Standards in the context of Teacher Accreditation

 D. E. Ingram

Education Consultant,Co-Director, ISLPR Language Services,

and Honorary Professorial Fellow,University of Melbourne.Email: d.e.ingram@bigpond.com

©2007

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

I INTRODUCTION: Teachers as the Pivot of Policy II THE NOTION OF STANDARDS III SPECIFYING STANDARDS IV LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY STANDARDS

IV.1 Expectations in Australia

IV.2 The ISLPR® in Language Proficiency Standards

V PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS VI FROM STANDARDS TO TEACHING PRACTICE VII CONCLUSION

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS (contin.)

APPENDIX ONE: Excerpt from Professional Standards for Accomplished Teaching of Languages and Cultures [AFMLTA 2005]

APPENDIX TWO: The International Second Language Proficiency Ratings (ISLPR®) APPENDIX THREE: Excerpts from the International Second Language Proficiency

Ratings (ISLPR®)

Figure 1: A Model of Applied Linguistics

Figure 2: A Model for Language Policy-Making and Language Education Planning

Figure 3: A Model for the Development of Language Teacher Standards

3

I INTRODUCTION: Teachers as the Pivot of Policy

• Language teachers are the pivot of policy. • Unless teachers have adequate skills, the quality of their teaching suffers

and policy itself founders, e.g., Australia during the language policy era. • Language policy developments in Australia in the 1980s-1990s highlighted

the need for improved standards for language teachers: this paper will focus on research, development and implementation of language teacher standards, both professional competencies and language proficiency.

• The International Second Language Proficiency Ratings (ISLPR®) has been

used for almost 30 years to assess the general proficiency of learners of English and other languages and in vocational accreditation, especially of language teachers.

4

I INTRODUCTION: Teachers as the Pivot of Policy (contin.)

• Positive cross-cultural attitudes are of paramount importance to worldwide education in the 21st century.

• Language learning does not automatically lead to improved attitudes. • At least two factors give language teacher standards their importance: first,

there is universal recognition of the vital role that language education must play in the 21st century if people of all nations are to achieve economic security and a harmonious and rewarding life.

• Second, such aspirations are meaningless unless language teachers have

the necessary skills.

5

II THE NOTION OF STANDARDS

• The term “standards” commonly has at least two senses: (1) some yardstick or framework against which learner performance, the content of examinations, or the goals of courses may be measured. (2) what students or others ought to achieve at one level or another or for some purpose.

• Standards in this sense can specify the attributes required to practise a particular

vocation. • AFMLTA: standards are “statements of values about teaching, learning and

knowing and the practices of those who teach languages and cultures: “values”. • The notion of a standard serves valuable purposes if it provides clear unambiguous

guidelines and is set with some rational justification or for some valid purpose. • A proficiency level may become a “standard” that learners must reach when it is

specified for university entry or to meet a professional registration requirement such as for teacher accreditation.

6

II THE NOTION OF STANDARDS (contin.)

• Queensland College of Teachers has set an English proficiency of at least ISLPR® S:4, L:4, R:4, W:3+ for overseas trained teachers. Education Queensland requires LOTE teachers (i.e., teachers of a language other than English) to have the equivalent of ISLPR® 3 in all skills.

• It is difficult to justify the notion of “standards” if they are arbitrary or used for

a purpose for which they were not designed. • If used simplistically or arbitrarily, “standards” may over-simplify the

educational, training and vocational registration process. • “Standards” in the context of language teacher accreditation should relate

to the needs of the society, the goals of language teaching, and the skills needed by language teachers to achieve those goals.

7

III SPECIFYING STANDARDS• Standards are specified in many different ways (e.g., formal academic awards that teachers

must hold) but a degree of itself does not guarantee formal training or skills in language teaching methodology or language proficiency.

• AFMLTA’s “Professional standards for accomplished teaching of languages and cultures”:

generalized statements about aspects of knowledge and skills together with “suggested questions for reflection”.

• “Dimensions”: • educational theory and practice• language and culture• language pedagogy• ethics and responsibility• professional relationships• awareness of wider context (subsequently entitled “active engagement with wider context”)• advocacy• personal characteristics (See Appendix One)

8

III SPECIFYING STANDARDS (contin.)

• The training and professional self-development role is emphasized rather than evaluation.

• Puts responsibility on the teachers themselves. • Teaching Australia: “national professional standards” whose purposes are to: • provide inspiration to aspiring teachers and principals, clarifying the expectations of

the profession about accomplished practice;

• offer guidance to members of the profession seeking to improve their practice through self-reflection and professional learning; and

• increase public understanding of the complexity and rigour of the work of teachers and principals.

 

9

III SPECIFYING STANDARDS (contin.)

• The model adopted has four parts:

1. A charter for the teaching profession: a knowledge-based, collaborative, ethical, collegial, and responsible profession.

2. Organizing categories from which the model branches into

3. Advanced teaching capabilities and school leadership capabilities.

4. “Descriptors” for the specific teaching area, cf. the AFMLTA’s professional standards.

• “Standards” need not be nebulous: see Figures 1, 2 and 3. • Consider the adequacy of standards: descriptive, prescriptive, predictive.

10

IV LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY STANDARDS

IV.1 Expectations in Australia

• The importance of language proficiency. • Queensland LOTE/foreign language teachers: the equivalent of ISLPR® S:3,

L:3, W:3, R:3 (Basic Vocational Proficiency).

• Australian Language and Literacy Council: ISLPR® 4 in all four macroskills. • Asian language policy implies at least ISLPR® 4. • Queensland College of Teachers: a minimum English proficiency of IELTS 7

in all four macroskills or ISLPR®, S:4, L:4, R:4, W: 3+ for overseas trained non-native English speaking teachers.

11

IV LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY STANDARDS (contin.)

IV.2 The ISLPR® in Language Proficiency Standards • The ISLPR® is a scale that essentially describes how a second or foreign

language develops from zero to native-like proficiency. It provides performance descriptions in terms of the practical tasks that learners can carry out and how they carry them out at nine points from zero to native-like proficiency.

• See Appendices Two and Three. • Authenticity. • Three columns: a general description, examples of specific language tasks

and of how they are carried out, a comment column.

12

IV LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY STANDARDS (contin.)

• Extensive trialling, re-evaluation and research. • Various versions (see Appendix Two). • The development process:

1. A notion of proficiency was adopted.

2. Descriptions of language behaviour and how it develops were sketched.

3. The initial descriptors were tested, elaborated and refined in interviews.

4. Compared with evidence from psycholinguistics.

5. Formally trialled.

6. Statistical processing to check validity and reliability.

13

IV LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY STANDARDS (contin.)

• Administered in a face-to-face interview in which each learner’s language is matched against the scale’s behavioural descriptions.

• The standard means for the statement of proficiency in Australia and used

in many different contexts, including in specifying language skills for vocational registration for teaching, nursing, etc.

• International Second Language Proficiency Ratings – Version for Second

Language Teachers: descriptors from ISLPR® 2 (Basic Social Proficiency) to 5 (native-like proficiency).

• The ISLPR® for Second Language Teachers is available from ISLPR Language Services, Level 1, Office Suites, Shopping Centre, cnr Padstow & Warrigal Roads, Eight Mile Plains, Queensland, 4113, Australia.

14

V PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS• The project identified the attributes or competencies (knowledge, skills and

attitudes) required by second language teachers. • Five areas of competence covering knowledge, tasks involved in actual

classroom practice, and interpersonal skills and attitudes:

1. Using and developing professional knowledge and values

2. Communicating, interacting and working with students and others

3. Planning and Managing the teaching and learning process

4. Monitoring and assessing student progress and learning outcomes

5. Reflecting, evaluating and planning for continuous improvement

15

V PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS (contin.)

• Elements of competence: a broad description indicating the properties of the minimum performance (i.e., the standard) expected of language teachers.

• Further elaborated with “cues” or concrete referents to exemplify activities or attributes.

• The “cues” are identified under the headings “Core”, Primary, Secondary, Immersion, University, and Vocational for each level of language teaching.

• The five areas of competence and their elements are presented in

the handout.

16

V PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS (contin.)• Contribution to quality assurance and the specification of professional or pedagogical standards

for language teachers. • The Australian Language and Literacy Council extended the discussion of professional standards

to specify basic requirements for pre-service and on-going professional development programmes:

– Nationally agreed minimum vocational competencies

– Understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of language teaching and hence knowledge of

– how language is learned; – the theory of language; – the linguistic system of the target language; – language teaching methodology.

17

V PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS (contin.)

– Knowledge and understanding of the target culture.

– Cross-cultural attitudes favourable to life and teaching in a racially, culturally and linguistically diverse society and world.

– Practical ability to apply rationally this understanding of the nature of language teaching to language teaching situations at any school level, whether in the classroom or elsewhere.

– Understanding of the actual and potential role of languages and language education in education and in responding to the needs of individuals and society as a whole.

– Ability to reflect rationally (and from a sound information base) on language teaching and teachers’ own teaching activities, to evaluate them, and to assist these reflective processes with their own research.

– Commitment to, and the necessary knowledge and skills to enable on-going professional self-development.

– Commitment to their profession and its advancement (including involvement in relevant professional associations, publications, and conferences).

18

VI FROM STANDARDS TO TEACHING PRACTICE

• Language education policies and syllabuses almost universally identify language proficiency and positive cross-cultural and intercultural attitudes as two of the central goals of second or foreign language education.

• A major project was undertaken in socially and educationally contrasting contexts in

Brisbane, Australia, and Akita Prefecture, Japan, to identify the cross-cultural attitudes of Year 10 students and what relationship their attitudes might have to their language learning experiences.

• For language learning to achieve proficiency and positive cross-cultural attitudes a

combination of key elements of methodology are required. Hence, there are clear implications for teacher standards.

• What the teachers actually did in the classroom contrasted sharply with the goals

and activities of the State or national policies, their current curriculum documents, and their own goals.

19

VI FROM STANDARDS TO TEACHING PRACTICE (contin.)

• The students saw their teaching-learning experience as largely formal, more closely reflecting what the teachers were actually doing than their aspirational goals.

• They were positive towards language learning and other cultures and their cross-cultural attitudes were generally positive.

• The students expressed strong support for more communicative activities and culture learning with more time for learning the language for everyday purposes and talking with native speakers.

• There was no significant evidence that students’ involvement in language learning had had much

influence on their cross-cultural attitudes. • The nature of their programmes and their activities were not conducive to the fostering of more

positive cross-cultural attitudes. Background variables were probably more influential.

• The changes the students wanted were towards activities more beneficial for the development of both language proficiency and cross-cultural attitudes.

• Other studies implementing such methodologies have demonstrated a positive effect on cross-cultural attitudes and proficiency development.

20

VII CONCLUSION

• Language teachers need the necessary attributes (knowledge, skills and attitudes) to enable them to implement the policies and methodology. They also need action research skills to self-monitor and self-evaluate.

• The necessary knowledge, skills and attitudes must be seen as critical

elements of the standards expected of language teachers and be incorporated into their pre-service and on-going training programmes.

• Standards are not static but the model suggests that, as the needs of

society change and as understanding of the factors that determine the principles and goals of language education evolve, so our understanding of the attributes required of a language teacher and hence of language teacher standards should also evolve.

21