Reflection and Feedback: Primary School Teachers of English Take Control
Steven Graham, Thailand
Steven Graham is a lecturer at Khon Kaen University International College (KKUIC) in Thailand and a founding member of Udon Education Foundation (UEF) in Udon Thani. His main interests are in English for Specific Purposes (ESP), English for Academic Purposes (EAP), teacher training and primary school teaching and learning materials. E-mail: steven@kku.ac.th
Menu
Abstract
Introduction
Procedure
Thai teachers’ feedback
Project manager’s feedback
Discussion
References
South East Asia has experienced an influx of methodologies over the years resulting in governments passing legislation designed to move the teaching of English forward into the 21st century. Unfortunately, there seems little explanation as to how this new focus can be implemented, especially in rural areas. This paper recounts the main discussion points from feedback sessions of a project based in north eastern Thailand, designed to give rural teachers the confidence to plan their own development from the bottom up; rather than rely on the top down approach that is endemic in Thailand. From the subjects that were raised, it is evident that these teachers, who do not have formal English language training, are in the process of taking control of their own personal development with a view to integrating communicative activities and learner centeredness into their classrooms.
Thailand’s teachers of English face many problems. The vast majority of English language teachers in primary school have not been trained in how to teach English as the teachers are graduates from other disciplines. The 1999 Education Act set out the standards needed to advance English language teaching in the country but did not address this problem and coupled with the lack of an implementation policy, the vast majority of English language teachers in Thailand’s rural primary education sector feel as if they have been left behind. Foley (2005) gives a historical background to Thailand’s English language teaching and learning in its formal education system and puts forward many problem areas that still require attention.
To understand a similar situation and have an overview of some additional curriculum problems, Prapaisit de Segovia and Hardson (2009) conducted a study that illustrated how teachers played an important part in proposed reform; they were actually an “untapped resource in the decision making process” and suffered due to a shortage of training, resources and support. Jacobs and Farrell (2003) argue that the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) paradigm needs to be looked at holistically. This paradigm shift seems too big to be completed in one attempt, judging by the lack of progress over the last eleven years since the 1999 Education Act. This project sets out to introduce CLT and learner-centred teaching over a longer than normal period of time, so that the Thai teachers of English can get used to CLT before adopting it in its entirety.
An initial proposal was put forward to Thailand’s Ministry of Education (Graham 2008) detailing proposed training of nearly 4,000 primary school teachers of English in rural locations in the north east of Thailand. The Ministry of Education wanted a smaller pilot project to be conducted first. Graham (2009) recounted the first four months of the project called “Smooth Transitions” where he describes how the school was chosen and how the initial four hours of teacher training and questions took place. What made this project different from many others was that it used a bottom up approach as detailed by Kantamara, Hallinger and Jatiket (2006) which is opposite to educational policy and innovation in Thailand. Just because the project is from the bottom up does not guarantee success (Stephenson 1994); however, it does give the opportunity for collaboration of like minded individuals. If the pilot project were to fail to convince the Ministry of Education to institutionalise the “Smooth Transitions” idea, which is so often the case with proposed innovation institutionalization (Waters 2009), nothing would have been lost as the pilot project could be used again and adapted in other rural schools for the benefit of the local communities.
The main focus for the Thai teachers of English was to continue teaching as they had done before, but add an extra element to their teaching by using a CD of dialogues and also sets of flashcards. This was a transitional phase from the traditional teacher-centred approach of English language teaching normally used in rural areas of Thailand to one that was more student-centred. The dialogues for the CD were in line with the national curriculum and the flashcards were standard cards, some with Thai translations. The paper by Graham (2009) concluded with the first feedback session after the initial four month period had finished.
This paper revisits the first observation session and then continues from where the previous paper left off and is a narrative inquiry; a descriptive research in order to provide a clear picture of what happened in the Thai classrooms (Allwright 1988) and does not follow an outcomes based approach as defined by Jones (2009). When the idea of conducting this research was first thought of, it was not the intention to publish papers detailing events; however, over a period of six months, this is now the second paper to be written concerning the “Smooth Transitions” project. As a result, this paper has turned out to be a journey of discovery, rather than a set of statistics from a teacher technician (Jones 2009). This exploratory practice proved to be much less daunting than traditional research for the researcher (Mann 2005) as it was based on familiar activities in a classroom setting. Fermin (2005) hints that what is taking place now is a departure from the more traditional forms of research towards a research that is more insightful into teachers’ personal and professional lives when looking at teacher development. This type of research is also the subject of a paper by Templer (2008), where he describes various narratives and demonstrates their usefulness and true worth.
A sustained period of observations which were filmed and photographed were followed by a reflective period and feedback, where the teachers would be given copies of the DVDs and photographs so that they would be able to reflect and discuss their teaching the following week. Teachers watching themselves on DVD proved particularly useful as it gave them the opportunity to look at their communicative competence, their use of language functions and their individual teaching styles (Orlova 2009). Self evaluation is gradually developed by teachers; it is not something that can be taught. Teachers have to observe themselves (Doff 1988). The video clips are only two to five minutes long, so can only show a short part of whatever micro-teaching that had taken place; however, they were still long enough to generate comparisons amongst the peer group with suggestions and critical comments (Geyer 2008). This was discussed as micro-evaluation (Ellis 1997) brought about by the feedback session; in addition, the feedback indicated whether the task being videoed was successful or not from the point of view of the teachers. The feedback was conducted one week after the observation allowing for a period of “critical reflection” encompassing recall, consideration and evaluation (Richards 1998).
Under the sub heading, “A process for reflection,” Bartlett (1990) reviews the different cycles of reflection for reflective teaching. For a teacher to reflect successfully we are informed that they need to observe and collect evidence. They then have to add meaning to the observations before explaining why a particular lesson was taught that way and then progressing to think about how they might have taught the lesson differently, before planning what to do the next time it is taught. It would have been beneficial for research purposes for the Thai teachers of English to have kept journals of their reflective practices (Lee 2007); however, these teachers were already overworked and under pressure, so the added burden of having to keep journals was deemed unfair. It proved more beneficial to use the feedback sessions as a social activity by combining the feedback and reflection into what Brandt (2008) calls “reflective conversations.”
The feedback sessions were conducted in Thai and recorded. Hayes (2009) suggests that there should be more examples of everyday experiences of teachers of English in state education systems made available for people to see and scrutinise. His idea is to show everyone the vast numbers of teachers who are working hard every day against all odds trying to do the best for their students. By recording the feedback sessions, it is possible for Thai teachers of English with very little English language competence to listen, understand and be encouraged by what their peers are doing and saying as the dialogues are predominantly in Thai.
In order to manage the feedback sessions successfully, Mead (1990) suggests that the manager needs to know as much of the Thai language as possible, understand that fluency does not guarantee effective communication and that there needs to be an understanding of the other person’s cultural priorities. The project manager does not speak Thai, so in order to achieve this, Channarong Rachbuanoy as the coordinator played a vital role in translating the conversations that were taking place and being Thai, understood the cultural meaning of what was being stated, thus giving true meaning to the dialogue that was taking place.
The project manager was very careful with the language of the feedback. By trying not to use contrastive conjunctions like “but” and giving alternative ideas as suggestions instead of using “don’t” as detailed by Buxton and Grant (2009), it was possible once again to focus on the more positive side of the observations and not be too critical at this stage, by supporting the teachers.
By conducting this project in an action research manner, it was anticipated and later substantiated that the process would make the teachers become more conscious about their own teaching (Brumfit and Mitchell 1990). Richards (1990) explains that self monitoring is useful as the time spent in training as opposed to the time in a teaching career is minimal and that self monitoring allows a teacher to “reflect critically on their teaching” as well as assist the teacher in narrowing the gap between their own view of their teaching and what is real. In the end, it is the teacher themselves, rather than the outside observer who assesses and makes adjustments where necessary. To assist in this process, there was the need for some kind of “expert scaffolding” in order that the teachers felt compelled to take part in the feedback sessions (Lee 2009). The idea that there was someone there to support them and give encouragement and advice was paramount in making the Thai teachers of English feel more relaxed at the beginning; and then gave them the confidence to continue and express themselves more as the feedback progressed.
The initial concerns of the teachers focussed on the perceived slow progress that the students were making and the short attention spans that they possessed. These are very young children and it came as no surprise that they were having difficulties concentrating on their activities. The teachers had very high expectations and were naturally worried that the students were not progressing at a fast enough pace. The teachers were reassured that they were doing a good job and that they could only go as fast as the students allowed them to. One of the reasons that progress seemed so slow was because the Prathom one syllabus was so large and that it seemed impossible for children at a rural school to attain the standards that were set. This situation did not bode well for the future as it might have a knock on effect for subsequent grades. Another concern was that the intonation of the students did not sound the same as the examples on the CD provided. It was explained that the children speaking on the CD spoke like native speakers and that it was unlikely that any of their students would sound like they did. It was explained that there was nothing wrong with a Thai accent as long as the message was understood. When the message is not understood, then there was a problem.
The use of Thai language was brought up by one of the teachers. He wanted to know if he was allowed to use Thai in the classroom. It was pointed out that his students would not be able to understand his instructions if he didn’t use Thai to help him explain. The use of Thai in the English language classroom has always been an area of debate; however, the introduction of CLT into the teaching repertoire necessitates the use of L1, especially in the early years, such as grade 1 as the students did not know how to complete the activities they were given and needed direction in their mother tongue. Wang (2005) highlights secondary school students and teachers and their use of L1 in the classroom to learn grammar as an example of how L1 is needed. The less English the students possess, the more mother tongue is needed in order for CLT activities to be completed. The more students become more experienced at CLT activities, the less L1 would be needed.
The teachers discussed how the new methodologies were time consuming resulting in some students being left behind as well as some students at the back of the classes not being involved. Extra help was needed and an example was put forward by one of the teachers of how she dealt with eight students who had difficulty completing one of the communicative tasks. She used a British Council CD to help the students practice the language needed to complete the dialogues that were causing the difficulty. This was particularly pleasing as the teacher had a problem and overcame it by thinking for herself and being flexible with her approach to teaching. Suggestions were put forward about the seating arrangements for those at the back of the class who were not participating and this led the teachers to work out their own plans of action.
When teachers used the CD to motivate their students to role-play and copy the English dialogues, some students had difficulty with the turn taking that the dialogues put forward. Most examples of easy English language dialogue have each participant saying one line before the next person says their line. The dialogues in the “Smooth Transitions” project have different turn taking rules, for example:
Is that a door?
No, it isn’t. It is a desk. Are these umbrellas?
Even though this type of discourse caused problems for some students, it follows the turn taking routine for dialogues used in the N-Net and O-Net tests which are part of the Thai education testing system and were based on the test books available for sale to the general public.
Teachers were willing to ask and to give explanations about the worksheets and other supplementary materials that they would like to use or materials that they had used and wanted to share with everyone else. These included their own worksheets and the use of pictures and drawings to help motivate their students and to explain what needed to be completed in class.
Surprisingly, given the cultural background to the teachers participating in the project, the project manager was asked to observe classes with specific tasks in mind, whether it was to listen to the students’ or teachers’ pronunciation or to give feedback on classroom management demonstrated by the teachers. Writing was another area of concern that warranted special attention.
There was obviously a need for more materials as the constant request for Prathom two and three CDs did not go unnoticed. DVDs would also have to be made at some point in the future as teachers had emphasised that it would benefit the students more if they could see people speaking the dialogues as well as listening to them. This would take a considerable amount of time and money; however, this was something that the teachers had initially identified and proved to be the future direction of this project.
This project has used an ad-hoc approach to observation (Wallace 1991) in that it was devised for a specific purpose; this project. The observer/ project manger provided feedback one week after the lesson in order for some kind of discussion or action to take place. Feedback can mean many things to different people. Conlon (2008) gives a comprehensive description of both good and bad feedback as well as a staged checklist. The idea is to inform in a non evaluative way, whilst making sure not to criticise the teacher as this could produce some kind of defensive reaction (Randall and Thornton 2001).
The project manger mentioned several times the differences in the teaching styles of the Thai teachers of English. This was an important area to emphasise as the ethos behind this project was for teachers to remain teaching the way they are used to; however, they were to add an extra communicative component to their teaching. This was highlighted by drawing everyone’s attention to the different classroom layouts that the teachers had decided to use as well as the different ways that they used the audio equipment to conduct some of their communicative activities.
The use of vocabulary substitution was raised as the script for the Prathom one dialogues had words underlined for this purpose. The teachers were made aware that once the students had got used to a particular dialogue, it was possible for the teachers to introduce new vocabulary whilst keeping the structures the same.
Various strategies were used to motivate the members of the project. Group and individual photographs for use on a website proved very effective as well as discussing good examples of teaching practices and student behaviour. It was important to offer encouragement at every available opportunity without sounding condescending. In addition, the use of future English camps and training days as something to strive towards also gave the teachers more stimuli and proved to be effective in boosting morale and elevating the status of the teachers concerned. The idea behind having the Thai teachers of English lead the teacher training for the Local Education Area’s training day was for them to have an event to look forward to and feel proud of, which would be the culmination of one year’s hard work (Wragg 1994). Event based training (Higginbotham 2009) is nothing new as it resembles task based learning; however, having 70 fellow teachers come to listen to their own experiences and then watch them teach in the classroom was something that they could learn from as well as enjoy.
The certificates that were to be issued for the initial training day nearly proved to be a demotivating factor as it took far too long a period of time to have them signed by the President of Udon Thani Rajabhat University. The reason for the delay was clerical; however, it is important to note the importance of certificates in this context for these teachers.
The project manager mentioned that it was important to be natural during the observations even though being observed may seem a daunting task. For the observations to work, they should show what really happens in the classroom, which includes the good and bad points. To this end, the project manger was able to discuss several major areas for concern during the three feedback sessions. First, having seen how the teachers managed their classrooms, he was able to share the different styles and practices with all the teachers of the project. The use of articles was discussed in order to try to stop this type of fossilisation for Thai students of English especially when they reach university level and still have difficulties with article use. In addition, the plural “s” was missing initially from many students’ pronunciation; however, this was soon rectified and proved both effective and comical as the students were told to over emphasise, so that the teachers could hear them properly. Finally, countable and uncountable nouns proved a problem when it came to liquids. It was decided to stay away from liquids and concentrate on classroom vocabulary as well as the vocabulary of the existing flashcards which were about animals, fruit and vegetables.
When possible, teachers were advised to try to make as much as they could out of the activities they were using in the classroom. A teacher may be conducting a writing activity; however, it was also possible to turn the activity into a reading activity as well as listening and speaking activities. An example of this was given where a class was completing a writing activity. The teacher was advised to speak to students as they were working and as he was checking their work. Ask the students to read what they have written; ask another student if they were right. Have another student read the work, and so on. Furthermore, if there happened to be a festival like New Year, then it would be a good idea to use one of the activities as it was topical and fitted the situation. The same could be said for birthdays.
Two major issues were addressed and accepted by everyone as it would prove to be helpful and that was to use these feedback sessions to prepare and plan for future lessons as well as highlight teacher English language skills that would need practice before they went in front of their classes to teach that particular lesson. One example was the use of pronunciation practice for difficult words that they were going to have to introduce to their students as part of the communicative activities that lay ahead. Initially this went down well with the teachers and was then adopted as normal practice during these feedback sessions.
The teachers were able to understand that because the observations were based on something that was real, in their own context; it was easier for them to reflect on their roles as teachers and to empower themselves (Ali 2007). Stevens and Lowing (2008) cite Moore (2004) when they choose the word “reflexive” rather than “reflective” to describe how teaching has to be looked at as part of the “big picture,” taking into account a teacher’s past teaching experiences, their beliefs and fears as well as social and cultural issues. Whilst their study concerned student teachers of English; the idea of looking at their teaching in a more humanistic and holistic way, gave the Thai teachers in this study more reasons to find positive aspects of their teaching than negative. There was also a motivating factor in that the teachers were looking at real life situations that were happening in their own classrooms, negating the problem for pre-service trainers who need to make up realistic cases for their students to use for reflection purposes (Farrell 2007).
A previous study by Bilash and Kwangsawad (2004) showed how Thai teachers of English could adapt CLT into their classrooms; however, they did state that it had to be completed within a collaborative action research structure. Without this sort of support, it would be difficult for CLT to be adopted in every classroom in the country.
Saleh (2009) puts forward an interesting idea that a general English curriculum for Palestinian schools is in fact English for Specific Purposes (ESP). The first English language curriculum for Palestinian schools is a modern communicative course specifically designed to meet the needs of the learners; their ages, readiness and interests. With Thailand having failed to implement the 1999 Education act in rural areas, a similar English course for K-12 may be the answer to Thailand’s English language problems. It would not take too much effort to make the curriculum Thai specific in nature as they have achieved in Palestine and when the comparisons are made between general English and ESP (Orr 2002); being Thai specific does not move too far away from general English, it would just give general English a Thai flavour.
It is important that language teacher education programmes introduce reflective practises to students from the beginning of the course, so that it is something that occurs naturally as they study and then eventually become teachers themselves. Santana-Williamson (2001) believes that critical reflection does not manifest itself naturally as a teacher becomes more experienced, and that it has to be introduced to the student teachers as early as possible. A study by Chinokul (2006) explains that the difference in her study between expert and non expert teachers was that the expert teachers had deep approaches to their learning, in that they are active cue-seekers and syllabus-free and the non experts demonstrated surface approaches to their learning illustrating that they were passive, cue-deaf and syllabus bound (Wallace 1991). From this it is safe to surmise that reflective practise is something that needs to be taught; however, the Thai teachers of English taking part in this project were all experienced teachers, it was just that they were not used to teaching English in a communicative learner centred way. Reflection turned out to be very easy for them. The idea was to make the teachers more task oriented and able to use good classroom management and questioning techniques in their large classes (Nitsaisook and Postlethwaite 1986).
Similar to a study by Atay (2004), this project emphasised the relevance of experiential learning and theoretical input in tandem with discussions based on reflection, feedback, language and teaching skills. Atay (2004) called it the phenomenological approach. This project was based on fieldwork and in the same way as the mentoring programme explained by Van Thielen (1993) “practical experience contributes to it daily.” Once new areas in the reflection and feedback process are discovered, there is the possibility for new research questions to be asked and answered as well as other avenues of enquiry to be followed.
Ali, S. (2007). Reflective teacher observation model for in-service teacher trainees. English Teaching Forum, 45(1), 16-25.
Allwright, D. (1988). Observations in the language classroom. Harlow: Longman.
Atay, D. (2004). Collaborative dialogue with student teachers as a follow-up to teacher in-service education and training. Language Teaching Research, 8(2), 143-162. doi:10.1191/1362168804lr138oa.
Bartlett, L. (1990). Teacher development through reflective teaching. In J. C.
Richards & D. Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education (pp. 207-213). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bilash, O., & Kwangsawad, T. (2004). Factors influencing Thai teachers' abilities to adapt CLT in their classrooms: A collaborative action research study. ThaiTESOL Bulletin, 17(1), 1-14.
Brandt, C. (2008). Integrating feedback and reflection in teacher preparation. ELT Journal, 62(1), 37-46. doi:10.1093/elt/ccm076.
Brumfit, C., & Mitchell, R. (1990). The language classroom as a focus for research. In
C. Brumfit & R. Mitchell (Eds.), Research in the Language Classroom (Vol. 133, pp. 3-15). London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
Buxton, B., & Grant, B. (2009). Taking the bite out of feedback. IATEFL Teacher Training & Education SIG Newsletter(2), 11-13.
Chinokul, S. (2006). Expert and nonexpert teachers: Do they use different processes while learning to teach? In T. S. C. Farrell (Ed.), Language teacher research in Asia (pp. 21-34). Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages Inc.
Conlon, S. (2008). The use of feedback to improve the ecology of the teaching-learning process. The New English Teacher, 2(2), 84-97.
Doff, A. (1988). Teach English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Farrell, T. S. C. (2007). Promoting reflection in language teacher education through case-based teaching. The New English Teacher, 1(1), 61-72.
Fermin, E. A. (2005). Making our personal stories count as research. Philippine Journal for Language Teaching, 44, 93-99.
Foley, J. A. (2005). English in ... Thailand. RELC Journal, 36(2), 223-234. doi:10.1177/0033688205055578.
Geyer, N. (2008). Reflective practices in foreign language teacher education: A view through micro and macro windows. Foreign Language Annals, 41(4), 627-638. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2008.tb03321.x.
Graham, S. (2008). Proposed teacher training for primary school teachers of English in Thailand. Retrieved February 17, 2008. Retrieved from
www.steves-english-zone.com
Graham, S. (2009). From the Bottom up: A case study of teacher training for primary school teachers of English in a Thai school in north eastern Thailand. English Language Teacher Education and Development, 12, 31-43.
Hayes, D. (2009). Learning language, learning teaching. RELC Journal, 40(1), 83-101. doi:10.1177/0033688208101446.
Higginbotham, G. (2009). Event based learning: The benefits of positive pressure. The Language Teacher, 33(11), 15-18.
Jacobs, G. M., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2003). Understanding and implementing the CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) paradigm. RELC Journal, 34(1), 5-30. doi:10.1177/003368820303400102.
Jones, P. D. (2009). Giving a voice to teachers and students in an outcomes-based approach. ELT Journal, 63(4), 387-389. doi:10.1093/elt/ccp055.
Kantamara, P., Hallinger, P., & Jatiket, M. (2006). Scaling up education reform in Thailand: Context, collaboration, networks and change. Planning and Changing, 37(1&2), 5-23.
Lee, I. (2007). Preparing pre-service English teachers for reflective practice. ELT Journal, 61(4), 321-329. doi:10.1093/elt/ccm022.
Lee, L. (2009). Scaffolding collaborative exchanges between expert and novice language teachers in threaded discussions. Foreign Language Annals, 42(2), 212-228. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2009.01018.x.
Mann, S. (2005). The language teacher's development. Language Teaching, 38(3), 103-118. doi:10.1017/S0261444805002867.
Mead, R. (1990). Cross-cultural management communication. Chichester: J. Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Moore, A. (2004). The good teacher: Dominant discourses in teaching and teacher education. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Nitsaisook, M., & Postlethwaite, N. (1986). Teacher effectiveness research. International Review of Education, 32(4), 423-438. doi:10.1007/BF00597552.
Orlova, N. (2009). Video recording as a stimulus for reflection in pre-service EFL teacher training. English Teaching Forum, 47(2), 30-35.
Orr, T. (2002). The nature of English for specific purposes. In T. Orr (Ed.), English for specific purposes (pp. 1-3). Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages Inc.
Prapaisait de Segovia, L. & Hardison, D. M. (2009). Implementing education reform: EFL teachers' perspectives. ELT Journal, 63(2), 154-162. doi:10.1093/elt/ccn024.
Randall, M., & Thornton, B. (2001). Advising and supporting teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (1990). The language teaching matrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C. (1998). Beyond training. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Saleh, I. (2009). Teaching English for general and specific purposes in Palestine. In
M. Krzanowski (Ed.), Current developments in English for academic and specific purposes in developing, emerging and least-developed countries (pp. 221-231). Reading: Garnet Publishing Ltd.
Santana-Williamson, E. (2001). Early reflections: Journaling a way into teaching. In J.
Edge (Ed.), Action Research (pp. 33-44). Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages Inc.
Segovia, L. P. d., & Hardison, D. M. (2009). Implementing education reform: EFL teachers' perspectives. ELT Journal, 63(2), 154-162. doi:10.1093/elt/ccn024.
Stephenson, H. (1994). Management and participation in ELT projects. ELT Journal, 48(3), 225-232. doi:10.1093/elt/ccn024.
Stevens, D., & Lowing, K. (2008). Observer, observed and observations: Initial teacher education English tutors' feedback on lessons taught by student teachers of English. English in Education, 42(2), 182-198. doi:10.1111/j.1754-8845.2008.00015.x.
Templer, B. (2008). LOT: Exploring teachers' real lives and voices. IATEFL Global Issues SIG. Retrieved July 30, 2008. Retrieved from
http://gisig.iatefl.org/pages/articles.html
Van Thielen, B. (1993). The mentor in teacher induction and teacher development. In J. Edge & K. Richards (Eds.), Teachers develop teachers research (pp. 94-101). Oxford: Heinemann International.
Wallace, M. J. (1991). Training foreign language teachers - A reflective approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, J. (2005). Mother tongue in the English Language Classroom: A case of one school. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 2(4), 17-39.
Waters, A. (2009). Managing innovation in English language education. Language Teaching, 42(4), 421-458. doi:10.1017/S026144480999005X.
Wragg, E. C. (1994). An introduction to classroom observation. London: Routledge.
Please check the Methodology and Language for Primary Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the How to be a Teacher Trainer course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the Skills of Teacher Training course at Pilgrims website.
|
