1

On Implementing an ESL Teacher Education Program Using Information Technology

Andreas Schramm aschramm@hamline.edu

Ann Mabbott amabbott@hamline.edu

Hamline UniversitySt. Paul, Minnesota

2

Overview

I. BackgroundII. Course DevelopmentIII. Course SupportIV. Course Delivery V. Conclusion

3

I. Background Elements of a Quality Online Teacher

Education Program Interaction among students and

between the professor and the students is central.

Education is student-centered and constructivist in nature.

There is an emphasis on practical application as well as a strong theoretical background.

4

Background of our Program

MA in ESL with teacher licensure located in Minnesota

3 separate tracks for teachers of: a. K-12 students in the US, b. Immigrant and refugee adults in the US, and c. overseas learners of English.

 

5

Background of our Program

Most of our students are practicing ESL teachers by the time they finish, if not before.

Most are adding the MA in ESL to previous credentials in teaching or applied linguistics.

Students live both close to and far from campus.

6

Competencies Included in the ESL Teacher Education Language as Content (21 credits)

Teaching Methodology (14 cr.) Research/MA Thesis (8 cr.) Practice Teaching (1-10 cr.; not

online)

7

II. Course Development Must be planned and deliberate within

theoretical framework

We conducted initial analysis to identify theoretical framework

There are similarities and differences between traditional and online courses

8

Differences: access, medium, interaction amount, learner control, interactivity

(e.g., Herring, 1996; Warschauer, Shetzer, & Meloni, 2000),

expanded teacher roles, etc. (Bennett & Lockyer, 2004)

9

Similarities motivation, setting designed for learning, language communication, visuals, etc.

(e.g., Brumfit, Phillips, & Skehan, 1985; Herring, 1996)

10

Web course developers tend to focus on differences

We focus on similarities (see also Bennett and Lockyer, 2004)

This facilitates envisioning teaching and learning online

11

Two parts to a successful theoretical framework: student-centered constructivist

educational philosophy (Mezirow, 2000, Bennet and Lockyer, 2004)

courses as communicative situations (Hymes, 1972)

12

Similarities revealed by ethnographic analysis of course communication: (Schramm, 2005; Schramm and Mabbott, 2005)

Setting-participant communication components public vs. private student-instructor student-student

13

Setting-event combinations lectures whole-class meetings small-group discussions informal exchanges

14

Implementation

Lectures: public, instructor-student one-way

communication delivered statically as Web page as slideshow-sound combination synchronously via web-conferencing

15

Implementation

Whole-class meetings: public, instructor-student, student-

student multi-directional delivered dynamically via bulletin board or via chat room synchronously via web-conferencing

16

Small-group meetings: public, instructor-student, student-

student multi-directional delivered to student subset dynamically via bulletin board or via chat room outcome collated collaboratively via

Wiki

Implementation

17

Implementation

Informal exchanges: public, student-student, multi-

directional delivered dynamically via bulletin board, chat

room, or web-conferencing to students only

pair-share tasks via text boxes and immediate student-initiated text feedback

18

Implementation

Off-to-the-side & Office hours: private, instructor-student &

student-student implemented using individual email web-conferencing

19

More similarities detected by communicative ethnography forms and topics:

language & humor content visuals

20

Implementation

Language: informal humorous

(Koetter 2002)

21

Implementation

Content & Visuals kept intact: speech sounds in linguistics via

streamed sound files streamed educational videos video-taped ESL teaching

techniques Jeopardy game slideshow for syntax

review Flash exercises, e.g. drag-and-drop

22

III. Course Support

Course recreation takes two phases course design program planning and coordination

23

Three expertises needed course design technological implementation pedagogical understanding

24

Additional Staffing Needs Faculty need more time

higher discussion participation assessment items handling

Staff adminstrative, e.g. orientation,

student questions tech support

25

Library staff online or phone reference desk work library orientation materials

26

Instructional Technology Staff for re-creation of course activities,

materials electronic preparation of additional

materials (audio, video, orientation, etc.)

identification and implementation of instructional hardware

27

IV. Program Delivery

Main program objectives deliver course content allow interaction with material facilitate learning interactively address multiple learning styles advise on academic theses

28

Comparable delivery Learning Management System

Blackboard: classroom video audio handouts slideshows images illustrations exercises

29

web-conferencing software Elluminate Live!: real-time interactivity application-sharing screen-sharing

30

Other Software Flash animation, e.g. pair-share

exercises Wiki for collaboration on documents digitization software for

preparation, delivery of video and audio materials

31

Comparable Library Resources multiple full-text databases electronic document delivery e-books

32

V. Conclusion

Frydenberg (2002) lists nine domains of quality are the basis for setting course standards. Today we addressed the first two:

design and development instruction and instructor services

33

Others need to be addressed as well: executive commitment technological infrastructure student services program delivery financial health legal and regulatory requirements and program evaluation

34

Program Evaluation

Program evaluation and continual improvement more challenging than for campus programs

but necessary to ensure program quality.

35

Reference List Bennett, S. & Lockyer, L. (2004). Becoming and

online teacher: Adapting to a changed environment for teaching and learning in higher education. Educational Media International, 41(3), 231-244.

Brumfit, C., Phillips, M., & Skehan, P. (Eds.). (1985). Computers in English language teaching. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Frydenberg, J. (2002). Qualitative standards in eLearning: A matrix of analysis. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 3 (2), Retrieved February 21, 2003, from http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.2/frydenberg.html

Herring, S. (Ed.). (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

36

Reference List Hymes, D. (1972) Introduction. In C. Cazden, V. John,

& D. Hymes (Eds.), Functions of language in the classroom (pp. xi–xvii). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Kötter, M. (2002) Tandem learning on the internet. Frankfurt/M.: Peter Lang Publishing.

Mabbott, A. & Schramm, A. (2005). Course quality in online English-as-a-Second-Language teacher education. In M. Bigelow & C. Walker (Eds.), Creating teacher community: Selected papers from the Third International Conference on Language Teacher Education. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition.

37

Reference List Third International Conference on Language Teacher

Education. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition.

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformation theory. In J. Mezirow (Ed.), Learning as transformation (pp. 3–33). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schramm, A. (2005). Making online students connect: Ethnographic strategies for developing online learning experiences. In B. Holmberg, M. Shelley, & C. White (Eds.), Languages and distance education: Evolution and change. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Warschauer, M., Shetzer, H., & Meloni, C. (2000). Internet for English teaching. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.