-58.

The study findingsbring some implica-tions to ways ofpreventing or copingwith possibleconflicts whileKorean students areintroduced to learnerautonomy ap-proaches.

These three findingsof this study showthe importance ofproviding ongoingopportunities forlearners and teach-ers to discuss theirrespective roleswhile they areengaged in languagelearning and teach-ing.


Riley, P. (1988). The ethnography of autonomy. In ABrookes & Grundy (Eds.) Individualization andautonomy in language learning. London: ModernEnglish publications/ The British Council. 12-34.

1 Although there are a lot of differences not onlyamong the various core Western cultures but alsoamong diverse East Asian cultures, it is generallyagreed that East-Asian learners share some com-mon cultural and educational backgrounds thatare different from Western backgrounds. Ac-cording to Littlewood (1999, p. 91), the geo-graphical and cultural region of East Asia is nor-mally defined as extending from China andMyanmar to Japan.

2 All names are pseudonyms.

Teaching Opportunities in China

Conestoga College is looking to send four qualified ESL teachers to teach in Harbin,China for two semesters starting in September 2001.

Accommodations and return airfare are included as are a competitive salary.

Qualifications

ü a University degree

ü TESL Certificate with focus on the adult learner

ü 3 to 5 years of teaching ESL/EFL to adults

For more information, please contactChristine Buuck, Chair, English Language Studies

[email protected](519) 748-5220, ext. 675


Teaching Word Stress � a Must at All Levels

Teaching Word Stress Glossary1

Comparative ValueEnglish syllables can come in one of three lengths.The easiest way (that I have found so far) torepresent this is with Xs. Three for major, twofor minor and one for unstress. It makes theconcept more visual than the traditional stressmarks and is easier to manage than dots.

Content WordsContent words are words that have semanticvalue. Close your eyes and say horse. Immedi-ately, you see a horse. Say jump or sweet orgently. You will visualize something. Studentscan usually translate content words into theirown language without too much trouble. Theyare universal to a large degree. They are the onlywords that occurred in telegrams (but many ofour students are so young they have never evenheard of a telegrams). They are nouns, verbs,adjectives and adverbs and ALL negatives.

Function WordsFunctions words are just what the name implies.They are words that serve a grammatical func-tion in an utterance. They are the hardest forstudents to learn because they are the hardest tohear and because they are not universal at all.Function words include articles, prepositions,pronouns, conjunctions and auxiliary verbs.

Major StressMajor Stress involves making the syllable threetimes as long and three times as loud as a schwaor an unstressed syllable. It has a comparativevalue of XXX.

Minor StressMinor Stress involves making the syllable twotimes as long and two times as loud as a schwaor an unstressed syllable. It has a comparativevalue of XX.

Pitch ChangeA pitch change is a change in the tone/music/melody from high to low or from low to high. Aclear shift can be heard. We exaggerate the pitchchange when we call someone over a long dis-

tance. Pretend that you are a mom calling her kidin for dinner. Listen to the pitch change.

The SchwaThe Schwa [¶] is the most commonly occurringvowel sound in English. All vowel sounds incompletely unstressed syllables are reduced toschwa. The pitch does not change at all.

UnstressUnstress involves making the syllable quieterand shorter. All vowels in unstressed syllablesare reduced to schwa. It has a comparative valueof X.

Word Stress and Comprehensibility inEnglish

� Stressing the correct syllable of a word is criticalin English. The actual word being said, the partof speech, the vowel quality and the amount oftime it takes to say a word can all be determinedby stress placement.

� Native speakers intuitively recognize the impor-tance of stress and will have trouble processingwords that are stressed incorrectly.

� Word stress also affects the overall rhythm of anutterance and it is the lack of or overuse of stressthat can contribute to non-native speakers sound-ing blurred or choppy.

1 These definitions are my own (I have to take fullresponsibility for any inaccuracies) and havebeen developed from many sources: Lecturesduring my TESL Certificate at U of T, my ownintuition, other teachers� comments etc. but thebook that I used when I first taught pronunciationand which I still think is the best resource isAccurate English: A Complete Course in Pronuncia-tion by Rebecca M. Dauer, Prentice Hall.

Kathryn Brillinger has a BA and TESL Certificate. Shehas taught ESL/LINC for 15 years; currently she isESL Coordinator/Instructor at Sheridan College.

Content words arewords that havesemantic value.Close your eyes andsay horse. Immedi-ately, you see ahorse. Say jump orsweet or gently. Youwill visualize some-thing. Students canusually translatecontent words intotheir own languagewithout too muchtrouble.

The Schwa [¶] is themost commonlyoccurring vowelsound in English. Allvowel sounds incompletely un-stressed syllablesare reduced toschwa.


Activity to Spell the Unstressed Vowel Schwa

A. Pronunciation: The schwa is produced in themiddle of the mouth. It is shorter and quieter thanall other vowels.

B. Usage: All unstressed syllables are reduced toschwa. It is the most commonly occurring vowelsound in English! It accounts for 10% of all vowelspronounced.

C. Spelling: Because any vowel can become schwaif the syllable in which it occurs is unstressed, thespelling varies drastically.

All of the following words are pronounced witha schwa in the space that I have left blank. Fill in theblank with the appropriate letter(s).

1. __ffend

2. __stablishm__nt

3. acc__d__nt

4. anch__r

5. atl__s

6. awes__me

7. C__nadi__n

8. c__noe

9. c__ntain

10. coll__ge

11. crook__d

12. curt__ns

13. d__vide

14. dist__nt

15. ev__d__nce

16. ex__rcise

17. exc__ll__nt

18. fab__l__s

19. fantast__c

20. fav__r__te

21. gard__n

22. hol__day

23. immigr__nt

24. incred__bl__

25. lett__ce

26. m__chine

27. magnif__c__nt

28. mel__dy

29. mesm__riz__ng

30. micr__wave

31. min__te

32. mirr__r

33. myst__ry

34. pal__ce

35. perf__ct

36. ph__togr__phy

37. phot__graph

38. prom__se

39. r__ve__l

40. s__ggest

41. sens__tive

42. stup__d

43. sup__rb

44. t__night

45. tens__n

46. text__re

47. tul__p

48. vac__nt

49. vacat__n

50. vol__nteer

51. whe__l

52. whisp__r

53. wond__rf__l

The schwa isproduced in the

middle of the mouth.It is shorter and

quieter than all othervowels.

Because any vowelcan become schwa ifthe syllable in which

it occurs is un-stressed, the

spelling variesdrastically.


Materials for Review

English in Today�s World: A WritingGuide, John M. Swales and Christine B.Feak, University of Michigan, 2000.

This text is an advanced sequel to AcademicWriting for Graduate Students.

Learning Computers, Speaking English:Cooperative Activities for LearningEnglish and Basic Word Processing,Steve Quann and Diana Satin, TheUniversity of Michigan Press, 2000,$16.95.

This text for high-beginner and intermediate ESLlearners provides cooperative computer-basedactivities that combine language learning withtraining in basic computer skills and word process-ing.

Each unit concentrates on a basic concept of wordprocessing while also focusing on a grammartopic. Lessons begin with learning to use themouse and advance to understanding the featuresof a basic word processing system; they are basedon Microsoft WordPad, available in Windows 95or higher. Instructors using other PC or MacIntoshapplications can adapt the lessons. Activitiesinclude writing business and cover letters.

In Our Classrooms: An Educator�s Guideto Helping English Language Learnerswith Curriculum, Mary Meyers,Mainstreams Publications, Toronto,2001, $29.95.

This text for all educators and teachers-in-trainingwho want to turn ESL research into practicalclassroom activities. It features a step-by-stepchecklist for introducing second-language theoryinto practical classroom activities and containsreproducible BlackLine Masters.

Chapters cover assessing newcomers, adaptingteacher talk and presenting new curriculum. Thereis even a recommendations for �best practices� inMinistry of Education policy and guides foreducation and training.

A REFUGEE CAMP IN THE CITY

Doctors without Borders is inviting grades 6-12 classes to schedule FREE groupvisits to an outdoor, interactive exhibit

in Nathan Phillips Square, Toronto,Oct. 11-15, 2001

It aims at educating the public, and students in particular, about the plight of theworld�s 39 million refugees and displaced people. The exhibit highlights the survivaland medical priorities that arise in a refugee crisis.

To arrange a visit, call Pam at 416 � 964-0619, ext. 242, or email [email protected]/refugee is the website.


Book Review

Swales, John M. and Christine B. Feak. A Writing Guide English in Today�sResearch World. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000. 293 pages.

As the world becomes increasingly complex dueto the various forces impacting on it, so too does theworld of ESL become more specialized. ESL re-searchers now find that they are called upon todiversify within their field. Following their previouswork, Academic Writing for Graduate Students(1994),Swales & Feak have produced English in Today�sWorld also for the graduate student.

Keeping in mind the specialized nature of this ESLgroup, it follows that the teaching matter itself is verynarrow in scope. Covering 8 units, the authors com-petently present the language requirements of gradu-ate students. Subject areas include literature reviews,conferences,dissertations and the academic commu-nication needed to support research and researchcareers. In addition, there is a language focus sectionat the end of each unit. These sections deal with moreadvanced grammar such as dangling modifiers, ex-pressions of gratitude, and even the topical good andbad news E-mail messages. The format of each unitis the same. There is a short introduction followedfirst by the highlights of the unit(probably intendedfor quick reference) then by tasks that involve thestudent. A language focus is next and at the end thereare very detailed notes that even include teachingtips.

More specifically, Unit 1 deals with the basicconcepts used in research and asks students to con-sider such issues as effective writing strategies andcross-cultural differences in research language. Units2 and 3 cover conferences and make students awareof how to present abstracts, how to set up theirposters and even the etiquette required while pre-senting their work. A most useful section (Units 4 and5) deals with literature reviews. I, too, even as a nativespeaker would have welcomed such useful informa-tion as a graduate student! The last three units covermore �advanced� work, i.e. the dissertation, and thewriting required when asking for research grants andeventually academic/research careers.

On the whole, the book does a thorough job ofexplaining the nature of writing within the researchfield. Each of the 8 units, although presented in thesame format, are noteworthy because an effort ismade to involve the student directly. For example,Unit 1 (p.15) asks the student to think about academicwriting in his own language and compare it withAmerican academic English. Then, as a task, thestudent is asked to photocopy a paper from his fieldand underline the informal elements of language.Rather than just explain matters, Swales and Feakmake the student an active participant. In unit 3,students must decide on the proper response to com-ments made at a poster presentation. In the final unit, asample C.V. is provided and the student must recom-mend changes to it.

Another positive feature is the detailed notes atthe end of each unit, with their teaching hints.

It is refreshing to see that there are 8 languagefocus sections dealing with areas of grammar andusage that trouble even such advanced students.While graduate students are at a high level academi-cally, we cannot assume that their language skills arealso. Native speakers also could profit from usingsuch a text.

However, one may argue that the format of thetext is rather �dry.� Each unit is presented in the exactsame manner. Yes, the text is for a specific audiencebut couldn�t some variety in format have been used tobreak the monotony? The authors suggest that thebook can be used for self-study, yet, the material ischallenging enough for the native speaker, let alonefor the ESL speaker studying on his own. A teacher isneeded to clarify details.

In sum, this is a valuable reference text intendedfor a specific category of ESL student, the graduatestudent. As such, the authors have done an admirablejob.

Vasie Kelos is currently teaching at the ELI at Seneca College and with Continuing Education at George BrownCollege. She has been teaching ESL/EFl for over 23 years both in Canada and in Greece. Her interests includemethodology in ESL, action research in the second language classroom and current trends in ESL.

Keeping in mind thespecialized nature of

this ESL group, itfollows that the

teaching matter itselfis very narrow in

scope.

On the whole, thebook does a thor-

ough job of explain-ing the nature of

writing within theresearch field. Each

of the 8 units,although presentedin the same format,

are noteworthybecause an effort ismade to involve the

student directly.

IELTS (International English Language Testing System...

Documents

Transcript of IELTS (International English Language Testing System...