Dogme in the BE Classroom. Really?

Returning from Glasgow I realized that the conversations I had in the corridors and over dinner were truly eye-opening and the real take away from the conference.  Definitely, the presentations were good and insightful, but the chance to speak with the most experienced and talented trainers in the industry has caused more reflection.

Of course, one of the issues on my mind was the Dogme trend in ELT.  It has appeared so often in blogs and online discussions, it is difficult to miss.  As a Business English Trainer, I am fascinated by the approach and how it could be implemented in the classroom.  My goal in this post to share my persecptions on Dogme and offer some solutions for how we can incorporate the best parts into our training.

I have had several problems with what I have read, even pinning down what exactly it is.  In my reading I have boiled it down to several what it is and what it isn't (but I could be wrong):

IS...

• Extremly learner-centered.  Trainers should remove many (if not all) external materials and resources from the classroom which impose ideas, emotions, roles, and pre-formed learning paths.  As drivers of the content, the participants create the class and lessons through collaboration with the trainer and each other.
• Focused on binding language to pre-existing concepts within the learner.  Through the self-expression created in the Dogme classroom, the students are more receptive to language input which helps to refine, clarify, and give meaning to their ideas.  Thus, the theory is that students will learn faster because we are not asking them to communicate through a pre-determined language structure, rather giving language to the communication goal.
• Flexible.  Because learner self-expression is unpredictable, trainers must remain flexible to harness, highlight, and build upon emerging language.  Formal materials limit this flexibility.
• Focused on emerging language.  Emerging language could be expressed language forms which should be spread across the class or could be when the expressed meaning is clear, but a language gap impairs clear transmission.  One example of the second case is when students are faced with trying to express regret without knowing past modal verb forms.  Even a quite fluent learner will hesitate, realize they don't know how to express it, try to translate it from L1, and find the best possible work-around.  It is the trainer's job to afford these opportunities, recognize them, and fill these gaps with a lasting learning point.

IS NOT...

• Superfulous conversation.  Goals do exists and it is the trainer's duty to guide topics and discussions which will lead to these objectives.  A focus on progress is built into every lesson, and learning points should be recycled to reinforce learning and demonstrate improved performance.  To this point, a lesson log is crucial for the trainer to record and prepare for the next lesson.  Otherwise, training points could easily be lost and forgotten.
• All touchy feely.  While yes it is based on self-expression and interaction within the student group, it is not a group of people coming together and talking about their feelings and emotions.  That can happen, but it isn't Oprah's book club.  Learners are expected to learn and teachers are expected to teach (or rather facilitate learning).
• Materials and technology free.  From my reading it seems that these two items are both welcome in the classroom, but we should be very selective about why they are included.  Do they afford and reinforce the process of self-reflection and communication?  Do they enable the learners to express what they want and need to express?  Or are we simply bringing in a listening because it is the next step in our off-the-shelf learning plan?

Now, I have several problems with this approach in the BE classroom.  And honestly, if done correctly, I feel task-based activities may be better suited to the needs of our learners.  But I think many of the elements of Dogme are already present in some BE classrooms.  First, our clients expect a personalized training plan.  They also expect us to help them refine what they are already using in their job.  In fact, I think it is difficult as a BE Trainer in the one-to-one or small group setting to ignore the Dogme approach.

But here are the challenges I see for Dogme...

1. The Messi Analogy  There are many outstanding footballers, but there is only one Messi.  He seems to be able to do things on the field which defy explanation.  He can see moves before they are made, he is unbeliably quick, always calm, and gives every motion a flurish of creativity.  I tend to think that in order to pull off Dogme and make it effective, a trainer would have to be as talented as Messi.  The trainer would have to have the experience to see the dialog before it happens, guide this discourse through the students themselves, recoginze the emerging language and then have the supreme flexibility and creativity to set an activity to utilize the training point.  Wow.
2. Too many levels of listening  As a trainer, I am quite adept at listening to my students at various levels.  What are they saying (content)?  How are they saying it (accuracy)?  What are they not saying (language gap)?  What emergent language are they using?  I know I can do all four levels of listening sometimes, but I have to be 100% in the moment.  Of course, I cannot be 'on' in every minute of every lesson .  The risk of Dogme is that if I drop one of these levels of listening because I am distracted, tired, or unmotivated, the progress aspect of the lesson deteriorates.
3. It can't be taught  I am not sure how new trainers could learn such flexibility and language awareness.  I have digested massive amounts of activities ideas, approaches, tasks, and language features in my first three years of training.  I dove into the field with passion and enthusiasm.  I am still far from having the flexibility needed to make it work.  I am not sure how this could be taught in a course less than 6 months.
4. How to create affordances which replicate BE situations?  I am struggling with the idea of creating a environment in which we can really practice the skills needed in the learners' jobs.  One of the benefits of TBL is that we can model what right looks like and work from there.  In Dogme, we are working together to develop a suitable task situation.  In some BE classrooms the desire to improve their job performance is less motivating than other factors.  I could see conflict here between the Dogme approach and what companies expect from the training.

So, these are the challenges I see.  I think they can be overcome.  For example, I think we can train the different levels of listening by using authentic learner discussions in the trainer development setting.  I think the internet provides a great opportunity for us to develop the flexibility to respond to emergent language.

Also, I think the approach is perfectly suited to BE, specifically in-company courses in which we are faced with the challenge of adapting training to meet a variety of specific needs.  And I would like to think that many of us in BE are using this approach well, particularly in coaching.  Therefore, we should add it to our training toolbox, but understand that until it is more-fully developed it has a certain place and certain time.


Dogme Resources:

Scott Thornbury http://www.thornburyscott.com/  check out his articles under "Works"
His blog http://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/

Blog from Emi Slater, Phil Wade, and Dale Coulter http://languagemoments.wordpress.com/

Outstanding paper from Martin Sketchley "Incorporating Dogme ELT in the Classroom"  http://www.scribd.com/doc/85100701/Incorporating-Dogme-ELT-in-the-Classroom-Handout-Version

Teaching Unpluggled co-author Luke Meddings http://lukemeddings.posterous.com/

Chia Suan Chong, a highly skilled and innovative Dogmetician http://chiasuanchong.wordpress.com/

IATEFL Glasgow Conference Notebook - Day 1 (Part 1)

The day started out extremely well.  I aslept in, had breakfast in the hotel, then went back to sleep for a bit while watching BBC 4.  I am quite sure that the BBC channel I chose to watch says something about my character, but I don't know what.  I am also sure that my falling back to sleep also says something.

In any case, I missed Adrian Underhill's plenary session.  However, judging by the reaction on Twitter and the audience size, summaries of his talk are probably fairly easy to track down.

So after relaxing I hit the conference in full force, attending each session.  I will not be able to deal with all of the talks I attended today, but I hope to get to them all soon.

1.  Global Business Etiquette 101 by Nikolina Korecic

Ms. Korecic, a business English trainer in Croatia, advocated cultural training as part of the BE classroom and suggested several methods to do so.  Perhaps her most effective method was a discussion activity in which the participants give their culture a color and then explain why.  It was clear during the practical activity that this would certainly generate cultural self-reflection and aid communication.  Other metaphors for culture included fruit, football teams, and the standard iceberg, tree, and onion.  She also references the importance of cultural awareness in the context of ELF, continuing the discussion from Monday's BESIG PCE.

I think she is correct that BE involves cross-cultural communication at some level.  The questions remain open, however:

• How much does culture affect our clients ability to communicate?  When have we reached the right balance of cultural awareness?
• How can we train our participants to recognize when culture is interfering with communication or goal achievement?   Then how can they acknowledge it, repair it, and continue?
• If ELF is emerging as a common communication medium, is there a standard global business etiquette that is also emerging?  I would argue that there is.  Yes, it may be an adapation of Anglo-Saxon or Western communication methods and behaviors, but it is being standardized.  Participants are putting on this international culture just as they put on different clothes.  For example, I have trained leaners on working with the Middle East, and they come back and say it was wasted because everything was just like Europe.
• How do we handle cultural issues where they are really causing hovac, in virtual teams?  The classic business etiquette training such as hand guestures, eye contact, behavior, etc. doesn't apply here.  But communication styles and cultural expectations are destroying web meetings, emails, presentations and the like.

I would love to see more from Ms. Korecic on these issues.

2.  Training Virtual Communication Skills by Jackie Black and Jon Dyson (York Associates)

Ms. Black and Mr. Dyson gave a great introduction to web meetings, the technology businesses are using, and exercises to practice these skills in companies.  However, judging by the audience response, this area of BE is still quite new.  This is something we need to get on board with quickly.  In fact, in many cases we can take those old business travel sections out of our syllabi and replace them with web meetings, online collaboration, and messaging.  Companies are cutting travel budgets and using web meetings to replace them.  As communication experts we need to understand how our clients are talking to each other and master that format.

The presenters from York Associates are clearly ahead of the game (as I would expect from their company) and are basically using standard teaching activities such as role-plays, decision-making execizes, etc. and adapting them to the web meeting context.  For me, as a trainer who uses web meetings quite often, I found their idea of assigning roles to keep the participants engaged to be quite useful.  These roles include note-taker, time-keeper, challenger, etc.  Another great idea was the one slide business card of the participant, which they can prepare as they like at home and then present in the web meeting.

They also identified a series of language focus areas for learners to perform well in this context, such as numbers, checking and clarifying, and turntaking.  I would say the only thing they missed was words to talk about technology and software such as margin, spreadsheet, column, font, header, etc.  But overall a great presentation and BE trainers should sit up and assess their online collaboration competence.

So, those were the first two from today, and I hope to get to the rest in due course.

The Trainer as a Change Agent

I would like to relate a story about some recent classes I have had and analyze how they reflect the challenges of the trainer as a change agent in the company.

Twitter in my Classroom

Over the past few weeks I have taught variations on a social networking debate lesson.  The activities and performance tasks varied depending on the group, but the basic elements were the same.  First, we discussed the term social networking and what it means.  Then we changed perspective to that of a company, and discussed why a company would want to engage in social networking sites.  Next, I presented how their company used social networking by bringing up Twitter and Facebook on the projector.  Then I showed them how JetBlue, an American airline uses Twitter with 1.6m followers in its CRM.  Finally, groups were formed to develop possible pros and cons for a company using social networking and they debated their findings.

From @Jetblue

What happened in every single lesson was that I spent much more time than planned explaining how Twitter worked and they debated amongst themselves how horrible it was.  Not one single person was able to see the customer relationship benefit from using social networking.  In fact, one participant even questioned why the company would ever need more than print ads in trade magazines and targeted emails to spread company information, while others in the class nodded in agreement.  I honestly didn't know what to say.  I had expected that Twitter would be new, but not that it would be seen as evil so quickly.  So, in the end, one side had to assume the pro role and with my help find possible benefits. 

This relates to my recent post on the BESIG World Blog, which I was so honored to participate in.  Special thanks to Claire Hart (@claire_hart), Carl Dowse (@carldowse) and Mike Hogan (@irishmikeh).  In the blog post I talked about how we need management support to bring about organizational change.  I use the example of trying to incorporate BELF into communication. 

So what does it take for the English trainer to impact change?

1.  We need a sponsor and a mandate

As I talked about in the BESIG blog, we need managment support and we need to know what they want to change.  A sponsor is worthless without a mandate and vice versa.  The most common change we will probably encounter is communication style.  This includes telephone calls, meetings, presentations, emails, etc.  If we are teaching BEFL, we are teaching a global standard of communication, not only in words and grammar, but also in style, register, and politeness.  This change requires support and understanding from management.  At an organizational level, this means we might be changing company templates and norms.

We also need to know where management wants the organization to go.  Where does the English program fit into strategic objectives?  Are we part of a push to adopt globalization?  Are we part of a program to accept new technologies and knowledge sharing?  If not, forget it.  Teach the lexis, grammar, skills and go home.  If so, how can management support us?  Can they come to the lessons?  Can we include them in email distro lists and blended learning sites?

This means our training needs to be sold as a means to strategic objectives and advertised to the participants as a rounded communication training course.

2.  We need to know how much change is possible

Within any change management program we need to know where we are compared with where the participants are.  We are taught that within any random sample, the results will have a normal distribution and create a bell curve.  Matching this with the Law of Diffusion of Innovation, we should have early adopters, members of the majority, and laggards in the class.

But this is not true because recruiting, company culture, and stagnant diversity mean that most participants will belong to one group.  For example, Google hires only innovators, This means there will typically be a disconnect between the trainer and the participants.  I think that bringing the participants forward one level in the adoption of innovation is great step.  We should realize that rapid change is not possible.  It must be step by step.

3.  We have to understand our participants perspective of change

Individuals typically go through several stages when adopting change.  Normally, they are:

1. Shock
2. Denial
3. Frustration
4. Depression
5. Experimentation
6. Decision
7. Integration

Depending on the level of change we are involved in, we need to understand where our participants are in this process.

Some general rules I have found:

• Participants/Organizations normally order an English course as a transition from depression to experimentation.  Our performance in the first several lessons makes a huge difference.
• When learners are confronted with the concept of learner autonomy, they oftean enter the shock phase based on their previous training and expectations.  The trainer must then understand that real autonomy will begin later.  They must then recognize and support the experimentation phase.
• Talking about technology, we need to assess the company culture, recruting, and diversity to understand which topics will cause difficulty in the classroom.  For example, my story about Twitter (at innovator stage in Germany) was too far for the department (late majority).
• When using technology in the classroom (m-theory, Prezi, blended learning, etc.) we have to understand how willing the organization will adopt it.
• There is generally low cultural self-awareness and the learners can benefit from seeing how their culture communicates compared to international methods.  Because culture (general and office) affects the rate of adoption, it helps to tell them where they are and use benchmarks (like the Jet Blue example).

Are we ready to change?

So, assuming we know these three things, we can build change into our syllabus.

First, ask for the sponsorship and mandate for change.  Sell our qualificiations as communciations and cultural experts as well as language teachers.  Build the relationships with management.  Ensure they know what we are training and how it benefits their company.  Talk to management when we see organizational communication problems.

Second, understand the organization and it members.  Assess where the participants are on the innovation curve before establishing course plans.  Embrace early adopters and use them as peer voices.  For example, ask the early adopter participant to give a presentation on how they use their smart phone/new software/process, etc..  Peer comments will go much further than what we say.

Finally, be sensitive to the various stages of change.  Help the learner get through the depression stage as fast as possible.  This is also the part when they are most likely to drop the course.  Disguise change strategies as English lessons.  Using my Jet Blue example... the homework is to monitor JetBlue and create a telephone dialog between a customer service rep and a customer about a case discussed on Twitter.

I belive that by selling and delivering change, we are offering a great value to our customers, improving our participants' communication skills, and driving better English fluency.

Back to the Twitter in my classroom story.  I think I tried the right thing and maybe I was even able to move one or two participants forward.  Using Jet Blue as a benchmark was a good idea, as was assigning pro and con roles.  However, from this lesson I do not think I created adoption.  The subject may have been a bit to far for the group.  In this case we have the mandate but sponsorship is lacking.

10 Tips for ESL Presentation Coaching

For me, one of the most rewarding experiences as a trainer is to rehearse actual presentations and web meetings with participants.  For them, it is a huge confidence boost and helps them stay on message during the real thing.  For us, we gain valuable insight on the business, and are better able to provide targeted follow-up training.

This situation, however, requires trainers to change roles and expectations for the training event.  When setting up the training there are several keys to success.  First, try to have the training in the same environment as the real event.  If it is online, set up a web meeting.  If it is in a technical training room, reserve the training facility.  Second, try to get the presentation before the event to help you prepare.  For the most part the rehearsal will be participant led, but walking in with some warning of what you are about to see it helpful.  Third, make sure the participant brings a printed copy of the slides to the training.  Constantly changing between presentation view and edit view in PowerPoint disturbs the flow of the rehearsal.  It is better to make written notes on the slides for later reference.  This also allows the participant to review what we covered after the training.  Finally, try to enlist the help of a colleague to sit in and also give feedback and take notes.  This person will help refine the content of the presentation and can augment trainer feedback.

Once the training is arranged there are several tips for a successful coaching, here are ten.

1.  Audience Analysis

More than likely, the presenter has been so wrapped up in the details of the presentation that they have forgotten about the audience.  First, elict as much information about the audience as you can.  Who are the attendees?  What are their jobs?  What do they expect to get from the presentation?  Second, because most presentations are given to other non-native speakers, try to find out what level of English we are talking about.  Very often I see slides come back from the translators at a higher level.  We need to make sure the audience will understand what we are presenting.

2.  Modelling

It is helpful to give the participant a starting point by modelling the introduction or certain key parts of the presentation.  This could include key diagrams and graphics or particularly complex topics.  Remember to keep the model at the level of the participant.  So, if the presenter is B1 and the audience is assumed to be A2, keep the language appropriate.  Setting the bar too high is demotivating for the presenter.  We are hoping to avoid the phrase, "Oh wow!  You should give this presentation."

Modelling also provides the opportunity for the trainer to highlight discourse markers like "First..", "Next...", and "Let's take a look at..." as well as topic and slide transition phrases.  The model is only to get the ball rolling and should be as short as needed (typically 1-2 minutes is enough).

3.  The slides as an aid / hindrance

The slides can both help and hinder the presenter.  The presenter will naturally want to use the text from the slides as much as possible to help them find the words.  This causes several problems.  First, it normally distorts their body language and reduces the impact of their voice.  Second, if the attendees are not clear about the meaning of a bullet point, explaining it in the same terms will not help their understanding.  Finally, overusing the text often disturbs the flow of the explanation.  The presenter explains bullet point one... stops... reads... then explains bullet point two.  This makes it difficult for the listener to get the context of the slide and how all the parts fit together.

On the other hand, slides can provide a great reference for the presenter to organize their thoughts and signal where discourse markers should be placed.  I advise my learners not to have written notes or slide presentation notes because they already have most of the information on the slides.  Instead, we should look how we can use the text to aid the presentation.  I recommend placing some key words in bold, italics, or in different colors so that when they look at the screen they can quickly identify the main points before speaking.  Often, I will also have the learner turn away from the screen or close their eyes and simply talk about what they know on the subject.  This helps give the slide more flow and explains the text in different words.

4.  Timing

In most cases, the English presentation is copied or adapted from a presentation in L1.  The learners often fail to realize that presenting in L2 will take much longer.  Sometimes to fit the presentation into the allotted time slot, difficult choices must be made.  For example, if the most important information is at the end of the presentation, you might want to consider reorganizing the slides.  We don't want to be rushing to finish during our main point.  I find that the same number of slides and amount of content will take at least 50% more time than in L1 (depending on level).

This is also a time to remind them that going faster is not really the best answer.  Because the audience is also non-native speaker, they will need more time to to read the text, listen to the presenter, and understand the material.

5.  Audience Multitasking

Expanding on this, it helps to shows the presenter what the audience will be doing during the presentation.  In L1, it is possible for the audience to read, listen, and think about the material simultaneously.  In L2, this is a huge challenge.  Often, the presenter will change slides and dive right in talking about the material.  I typically tell the learner not to be afraid of silence.  Give the audience a moment to digest the material.  Don't ask them to read and listen at the same time... they will stop doing one or both.

6.  Two-way Communication

Many business presentations are inherently one-way communication, but in the L2 environment two-way communication is crucial for the presenter.  The audience will be very hesitant to interrupt them with questions and if they don't understand the material they might be too embarrassed to acknowledge it.  I encourage the learners to state at the beginning that if the audience doesn't understand something, let the presenter know.  The presenter will also often try to avoid two-way communication to minimize the demands in English.  They present a slide, transition, and start talking about the next.  Encourage the participant to stop, ask for questions, watch for non-verbal communication, ask for feedback, etc.

7.  Realistic Changes

Most of these training events occur shortly before the real presentation.  It would be great to be part of the drafting process, but that is not always practical.  So when making suggestions for changes we need to be realistic about how much time the learner has.  A rule of thumb is that for small edits, estimate 5 minutes per slide.  For text reorganization, 10-15 minutes per slide.  For larger reorganization and changes, 20-30 minutes per slide.  We don't want to make recommendations and then either stress the learner to make them (giving them less time to consider our feedback) or cause them to doubt the quality of the presentation.

8.  Content Gaps

One helpful thing during the rehearsal is to listen for topics they are not covering.  Have they assumed some kind of prior knowledge because they are an expert?  This is where having the colleague in the room can be very helpful.  When I am reading the presentation before the training, I am thinking of what questions the audience will have for the presenter.  Sometimes we find topics that the participant has simply forgotten to include in the presentation.

9.  Limited Language Input

This is not really the time for language input and correction.  Vocabulary retention is minimal in this context and improving accuracy should not be the aim of the training.  That said, any glaring cultural errors or errors which could cause significant misunderstandings should be corrected.  Occasionally, I will monitor for accuracy, but mostly only to drive future training.  In this scenario, we need to give the learner as much confidence as possible, pointing out verbs tenses doesn't help this effort.  I will, however, listen for words or phrases which are overly used, such as "overview" or "in this environment" and try to help the learner find other expressions.

10. Review and Summarize

Finally, save some time at the end of the training to review what you have covered, distill the feedback into general concepts, and make task lists prior to the presentation.  The coaching event is a stressful time for the learner and they have probably not had the chance to take everything in.  Also, they have been 'on stage' and have not had the opportunity to stop, take some notes, and really consider the feedback.  This review and summary stage helps them implement the advice they have received.

Of course, after the training event, check back with the learner to find out how everything went and congratulate them for a job well done.  The students will be thankful for your feedback and truly grateful for helping them make a great impression on their audience.

Group Stages and Reaching Training Objectives

In this post I want to examine how group dynamics affect performance objectives and the implications on syllabus development.  For the past few weeks, I have been searching my university database for applicable research on the subject in TESOL and general adult education.  While the results are clear that collaborative learning benefits training, I have been unable to find references to show how group development impacts results (except in e-learning).  If you are aware of research please let me know.  I’m sure some of the books I see on the MA TESOL reading list must include this subject.

The stages of group development have remained relatively intact since Tuckman’s forming, storming, norming, performing, adjourning framework in 1965.  To this, we’ll add Lencioni’s Five Dysfunctions of a Team, a bestseller now prevalent in management training.  While nearly 50 years apart, these two structures are aligned.  In fact, Lencioni’s dysfunctions seem to reinforce Tuckman’s legendary model.  The dysfunctions result when the stages are not properly resolved.

Tuckman’s Five Stages of Team Development	Lencioni’s Five Dysfunctions of a Team
Forming	Absence of Trust (Invulnerability)
Storming	Fear of Conflict (False Harmony)
Norming	Lack of Commitment (Ambiguity)
Performing	Avoidance of Accountability (Low Standards)
Adjourning	Inattention to Results

Taking it a step further, we can apply the dysfunctions of a team to common class problems, both student-to-student and student-to-trainer.

Dysfunction	Classroom Effects
Absence of Trust	Group and pair work is constrained. Learner opinions are formed only by role-play cues. Poor learner interaction without trainer involvement. Open discussion activities fail. Learners doubt course material and trainer.
Fear of Conflict	Learners withhold opinions until trainer establishes popular views. Discussions are lifeless and students remain passive. Trainer is unable to obtain feedback on training and learning styles. Trainer is unable to assess whether materials fit learners’ needs.
Lack of Commitment	Dropping attendance. Low homework / self-study completion. Learners do not consider or provide material to improve course. Learners do not listen to their classmates. Learners do not use trainer as a resource outside of lesson.
Avoidance of Accountability	Unclear progress, no pressure to improve. Learners merely repeatedly practice the language they already know. Trainer does not introduce or enforce risk taking or improved performance.
Inattention to Results	Learners do not notice what they have learned / do not apply lessons to real life. Training objectives are not defined / reached.

I have provided a long list, but it is certainly not complete.  But we can see that certain course shortcomings can be attributed to group dysfunction, either between the students themselves or within the trainer-student relationship.

If this is the case, it makes sense to ensure we as trainers encourage and allow the stages of group development to occur.  This should be incorporated into syllabus design.  However, most syllabi I encounter (and have made in the past) are linear (meaning we achieve the training objectives at a steady pace), essentially asking the trainer to jump straight to the performing stage.  Naturally, the trainer will front load some team-building activities (forming) and needs analysis, but targeted lessons soon follow.

I advocate an ‘accelerating’ syllabus, in which the course slowly builds toward the can-do statements.  Toward the beginning of the course, the aims of the lessons are aimed at completing the group development stages.  As the course progresses, the learners are able to accomplish more during the performing stage, reaching the same training objectives in the same timeframe.

Here are some considerations for the various group stages:

Forming – Building trust, overcoming inhibitions to speak, listening

·         Allowing extended group small talk at the start of lessons in L1

·         More whole group discussions about jobs, hobbies, personal issues, job issues

·         Cross talk activities about current events within their organizations

·         Interview activities about personal histories

·         Encouraging contact outside the classroom (both T-S and S-S)

Storming – Expressing opinions, setting expectations, identifying learning styles, establishing self-study

·         Negotiated needs analysis

·         Utilize learning styles

·         Test activities to determine what works and what doesn’t (with delayed feedback)

·         Test homework completion level / commitment level

·         Focus on metalanguage and language learning terms

·         Focus on self-study skills / using online resources

·         High lesson feedback from students

·         Start learner journals, lesson feedback forms, learner expectations for the course / trainer / peers

·         Trainer facilitated conversations on controversial topics, encouraging different opinions

Norming – Adopting rules, setting expected commitment level, formalizing goals, establishing activity type balance, formalizing the course plan

·         Establish ‘rules’ of the course (how much time Ss will spend on self-study, goals, behavior, absence notification, trainer follow up, blended learning balance, etc.)

·         Establish preferred activity types based on learning styles, interests, etc.

·         Choosing appropriate resources

Performing – Reaching training objectives, challenging trainer and learners to achieve more

·         Full steam ahead based on materials, self-study commitment, learning styles, and learner interests

Adjourning – Assessing, reflecting

·         Prove what we’ve learned and how we have used it in the real world

·         Reflect on how we can take the training to the next level, both inside and outside the classroom

·         Consider how we are different than when we started

For many trainers this will come naturally, yet all too often I see elements in the wrong stage of group development.  Furthermore, a standard linear syllabus superimposes itself on the stages of group development and pushes the performing stage further to the right.

Actions which fall in the wrong position:

·         Trainer dictates commitment levels expected in course introduction

·         Coursebooks or other materials are determined before the course begins

·         Learning styles are determined by trial and error as the course progresses

·         Homework and self-study expectations fluctuate

The list goes on and on.  The point is, if we slow down at the beginning, we can go faster later.  From a business point of view, a course in the performing stage is more likely to extend the contact or pressure management to continue the program.

Naturally, different groups progress through these stages at different speeds and the group will shift between stages periodically.  For example, when teaching a whole department, the trust level among the students may already be established, only forming the group with the trainer requires effort.  But it is important for the trainer to recognize the stages of development and the dysfunctions of a team.  By doing so we can improve our training and ensure the learners are truly reaching the objectives.

Using the course book to plan part 2... the text

Okay, so first I looked at using the bookend activities to design a lesson.

Basically...

• What is the warmer?  How can make it more personal/elicit conversation from the students' perspective?
• What is the finishing production activity?
• What are some ways the lesson can go from point A to point B?

So, now let's look at the written texts in course books.

Often, the texts either float above the book syllabus and exist only for reading practice or we use them to identify a few lexical items. The class then discusses the text. But honestly, it takes a particulary outgoing or opinionated group to make this work because the article is probably not something they would have read if they had the choice. After a few units, the whole process gets a little repetitive.

In most cases the text will be an article.  This means nearly all texts are written with the purpose of informing the reader. 

Let's look at some purposes we often find in business communication which are rarely included in the course book reading texts...

• to explain
• to recommend
• to evaluate
• to persuade
• to analyze
• to synthesize
• to propose
• to call readers to action
• to change attitudes

But wait, now let's turn the page and we find a function or skill lesson which attempts to train these exact areas.  The trick then is to somehow combine these two... e.g. inform + propose, inform + call for action.

Placing this in a business context.  Why do students read trade and business magazines?  This is an interesting question to pose to students.  More than likely, they are benchmarking and checking the competition.

Here are a few activities that can help make these texts a bit more useful.

1.  Inform + recommend
Teacher hands out a glossary for a few key words for the text.  Students read the text for gist and answer some comprehension check questions.  Next the students are told that they are going to compare the company to their own in small groups.  They will use the article to present 'lessons learned' and recommend action.  They then read the article in detail to find way to compare to their company.  The students meet in groups to draw on various experience.  Finally, the groups prepare a short presentation to recommend steps for their company to take or to avoid based on the article.  Note:  Depending on the context and experience of the students, it may be necessary to set a few starting points, such as "Your company is thinking about..."

2.  Inform + synthesize
This is similar to a classic jigsaw reading, but instead of comparing and sharing, the goal is to synthesize the various articles.  One group reads the text in the book (again glossaries are good).  Other groups read similar articles on the same subject.  The groups then answer comprehension questions and discuss their opinions on the article to ensure understanding.  Then the students are told that they will work in different groups and must create a "recent trends in the industry" text/slide.  They then meet together and determine what the articles have in common.  What are the most important events?  What conclusions can they draw?  Why would the newspaper/magazine write about them?  The groups then share their synthesis and we discuss the differences between the groups.

3.  Inform + analyze
This time we use the text as a starting point of a chain of events.  The key is to get the students to analyze what happened and think about what the effects will be.  First, we will introduce the company mentioned.  Then together we will brainstorm the major competitors, customers, or suppliers.  We talk about the reputation of the competitors and compile any simple market information we have on the industry.  Next, each pair or small group is assigned a stakeholder and they must read the text through the eyes of the stakeholder.  So, if the text is about VW's factory in Dresden, they would read as an employee of BMW or Fiat.  The groups then meet to discuss how the events in the article will affect their business.  How will the market react?  Do we need to take action against the competitor, etc.?  The task depends on the text.  But they should be analyzing the text to find consequences.  At the end, the class can come together and talk about how these possible consequences will affect us as consumers.

4.  Inform + persuade
Just as we used the text to read through someone else POV before, this time we use the text as the basis for a case study.  The normal reading procedures run as usual.  But when they read for detailed understanding they should be considering what events at the company led to the article.  In short, someone must have proposed what happened in the article (e.g. entering the Chinese market, signing Christiano Ronalo, whatever is in the article).  So, after we have a good understanding of the article we take the whole class back in time and have the meeting to discuss the proposal and others.  Students can be assigned roles based on who they think was in the meeting.  They can prepare other proposals that might have been discussed at the meeting.  One student can be the deciding authority or they can reach a decision by consensus.  We can use our imagination and that of our students to make the scenario.  Then we simulate the meeting and see if we came to the same decision as the company in the article.

5.  Inform + explain
Very simply, the students must 'translate' the text for someone outside the subject area.  This works well with high level students or specialists.  The reading procedure is the same and lexical analysis continues.  But this time when they discuss the text, they must change audiences.  For example, they need to explain the text to an angel investor who is not familiar with the details of the industry.  They must explain the article to a group of apprentices.  They must explain the article to an overseas colleague who speaks a low level of English.  Any audience will do.  But it will give the learners practice in changing their language to fit the audience.

These are just a few ideas for how to integrate the course book text into the syllabus.  Too often I feel the text in the book is only there merely for reading practice.  And when following the teacher's notes, I always got the feeling that we read the text, identified a few lexical terms, had a half-cooked conversation and turned the page.

These ideas might help bring the text more life.  I haven't mentioned mining the text for grammar and deeper lexical items.  These activities are not to be forgotten, but hopefully these lessons can increase interaction and link the informative purpose with other communication goals.

Using a course book to plan an open lesson... Part 1

While doing all this reading about teaching without course books, I thought it might be valuble to talk about a way to use the course book as a valuble resource when planning a lesson.

To start, I am not often a course book trainer.  When I teach classes for which books are provided I do not use them page by page, but I also make sure I don't waste the money spent (by the school, company, or student).

In short, I don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water simply because I don't like course books.  Sometimes whole units are useful, sometimes single lessons, but mostly it helps to pick and choose.

The pros and cons of course books have been extensively debated, so we'll leave it there.

For my lesson examples I am using a unit from Market Leader, Intermediate from Pearson.  Namely the free unit provided on their website about advertising.  http://www.market-leader.net/flash/pdfs/Int3rdEd_unit5.pdf

Technique One - Bookends

Look at the first and last activity of a unit.  Then think, "If I were forced to do these types of activities, what would I put in the middle?"  Thinking critically, the first and last activities are the warmer and the production stage and are designed to get the learners speaking.  Since this is usually our overall aim, it makes sense to use them as a backbone.

Example:
In the warmer, students discuss the ads shown in pairs.  Looking at the first vocabulary lesson, we see that students are first asked to brainstorm ad media.  The final activity is to agree or disagree with controversial statements about advertising.  With these two (three) pieces in mind, any number of lessons could develop.

In my case, I would first ask the students to remember as many ads as they can from the last 24 hours.  Where did they see them?  What was the product?  Why do you remember it?

When this is complete the students then compare in pairs or small groups.  Because the information gap is already created, the student begin naturally to describe the ads they saw.  Inevitably a television commercial comes up and suddenly students are telling stories.  At this point, I am moving around and helping to fill any unique lexis gaps.

Once they have compared, we can start grouping their ads as a class by medium.  Which are outdoor?  Which are from the radio?  Which are on the Internet and so on?  These groups develop and meanings are elicited from the students themselves.  By the end, we should have a fairly good list of key advertising terms.

Now we are starting to see that advertising is everywhere.  If it is everwhere, why do we remember some ads and not others?  The students are already prepared for this question because of their conversation at the beginning.  In the case of the book, I might board the adjectives from the lesson and have the learners assign them to their ads.  Then, I could write, "This ad is _______ because...".  A student can call out an adjective and those who chose it must stand up and complete the sentence.

Finally, with our list of media intact, we talk about how we are constantly exposed to promotions.  To discuss the point we can write the controversial sentences on individual paper (plus a few more) and have mind map conversations (this can also be done on the whiteboard).  I got this activity from Karl Dean.  The sentence is in the middle and the student must draw a line and write a response.  Then the paper moves.  The next student should respond to the original statement or any of the new statements.  Over time, the conversations develop in several ways simultanously and provide great ideas for a passionate discussion as a group or in teams.

So, we used the book as a guide by using the first and last activities to form the lesson.  In fact, I will typically leave the middle fuzzy and develop the middle as the lesson progresses.  In this example, I have kept the lexical focus.  However, nothing prevents this from become a lesson targeted at grammar constructions, functions or even skills.

Next time, I will look at another technique.  Text to Skill