The Learning Elt Professional: Edited by Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo

THE LEARNING
ELT PROFESSIONAL
EDITED BY DANIEL XERRI
AND ODETTE VASSALLO
PREFACE BY JEREMY HARMER

FOREWORD BY EVARIST BARTOLO
THE LEARNING
ELT PROFESSIONAL
THE LEARNING
ELT PROFESSIONAL
3RD ELT MALTA
CONFERENCE SELECTIONS
Edited by Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo
Published by ELT Council
Ministry for Education and Employment
Great Siege Road
Floriana VLT 2000
Malta
Copyright for whole volume © ELT Council 2015
Copyright for individual papers remains vested

in the contributors, to whom applications for
rights to reproduce should be made.
First published 2015
ISBN 978-99957-0-814-6
Designed by John Wilson Independent Studios.

Printed in Malta by Gutenberg Press.
The task of the modern educator is not to cut
down jungles but to irrigate deserts.
– C. S. Lewis
This book is dedicated to all inspiring

ELT professionals.
O THE LEARNING ELT PROFESSIONALO
Contents
Foreword IX
Preface XI
1. The learning ELT professional: an introduction

Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo 1
2. Professional learning through teacher research
Simon Borg 11
3. Action research: getting started
Larissa Attard 19
4. Language teachers’ perceptions of doing teacher research:
a Maltese case study
Kenan Dikilitaş and Koray Akyazı 29
5. An ELT teacher’s reflective journey: a bottom-up approach
to continuing professional development
Caroline Campbell 41
6. A research-based approach to teaching prewriting strategies
in academic writing
Mario Aquilina 51
7. Feedback practices and strategies: perceptions and challenges
Stephanie Xerri Agius 61
8. Rescuing babies: modern uses for old techniques
Alan Marsh 71
9. A digital literacies primer
Gavin Dudeney 89
About the contributors 99
O VII O
FOREWORD
Hon. Evarist Bartolo
Minister for Education and Employment, Malta
The Indian poet and Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore (1996) believed that just like a
lamp can never light another lamp unless it continues to burn its own flame, teachers can
never truly teach unless they are still learning themselves (p. 64). As a child he abhorred
formal education and the subject he disliked the most was English. Later he wrote that
“The main object of teaching is not to explain meanings, but to knock at the doors of the
mind” (Tagore, 1916/2007, p. 73). In order for teachers to motivate learners to discover a
galaxy of knowledge and develop the skills they require to steer their course through life,
it is essential that they themselves should be intrigued by the learning process throughout
their entire professional lives. In order for teachers to nurture learners’ curiosity, they
must identify completely with the role of a learner.
As the world’s global language, English acts as a vehicle of opportunity for an
increasing number of people from a wide range of contexts and social backgrounds.
English is also an avenue for personal and cultural enrichment. ELT is rendered noble by
the fact that it facilitates access to such opportunity and enrichment. ELT professionals
are endowed with the privilege of teaching a language that has become synonymous
with empowerment and the fulfilling of a learner’s dreams and personal potential.
Enabling as many people as possible to learn English is paramount; the language should
not just be the preserve of those who can afford to learn it. However, it would be
mistaken to assume that English could be taught by anyone who possesses a high level
of proficiency in the language. The fact that ELT is a highly lucrative industry worldwide
has meant that this misconception has taken root in some contexts. However, ELT
is a profession because those who practise it value the pedagogical and linguistic
knowledge and skills that need to be developed at pre-service level and cultivated in
the course of one’s career.
Internationally, ELT is considered to be at the forefront of innovative language teaching
methods and approaches. Over the past few decades it has helped to establish forms of
language pedagogy that are communicative and learner-centred in nature. These have
now become de rigueur not just in ELT but in the teaching of other languages too. One
of the possible reasons for such trailblazing is that ELT has almost always underscored
the significance of teacher education and development. This has not only ensured that
adequate support is provided to those individuals who embark on the ELT profession,
but it has also fostered the right conditions for ELT professionals around the world to
experiment with classroom practices and investigate their constitution as professionals.
This aptly entitled book foregrounds teachers’ identity as professional learners. It
highlights ways in which ELT professionals may continue to develop their knowledge,
skills and beliefs in order for teaching to be more effective in its endeavour to knock at
the doors of learners’ minds.
O IX O
REFERENCES
Tagore, R. (1916/2007). My reminiscences. New York: BiblioBazaar.
Tagore, R. (1996). The English writings of Rabindranath Tagore (Vol. 2). New Delhi:
Sahitya Akademi.
O XO
PREFACE
Jeremy Harmer
Freelance, United Kingdom
It is quite possible that people who are not familiar with Malta have no idea of the
strength and resilience of its ELT sector. That is a pity because, as in so many other
areas of life, the islands (to use a rather blunt cliché) punch above their weight.
And it is not just the numbers – though they are impressive; it is also the care that
goes into the nurturing of the industry and the inspection system which the ELT
Council oversees and which does its level best to make sure that the students who
pour into Malta every year are given the best care, both pedagogic and pastoral.
Something else that the council does is to organize an annual conference with the
express aim of involving the teachers in the latest thinking, research and feelings about
how languages should be learned and taught. You would think we would know about
all that by now, but – and this is one of the reasons that what we do is so continually
invigorating – the pieces never seem to quite fit. There is always something more
to think about, something new and challenging to engage our interest, some new
‘metaphor’ – in Lightbown and Spada’s (2013) words – to alter our thinking. Humans,
especially humans-in-groups, which is how most people prefer to learn languages, just
will not conform to strict and easily-interpretable measuring. Nowhere is this more
true than in learning, where the variables of personality, motivation, environment,
interpersonal classroom interaction and pedagogical intervention all play their part.
One of the ways that teachers can try and fit the pieces together in this vast
pedagogical jigsaw is to read research. Often contradictory and sometimes counter-
intuitive, what researchers tell us has to inform what we do; it is foolish to discount
the findings of studies both small- and large-scale as some teachers are occasionally
inclined to do. And anyway, there is an alternative, a complimentary path that we
can follow, a path which will keep us going and which can inform every aspect of our
practice. This is Action Research – which is a natural process for a reflective teacher.
For many people teaching is best thought of as a felicitous marriage between
instinct and experience. Yet our instincts can, of course, be wrong, and our experience
is only valuable if we learn from it. That is why we need to become experts in what
I like to call ‘two-brain teaching’. One ‘brain’ is taken up with the minute-by-minute
interactions in the classroom, some of which we respond to instinctually, but the
second brain is there, hovering somewhere in the classroom air, to constantly monitor
and evaluate what is going on, watching what brain number 1 is doing and trying to
make sense of it all. And then, if we give it space, that second brain comes into its own
when the lesson is over. That is when we think back to what went on and try to tease
out why things happened this way and what we might want to do differently on a
future occasion. It can and should be a highly intense and stimulating experience and
at its best, that is what reflective teachers do all the time – use their second brains to
O XI O
evaluate their experiences. As an aside, I have always worried slightly that the word
‘reflective’ seems to have a more relaxed connotation than the process I am describing,
but for effective reflective teachers that act of self-evaluation and memory processing
is not a restful act; it is an exciting and stimulating one.
How do we stimulate both brains? By doing our own research – which means trying
out new things (or re-visiting old ones) – about what works and then letting both
brains have a dialogue about how effective these practices have been. That process is
what many of the articles in this collection are about and they perfectly complement
the work of the ELT Council, one of whose chief aims is to sustain an ongoing
conversation about how teaching and learning works and how it can be improved. Or,
just as importantly, how teachers keep on learning, questioning and researching – for
that kind of thinking is the lifeblood of the inquisitive and enquiring teacher.
Old techniques, new techniques? A digital revolution? The world never stands still;
the world of English Language Teaching is constantly turning. That is why the articles
in this collection are so timely and so important.
O XII O
REFERENCES
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
O XIII O
1
The learning
ELT professional:
an introduction
Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo
ELT Council, Malta
This book consists of a selection of papers based on talks and workshops delivered at the 3rd ELT
Malta conference. The book’s title is derived from the theme of the conference and it brings together
the perspectives of a group of international and Maltese experts in ELT, all of whom address the idea
that learning needs to be an intrinsic part of the identity of ELT professionals.
O1O
ELT IN MALTA
Every year, Malta caters for the needs of around 77,000 students coming from
more than 40 countries (NSO, 2015). The ELT sector is a key contributor to Malta’s
economy given that students account for around 4% of the total number of tourist
arrivals (NSO, 2015). More significantly, a typical student spends three weeks in Malta,
with the total number of weeks for international students amounting to more than
245,000 (NSO, 2015). Since the founding of the first language school in the 1960s,
it is estimated that Malta has taught English to more than one million students from
around the world. These students chose Malta as their language-learning destination
not only because of its culture, climate and beaches, but also because over the past
50 years, the country’s ELT industry has built an international reputation for academic
excellence. There are currently more than 45 licenced schools in operation and they
range from family businesses to multinational companies with schools in different
continents. This diversity is highly important since students who opt for Malta as their
academic destination are spoilt for choice when it comes to selecting a school that
best fits their requirements. Such diversity is also of crucial importance to Malta’s
success in carving a niche in the global ELT sector.
Over the past few years, a number of ELT schools have taken the initiative to
look beyond the industry’s five biggest clients – all located in Europe – and explore
new markets in order to attract students from far-flung parts of the world. In most
classrooms there is increasingly a bigger mix of nationalities that make the language
learning experience even more satisfying. However, schools need to be provided
with more support in order for the ELT industry in Malta to continue prospering. If
this industry is to contribute even further to Malta’s economy, then there should be
provisions in place that facilitate the process of attracting students from an even wider
variety of countries.
Ever since its inception, the ELT industry in Malta has always been renowned for its
high academic standards. Despite its small size, the country has an ELT industry that
can provide larger competitors with a run for their money. It can do so because Malta
was the first country to regulate this industry by enacting legislation; this was meant at
safeguarding the interests of all relevant stakeholders. The EFL Monitoring Board, the
forerunner of the ELT Council, was set up in 1996; over the years, it published policies
that regulated all aspects of a student’s stay in Malta. Fully aware of the dangers that
are associated with an exclusively top-down approach to educational management, the
EFL Monitoring Board implemented policies that were entrenched in grassroots-level
consultation and the sharing of best practice. In doing so, it consulted both FELTOM
and MATEFL, the school owners’ association and the teachers’ association respectively.
The EFL Monitoring Board was responsible for designing the Test for English Language
Teachers (TELT), an internationally level-rated examination that assesses the language
awareness requirements of teachers, as well as TEFL Cert., a pre-service teacher
education programme that specifies all the pedagogical knowledge and skills that ELT
professionals require in order to function effectively. Before ceasing operations, the
O 2O
EFL Monitoring Board produced legislation aimed at ensuring that regulations are in
line with the needs of the industry in the 21st century and guaranteeing even higher
levels of quality. This legislation led to the creation of the ELT Council, which took
on the mission and remit of the EFL Monitoring Board as well as added powers and
responsibilities.
In the last four years of its operation, the EFL Monitoring Board broadened
the scope of its interests and sought to forge ties with various entities in an effort
to maintain high standards of English proficiency in Malta. For example, in 2014 it
collaborated with Aġenzija Żgħażagħ in order to engage ELT schools in a corporate
social responsibility programme aimed at developing English proficiency levels of
vulnerable Maltese youths. This kind of collaboration amongst different stakeholders
continues to be an objective of the ELT Council given its conviction that Malta’s
bilingual identity provides it with a competitive edge. Preserving the status of English
in Malta is of utmost importance if the country is to continue reaping the benefits it
has enjoyed so far.
One means of maintaining high standards of English is by enhancing teaching
standards. It is for this reason that the ELT Council is committed to fostering a
culture of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) amongst teachers. In order
to guarantee even better teaching, the ELT Council encourages language schools to
promote CPD as an intrinsic part of their academic philosophy. It does this partly by
means of its academic school visits policy, which seeks to help schools with the use of
teacher portfolios. Moreover, it collaborates with the Education Officers for English
within the Department of Quality and Standards in Education in order to provide
mainstream teachers at primary and secondary levels with in-service training aimed
at enhancing their language awareness and methodology. Together with FELTOM, the
ELT Council supports the University of Malta’s MA in TESOL. Launched in 2014, this
programme has the potential to lead to a better-informed cadre of professionals who
are able to occupy the top academic positions in Malta’s ELT industry. Through such
initiatives, the ELT Council aims to keep fostering the growth of teachers of English and
other ELT professionals.
ELT PROFESSION IN MALTA

The term industry is commonly used to refer to ELT in Malta and that is because
the teaching of English is a profit-making sector in this country. However, one
must never lose sight of the fact that this is an industry that is almost entirely
dependent on a single profession: teaching. The quality of teaching is what has
built the industry’s international reputation. The facilities of the schools, the
leisure activities organised for students, the non-academic services provided to
them are very important. They are a significant part of the package offered to
those visiting Malta for the purpose of learning English. Nonetheless, it is because
of teachers’ knowledge and skills that the ELT industry has thrived so much. Its
success is due to the top quality teaching that is delivered on a daily basis.
O 3O
The composition of the ELT profession in Malta is adequately varied, consisting

of both native and second language speakers of English with a wide range of
ages and life experiences. Around 1,400 teachers work in the ELT sector and
the majority of them are employed on a part-time basis while usually acting as
teachers in mainstream schools (NSO, 2015). More than 70% of these teachers
are female and a significant proportion of women occupy decision-making posts
in most ELT schools. Half of all the Directors of Studies in Malta are women and
the success of this industry owes a lot to women’s insightful contributions. All the
teachers working in the ELT sector in Malta are employed on the basis of specific
minimum requirements in terms of qualifications in pedagogy and language
proficiency and awareness. The industry encourages people from all walks of life
to obtain the necessary qualifications in order to teach English. The university
student population has always been one of the mainstays of the ELT profession in
Malta and many undergraduates start teaching English while reading for a degree.
This initial teaching experience provides them with the opportunity of meeting
people from all over the world and allows them to value the contribution that
English teachers make to the attainment of students’ aspirations. This profession
also welcomes people who might have been doing a variety of other jobs before
choosing to become teachers. This blend of life experiences helps to create a
highly dynamic group of teachers that enrich their students’ learning. Those who
choose to make teaching their vocation also choose to embrace the fact that
teaching necessarily involves constant learning. As teachers they are convinced
that learning is an experience that lasts a lifetime and it is only because they are
passionate about learning that they can fulfil their duties as teachers. It is for this
that the ELT Malta conference was launched in 2012 and it has kept this annual
appointment with ELT professionals ever since.
ELT MALTA CONFERENCE

Given its appreciation of the fact that MATEFL, FELTOM, and individual teacher
trainers regularly run workshops and seminars for CPD purposes, the EFL
Monitoring Board in 2012 took the initiative to organise the country’s first ELT
conference so that as many teachers as possible would be provided with a means
of professional growth. The organisers of this seminal event in the history of ELT
in Malta hoped that it would be the first in a series of annual conferences in which
teachers of English working in different contexts could come together to celebrate
their profession. The hope was that the conference would complement the many
other CPD opportunities available to teachers of English in Malta, especially in an
era characterised by the prevalence of online forms of professional development.
In organising the 1st ELT Malta conference, the EFL Monitoring Board sought
the collaboration of the English Language Resource Centre, and the support of
FELTOM and MATEFL. It did this because it wanted the conference to address the
O 4O
needs of all English language teachers and not only of those teachers involved in
the ELT sector. The conference organisers believed in the value of cross-pollination
and were aware that many mainstream teachers worked in the ELT sector in the
peak season, i.e. July and August.
Since its first edition, the ELT Malta conference has acted as a learning
experience for all participants. ELT professionals gather to listen to speakers
who have amassed a substantial amount of knowledge about the profession and
who have ideas that they would like to share with their audience. The latter, in
turn, attend the conference because they want to contribute their thoughts and
experiences and because they feel enthusiastic about the fact that learning is a
highly social activity that is dependent on the exchange of ideas. The participants
question these same ideas and adapt them to their respective classrooms, fully
knowing that as ELT professionals they need to avoid a one-size-fits-all mentality.
As one of the plenary speakers at the 3rd ELT Malta conference points out in his
book Learning Teaching, “In order to become a better teacher, it seems important
to be aware of as many options as possible. This may enable you to generate your
own rules and guidelines as to what works and what doesn’t” (Scrivener, 2011, p.
8). One of the aims of the ELT Malta conference has always been that of providing
teachers with access to new options so that they may continue enriching their
teaching.
It is in recognition of the fact that the quality of teachers needs to remain the
industry’s first priority that the ELT Malta conference is organised every year. Just
like its collaborators within MATEFL, FELTOM and the schools themselves, the
conference organisers see teaching as a lifelong learning process. The very first
edition of the conference owed its origins to the idea that the industry required
a unified event that celebrated ELT professionals’ identity as learners. Their
knowledge, skills and attitudes need to be constantly nurtured and developed;
otherwise, stagnation is inevitable and the repercussions of that are disgruntled
students for whom no learning is taking place. Teachers who are not motivated
to keep learning cannot inspire their students to do the same. Without their
admirable commitment to learning, the ELT Malta conference would not have
continued to take place year after year.
Attending the ELT Malta conference is not only a means for teachers to be
inspired by different speakers in order for them to inspire their students. The
conference is also meant to encourage ELT professionals to position themselves
differently. They can be inspiring for their own peers if they start valuing their
potential to be more than consumers of knowledge. Their experiences as ELT
professionals, in schools and in CPD events like the ELT Malta conference, allow
them to be contributors to the professional development of others. Harmer (2012),
a plenary speaker at the 2nd ELT Malta conference, points out that “Some of the
most effective teacher development takes place when we work and share with
colleagues and other professionals” (p. 173). Most probably, the emphasis in that
sentence should fall on the word share. There are so many ways in which teachers
O 5O
can engage in such sharing. They could give a joint session at a conference like ELT
Malta or at one of the regular CPD events organised by a teachers’ association like
MATEFL. They could write a blog and comment on those written by so many ELT
bloggers from all over the world, or use Twitter and Facebook to discuss issues
they find relevant to their practice. They could rope in a colleague and engage in
action research, or collaborate in writing an article for a teachers’ magazine. They
could do peer observation with colleagues they trust, or take part in webinars.
Most importantly, they could talk to their colleagues about their ideas and use
these discussions to reflect on what happens in the classroom.
Ever since it was first organised, the ELT Malta conference has sought to
bring about a mind shift amongst ELT professionals in the industry. The hope has
always been that as many professionals as possible would muster the courage to
share what they know with their peers. Such professionals already inspire their
students and that is why ELT in Malta is a healthy sector. However, the conference
is meant to encourage them to position themselves as inspiring teachers of
teachers, in their schools, in the blogosphere, and at CPD events in Malta and
beyond its shores. It was for this reason that at the 3rd ELT Malta conference the
Inspiring ELT Professional Award was given for the first time. This was awarded
to Alan Marsh, one of the contributors to this book. With such a long-standing
ELT industry, professionals in Malta have so much to offer one another and those
working in other countries. They have a wealth of ELT knowledge and experience
to export far and wide. The fact that professionals working in Malta have authored
a number of contributions in this book is probably an indication that the ELT Malta
conference has helped to ignite the spark of inspiration. Hopefully, this book will
act as a means by which the act of sharing can take a leap forward.
THE LEARNING ELT PROFESSIONAL

The 3rd ELT Malta conference spanned over four days, starting with an IATEFL
Research SIG supported event led by Simon Borg and consisting of 19 workshops
and 6 plenary sessions, some of which were delivered by the likes of Carol
Read, Lindsay Clandfield, and Jamie Keddie. The fact that a sizeable number of
participants registered for Borg’s workshop on doing good quality ELT research
was testament to the fact that there is a growing commitment to non-traditional
forms of professional development in Malta’s ELT industry. This is reassuring given
that the industry urgently requires more teachers to adopt the role of research-
engaged professionals.
The conference theme focused on the learning ELT professional because of the
belief that effective professionals are primarily effective learners. They value the
development of their own knowledge, skills and beliefs. They refuse to stagnate as
professionals. They embrace learning, its joys and its challenges. ELT professionals
can lead by example by demonstrating the attitudes of effective learners. They
can act as role models by being fully engaged with the lifelong learning process.
O 6O
The eight papers in this book address the issue of ELT professionals’ learning
development by either showcasing how they can position themselves as learners
or by discussing pedagogical approaches that can enrich classroom practices.
The papers by Simon Borg, Larissa Attard, and Kenan Dikilitaş and Koray Akyazı
focus on how teacher research can act as a form of professional learning. Borg
argues that teacher research is a highly valid form of professional development
as it enables practitioners to become knowledge producers, this being in contrast
to the traditional view of teachers as consumers of the knowledge shared by
experts coming from outside the school. Hence, teacher research is empowering
given that it provides practitioners with ownership over their professional
development. Recognising the validity of this idea, Attard provides an introduction
to how practitioners may engage in one type of teacher research. Action research
is a systematic approach to teacher research in that it allows practitioners to
investigate their own practices and classrooms by following a number of stages
and cycles. Attard’s paper gives a lot of importance to the preparation stage and
seeks to provide a model for this given that some teachers might consider this
stage to be the most challenging one. Given the possibility that teacher research
might be perceived as demanding, in their paper Dikilitaş and Akyazı explore
the perceptions of a group of ELT professionals in Malta. Their study shows
that despite some negative views, doing teacher research is mostly deemed to
be a professional development activity that enhances beliefs and practices, and
possesses relevance to the classroom.
Writing is the focus of the papers by Caroline Campbell, Mario Aquilina and
Stephanie Xerri Agius, each author approaching the subject from somewhat
different angles. Campbell discusses the significance of writing as a tool that
facilitates teachers’ reflective practice. She delineates a process that facilitates
teachers’ reflective journey and provides them with ownership of their professional
development. Besides being necessary for this purpose, writing is also one of the
skills that ELT professionals give a lot of attention to in schools. Hence, developing
their knowledge of how to address students’ needs more effectively is crucial.
Aquilina’s paper builds on research in order to equip the reader with a better
understanding of how to exploit pre-writing strategies in academic writing classes.
The instructional practices he explicates are derived from both genre-based
and process approaches to the teaching of writing. Within the latter field over
the past few years the issue of feedback has become one of the main areas of
concern. Xerri Agius discusses the principles of feedback practice and presents a
number of strategies for providing and implementing feedback. Based on research
investigating learners’ perceptions of feedback, her paper indicates how some of
the most common challenges involved in providing feedback can be overcome.
In order to better address the needs of learners in the 21st century, ELT
professionals are required to demonstrate the ability to repackage their existent
knowledge as well as develop new competences. This is what the papers by Alan
Marsh and Gavin Dudeney touch upon respectively. Marsh proposes a number of
O 7O
ways by means of which the teaching techniques associated with methodological

principles that might no longer be considered valid can be reactivated once they
are merged with contemporary ELT approaches. He illustrates how translation,
stimulus-response pattern drills, teacher talk time, and the PPP model could all
benefit from such treatment. Dudeney’s paper acts as a digital literacies primer for
ELT professionals working in a learning environment in which the use of technology
prevails. It starts by defining digital literacy and then develops a taxonomy of sub-
literacies by analyzing the concept of digital literacies.
All eight papers seem to indicate that a positive attitude towards professional
learning is necessary on the part of ELT professionals. The authors exemplify how
such learning may be conducted by either focusing on empowering forms of CPD like
teacher research or else by reexamining how professional and pedagogical knowledge
and skills may be harnessed and enhanced. In this sense, this book propounds the idea
that learning is a fundamental part of every ELT professional’s identity.
[email protected]
[email protected]
O 8O
REFERENCES
Harmer, J. (2012). Essential teacher knowledge. Harlow: Pearson Education.
NSO. (2015, April 7). Teaching English as a foreign language: 2014. Malta: National
Statistics Office. Retrieved April 7, 2015 from https://eflmalta.gov.mt/en/
Documents/Industry%20Statistics/2014stats.pdf
Scrivener, J. (2011). Learning teaching: The essential guide to English language
teaching (3rd ed.). Oxford: Macmillan Education.
O 9O
2
Professional learning
through teacher research
Simon Borg
Freelance ELT Consultant, Slovenia
Conventional approaches to professional development view teachers as knowledge consumers who

are dependent on external expertise for their growth. In contrast, professional development can be
seen as a process through which teachers generate knowledge themselves. This paper discusses
these two perspectives, highlights the limitations of exclusive reliance on the former, and examines in
particular teacher research as a ‘knowledge generating’ strategy that allows teachers to take charge
of their own professional development.
O 11 O
O THE LEARNING ELT PROFESSIONAL O
INTRODUCTION
The centrality of the teacher to the quality of education has been increasingly
affirmed in recent years; for example, Schwille et al. (2007) note that “the teacher
is at the epicentre of the learning process…learning depends first and foremost
on the quality of the teacher” (p. 15). The question, then, is no longer whether
Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is necessary – it is clearly an essential
factor in sustaining teacher quality – but what forms of professional development
are more likely to promote sustainable positive changes in teaching and learning.
This paper examines current views of professional development in ELT and
suggests that alternatives which give teachers a more central role in their own
learning are needed.
TWO VIEWS OF CPD

CPD can be characterised in two contrasting ways. The first places teachers in
the role of consumers. The second sees them as knowledge generators. ELT
is characterised by a strong tradition of professional development, yet I would
suggest that, globally, the kinds of CPD that teachers of English experience fall into
the former category. I will first comment on some problems with this ‘teacher as
knowledge consumer’ view of CPD, then discuss some features of the ‘teacher as
knowledge generator’ perspective and focus on one example of how it might be
implemented.
Teachers as knowledge consumers

CPD which casts teachers in the role of knowledge consumers tends to focus
on the provision of input by external experts. This approach to CPD often has
a training orientation which emphasizes the need for teachers to be taught
desirable teaching behaviours. There is an assumption that teachers need to do
something they are currently unable to do and the purpose of the training is to
teach them to do it. It is also assumed that after the training teachers will then
apply the behaviours learned to their classrooms (the classroom is thus not seen
as a site for professional learning but simply a place where the application of
knowledge occurs). Training of this kind also occurs off-site – typically at a training
centre – rather than being classroom or workplace-based. There is a paradox
here as while teachers spend the bulk of their time in the classroom, professional
development typically involves activities that occur away from this site – for
example, workshops, lectures, courses and conferences. There is of course value
in all such activities; however, exclusive reliance on external opportunities for
professional development has several drawbacks, summarized in Table 1.
O 12 O
TABLE 1: ‘EXTERNAL’ TEACHER DEVELOPMENT
Infrequent Teachers cannot attend external events on a regular basis

Costly Teachers or their schools must pay to attend
Disruptive Teachers are taken out of school and lessons must be rearranged
Generic External training may not address individual teacher needs
Decontextualized Learning is not situated in teachers’ classrooms
Receptive Teachers receive knowledge from more ‘expert’ trainers
Not ‘owned’ Teachers have minimal say in decisions about the training
The final point in Table 1 is an important one; teachers who are not involved in
decisions about their professional development may be less motivated to engage
in the activities that others prescribe. This point is made by Muijs et al. (2014)
in their discussion of the factors that limit the effectiveness of professional
development initiatives:
The problem…is that the need to know something new is identified

by someone external to the group of teachers (e.g., a policy official
or a researcher) without the participating teachers necessarily
understanding the reason why it is important to know it or being
committed to doing so. (p. 247)
Teachers as knowledge creators

A contrasting view of CPD sees teachers as knowledge generators. From this
perspective, the emphasis is on professional learning – on creating thoughtful
but critical understandings of practice – rather than on the generic and uncritical
application of activities and techniques. CPD of this kind is typically school-placed
and the classroom is valued as a site for professional learning, not just a place to
apply received knowledge The key learning process here is inquiry – this is seen as
a powerful strategy through which teachers grow, individually and collaboratively.
One other characteristic we can mention here is that CPD of this kind tends to
be teacher-owned; teachers contribute in a significant way to decisions about the
content and process of their own professional learning.
This contemporary perspective on CPD can take many different forms, such
as peer observation (Richards & Farrell, 2005), lesson study (Tasker, 2011), reading
groups (Fenton-Smith & Stillwell, 2011) and action research (Burns, 2010). Teacher
research (Borg, 2013) is another option and I will now examine this strategy for
CPD in more detail.
O 13 O
TEACHER RESEARCH
Teachers often react negatively to the suggestion that they can use teacher
research to support their professional development. These reactions stem from
misconceptions about what research is and Figure 1 shows six common ideas
about research that teachers often have.
FIGURE 1: MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE DEFINING FEATURES OF RESEARCH
Research very often does have one or more of these characteristics; however,
none of them are defining features of research. For example, although teachers
often see research as an activity that is academic (i.e. done to obtain a degree
or by someone working in academia), research can also be done by teachers
to support their professional development. And, to take two further examples,
while research may be large-scale and statistical, it can also be small-scale and
qualitative. In introducing teacher research, then, it is important to ensure that
research is not being conceived of by teachers in ways which make it appear
to be an unfeasible and irrelevant activity. Research should not be defined with
reference to its scale, its methodology or the status of the researcher; rather, I
find it useful to see it more generally as planned, systematic, purposeful, empirical
inquiry which is made public. This definition of research is an appropriate way into
a more specific definition of teacher research, which can be distinguished from
other forms of research in three particular ways:
O 14 O
1. It is done by teachers – i.e. teachers are the researchers.

2. It takes place in teachers’ working contexts – the site for teacher research is
the school or classroom.
3. Its purpose is to enhance teachers’ work – teacher research allows teachers to
understand themselves, their teaching and their students; such understandings
can also contribute to the growth of the organization teachers work in.
It is important to stress that teacher research is not simply research done

by teachers; a teacher doing research for their MA degree who studies other
teachers (e.g. through a questionnaire) is not doing teacher research because the
focus is not on themselves; similarly, not all research done in the classroom is
teacher research – e.g. an academic who visits a school to collect classroom data is
not investigating their own teaching but studying others in the way that research
conventionally does – this is not teacher research.
Doing teacher research

The starting point for teacher research is a question of some kind – an issue
that the teacher wants to learn more about or understand better. Although
this initial question is often driven by a problem, teacher research is not simply
a strategy for solving problems. For example, teachers may want to develop a
better understanding of something that works well. The questions that drive
teacher research will also be very practical, stemming from teachers’ experiences
in the classrooms. How can I integrate pair work activities into my lectures? What
kind of feedback on writing do my students prefer? How do my learners react
to the use of self-assessment? These are examples of questions teachers have
investigated using teacher research (see Borg, 2014a for more examples of the
kinds of questions teacher research can explore).
Once teachers have a question, the next step is to act – to collect some
information (or data) relevant to it. This is a central part of the process – teacher
research is empirical (i.e. it relies on the collection and analysis of data). The
information that is collected needs to be analysed and evaluated, and teachers
then use the insights emerging from these processes to make pedagogical
decisions. The cyclical nature of teacher research means that the process can go
through several iterations; this does not mean that teachers will be doing teacher
research all the time, but more generally the idea is that it is not a linear process
through which definitive solutions or answers will be discovered after one cycle
of inquiry.
There are four additional processes which can enhance teacher research:
reflection, because teacher researchers are by definition being systematically
thoughtful about their work in an on-going manner; reading, because it can be
useful to know about what others have already written about the issues teachers
are interested in (there is no suggestion here, though, that teacher research
O 15 O
should involve the kind of reading that would be required for an academic degree);
communicating, because by talking to colleagues about their inquiries teachers
can receive useful feedback and advice and also motivate others to engage in
inquiries of their own; and finally, collaborating, because teacher research (and
professional development generally) will be enhanced when teachers work
together on a shared project rather than alone.
As noted above, teachers need to collect data to help them examine the
questions they are pursuing. Various strategies for data collection are available to
teachers – e.g. journal writing, surveys, drawings and photos, video, observation,
interviews, class discussions, and documents such as student work and lesson
plans. One key consideration which should influence which options teachers
employ is feasibility – teacher research must be feasible, as it is an activity which
teachers do as part of their normal teaching duties; data collection, then, should
be integrated as far as possible into teachers’ regular work (as opposed to creating
large amounts of extra work for them).
Benefits of teacher research

Numerous benefits of teacher research have been identified in the literature
(e.g. Borg, 2014b; Borg & Sanchez, 2015; Burns, 2014; Smith, Connelly, &
Rebolledo, 2014). For example, teachers engaged in teacher research have said
they feel more confident, motivated and autonomous; they also feel they are
more knowledgeable and have a better understanding of their students. Where
teacher research is collaborative, teachers have also reported improvements in
their relationships with colleagues. Teacher research allows teachers to be more
optimistic; as one teacher I worked with said, “I look upon problems as challenges
to be overcome through research not hurdles to cry about.” Renewed enthusiasm
is another benefit that teachers derive from teacher research, as illustrated in this
comment: “We have been teaching the same way we taught ten years ago but now
we have an urge to experiment with new ideas in our teaching.” It is clear then
that teacher research offers many potential benefits to teachers; their students
also benefit from more informed pedagogical decisions while organizations can
benefit too where a culture of teacher research exists across a school. As evidence
of these many benefits grows, teacher research is becoming increasingly visible as
a professional development strategy for teachers. For example, Cambridge English
and English Australia run a teacher research scheme for ELT professionals in
Australia; Cambridge English and English UK run a similar scheme for teachers of
English in the UK; while Cambridge University Press also recently launched its own
teacher research scheme. The British Council is also supporting teacher research,
as for example in the project I facilitated with teachers of English in Pakistan in
2012–2013 and which resulted in a publication containing the reports of teachers’
work (Borg, 2014b).
O 16 O
CONCLUSION
I started this paper by arguing that exclusive reliance on external forms of
professional development has several drawbacks. In contrast, teacher research
provides an option which allows professional development to be on-going,
inexpensive, integrated into teachers’ routine work, personalized, and practical.
Teacher research also gives teachers a strong sense of ownership in shaping the
direction their professional development takes. I am not of course suggesting that
teacher research is the right or only option for all teachers – teachers in different
contexts and at different stages of their career will benefit in varying ways from
different approaches to professional development; however, where the conditions
are appropriate (see Borg, 2006) and teachers have suitable skills, knowledge and
dispositions, teacher research has significant transformative potential.
[email protected]
O 17 O
REFERENCES
Borg, S. (2006). Conditions for teacher research. English Teaching Forum, 44(4),
22–27. Retrieved December 20, 2014 from http://americanenglish.state.
gov/files/ae/resource_files/06-44-4-d_0.pdf
Borg, S. (2013). Teacher research in language teaching: A critical analysis.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Borg, S. (2014a). Teacher research: Practical and relevant classroom inquiry.
Retrieved December 20, 2014 from http://tinyurl.com/qg7veew
Borg, S. (Ed.). (2014b). Teacher research in Pakistan: Enhancing the teaching and
learning of English. Lahore: British Council.
Borg, S., & Sanchez, H. (Eds.). (2015). International perspectives on teacher
research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for
practitioners. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
Burns, A. (2014). Professional learning in Australian ELICOS: An action research
orientation. English Australia Journal, 29(2), 3–20.
Fenton-Smith, B., & Stillwell, C. (2011). Reading discussion groups for teachers:
Connecting theory to practice. ELT Journal, 65(3), 251–259.
Muijs, D., Kyriakides, L., van der Werf, G., Creemers, B., Timperley, H., & Earl, L.
(2014). State of the art: Teacher effectiveness and professional learning.
School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 231–256.
Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language
teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schwille, J., Dembele, M., & Schubert, J. (2007). Global perspectives on teacher
learning: Improving policy and practice. Paris: UNESCO.
Smith, R., Connelly, T., & Rebolledo, P. (2014). Teacher-research as continuing
professional development: A project with Chilean secondary school
teachers. In D. Hayes (Ed.), Innovations in the continuing professional
development of English language teachers (pp. 111–129). London: British
Council.
Tasker, T. (2011). Teacher learning through lesson study. In K. E. Johnson & P. R.
Golombek (Eds.), Research on second language teacher education (pp.
204–221). London: Routledge.
O 18 O
3
Action research:
getting started
Larissa Attard
Freelance, Malta
Action research is conducted by teachers in the classroom to scientifically measure questions or notions
they may have about aspects of their teaching or their students’ learning. Although much like the reflective
model, action research differs in that it is written down and shared with members of the teaching
community. Like most first attempts, the starting point for teachers new to action research is perhaps the
hardest. This paper briefly introduces the action research cycle and focuses on the preparation stage where
teachers develop a research question and come up with a plan to collect the data; once the preparation
stage has been completed, teachers may put their plan into action and work through the different stages
of the action research cycle. The intention of this paper is to break the preparation stage into distinct
parts and to provide a model for teachers who may be interested in conducting their own action research.
O 19 O
INTRODUCTION
This paper is based on a workshop that was presented at the 3rd ELT Malta
Conference held in November 2014. The workshop started off with a brief
introduction to action research and its cyclical development, after which the focus
was on the preparation stage: where to start from and how to plan the process
before putting the research plan into action. The participants present at the
workshop were provided with a model to help them get started on action research
in an area of interest they might later identify. This paper will briefly introduce
action research and clarify where it differs from reflective research, focus on the
preparation stage leading up to the development of a plan, and highlight a model
to help teachers who have never done any action research before to put together
a plan of action.
ACTION RESEARCH AND WHERE

IT DIFFERS FROM THE REFLECTIVE MODEL
Action research is a form of teacher research carried out individually or
collaboratively in teachers’ classrooms. According to Nunan (as cited in Burns,
2010), research is made up of three essentials: “(1) a question, problem or
hypothesis, (2) data, (3) analysis and interpretation” (p. 11). The process is triggered
by an observation or a question teachers may have about a particular aspect
of their teaching or their students’ learning, or even a different technique they
may have come across in an article published in a teaching journal or a teacher
training session they may have attended. Teachers may consult their peers in the
staff room or during training meetings, read up about what it is that intrigues
or interests them, or even attend teacher training workshops with a focus on
this area. Having given the concept some thought, they may then decide to try
something new in their lesson, such as a different teaching technique or alter their
teaching practice in a particular way. Once teachers deliver their lesson with the
alteration in their teaching practice, which may be a different teaching technique,
they then reflect on the effect or effects the intervention in their teaching might
have had. So far, this sounds very much like the reflective model which encourages
teachers to continuously engage in a self-reflective cycle of planning a change,
implementing the change in the lesson, and thinking about the effects or results;
a repetition of the process with perhaps a modified change every time leads to
the cycle of development. Action research takes the cyclical process of planning,
teaching, observation and reflection further by calling for the teachers conducting
the research to plan, document and share it with the wider teaching community.
The reflective model can be seen to be very much a personal and private mode
of research, whereas the action research model contributes to the great body of
research and development. So while the concept of conducting research might
O 20 O
FIGURE 1: ACTION RESEARCH STAGES
PREPARATION CYCLE
4. PLAN TEACH 1.
They devise a plan of Teachers are intrigued
action and come up by an aspect of their
with: (a) a research teaching or their
question, (b) an students’ learning.
intervention (change/
modification), and
(c) methods of data
collection.
3. REFLECT OBSERVE 2.
They may discuss They think about what
this with their peers, it is that intrigues them
read up about it, and/ and explore the notion.
or attend a workshop
on it. They decide to
implement a change in
their teaching.
IMPLEMENTATION CYCLE
8. PLAN TEACH 5.
Teachers conclude the Teachers put the
research, repeat it, plan into action. The
or continue the cycle intervention (change/
with a revised plan and modification) is
a new intervention. implemented.
7. REFLECT OBSERVE 6.
Teachers analyse the Teachers gather
data and write up their data using the
and disseminate the methods laid out in
findings. their plan.
O 21 O
initially seem daunting for teachers, action research is really no more than what
the reflective teacher already does, the difference being that it is planned, written
down, and shared with other members of the community.
THE ACTION RESEARCH CYCLE

Figure 1 attempts to provide a visual representation of the stages of action research
and its cyclical process. The preparation cycle shows a possible preparation stage
where teachers have an enquiry about their teaching, which they may explore
further by consulting colleagues and possibly reading up about the area (steps 1–3).
Having gone through this reflective process and assuming they would like to carry
out a concrete study using the action research model, teachers develop a plan of
action (step 4): they refine their enquiry into a research question; come up with
an intervention that will effect a change in their teaching; and think about ways
to collect data with the aim of providing answers to the research question. In the
implementation cycle, the plan is put into action (steps 5–7): the intervention, such
as a change in a teaching technique, is implemented in the lesson; the methods
of data gathering are carried out according to the plan; the data is collected and
analysed; and the findings are written up. The teachers conducting the research
decide whether to end the research there, to repeat the process for validity, or to
continue the cycle with a revised plan and a modified intervention (step 8). There
may be many cycles and many revised plans before the research is concluded.
FINDING AN AREA OF INTEREST

Teachers might get ideas for conducting action research directly from the
classroom and what happens during their lessons, or they may be inspired by a
training session or an article they have read. Many ideas are generated in the staff
room during lesson breaks with discussions on what has just worked really well in
the classroom as well as what has not, and ways for it to work better are often a
topic of conversation. Burns (2010) talks about finding a problem in the classroom
and has some good suggestions for coming up with ideas such as having teacher
focus groups and using activities such as keeping a diary and techniques such as
brainstorming. Teachers who are looking for an area to research might explore
areas of interest together in focus groups (Burns, 2010, pp. 28–29). Brainstorming
ideas around a central topic using a mind map can lead to a particular area of
focus. Teachers may want to consider whether the effects of a particular teaching
technique work the same or differently with different groups. One way of finding
an area of interest is to keep a diary or a record of what is intriguing in the
classroom; another technique is for teachers to keep a list of things they would
like to know more about. Teachers may be able to observe their peers in action
and focus on particular classroom situations, or conduct a survey with them on
O 22 O
hot teaching issues (Burns, 2013). Once an area of interest has been established,
teachers may conduct their research individually or collaboratively with fellow
teachers or mentors assisting in such processes as gathering and analysing data.
Teachers may choose to collaborate by working on the same action research
project in their separate classrooms, collating data using the same data collection
methods, and comparing the findings.

A POSSIBLE PREPARATION STRATEGY
What follows is a possible model to assist teachers in the preparation stage,
namely: (a) developing a research question, (b) identifying an intervention, and
(c) designing methods of data collection. Once the following strategy is complete,
teachers are ready to put it into action and can carry out steps 5 to 7 in the
implementation cycle outlined in Figure 1 above.
Develop a research question

Burns (2010) talks about identifying a “problem” in the classroom or
“problematising” a situation (p. 2). Borg (2011) points out the negative associations
tied to the word “problem” and suggests the use of another word – “issue” (p.
485). For the purposes of this paper, my choice of word is “question”. After having
identified an area of interest, teachers identify a question and explore all aspects
of the particular topic in order to refine their research question. It is imperative
that the research question is not too broad in its interpretation. Teachers must be
able to fully answer the question at hand and should therefore ensure to narrow
down their research question so that it is measureable and specific. A research
question that aims to measure the effectiveness of error correction is far too
broad as there are too many different potentials and variables. On the other hand,
a research question that aims to measure the effectiveness of end-of-task class
correction as opposed to on-the-spot teacher correction is more specific and
measureable.
Introduce an intervention
Action research is about research and development. Measuring what is usually
practised in the classroom is a start; however, measuring the changes and
effects of that which is different to what is normally practiced is a move towards
development. An intervention is a modification that teachers implement in their
lessons in order to trigger a difference that they can measure in answer to their
research question. An intervention could be a different teaching technique or a
change in the way they conduct a specific aspect of their lesson. To come up with
an intervention, teachers may read up about the focus of their research question,
consult other teachers or mentors, or gather some evidence from their own
classroom.
O 23 O
Design methods of data collection

In order to reliably measure difference there needs to be concrete evidence.
As part of the planning process, teachers conducting action research need
to consider how they will collect the data. Methods of data collection must be
purposeful to the research question and are likely to be mostly qualitative, but
may also be quantitative. Burns (2010) distinguishes between methods of data
collection that are observational – teacher’s observations – and non-observational
– participants’ experience. Observational ways of gathering information include:
keeping a diary, drawing diagrams, making notes, recording parts of lessons, and
taking photos. Non-observational data include: surveys, interviews, narratives, and
focus groups. Burns (2010) advises using several methods to collect data in any
given action research project in order to have as complete a picture as possible.
At this stage, teachers must decide whether they are going to work individually or
collaboratively, and whether they will need any assistance. Whenever collecting
data for research, teachers must always get the go-ahead from the school where
they intend to conduct the research and written consent from their students; if
the students are underage, parental consent is required.
Sample situation
The following is a fictitious situation described in simple terms to exemplify the
above preparation strategy. A teacher notices that the same few students in the
class do not participate much during group speaking activities and would like to
investigate the situation. The teacher decides to gather some evidence to verify
whether this is really the case. The teacher gets the go-ahead from the school,
explains the exercise to the students in a manner that does not compromise
the task and obtains their consent. Since the students are in small groups for
the speaking activities which happen simultaneously, audio recording will not
work, so the teacher brings in some colleagues to observe specific groups and
note down the timings of individual student talk time. The results validate the
teacher’s suspicions. The teacher explores all possible factors such as whether
the students have the necessary language skills to participate in the task, whether
they understand the instructions, whether the topics and activities are suitable for
the student description, or whether it is a matter of personality as some students
might be reluctant speakers. The teacher narrows it down to willingness and
reluctance and considers ways to encourage the reluctant speakers to speak more.
The teacher thinks that specific group patterns that match speakers’ willingness
or reluctance might encourage more participation from the more reluctant
speakers and develops a research question based on this idea. As an intervention,
the teacher plans to use specific grouping patterns matching students according
to degree of participation in the next lesson. The teacher already has an idea for
a second intervention consisting of giving students more structured cues for
guidance during speaking activities; however, the teacher deems it worthwhile
O 24 O
to see whether specific groupings will make a difference first, so this second
intervention is planned for possibly the next cycle. The teacher considers methods
of data collection and decides to bring in the same observers to take note of
individual student talk time which will be measured against the previous timings.
The teacher will also ask students to complete questionnaires and conduct
interviews with individual students. The plan is ready to be implemented as per
steps 5 to 8 in Figure 1.
WHY PERFORM ACTION RESEARCH?

The benefits of action research affect teachers, their students, and the schools
they work for. The process of having teachers looking at their own teaching and
their students’ learning more closely is likely to have a positive effect on teaching if
just by increasing teachers’ situational awareness. The scientific approach of action
research validates what teachers think happens, or does not, in the classroom,
answers the enquiring mind, and may prompt further research and study. The
cyclical nature of action research encourages an environment of continued
reflection and development. Many teachers who have conducted action research
have found it to be motivational and self-empowering. A teacher’s reflection after
conducting action research in oral testing attests to this:
I have certainly acquired new tools, and, above all, a greater awareness
of my being a teacher. Observing and analysing…have made me see
more clearly the asymmetric nature of classroom communication. As
a result, I now feel more in control of what happens during an oral test.
(as cited in Burns, 2010, p. 4)
Action research is teacher-driven – it is conducted by teachers and shared with

the wider teaching community. Ways of sharing action research locally include
presenting it at a training event such as a teacher training workshop, or publishing
it in a newsletter or a journal for teachers. More than reflective, action research
strives to help the teaching community develop and grow in the field.
CONCLUSION
This paper has presented a brief description of the workings of action research, its
cyclical development, and its differentiation from the reflective model; however,
its focus lies on the preparation stage before teachers put their plan into action.
It has been written with the intention to offer some guidance to teachers who
have not carried out any research before but might be interested in starting up
an action research project of their own. Using a model split into three parts to
develop a plan – developing a research question, introducing an intervention, and
O 25 O
designing methods of data collection – this paper, therefore, presents a strategy

for the preparation stage and provides teachers with a sample situation of how it
would be applied. The model provides teachers with a framework to devise a plan
of action for the implementation stage of the action research cycle.
[email protected]
O 26 O
REFERENCES
Borg, S. (2011). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for
practitioners. ELT Journal, 65(4), 485–487.
Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for
practitioners. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
Burns, A. (2013, August 28). Professor Anne Burns talks about action research in
TESOL [Online video]. Retrieved December 16, 2014 from https://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=U4kLZLhxWzk
O 27 O
4
Language teachers’
perceptions of doing teacher
research: a Maltese case study
Kenan Dikilitaş and Koray Akyazı
Gediz University, Turkey
This paper presents different forms of teacher research that language teachers are engaged in doing
particularly for their professional development. The study discusses the distinctive differences as well as
commonalities among three forms of teacher research. For this purpose, written reports collected from
34 Maltese EFL teachers and trainers were analyzed according to the beliefs they held regarding what
teacher research is. The study concludes that teacher research is perceived as a professional development
activity which may have positive and negative aspects, where the former outnumber the latter. In addition,
this activity is seen as a strategy that may promote language teaching beliefs and practices and is quite
relevant to what teachers are doing in the classroom. The major implications include the fact that teacher
researchers think that they should develop adequate skills for doing research for professional development.
O 29 O
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, there has been a shift from teacher training to teacher development
and an approach to professional development (Mann, 2005). Teacher research
can be seen as one of several professional development activities, which focuses
on teacher development through researching one’s own beliefs and practices in
the classroom. The aim of this study was to introduce teachers to what teacher
research is and facilitate their exploration into the motivations for doing teacher
research. By teachers being given the chance to explore their unique contexts,
personal beliefs, and practices with learners or colleagues, teachers may take
steps to making more informed choices in what they do in the class, why they do
it, and how to improve what they do if needed. Becoming a teacher researcher is
no simple matter and it requires great care if it is to be done effectively. Therefore,
a long path is proposed before improving classroom practice and ultimately the
learning currently seen in the classroom. The study aims to report on the responses
of the participants regarding how they perceived teacher research and what their
reasons for involvement in teacher research were and what they expected to learn
from the process of doing teacher research.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Teacher research is an integrative strategy for teachers in their pursuit of
professional development. Borg (2014) states that, through the involvement of
teacher research, teachers not only have the chance to develop the quality of
practice but also improve their sense of professionalism. Henson (2001) also
highlighted the role of action research in promoting teacher efficacy, thus giving
autonomy to teachers to decide and govern their own instructional decisions.
This is closely linked to Bandura’s (1977) theory on self-efficacy points out that
people’s efficacy can be developed by a number of sources of influence. The most
influential source of these beliefs is the mastery experience. When individuals
believe that they have what it takes to succeed, they may develop a strong sense
of efficacy. When they encounter difficulties or setbacks, teachers will know that
they can be successful through perseverance. The perception that one’s teaching
has been successful increases efficacy beliefs raising expectations that future
performances will be successful. So through systematic engagement in teacher
research, teachers will gain self-confidence in their practice and improve practical
teaching skills and strategies.
From a broader perspective, Ryan and Deci’s (2000) self-determination theory
explains the interrelation between self-efficacy and teacher autonomy. They stress
the key role of intrinsic motivation with special reference to functional differences
between two different types of motivation, namely intrinsic and extrinsic. In
relation to the role of motivation that comes from inside and made by the internal
drive of the teacher, Borg (2014) also argues for the need for teachers to specify
O 30 O
and determine their own professional development needs as opposed to external

top down intervention. This sense of autonomy also adds to teachers’ sense of
self-efficacy. One fundamental argument underpinning this requirement is that
teachers’ research engagement, as well as their pedagogical decisions informed by
research, will benefit both their teaching and their students’ learning (Hargreaves,
1999). There has been an increased interest in self-study of practice in recent
times. In some cases this appears to be related to the development of Schön’s
(1987) ideas about reflection on practice. Munby and Russell (1994) have furthered
these ideas to highlight the ‘authority of experience’ as a source of knowledge and
understanding of teaching and learning. There is also a realization that there is no
educational change without people change. Therefore, by focusing on personal
practice and experience, teachers may undertake genuine inquiry that leads to a
better understanding of the complexities of teaching and learning.
Although the concept of research practice may seem clear, it is used here
as an umbrella term that includes teachers’ research engagement, attitudes,
motivations, perceptions, and the contexts in which their research is based. There
is an increasing body of work that has explored language teachers’ research
activities, and what their perceptions of research are. For example, Borg (2009)
reported that teachers perceive teacher research as a scientific form of research
rather than a professional activity that could relate to classroom context. This
misconception of teacher research may be seen as an obstacle that prevents
teachers from engaging in teacher research as they feel they lack the academic
and scientific skills believed necessary for teacher research. Borg (2010) talks
about engagement with research as being reading and using the work of others,
whilst engagement in research refers to teachers actually doing their own teacher
research projects. He states that to encourage teachers to be engaged in and with
teacher research, a shift in teacher attitudes, knowledge, and skills is necessary,
together with a change in institutional conditions.
Dikilitaş (2014) gathered data about perceptions of teacher research from
preparatory English teachers engaged in teacher research over a period of two
years. Teachers talked about how it integrates theory with practice in their own
contexts by giving them the chance to experiment with theory in their own class
to see what impact the theory has on their teaching practice. An increase in self-
awareness was also a key theme, where the focus was on the individual personally
benefiting in a meaningful way. Teachers commented on how it made them more
aware of their own professional development, giving them a sense of autonomy
that is often not felt in workshops or seminars. However, there is literature (Zeuli,
1994) that shows teachers’ non-integrative conception of teacher research as a
transformative tool. Zeuli (1994) discovered that many teachers were engaged
with teacher research with the aim of finding ideas to utilize in the classroom.
He found that there was a focus of the product of research as opposed to the
process of gaining knowledge and understanding. Elements of this concept of
teacher research emerged to some extent from the participants of this study. But
O 31 O
more generally, some of the major benefits that may be gained from engagement
in teacher research are depicted in the table below.
TABLE 1: BENEFITS OF DOING TEACHER RESEARCH
(ADAPTED FROM KINCHELOE, 2003)
• Begin to understand the power implications of technical standards

• Appreciate the benefits of research
• Begin to understand what they know from experience
• Become more aware of how they can contribute to educational research
• Be seen as ‘learners’ rather than ‘functionaries’ who follow top-down orders
• Explore the learning processes occurring in their classrooms and interpret them
• Reverse the trend toward the deskilling of teachers
As can be seen from the above table, TR empowers the teacher to take control of
his or her own personal and professional development. Teachers, with a thorough
awareness of their own teaching context, together with informed theory, are best
placed to make their own judgments about what happens in the classroom.
METHODOLOGY
Participants
There were 34 participants in the study and mainly from a Maltese background,
predominately working in the private language school sector. Teachers, teacher
trainers, head of departments, and material developers with years of teaching
experience ranging from 3 to 25 years chose to take part in the workshop in order
to learn more about what teacher research is, and how it may be done.
Data collection tools

The data on which this study is based was collected throughout a workshop run
in Malta in October, 2014. The participants of the workshops engaged in exploring
and thinking before the hands-on activities. In those sessions, they discussed the
following questions in groups of 6-8. The first of these included participants’ beliefs
and perceptions about teacher research. Each group was asked to write responses
on a piece of paper. The second required them to discuss the constraints and
limitations of doing teacher research. The collaboratively generated written data
was then submitted at the end of the workshop.
Data analysis
The collected data was read in order to explore it and have a general sense of it
(Agar, 1986). Later, it was coded by segmenting and labelling the text in order to
obtain categories and broad themes (Creswell, 2005). During the coding process
a total of 62 codes were induced from the written documents, which were then
reduced to 32 categories when overlapping ones were excluded. Later these 32
O 32 O
categories were gathered under 7 central themes, which helped us form an idea in
the database. The induction of codes and themes from the data were treated by
the two researchers to ensure interrelated reliability. The researchers agreed on
all themes which are reported in the findings section.
FINDINGS
This study aims to discuss the beliefs of teachers and trainers about teacher
research. In other words, how teacher research is perceived as a professional
development strategy in the Maltese context. This could help discuss research
as a process of teacher learning in an ESL context where English functions as an
official language.
RQ1: What are the teachers’ beliefs about teacher research?

The participants were asked to discuss their beliefs about what teacher research
is. The responses were tabulated below. Seven major themes can be summarized
as follows:
• Teacher research as learner-based

• Teacher research as promoting classroom practices
• Teacher research as a way of building collaboration
• Teacher research as a way of developing teacher autonomy
• Teacher research as a continuous professional development activity
• Teacher research as a way of changing beliefs and attitudes
• Teacher research as a problem-solution activity
MAJOR THEMES
Teacher research as learner-based
Five responses provided by the participants relate directly to the fact that teacher
research is research carried out for the needs and preferences of students in the
classroom. The responses are shown in Table 2.
TABLE 2: STUDENTS’ NEEDS AND PREFERENCES
1. Research driven by students’ needs

2. Trying out new things in the classroom and adapting to your students
3. Meets specific student needs better
4. A way of considering learner perceptions and expectations
5. Not necessary to be teacher-based
These responses indicate one of the critical functions of teacher research as a

way of integrating students’ perspectives into the classroom. In this way, a learner-
O 33 O
centred and learner-sensitive classroom context may be created, which supports

the learning process of learners as their needs are taken into consideration.
Students are seen as an integral part of developing classroom instruction through
such classroom-oriented research studies carried out by teachers.
Teacher research as promoting classroom practices

15 responses, some of which are listed below, centred on ensuring innovation
in classroom practices. Teacher research is seen as a strategy to develop
understanding, production, exploration, and practice of new ways of teaching.
As teacher research is a form of research carried out in the classroom context,
which involves classroom dynamics including teachers’ classroom practices, it
is inevitable to observe an interaction between what teachers do and how they
develop what they do.
TABLE 3: INNOVATION IN CLASSROOM PRACTICES
1. Implementing innovation
2. Understanding how to incorporate something new
3. Looking for new ideas on how to teach
4. Feeds back into classroom practices
5. Is practice-based
6. To produce new ways for self-development
7. To explore new pedagogies and methodologies
8. Should encourage experimentation
9. Relevant to teaching and learning
10. Studying anything related to teaching
The above listed chunks of phrases focus on the anticipated impact of doing
teacher research on the practices carried out in the classroom. They also show
that teacher research is closely related to teaching with a sense of a constant
quest for innovative ideas. Moreover, it is also seen as a bridge between theory and
practice or practice and theory. The process of researching teaching and learning
may lead them to explore the theoretical principles behind their practices, which
could contribute to their understandings.
Teacher research as a way of building up collaboration

The participants also reported that they perceived teacher research as a way of
building relations with other colleagues. This aspect is crucial because teacher
learning should be promoted in a school context characterized by teachers’ similar
experiences, whereby they can find better solutions to the teaching and learning
problems that may occur in their classroom.
O 34 O
TABLE 4: COLLABORATION
1. Get new ideas from peers

2. Getting and providing feedback
3. A mentor can guide us to discover more
4. Should be supported by mentoring
5. Getting support from other colleagues
6. Transferable to other teachers
Another aspect that is highlighted is the need for a mentor who provides support
during the research process. This could be explained by the lack of knowledge of how
it could be carried out. Colleagues are seen as sources of feedback and discussion,
whereas mentors are seen as source of expertise and guidance.
Teacher research as a way of developing teacher autonomy

Teacher research is also seen as a private act which can be carried out by teachers
for their own use. As it is individually carried out, it is thought that it may function
as a strategy to develop teacher autonomy and empower teachers’ research and
teaching processes.
TABLE 5: TEACHER AUTONOMY
1. Initiative
2. Customized
3. Autonomy
4. Not always mentored
5. Should promote learning autonomy
6. Teacher-owned
Teacher research is seen as an autonomous teacher learning strategy that can

be designed for one’s own personal and practical interests, as well as the needs
identified in the classroom.
Teacher research as a continuing professional development

activity
Teacher research is also seen as a professional development activity that is carried
out over a period of time as opposed to one-shot teacher training sessions, which
focus on the transmission of knowledge and skills by an expert directly or indirectly.
TABLE 6: CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
1. Continuing
2. Ongoing process
3. Learning centered not training centered
4. Beneficial and useful in the long run
O 35 O
Another idea implied in the responses is that it promotes teacher learning not
through traditional training given by a trainer, but through individual engagement
in doing teacher research. It is also believed that the impact of doing teacher
research is not an immediately emerging one but one evident in the long run.
This is because teachers learn from their own research and implement or behave
accordingly in their classroom and monitor change and development.
Teacher research as a way of changing beliefs and attitudes

Some of the responses concentrated on the impact of doing teacher research
on beliefs and attitudes. Participants expected to change their understandings of
teaching and learning as a result of research findings.
TABLE 7: CHANGING BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES
1. Change in ingrained beliefs

2. It challenges your intuitions
3. Learning to be open to change
It is also implied that research may provide teachers with evidence or

justification for teacher change through which they promote new attitudes for
being open to change and development.
Teacher research as a problem-solution activity

Responses also show that teacher research is perceived to be a way of promoting
specific knowledge in a particular area of teaching and learning and helps teachers
improve themselves where they are weak.
TABLE 8: PROBLEM-SOLUTION ACTIVITY

1. Based on a question or a problem
2. Results from a gap in personal knowledge
3. Answers your questions and expectations
4. Teacher research strengthens weaknesses
Teacher research is also understood as an activity that can empower teachers

to develop solutions to the pedagogical problems they encounter or to address
weaknesses in teaching.
RQ2: What are the constraints and limitations of doing teacher

research?
The responses provided by the participants highlighted that teacher research
could also be questioned in terms of the challenges and influence on the teacher,
though they do not outnumber the positive aspects highlighted above. Table 9
O 36 O
shows the reported questions and disadvantageous aspects. The participants had
questions about the impact on the teacher, the challenges and difficulties of doing
research, coupled with knowledge of how to do it, time, cost and effort required.
TABLE 9: CONSTRAINTS AND LIMITATIONS
What is the end result? Unclear impact

Complicated Difficult process
Relevant background Research competence
It requires commitment? Effort
Time consuming Time
Are teachers too busy? Time
Generally unpaid Lack of incentive
The reported limitations are among the most often cited ones in the teacher
research literature. The participants questioned the impact of doing teacher
research on what they do. This could be related to their confidence in their
research competence. When not equipped to do research, teachers may not feel
confident in the results. They also questioned the effort put into the work and
benefit gained out of it, which is also related to time and cost issues.
RQ3: What are the expectations of the participants from

participating in a workshop on teacher research?
The participants’ responses centred around four major expectations from the workshop.
These consisted of developing practical ideas, developing knowledge of teacher research,
developing research competence, and promoting professional development.
TABLE 10: DEVELOPING KNOWLEDGE OF TEACHER RESEARCH
1. Improve research skills

2. Insight into methodology and content
3. How to plan and carry out TR
4. To learn more about the practice of TR
5. Explore TR from different perspectives
6. Some knowledge of TR in other contexts
7. To learn more about TR
8. Understand how to do TR
9. Learn more about TR
10. Learn different types of TR
11. Hands-on tips for doing TR
12. Knowledge on how to carry out TR: guidelines
13. How to set up TR online learning
14. New ideas for information on TR
15. Better understand aspects of TR
16. To learn more about TR applications
17. Evaluate the alternatives of TR
18. Hope to get practical ideas for implementing
19. How to begin research on online teaching
O 37 O
As may be interpreted from the descriptive sentences, there seems to be a

focus on gaining a firmer grasp of what teacher research is and how it may be
implemented in the classroom.
TABLE 11: PROMOTING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
1. Get ideas to promote personal development

2. Develop myself as a DoS, facilitating teachers’ development
3. Be a better teacher by becoming more self-critical
4. Innovative strategies for development
5. Learn more about teacher development
6. Explore areas of interest
7. Pass benefits onto others involved in TR
This group of teachers viewed TR as a device for both their own professional
development, and the development of the teachers they work with.
TABLE 12: GAINING PRACTICAL IDEAS
1. To find innovative ways of exploring and improving learners’ learning experience

2. Ideas for classroom application
3. For TR direct benefits for classroom
4. Learn about motivating students
5. To learn new methods of teaching
6. New ideas
Teacher research as an instrumental tool was the key theme that emerged
from this group of comments. Teachers here saw TR as a product rather than a
process of development. They expected to see direct applications of teaching that
could be implemented in their own classrooms.
TABLE 13: DEVELOPING RESEARCH COMPETENCE
1. Hope to get inspiration for my PDR assignment

2. Help with research for DipTESOL
Two of the participants were at the time doing a Diploma in TESOL, so they
expected to gain further insight into TR with the aim of improving their research
skills as opposed to classroom inquiry.
O 38 O
DISCUSSION
In response to the study’s first research question, this paper has discussed the
beliefs and perceptions of 34 language teachers and trainers regarding teacher
research . From the analysis of the data, the following seven themes related to
teacher research engagement were induced: a learner-based activity, promoting
classroom practices, building collaboration, developing teacher autonomy, a
continuing activity, changing beliefs and attitudes, and a problem-solution activity.
The participants pointed particularly to practical, social, cognitive and pragmatic
aspects of potential impact of research engagement. These aspects show that
they perceived teacher research engagement as a powerful strategy for their
development by indicating that they may go through a variety of change processes
as a result of active involvement. This view of teacher research as a developmental
strategy is in line with the shift from the traditional top-down approach to teacher
training, where knowledge and good practice is imposed by experts who may not
have a true understanding of the context teachers may be working in. Teacher
research is grounded in a constructivist theory of learning pioneered by the
work of Bruner, Piaget and Vygotsky, who support knowledge as being self or co-
constructed as opposed to being discovered in external sources.
However, some participants reported several questions and obstacles in
relation to research engagement, which include unclear impact of research
engagement, the difficulty of the process, teachers’ limited research competence,
the effort invested in the work in relation to time, and a lack of incentive in return
for the work accomplished. These concerns should be taken into consideration
by policy makers and school directors who may support teacher research as a
professional development tool. It is clear that teacher researchers put a great deal
of effort into research, which also requires sufficient time, academic, financial or
motivational support that can be offered through incentives and promotion.
[email protected]
[email protected]
O 39 O
REFERENCES
Agar, M. (1986). Speaking of ethnography. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
Allwright, D. (2003). Exploratory practice: Rethinking practitioner research in
language teaching. Language Teaching Research, 7(2), 113–141.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
Borg, S. (2009). English language teachers’ conceptions of research. Applied
Linguistics, 30(3), 358–388.
Borg, S. (2010). Language teacher research engagement. Language Teaching,
43(4), 391–429.
Borg, S. (2014). Teacher research: Practical and relevant classroom inquiry.
Retrieved November 20, 2014, from http://www.cambridge.org/elt/
blog/2014/02/teacher-research-practical-relevant-classroom-inquiry
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1990). Research on teaching and teacher research:
The issues that divide. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2–11.
Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Dikilitaş, K. (2014). Professional development through teacher research. Izmir:
Gediz University.
Hargreaves, D. H. (1999). The knowledge creating school. British Journal of
Educational Studies, 47(2), 122–144.
Henson, R. K. (2001). The effects of participation in teacher research on teacher
efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 819–836.
Kincheloe, J. (2003). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to
empowerment (2nd ed.). Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
Mann, S. (2005). The language teacher’s development. Language Teaching, 38(3),
103–118.
Munby, H., & Russell, T. (1994). The authority of experience in learning to teach:
Messages from a physics methods class. Journal of Teacher Education,
45(2), 86–95.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation
of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American
Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Zeuli, J. (1994). How do teachers understand research when they read it? Teaching
and Teacher Education, 10(1), 39–56.
O 40 O
5
An ELT teacher’s
reflective journey: a
bottom-up approach to
continuing professional
development
Caroline Campbell
Easy School of Languages, Malta
Teachers often feel that professional development is being ‘imposed’ on them and find that the training
provided sometimes fails to meet their real needs and expectations. It must also be said that often the busy
schedule that teachers follow and the amount of work that they put into lesson preparation does not leave
space for much reflection. Reflective practice is often looked upon as a daunting task and mentors who
promote this rarely get enthusiastic reactions from teachers. However, the practice of writing reflections
about teaching and learning practices as well as teachers’ own beliefs and attitudes towards teaching can
help them make more informed decisions about the type of Continuing Professional Development (CPD)
they should seek and engage in. This paper outlines a process that helps teachers start or continue their
reflective journey as professionals who want to take ownership of their own CPD.
O 41 O
RATIONALE
This article is a reaction to a set of responses given by a group of ELT teachers
during a semi-structured interview in a small-scale study on the use of teacher
portfolios for CPD purposes (Xerri & Campbell, 2015). When asked to give their
opinion about reflective writing, teachers expressed concerns about the writing
skills necessary to produce written reflection, the awkwardness of having to write
about oneself and the uncertainty of not knowing the exact purpose of writing
self-reflection and who its readers will be. Following this feedback, I started
reflecting back on my own personal experience and realized the importance that
reflective practice, in particular reflective writing, has had on my professional
career, especially since it saved me from teacher burnout after just a few years
of teaching. It was through reflective practice that I identified my strengths and
weaknesses as an ELT teacher and the areas I lacked or needed more training
in. In the long run, it was also through reflective practice that I found where my
true interests lie. In this paper I will outline the benefits of reflective practice, in
particular reflective writing, as a tool that helps ELT teachers find a way to reflect
on their attitudes, beliefs and practices, as they move towards taking ownership
of their CPD. I will also point out the concerns that teachers usually have when it
comes to writing down their reflections and I offer some suggestions that might
help mitigate these concerns. I will then focus on how reflective practice can be
applied to the classroom, how teachers can involve their students and colleagues
in their reflective journey and even take it beyond their immediate environment.
At intervals I include reflective tasks with questions that might serve as prompts to
help readers reflect on their own reflective journey as ELT professionals.
TAKING OWNERSHIP OF CPD

Teachers engage in CPD to acquire knowledge, to learn how to learn and to turn
their knowledge into classroom practice for the benefit of their students (Avalos,
2011). Since this is fundamental to a teacher’s career, it is important that they
choose to engage in CPD that helps them in this feat. However, “not every form
of professional development, even those with the greatest evidence of positive
impact, is of itself relevant to all teachers” (Avalos, 2011, p. 10). What I would like
to point out here is the importance of taking a conscious decision when choosing
what CPD would truly be of benefit along one’s journey as an ELT professional.
Nevertheless, CPD is more often than not ‘imposed’ on teachers by the school
management, “policymakers (who…seem to know little of teaching or learning)
or professional bodies who, in all good faith, act…to ensure performativity and
standardization of teaching and learning across the sector” (Rushton & Suter,
2012, p. 8). It is often these entities themselves that propose and ‘invite’ teachers
to attend specific conferences or workshops and in turn teachers feel obliged to
O 42 O
attend them, only to feel very disappointed as they find out that the CPD they
engaged in did not tally with their interests or needs. At this point the question
is whether teachers do reflect on their choice of CPD before getting themselves
involved or to what extent they do so.
REFLECTIVE TASK 1:
• Why do you attend conferences?

• Do you usually attend conferences out of your own free will?
• Do you reflect on which workshops and presentations you would like
to attend at a conference?

Based on personal experience, engaging in reflective practice effectively

leads to making informed decisions about what type of CPD to take up. Interests,
weaknesses, strengths, needs and so on become clearer as teachers reflect and
“initiate the process to inform themselves by investigating their practices and
beliefs so that they can construct their own theories of teaching and learning”
(Farrell, 2013, p. 15). Chin-Win (2012) points out that “Reflection involves teachers’
thinking analytically about their past and current teaching beliefs, experience and
practice” (p. 132). Once teachers start doing this, they are more likely to engage
in CPD from the bottom-up approach, doing what is relevant to their needs and
eventually benefitting from it. Moreover, from journal entries, Genc (2010) found
that “teachers developed bottom-up teaching strategies based on the dynamics
of their classrooms through critical reflection in journals because they were able
to explore, analyze and observe their own beliefs and classroom practices, and
experiment with alternative instructional behaviours” (p. 402).
REFLECTIVE TASK 2:
• What made you read this article? Was it the title, the abstract or something else?
• What was your first reaction when you read the abstract?
• In what way do you expect this article to help you?
• How willing are you today to start/continue your reflective journey
as an ELT professional?

THE CHALLENGES OF REFLECTIVE WRITING

Reflective journal writing is probably the most common reflective procedure used
among teachers (Abednia et al., 2013). It can be “an integral part of the reflective
process, and it is more often than not a requirement on an initial teacher training
course to keep a reflective journal on one’s professional practice” (Rushton &
Suter, 2012, p. 20). However, reflective writing should not be a task that is used
only by novice teachers during training (Borg, 2001). A teacher’s journal or a diary
O 43 O
can become a tool that can be used throughout an ELT professional’s entire career.
Novice teachers use reflective practice to tweak their beliefs and practices but more
experienced teachers should use it to transform them (McGregor & Cartwright,
2011). Genc (2010) reports that “writing in journals helped teachers become more
aware of the needs and problems specific to their teaching contexts” (p. 402).
She adds that it is “a kind of eye-opener because teachers felt empowered and
autonomous in their classroom practices when they implemented self-initiated
pedagogical options” (Genc, 2010, p. 402).
REFLECTIVE TASK 3:
• How often do you reflect about your classroom practices and your attitudes
and beliefs as a teacher?
• Do you keep a written record of your reflections? If yes, how do you do this?
• If not, what do you think might be the benefits of self-reflection and keeping a
written record of it?

This is not to say that engaging in reflective writing is an easy endeavour nor
that teachers will readily find time to write their reflections. Teachers are busy
people and often find it hard to make an effort to stop and reflect. Chin-Wen
(2012) points out that “the two biggest challenges in writing a journal for reflective
practice were time constraints and the lack of the analysis in journal entries about
better classroom practice” (p. 131). Teachers are often concerned about writing in
general and feel that they lack ideas and do not know what to write about (Xerri
& Campbell, 2015). An additional concern is fear of being assessed by a mentor
on their writing skills; teachers also agonize over the true purpose of this task.
Teachers might even think that it might jeopardize their employment and this
often results in a halo effect as they will only write what they think their mentors
want to read. The task might also become too time consuming and daunting if
teachers are too concerned with finding the right words. Teachers might also
be reluctant to reveal their own weaknesses or failures when writing about their
classroom practices. Another concern is that their written reflections might be
made accessible to other ELT professionals or colleagues who might judge them.
Finally, given the well-known fact that teachers are not well paid, they might
also lack the motivation to invest time and effort into improving themselves as
professionals.
If this is the way teachers look upon the task of reflective writing, a change
of heart will be essential before they can start benefitting from it. They need to
start looking at reflective writing as an opportunity to stop for a while and slow
down all the different thoughts in their head and try to make some sense out of
them (Farrell, 2013). Reflective writing can take various forms, and teachers may
opt for a freer or a more structured form of writing. Rushton and Suter (2012)
indicate that teachers find it helpful to have a structured approach, especially
O 44 O
when reflective writing is new to them. They suggest that teachers should reflect
on their classroom practice, revise their practice, and reflect again. Following such
a cycle will help teachers become fluent in reflective writing and gain confidence.
Moreover, “to ensure that the efficacy of the changes can be properly evaluated…
it is important that the introduction of changes is carefully planned” (Rushton &
Suter, 2012, p. 18).
However, having to pay too much attention to the way reflections are written
might need a certain amount of effort. Farrell (2013) suggests that teachers should
see writing not as a finished product but as a process that helps them discover
their thoughts. It would be a good idea if mentors encouraged teachers “to voice
their opinions freely, analyze their teaching beliefs and values critically, and, as a
result, refine them constructively” (Abednia et al., 2013, p. 511). Mentors should
provide training and support to help teachers face the challenges of reflective
writing, and provide feedback. However, “once the teacher has received advice or
feedback from a tutor or a mentor it is incumbent upon them to reflect on how
what has been suggested can actually be integrated into professional practice”
(Rushton & Suter, 2012, p. 101).
REFLECTIVE TASK 4:
• How do you feel about writing, in general?

• How do you feel about writing down reflections on your teaching?
• How important do you think writing your reflections is for your CPD?
• What forms of reflective writing do you already engage in?
• What forms of reflective writing would you like to start doing?

ELT professionals already do a lot of writing in their everyday lives. This is not
necessarily strictly reflective practice but it can be used to reflect on classroom
practice as well as attitudes and beliefs. Lesson plans, writing class reports, marking
students’ work, designing course units and so on are all forms of writing that involve
thinking, reflecting and evaluating (Burton, 2009) and that can contribute towards
reflective writing. Reflections can be recorded in different forms. Teachers just
need to find the form that is the most feasible for them, a style they like, one that
will not burden them. They might also want to consider the amount of time they
have available and opt for something that is achievable in that span of time. For
instance, using technology might make writing easier and more accessible. Burton
(2009) suggests various types of journal writing, including personal, dialogue,
online and small-group journals, autobiographies, on-line discussion boards and
free writing. To this list, Cartwright (2011) adds pieces of academic writing for
assignments, written lesson evaluations, and written reviews of progress before
meeting with a mentor.
O 45 O
Engaging in reflective practice as I have presented it so far constitutes the first

two out of the four stages identified by Farrell (2013):
• Engaging in reflective practice.

• Noticing what is going on in the classroom.
• Involving students and colleagues.
• Sharing ideas with other ELT professionals. (pp. 23–24)
The next natural stage is to involve students and colleagues and take self-reflection
beyond the classroom doors.
TAKING REFLECTIVE PRACTICE INTO THE

CLASSROOM AND INVOLVING STUDENTS
AND COLLEAGUES
According to Rushton and Suter (2012), “the teacher may work in isolation from
colleagues for much of the time” (p. 101). However, most reflective practice has
to do “with thinking, mediating or pondering over the learning process and one of
the best sources of material for reflection is to ask the students” (Rushton & Suter,
2012, p. 6); it “can include the consideration of others’ perspectives” (Rushton &
Suter, 2012, p. 101).
REFLECTIVE TASK 5:
• What are my students learning? How are my students learning?

• What do my students think about me as a teacher?
• What are my students’ preferred learning styles and strategies?
• What are my students’ real needs?
• What would my students’ rather be doing in class?

Reflective writing is very personal but it can be more beneficial when shared
with colleagues. Trainers and mentors can encourage teachers to exchange their
written reflections with peers especially during training (Abednia et al., 2013). This
might reduce teachers’ fear of being ‘assessed’ by a trainer or mentor and the
teachers will be less cautious and reserved and more genuine when writing their
reflections (Abednia et al., 2013). Burton et al. (2009) affirm that
Reflective writing about teaching is a way of inviting others into our

classrooms to see what is going on there and to think about the
ramifications of certain problems and successes. Teaching can be an
isolated and isolating experience. Reflective writing about teaching is
a way of expanding our world beyond the individual classroom. (p. 2)
O 46 O
Borg (2001) suggests that besides allowing teachers to get an insight into their
practice, once made public, written reflections will also be beneficial to readers. In
addition, “if teachers share their reflections, they can attain different perspectives
about their work from the reflections of others” (Farrell, 2013, p. 97). However,
others might suggest a list of things to do as a quick fix if the teacher is not well-
prepared to weigh the feedback received from peers. For this reason, Heslop and
Devlin (2011) suggest that teachers should do some initial self-reflection before
asking peers for feedback because this will help them make the best out of support
networks.
Colleagues can be involved in many different ways. Reflections can be simply
shared or discussed in the staff room or in specifically organized meetings. Burton
(2005) points out various ways of how writing can be shared, for instance, one-to-
one, in focus groups during pre-service training, between groups, and by email to
mention a few. Teachers can even ask colleagues they trust or mentors to give them
feedback on their written reflections or ask colleagues about the methodologies
they use or else carry out peer observations. Coaching or mentoring a novice
teacher can also contribute towards the experienced teachers’ reflective practice.
TAKING REFLECTIVE WRITING

BEYOND THE CLASSROOM
Reflective writing can be taken a step further. Burton et al. (2009) mention that it
can also be “a powerful personal resource that encourages teachers not only to
write but to communicate about teaching outside their immediate educational
setting” (p. iv). They also suggest that teachers might want to use their reflective
writing to reach other teachers around the world. Burton (2005) mentions that this
can be done by publishing books or posting written work on websites. Borg (2001)
adds that when teachers read other teachers’ reflections they may understand
their own work better as they see it in the light of their peers’ experience.
Moreover, “teachers who do become researchers or reflective practitioners
face another responsibility: writing up their research so that their learning is not
lost to the profession” (Burton, 2005, p. 1). However, as I mentioned earlier, most
teachers are already concerned about their writing skills let alone engaging in
academic writing and following strict writing guidelines and editing their written
work to publish it. Teachers may also argue that in academic writing their voice
is denied (Burton, 2005). Additionally, publishing articles or books is often seen
as something that can only be done by academics and hence teachers feel that
their own reflections will not be good enough for publishing. This is unfortunate
because if teachers fail to communicate their reflections, a wealth of knowledge
and insight will be lost.
Nevertheless, I am not suggesting here that journal writing will automatically
O 47 O
lead to academic writing, publishing material, writing books and so on. However,
I would like to emphasize the importance of sharing one’s work with other
professionals working in the same field. Sharing in this sense can take various
forms, such as organizing an in-service training session at one’s own school, giving
a presentation or a workshop at a local or an international conference, writing
for an association’s newsletter or a teachers’ magazine, and using an online blog,
website or social networking site where ideas can be discussed with other teachers
who form part of one’s personal learning network (Xerri, 2014). A step at a time,
in the long term, these steps will become part of one’s own CPD based on one’s
own choices. ELT professionals will be able to find their own way and share their
knowledge and interests with other colleagues who are interested in the same
issues and areas of interest.
REFLECTIVE TASK 6:
• Which stage of your reflective journey are you at?

• What is your next step?
• What do you see yourself doing in a year’s time?

CONCLUSION
Taking ownership of one’s own CPD is key to an ELT professional’s successful
career but this necessitates engaging in some type of reflection. Reflective practice,
in particular engaging in reflective writing, is not without its own challenges and
teachers often have many concerns. However, if teachers take one step at a time
and find appropriate support and guidance from tutors or mentors, the reflective
process will be rewarding.
[email protected]
O 48 O
REFERENCES
Abnedia, A., Hovassapian, A., Teimournezhad, S., & Ghanbari, N. (2013).
Reflective journal writing: Exploring in-service EFL teachers’
perceptions. System, 41(3), 503–514.
Avalos, B. (2011). Teacher professional development in Teaching and Teacher
Education over ten years. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1),
10–20.
Borg, S. (2001). The research journal: A tool for promoting and understanding
researcher development. Language Teaching Research, 5(2), 156–
177.
Burton, J. (2005). The importance of teachers writing on TESOL. TESL-EJ,
9(2), 1–18.
Burton, J. (2009). Reflective writing: Getting to the heart of teaching and
learning. In J. Burton, P. Quirk, C. L. Reichmann & J. K. Peyton (Eds.),
Reflective writing: A way to lifelong teacher learning (pp. 1–11). USA:
TESL-EJ Publications.
Burton, J., Quirke, P., Reichmann, C. L., & Peyton, J. K. (Eds.). (2009).
Reflective writing: A way to lifelong teacher learning. USA: TESL-EJ
Publications.
Cartwright. L. (2011). How consciously reflective are you? In D. McGregor
& L. Cartwright (Eds.), Developing reflective practice: A guide for
beginning teachers (pp. 55–67). Berkshire: Open University Press.
Chin-Wen, C. (2013). Analysis of a language teacher’s journal of classroom
practice as reflective practice. Reflective Practice: International and
Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 14(1), 131–143.
Farrell, T. S. C. (2013). Reflective writing for teachers. Sheffield: Equinox.
Genc, Z. S. (2010). Teacher autonomy through reflective journals among
teachers of English as a foreign language in Turkey. Teacher
Development: An International Journal of Teachers’ Professional
Development, 14(3), 397–409.
Heslop, D., & Devlin, L. (2011). Identifying and mapping your complementary
support systems: Who are your partners in reflection? In D. McGregor
& L. Cartwright (Eds.), Developing reflective practice: A guide for
beginning teachers (pp. 91–106). Berkshire: Open University Press.
McGregor, D., & Cartwright, L. (2011). Taking the longer term view: How can
reflective practice sustain continuing professional development. In
D. McGregor & L. Cartwright (Eds.), Developing reflective practice:
A guide for beginning teachers (pp. 235–250). Berkshire: Open
University Press.
O 49 O
Rushton, I., & Suter, M. (2012). Reflective practice for teaching in lifelong
learning. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Xerri, D. (2014). Teachers’ use of social networking sites for continuing
professional development. In Ġ. Mallia (Ed.), The social classroom:
Integrating social network use in education (pp. 441–464). Hershey,
PA: IGI Global.
Xerri, D., & Campbell, C. (2015). Implementing teacher portfolios for
professional development. In T. Pattison (Ed.), IATEFL 2014: Harrogate
conference selections (pp. 205–207). Faversham: IATEFL.
O 50 O
6
A research-based
approach to teaching
prewriting strategies
in academic writing
Mario Aquilina
Centre for English Language Proficiency, University of Malta, Malta
This paper presents an instructional method for prewriting strategies in academic writing classes. The
instructional practices proposed have been tested in a variety of academic writing contexts, and they are
based on theoretical and research insights from both genre-based and process approaches to writing. The
paper refers to and builds on existent research in the field to first investigate the relevance of prewriting
strategies in academic writing and then suggest practical ways in which these may be implemented in a
writing class context.
O 51 O
WHY TEACH PREWRITING STRATEGIES?

Academic writing requires students to write texts that are determined by what may
be described as specific rhetorical situations. In many class, home and examination
contexts related to academic writing, students have to respond to pre-established
rubrics, which necessitate writing in specific genres, and to address their writing to
an intended audience. In such contexts, several crucial aspects of writing, including
content, style, tone and pitch, are regulated by the requirement for qualities like
clarity, relevance, coherence, accuracy and appropriateness. These expectations,
which are generally inimical to impulsive and spontaneous approaches to writing,
strengthen the case for students being taught prewriting strategies that enhance
their awareness of and control over the overarching rhetorical situation.
Research into the effectiveness of prewriting techniques has consistently
shown that specific forms of prewriting treatments tend to have varying degrees
of largely positive effects on the quality of the writing of students at different levels
(Graham & Perin, 2007; Brodney, Reeves, & Kazelskis, 1999; Reece & Cumming,
1996). For instance, Graham and Perin’s (2007) extensive meta-analysis leads
to several recommendations for the adolescent writing class context. Defining
writing quality “in terms of coherently organized essays containing well developed
and pertinent ideas, supporting examples, and appropriate detail,” (p. 14), Graham
and Perin (2007) highlight, among others, the effectiveness of prewriting, “which
engages students in activities designed to help them generate or organize ideas
for their composition” and of writing strategies, “which involves teaching students
strategies for planning, revising, and editing their compositions” (p. 4). What is
more contentious is not the relevance of prewriting in the writing class but the
kind of prewriting strategy that may be most effective.
Emphasis on prewriting tends to be associated with process writing
approaches (Flower & Hayes, 1981; Brodney et al., 1999; Graham & Sandmel, 2011;
Morris, 2012). Prewriting strategies are seen as playing a crucial part in the writing
process primarily because they provide writers with the opportunity to plan their
work in various levels of detail before they move on to other phases in the writing
process, including translating and revising (Graham & Perin, 2007). In this context,
prewriting may take the form of brainstorming, clustering and concept mapping,
through which writers generate ideas for writing and reflect on the best ways
of presenting those ideas within the rhetorical circumstances provoked by the
assigned rubric.
However, prewriting strategies are not exclusive to process approaches, and
they also play a key role in genre-based methodologies, which are often proposed
as alternatives to process writing (Hyland, 2007). Rather than focusing primarily
on the cycle of writing, genre-based approaches foster an understanding of
text as a specific type of communicative event serving a specific function and
recognised by a relevant community. Texts are analysed for typical ‘moves’ within
O 52 O
the genre, some of which are obligatory and some optional (Swales, 1990; Henry
& Roseberry, 1998). While genre analysis is characterised by a central focus on the
text in context, different pedagogical routes may be employed (Wingate, 2012, p.
28). One key variation relates to whether the text analysis is carried out by the
teacher-researcher who identifies moves in a wide range of texts in a specific
genre, which are then taught to students in the academic writing class, or whether
the text analysis is carried out, jointly, by instructors and learners within the
modelling phase of the writing class (Wingate, 2012, p. 28). Within the method
being proposed in this paper, the latter option is seen as preferable because it
encourages learners to participate in the analytical phase of the process hence
urging them to tap into higher order cognitive skills such as critical awareness that
the method, as a whole, aims to foster.
Through exposure to model texts in the genre being studied, the method
proposed guides students towards identifying key textual moves in a specific genre,
their arrangement in texts, and related linguistic features. In particular, the focus
is on recognising the typical rhetorical organisation of texts in a genre, which, as
a study by Henry and Roseberry (1998) shows, allows students “to concentrate
[during the writing stage] on combining the elements effectively in terms of
both achieving their communicative goals and producing more highly textured
writing” (p. 154). Genre analysis helps to foster the understanding that academic
writing places writers within a pre-established rhetorical tradition characterized
by specific norms and conventions. One key difference between this kind of
prewriting, which is used in genre-based literacy pedagogy, and those associated
with process approaches, such as brainstorming and concept mapping, is that it
cannot be used in most examination contexts. However, both have a key role to
play in the academic writing classroom environment and in pedagogies that value
independent and active learning.
RESEARCH AND THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS

OF METHOD PROPOSED
The prewriting treatments being suggested involve a combination of genre-based
and process approach strategies. The motivation behind the method proposed
here is to utilise the strengths of the different approaches while mitigating their
potential weaknesses. More specifically, from process writing, I emphasise the
activation of the students’ higher-order thinking skills that brainstorming and
concept mapping can provide (Bloom et al., 1956; Morris, 2012). Through these
prewriting routines, students are encouraged to show “active engagement with
ideas” in the context of specific rhetorical situations rather than simply working
within pre-established prescriptive constraints (Morris, 2012, p. 85). Students are
encouraged to not only think of relevant points, while distinguishing between
superordinate and subordinate ideas, but also about the connections between
O 53 O
these points. This concept-based thinking encourages students to “shape their

material according to its nature and their aims” (Robinson, 1994, p. 194).
One key benefit of focusing on prewriting strategies in the academic writing
class is that, as Morris argues, “quality prewriting helps motivate students by
increasing their expertise and by spreading the cognitive load of composing,
freeing mental resources for the actual writing” (Morris, 2012, p. 85). Having
thought about which points will be developed and in which order before writing
begins allows writers to focus more on language accuracy and expression during
the writing itself.
A further consideration underpinning the method is the emphasis on strategy
instruction that allows students to learn higher order skills that are transferable to
different writing contexts. More specifically, the use of what Richards et al. (1992)
describe as a combination approach to strategy instruction, in which strategies
are introduced both explicitly and in ways which are embedded in the actual
content of the subject (p. 355), allows students to acquire thinking, planning and
writing skills that are essential not only in academic writing but also a variety of
other genres (Flower & Hayes, 1980, p. 40). As Al-Shaer (2014) puts it, strategy
instruction “transform[s] students into active learners by training them on how
to learn and how to employ what they have learned in their daily life… [S]tudents
learn to integrate new information with previous background, in a way that makes
sense, facilitating information or skill retrieval at any time or place” (p. 3).
From genre-analysis, I retain the exposure to exemplary texts from specific
genres. Reading a carefully selected sample of texts written in the genre that
writers are learning compensates for the lack of awareness of language and genre
constraints that an exclusively process-oriented approach to writing would create
(Hyland, 2007). The method proposed also embraces the argument that the
writing process cannot be conceived in a vacuum and that it is inextricable, both
cognitively and pedagogically, from reading. Research by Brodney et al. (1999),
which compared the effect of various combinations of prewriting and reading
treatments on expository compositions written by fifth grade students, found
that a combination of reading and prewriting before composing was “the most
effective prewriting instructional strategy” (p. 5). Summarising the issue, Grabe
(2001) argues that “One of the most consistent implications of two decades of
reading and writing relations is that they should be taught together and that the
combination of both literacy skills enhances learning in all areas” (p. 25). Brodney
et al.’s (1999) review of relevant literature makes similar claims for the combination
of reading and writing instruction. The authors justify the rationale for this
combination by highlighting the way both reading and writing involve construction
of meaning through the same cognitive schemata. During composition, writers
anticipate the metacognitive processes involved in reading, and an understanding
of text organisation and paragraph construction is crucial both in writing and in
reading.
O 54 O
METHOD
The prewriting method proposed here may be schematised as consisting of five
stages, beginning with genre analysis and continuing with four prewriting cycles
characterised by descending degrees of teacher input and ascending degrees of
independent learning. The model (shown in Figure 1) allows for flexibility as the
writing instructors may opt to repeat or omit any of the prewriting cycles depending
on their judgment of the cognitive abilities of the learners as well as their familiarity
with the genre being taught and with the prewriting strategies employed. The
rationale behind the combination of genre analysis, as a first stage, and successive
prewriting stages is based on the assumption that the prewriting strategies
employed—primarily, brainstorming and concept mapping—are more likely to be
effective when the writers are familiar with the linguistic and rhetorical conventions
of the genre in which they are writing. The proposed order of the prewriting stages,
on the other hand, allows the classroom sessions to move, gradually, through the
following combinations of teacher input and active learning: modelling and explicit
instruction by the teacher; collaboration in the form of peer to peer and peer to
teacher interaction; and relatively independent writing practice. The stages are
designed to not only guide students into learning how to write in a specific genre but
also to stimulate their higher order thinking skills and to equip them with thinking
and writing strategies that can then be employed in contexts beyond the genre they
are learning. One benefit of this focus on writing strategies means that in successive
uses of the method for the teaching of different genres to the same students, less
time will need to be spent on fostering the meta-awareness of the students about
the processes of brainstorming and concept mapping as they will have already been
exposed to this aspect of prewriting in previous cycles.
FIGURE 1: THE PREWRITING METHOD
GENRE ANALYSIS
CHOICE OF ENTRY LEVEL
CYCLE 1
CYCLE 2
CYCLE 3
CYCLE 4
O 55 O
STAGE DESCRIPTIONS
This section of the paper offers suggestions on how the method being proposed
can be applied, in practice, within the academic writing classroom context. The
proposed teaching strategy is to combine prewriting exercises favoured in genre
analysis with cyclical stages that are usually associated with process writing
approaches. As it will become clear in what follows, the various cycles are designed
to enhance students’ higher order cognitive skills, thus allowing the specific training
in a particular writing genre to also strengthen their writing in other genres.
However, the cycles also allow for students to be exposed to appropriate models
of writing in specific text-types, thus building on the philosophy of familiarity with
convention that is central to genre approaches.
Genre analysis
During this stage, students are exposed to a range of texts in the genre that they are
learning. Teachers may employ a variety of methods to make the students aware of
the linguistic devices and the rhetorical moves that are typical of a specific genre.
They may use their expertise in a genre, acquired, for instance, through analysis of
relevant corpora, to highlight the generic constraints directly. They may also guide
the students by asking specific questions and assigning specific exercises aimed at
eliciting generic characteristics from the learners.
For instance, in teaching academic writing, teachers may ask students to
identify the transitional phrases and the topic sentences in some paragraphs or the
whole text. They may then focus on a particular paragraph and elicit the different
functions of sentences within a paragraph, such as exemplification, clarification,
elaboration, referencing, quoting and linking. The aim of these exercises is to
expose students to the linguistic, rhetorical and generic constraints they will need
to be aware of when writing in the specific genre at a later stage.
Cycle 1
Brainstorming and concept mapping are the two key prewriting strategies in
academic writing. The first cycle after the genre analysis allows the writing instructor
to introduce both of these strategies by highlighting their importance to students
and offering a practical demonstration of how they may be employed in academic
writing. In this cycle, the instructor provides a significant level of input by eliciting
and participating in both the brainstorming and concept mapping phases. At this
stage, learners are immersed in “borrowed consciousness,” that is, “the idea that
learners working with knowledgeable others develop greater understanding of
tasks and ideas” (Hyland, 2007, p. 158). In this cycle, the instructor acts as a model
for the learners, while the students actively learn by participating in the prewriting
exercises as a class activity.
At this stage, the instructor may focus on highlighting thinking strategies
O 56 O
that the students may employ to facilitate their prewriting exercises when they
are working on their own. While brainstorming is often thought of as a random
association exercise, students may be shown the usefulness of thinking triggers
that could improve their brainstorming skills in different writing genres. For
instance, students may be shown the effect of looking at the specific topic they
are writing about through journalist questions—what, who, where, when, how and
why—or through a series of other relevant prompt words, like ‘context,’ ‘history,’
‘theory,’ ‘for’ and ‘against,’ which may facilitate and guide their brainstorming.
These prompts may also be adapted to the specific academic writing genre being
taught.
In the concept mapping stage, the instructor may focus on distinguishing
between superordinate and subordinate concepts that will have arisen in the
brainstorming phase. The class discussion may also be focused on eliciting
different opinions about the ways in which the concepts may be organised in
the writing. This encourages the students to develop meta-awareness about the
prewriting strategies they are practising.
Cycle 2
The cycles following the genre analysis phase and Cycle 1 are meant to gradually
shift the cognitive workload from the writing instructor to the learner, thus
encouraging the latter to take a gradually increasing responsibility in the
prewriting exercises conducted in class. In this cycle of teacher-supported
learning, the brainstorming is done by the students, in groups of three to five, and
is then followed by a teacher-led class discussion of the possible concept maps
that may be derived from the students’ brainstorming. Once again, in this part
of the prewriting, the teacher can contribute to the shaping of the concept map.
Through the group work, the students have access to “shared consciousness,” that
is, “the idea that learners working together learn more effectively than individuals
working separately” (Hyland, 2007, p. 158).
Cycle 3
The aims in this cycle are to, on the one hand, give further opportunities to
students to practise prewriting strategies and, on the other hand, develop the
higher order skill of meta-cognitive awareness. In this cycle, the brainstorming
is done by the students working individually, while the concept mapping is done
collaboratively by the students in groups of three to five. During this part of the
session, the instructor can roam around the space of the classroom in order to
offer feedback and assistance where necessary. After the groups have formulated
their concept map, the structure of the lesson changes to a class discussion in
which the various concept maps are explained by group representatives and the
teacher gives feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of the various possibilities
proposed by the students.
O 57 O
Cycle 4
In the final cycle, students work individually throughout the various stages of
prewriting, that is, through brainstorming and concept mapping. The instructor
may opt to ask some of the students to share their final plans in a class discussion
or may give individual feedback while roaming around the class.
CONCLUSION
The method proposed here has been developed and utilised over ten years of
teaching within the context of academic writing classes at both pre-university and
university levels. While evidence of the method’s beneficial effects on students’
writing exists in the form of student feedback and teacher evaluation, more
scientifically verifiable evidence of its positive impact on writing quality should be
sought. A potential limitation of this method, also to be verified by research, is the
time needed for its implementation. Given its cyclical structure, which is inspired
by process approaches to writing, the use of the method for the teaching of a
specific writing genre needs to be spread over a number of lessons. Whether an
exclusively genre-based approach may lead to better results within the short (or
indeed the long) term is a research question worth investigating.
[email protected]
O 58 O
REFERENCES
Al-Shaer, I. M. R. (2014). Employing concept mapping as a pre-writing strategy
to help EFL learners better generate argumentative compositions.
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2),
Article 10.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Book I: The cognitive
domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.
Brodney, B., Reeves, C., & Kazelskis, R. (1999). Selected prewriting treatments:
Effects on expository compositions written by fifth-grade students. The
Journal of Experimental Education, 68(1), 5–20.
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College
Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.
Grabe, W. (2001). Reading-writing relations: Theoretical perspectives and
instructional practices. In D. Belcher & A. R. Hirvela (Eds.), Linking
literacies: Perspectives on L2 reading-writing connections (pp. 15–47). Ann
Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing
of adolescents in middle and high schools. Washington, DC: Alliance for
Excellent Education.
Graham, S., & Sandmel, K. (2011). The process writing approach: A meta-analysis.
The Journal of Educational Research, 104(6), 396–407.
Henry, A., & Roseberry, R. L. (1998). An evaluation of a genre-based approach to
the teaching of EAP/ESP. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 147–156.
Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction.
Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148–164.
Morris, P. (2012). Planning at a higher level: Ideas, form, and academic language in
student prewriting. English Journal, 102(2), 85–92.
Reece, J. E., & Cumming, G. (1996). Evaluating speech-based composition methods:
Planning, dictation, and the listening word processor. In C. M. Levy &
S. Ransdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual
differences, and applications (pp. 361–380). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Richards, J. C., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of language teaching and
applied linguistics (2nd ed.). Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Robinson, W. S. (1994). On teaching organization: Patterns, process, and the nature
of writing. Teaching English in the Two Year College, 21(3), 191–198.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wingate, U. (2012). Using academic literacies and genre-based models for
academic writing instruction: A ‘literacy’ journey. Journal of English for
Academic Purposes, 11(1), 26–37.
O 59 O
7
Feedback practices
and strategies:
perceptions
and challenges
Stephanie Xerri Agius
University of Malta, Malta
This paper explores feedback practices and strategies, as well as the challenges of feedback implementation.
Drawing from research conducted in an ESL context and referring to seminal research in the area of
feedback, the paper investigates learners’ perceptions of feedback and suggests some procedures for
providing and implementing feedback. The principles of feedback practice and strategies of feedback
implementation were trialled in a variety of international contexts, and they can be adapted to a range of
instructional situations. Ultimately, this paper underlines that feedback is not only important to highlight
learners’ errors but it is also instrumental in enabling learners to become more responsible for their writing.
O 61 O
INTRODUCTION
This paper explores feedback practices in an ESL context, learners’ perception
of feedback, the concept of ‘usability’, and feedback application. Challenges of
feedback application and suggestions to overcome them are also considered, with
the aim of encouraging learners to use the feedback for future writing practice.
The study was conducted at a post-secondary school in Malta and it involved semi-
structured interviews with students and teachers. Following the transcription of
the interviews, patterns were analysed using grounded theory, which meant that
the perceptions and challenges of feedback emerged from the data. The study
established definitions of feedback, highlighted the language of feedback (and
comments), explored learners’ feedback preferences, and considered feedback
implementation. All of these foci are discussed in more detail in the subsequent
sections.
DEFINING FEEDBACK
The starting point was an attempt to interpret what feedback signifies to the
learner. From a conceptual viewpoint, feedback can be defined as specific
information provided by tutors to the students about the performance of a task,
so one of the aims of feedback would be to enhance future performance (Ur,
1996). Moreover, feedback is “a key element of the scaffolding provided by the
teacher to build learner confidence and the literacy resources to participate in
target communities” (Hyland & Hyland, 2006, p. 83). So teacher feedback can
not only enable learners to understand how well they have performed, but it also
motivates them to be part of a supportive classroom environment (Richards &
Lockhart, 1996). Other researchers (Leki, 1991; Ferris & Roberts, 2001) contend
that students find feedback most useful when it leads to effective changes and
improvement in writing.
The benefits of feedback extend to the motivational and cognitive level
(Brookhart, 2008). At the cognitive level, feedback gives students the information
they need so they can understand their progress in their learning journey and what
to do next. At the motivational level, once students feel they understand what to
do and why, most of them go on to develop control over their own learning. These
two factors are part of the scaffolding that feedback entails.
O 62 O
TABLE 1: DEFINING FEEDBACK

Area of feedback Learners’ comments
(based on student interviews)
The importance of Having feedback helps you to write

feedback a more structured and more detailed essay
Benefit of feedback To have detailed comments makes me
(motivational level) want to try harder to write a good essay
Benefit of feedback It allows you to see what you did and you can
(cognitive level) evaluate your work not just have someone else do
it for you
Feedback as scaffolding When feedback comments point you in the
for future writing right direction I keep the essay and refer back to it

Gradations of feedback commentary

Feedback practice focuses on targets of achievement in relation to the writing task
in question. Analysis of text types and learners’ essays have yielded categorisations
of feedback, which are also linked to the role that feedback plays in directing the
learner towards future writing practice. The example of six types of feedback (or
comments) is one of the categorisation systems. The key concept is that these
gradations of feedback offer flexibility as they can be adapted according to the
context and learners’ needs. Practitioners can either utilise or reflect on their own
practice and compare the gradations with what they currently do. The following
activity suggests how to utilise the example.
Activity 1
The teacher assigns learners a writing task (it could be a 100-word paragraph or a
250-word essay on any topic or area). Whilst responding to the text, the teacher
writes comments according to Walker’s (2009) adaptation of Brown and Glover’s
feedback system (2006):
1. Content – that is, comments that relate to the substance of the

answer, to the appropriateness of what the student has chosen
to include, to the quality and/or accuracy of the material, to
omissions;
2. Skills development – that is, comments about the structure
of the answer (whether it is a text or diagram), about whether
the question has been properly addressed, about the student’s
communication skills;
3. Motivating – that is, praise, encouragement and other comments
designed to motivate the student;
O 63 O
4. De-motivating – that is, using harsh language, judgmental;

5. A mention of future study;
6. A reference to a resource the student could use. (p. 68)
Alternatively, the teacher may want to look back at previously marked essays
and reflect on how the comments were written and what the focus of feedback
was initially. Another suggestion would be to mark the essays as one would usually
do and ask a colleague to do the same; the two teachers would then swap the
essays and compare them against the criteria above. This would enable objectivity
and serve as reflective practice.
The language of feedback is as important and effective as the content.
Feedback commentary can be worded as praise, criticism and advice (Hyland,
2001). In praising learners’ writing, the positive features of writing are emphasised
and this can be conveyed either through in-depth written feedback or by means
of verbal feedback. This is one way of boosting motivation in learners’ attitude to
writing. On the other hand, criticism focuses on the omissions or lapses in writing;
however, this can be perceived as negative, so it is suggested that teachers adopt a
constructive approach whereby the criticism aims to locate issues in writing so as
to raise more awareness of errors (Silver & Lee, 2007). Ferris (1997) recommends
that “teachers should not abandon constructive criticism but should place it
side-by-side with comments of encouragement” (p. 49). This involves striking a
balance between the two extremes, which entails wording the feedback as advice
that “might include an element of criticism but is seen as being more extended
and perhaps as less explicitly critical” (Silver & Lee, 2007, p. 7). In using advice
as feedback, the teacher is perceived as “a mentor or a facilitator rather than a
critic or an evaluator” (Silver & Lee, 2007, p. 16). At different stages of providing
feedback, it is recommended that teachers are more conscious and reflective of
the language that frames their recommendations; the next section explores the
metalanguage of feedback more specifically.
THE LANGUAGE OF TEACHER FEEDBACK:

LEARNERS’ PERCEPTIONS
One of the concerns of teachers and learners alike is the extent to which feedback
is understood and ultimately applied by the latter. The evidence in writing
samples very often indicates that there is a gap between the feedback provided
and its application. The question is whether this gap is due to the content, or
whether the language that frames the feedback is adequately understood by the
learners and can be utilised for future writing. For this reason, the key concepts
of “usability” and “feeding forward” are central to research on feedback; the first
refers to comments that learners can understand, interpret and adopt in future
assignments so as to “address their misconceptions” and “improve their work”
O 64 O
(Walker, 2009, p. 68). Feedback that is meant to “feed forward” (Walker, 2009) is a
set of comments and recommendations that learners can apply to future learning.
The feedback provided can also be either retrospective or future-altering (Walker,
2009) and the language used reflects one of the two; when teachers provide feedback,
they would need to decide whether their comments are meant to reflect on the writing
produced or if their recommendations involve a set of steps to follow to improve the
quality of writing. On the one hand, retrospective feedback addresses a gap manifested
in the work that has been assessed; on the other, future-altering feedback aims to
alter or ‘close’ the gaps in upcoming writing activities. The second type of feedback is
considered more useful because students can look beyond the assignment towards
future work (Walker, 2009). So the feedback is looking ‘forward’ rather than looking
‘back’, which means that the comments are to be actively transferred to future writing
tasks. However, to be usable by the learners, the teacher’s comments must do more
than simply point a gap out; they must be designed to help the learner to reduce or
close the gap. The point is to discover and analyse the type of feedback or comments
that targets closing the gap between feedback provision and application.
TABLE 2: LEARNERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF FEEDBACK
• It’s one thing just giving a mark and writing ‘it could be better’ and it’s another
saying ‘you could use more descriptive terms such as…’ – it’s feedback that actually
leads you somewhere
• I can remember what the teacher said by looking at the comments and then I
prepare to write the next essay
• Giving detailed correction so as to explain what should have been done instead
• It has helped me not to repeat certain mistakes sometimes and also learn from
others, for example, when the teacher reads a better essay I write certain words
and try to use them next time

Teacher feedback practices and student feedback implementation were

investigated in line with the recommendations and principles of good feedback
practice (Gibbs & Simpson, 2005; Brown & Glover, 2006; Gould & Day, 2012).
Activity 2
The seven principles of good feedback practice could help to refine the way in
which teachers write their feedback comments. This activity suggests rewording
one’s feedback or creating feedback comments that satisfy the following criteria
embedded within the theoretical principles (Nicol & Milligan, 2005; Nicol &
Macfarlane-Dick, 2006).
O 65 O
TABLE 3: SEVEN PRINCIPLES OF GOOD FEEDBACK
1. helps clarify what good performance is (goals, criteria, expected standards)

2. facilitates the development of self-assessment (reflection) in learning
3. delivers high quality information to students about their learning
4. encourages teacher and peer dialogue around learning
5. encourages positive motivational beliefs and self-esteem
6. provides opportunities to close the gap between current and desired performance
7. provides information to teachers that can be used to help shape the teaching

Additionally, the teacher can reflect on whether the language of feedback succeeds
in being:
• true and relevant (to assessment);

• feasible and realistic to implement;
• associated with methods, preferably tried and proven, to implement the principle.
Learners’ feedback preferences

Most learners prefer positive feedback and constructive criticism rather than
comments that only emphasize the more problematic features of their writing
(Reed & Burton, 1985; Sträub, 1997; Daiker, 1999). Others prefer constructive
criticism as they believe it encourages them to strive harder (Radecki & Swales,
1988; Enginarlar, 1993). Alternating between constructive criticism and praise can
be extremely helpful and motivating for students (Burkland & Grimm, 1984). Later
studies revealed that students prefer teacher written feedback to alternative forms
such as oral and peer feedback (Saito, 1994; Zhang, 1995). Feedback on content and
expression of ideas is as important as grammatical feedback. Students are eager
to receive feedback on what Sträub (1997) defines as global issues (related to
organization, purpose and content), as well as on local issues (related to grammar,
sentence construction and choice of vocabulary).
TABLE 4: LEARNERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF ORAL VS. WRITTEN FEEDBACK
• I prefer oral feedback because even though sometimes it can be a little bit
intimidating you try to remember next time so the teacher won’t repeat the
same things in front of your friends
• If a student is paying attention then for me oral feedback is more immediate and
personalized; but then written feedback is easier to refer to at home
• Normally, I prefer one-to-one feedback. OK, it’s good that you have comments
on an essay at the end but normally when the lesson ends I go and ask ‘What is
this comment? I don’t understand how I could do better?’

O 66 O
FEEDBACK IMPLEMENTATION:
CHALLENGES AND SUGGESTIONS
The first type of learner adapts teacher feedback but tends to be more independent-
minded and creative, willing to experiment with language, and considered to be more
confident in writing (Ferris, 1997). The second type of learner feels more encumbered
by mistakes and will depend heavily on teacher feedback as a yardstick for revision. The
latter is generally perceived as the less proficient learner (Hyland, 1998). Moreover, the
process of being provided with feedback for assessment purposes can be perceived
as daunting by learners for whom the teacher is merely an evaluator and assessor
of their work (Ziv, 1984). Those learners who have low self-esteem may not find
teacher feedback useful as they associate it with poor proficiency in writing (Cohen,
1987). Feedback that is far too critical or harsh could affect and even undermine their
willingness and confidence to write. Additionally, feedback that is either too focused
on ‘correcting mistakes’ and not goal-oriented enough to achieve certain objectives is
not perceived as very relevant for future writing tasks.
TABLE 5: LEARNERS’ EXPERIENCES OF FEEDBACK IMPLEMENTATION
• I used to get the same mark so I didn’t bother with the feedback very much
• Often the feedback is only at the end of the essay so it’s not clearly connected
to the parts of the essay
• What confuses me the most is when feedback is written in point form and it’s
short and not in detail
• I think it would be hard if the feedback is not written and the paper is not next to
me, if the feedback does not say where I did wrong or what I did wrong

An analysis of the learners’ comments, perceptions and experiences was conducted

against the criteria of providing feedback (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006; Walker, 2009).
The concept diagram below presents some initial suggestions as points of reflection on
how to overcome the above challenges to the implementation of feedback:
FIGURE 1: POINTS OF REFLECTION ON FEEDBACK IMPLEMENTATION
Role of the Language of Feedback

teacher feedback foci
Boost learners’ Awareness of Establish clear foci

selfesteem language and tone of feedback and
- focus on used when doable targets to
strengths of writing providing feedback achieve
Provide scaffolding Inclusion of Reconcile the gaps

for the learner - comments of between oral and
feedback is iterative encouragement written feedback
O 67 O
CONCLUSION
The process of providing feedback involves imparting cognitive and analytical
mechanisms that enable the learners to assess their own progress and apply
a critically reflective approach to academic work and professional practice.
Learners need to develop their critical appraisal skills and gain an appreciation
of how teachers make qualitative judgments about their work (Sadler, 2010).
Learner autonomy relates to the ability to work independently towards identified
goals (Nicol & MacFarlane-Dick, 2006). Finally, the aim of feedback is not only
to ‘fix’ errors in writing but also to encourage students to learn how to self-
monitor their thinking, learning and performance (Pintrich & Zusho, 2002). It is
an iterative process whereby students are not only guided as to how to write but
also as to how to become more self-aware and consequently more responsible
for their writing.
[email protected]
O 68 O
REFERENCES
Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Brown, E., & Glover, C. (2006). Evaluating written feedback. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg
(Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp. 81–91). London:
Routledge.
Burkland, J., & Grimm, N. (1984, March). Students’ response to our response, parts
I and II. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Conference on
College Composition and Communication, New York.
Cohen, A. D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A.
L. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp.
57–68). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Daiker, D. (1999). Learning to praise. In R. Straub (Ed.), A sourcebook for responding
to student writing (pp. 153–163). Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Enginarlar, H. (1993). Student response to teacher feedback in EFL writing. System,
21(2), 193–204.
Ferris, D. R. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision.
TESOL Quarterly, 31(2), 315–339.
Ferris, D. R., & Roberts, B. (2001). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit
does it need to be? Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(3), 161–184.
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports
learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.
Gould, J., & Day, D. (2012). Hearing you loud and clear: Student perspectives of
audio feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education, 38(5), 554–566.
Hyland, F., & Hyland, K. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing.
Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101.
Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. Harlow: Pearson.
Leki, I. (1991). The preferences of ESL students for error correction in college level
writing classes. Foreign Language Annals, 24(3), 203–218.
Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated
learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies
in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
Nicol, D., & Milligan, C. (2006). Rethinking technology-supported assessment
practices in relation to the seven principles of good feedback practice. In
C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (pp.
64–77). London: Routledge.
Pintrich, P., & Zusho, A. (2002). Student motivation and self regulated learning
in the college classroom. In J. C. Smart & W. G. Tierney (Eds.), Higher
education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 17) (pp. 55–128). New
York: Agathon Press.
O 69 O
Radecki, P., & Swales, J. (1988). ESL student reaction to written comments on their
written work. System, 16(3), 355–365.
Richards, J. C., & Lockhart, C. (1996). Reflective teaching in second language
classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sadler, D. R. (2010). Beyond feedback: Developing student capability in complex
appraisal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 535–550.
Saito, H. (1994). Teachers’ practices and students’ preferences for feedback on
second language writing: A case study of adult ESL learners. TESL Canada
Journal, 11(2), 46–70.
Silver, R., & Lee S. (2007). What does it take to make a change? Teacher feedback
and student revisions. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 6(1), 25–49.
Sträub, R. (1997). Students’ reactions to teacher comments: An exploratory study.
Research in the Teaching of English, 31(1), 91–119.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Walker, M. (2009). An investigation into written comments on assignments:
Do students find them usable? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher
Education, 34(1), 67–78.
Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL
writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 209–222.
Ziv, N. (1984). The effects of teacher comments on the writing of four college
freshmen. In R. Beach & L. S. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composition
research (pp. 362–380). New York: Guilford Press.
O 70 O
8
Rescuing babies:
modern uses for
old techniques
Alan Marsh
Freelance, Malta
Several disregarded teaching techniques, once shorn of the ‘discredited’ methodological principles
underpinning them, can in fact be reinstated and used to great practical effect in the classroom. In some
cases they can even be reinserted into more ‘enlightened’ approaches. Grammar-Translation is examined
first and translation is re-presented as a means of consciousness-raising by helping learners to explicitly
compare their own language(s) with English. Audiolingualism’s stimulus-response pattern drills are
repackaged as a means of introducing ‘playfulness’ and notching up the level of challenge, two elements
that feature in Scrivener and Underhill’s Demand-High Teaching. Teacher Talking Time in Communicative
Language Teaching is re-examined in the light of the importance in the acquisition process given by
Krashen to teacher talk as a vital source of comprehensible input for learners. Finally, the PPP model for
grammar instruction within Communicative Language Teaching is redesigned with a new, non-accuracy
stage replacing the final P for Production stage.
O 71 O
INTRODUCTION
The last hundred years have seen methodologies come, methodologies go. As
each exciting new approach asserts itself, ELT frequently pulls the plug on the
previous approach – and often, down the plughole disappear the approach, the
methodology and all the associated teaching techniques: the baby gets thrown
out with the bathwater. However, several disregarded teaching techniques, once
shorn of the ‘discredited’ methodological principles underpinning them, can in
fact be reinstated and used to great practical effect in the classroom. In some
cases they can even be reinserted into more ‘enlightened’ approaches.
GRAMMAR TRANSLATION
Features
In a Grammar-Translation approach, learners often learn grammatical rules and
apply them to sentences and texts to translate, from the native language (L1) to
the target language (L2) and vice-versa. Vocabulary is taught in long lists, with
words in L1 and corresponding L2 columns (and vice-versa). Typical examples used
to practise the genitive/possessive might include:
The jaw of the jackass lies in the corner of the field.

La plume de ma tante.
Although Grammar-Translation was in vogue early in the last century, and was
mainly used for the study of Greek and Latin, many learners in the UK and here
in Malta recall being taught French via Grammar-Translation in the late 1960s.
Indeed, although no longer in fashion in north-western Europe and the USA and
other countries influenced by Anglo-Saxon cultures, it is still probably largely in
use in the vast majority of schoolrooms around the world.
Disadvantages of Grammar Translation

• The language focussed on tends to be translations of literary language or
made up to exemplify grammatical points and does not really cater for the
practical, communicative needs of learners.
• The strong focus on memorisation of grammar rules and word lists does not
motivate learners to communicate in L2: any interaction in the classroom
tends to be in L1.
• There is an almost exclusive focus on reading and writing: little attention is
paid to speaking and listening.
• Some words/expressions/tenses/concepts do not have a direct translation.
• A G-T (Grammar-Translation) approach often encourages a word-for-word
approach to translation.
O 72 O
• A G-T approach is only possible in monolingual classes.

• A G-T teacher needs to be competent/proficient in both L1 and L2.
• An over-emphasis on translation means the learner cannot become
emancipated from dependence on L1.
• In a G-T approach, lessons tend to be very teacher-fronted.
USING TRANSLATION TODAY

Before moving on to seeing what can be salvaged from Grammar-Translation
and used in the modern classroom, let us look briefly at two concepts that have
become established in recent times.
Interlanguage and noticing the gap

The term ‘interlanguage’, first coined by Selinker (1972), refers to a non-native
speaker’s use of the foreign language in its current state of development. It is
an evolving system of rules and it is influenced by many factors and processes,
including what the learner already knows and can use in the target language,
hypotheses about L2 influenced by L1, and generalisations and contrasts of rules
and patterns influenced by other examples in L2.
Many language teachers nowadays believe that it is highly beneficial for
learners (particularly adult learners) to help them to ‘notice’ features of L2 that
they may not have previously registered because “adults do seem to have lost the
still mysterious ability of children to acquire the grammatical forms of language
while apparently not paying attention to them” (Schmidt, 1983, p. 172) and to
‘notice the gap’ between their own interlanguage and what a native or proficient
speaker might say or write. Much of this work is derived from Schmidt’s seminal
case studies of two learners (Schmidt, 1983; Schmidt & Frota, 1986) from which his
Noticing Hypothesis was formulated:

The Noticing Hypothesis — an hypothesis that input does not become
intake for language learning unless it is noticed, that is, consciously
registered (Schmidt, 1990, 2001) — has been around now for about
two decades and continues to generate experimental studies,
suggestions for L2 pedagogy, conference papers and controversy.
[…] In the simplest terms, people learn about the things that they
pay attention to and do not learn much about the things they do not
attend to. (Schmidt, 2010, p. 721)
Schmidt (2010) also posits that often it is not enough to be corrected. Some
stronger, more explicit form of noticing is required:
O 73 O
In addition, [Frota and I] found that although I was frequently

corrected for my grammatical errors in conversation with native
speakers, in many cases this had no effect because I was unaware that
I was being corrected. This suggested a slightly different hypothesis
that we called “noticing the gap,” the idea that in order to overcome
errors, learners must make conscious comparisons between their own
output and target language input. (p. 724)
So how can we get learners to ‘notice the gap’ between their own interlanguage and
proficient L1 use? One effective way of creating what we can call ‘Ah moments’ is by
providing opportunities for learners to consciously contrast L1 and L2 through C-R
activities: consciousness-raising activities. Translation provides a means of doing so.
‘Noticing the gap’ – translation technique 1: L2 to L1

Learners focus on a language structure using whatever approach the teacher
deems appropriate. When this has been done, the teacher writes on the board
an example of the language point and learners are asked to come up to the board
and to write a translation into their own language. They then answer the following
questions (and explain to the class):
• Is it the same, more or less, in your language? Do the same kinds of things
happen?
• Is it different? If so, in what way(s)?
For example, in the following two sentences contrasting the present perfect
simple with the past simple
1 a. I’ve been to Spain b. I went to Spain last year
the verb phrases can be expressed using the same verb phrase in Maltese (mort)
and in many other languages.
Other example contrasts in English are offered which could be subjected to
the same technique. These include:
1 a. She works in London. b. She’s working in Spain this month.

2 a. I’ll help you if I can. b. I’d help you if I could.
3 a. Have you been to Spain? b. When did you go?
4 a. I’m here for a month. b. I’ve been here for a month.
5 a. I’ve been here for a month. b. I’ve been here since September.
6 a. He’s reading a book. b. He bought the book in London.
Helping learners to become explicitly aware of such similarities and differences

beten L1 and L2 probably increases memorability: the gap is noticed and registered.
O 74 O
‘Noticing the gap’ – translation technique 2: L2 to L1

The procedure for this technique is as follows:
1. Take an item of language you intend to teach.

2. Insert it into a short text/dialogue.
3. Translate it into the learners’ language(s).
4. Ask learners to write out a translation into English (their interlanguage).
5. Ask learners to compare their translation with your original English text.
Ask:
• Is anything strange, or unfamiliar, to you?
• Is there anything you would like to ask about?
For example, the following dialogue in learners’ L1 can be offered for learners to
translate into English.
FRENCH GERMAN
A Mario est toujours en retard! A Mario kommt immer zu spät!

B Si (seulement) il pouvait arriver à B Ich wünschte, er wäre pünktlich, nur ein
l’heure, juste une fois! einziges Mal!
A Quel est son numéro? A Welche Nummer hat er?
B Si je le savais! B Ich wünschte ich wüsste es!
SPANISH ITALIAN
A Mario siempre llega tarde. A Mario è /arriva sempre in ritardo.

B ¡Quisiera que llegara a tiempo sólo por B Vorrei che arrivasse in orario per una
una vez! volta!
A ¿Cuál es su número? A Qual’ è il suo numero.
B ¡Ojalá lo supiera! B Magari lo sapessi!
MALTESE
A Mario dejjem tard!

B Nixtieq li jiġi / jasal fil-ħin, imqar għal-
darba.
A X’inhu n-numru tiegħu?
B Nixtieq li kont naf!
O 75 O
Learners work on a translation into L2. Finally, the ‘teacher’s translation’ (containing
the target language) is provided:
A Mario’s always late!

B I wish he’d arrive on time, just for once!
A What’s his number?
B I wish I knew!
At this point, participants are reminded of the two questions in e. above.
THE DIRECT METHOD

The Direct Method in English Language Teaching was developed as a response
to the Grammar-Translation method in the late nineteenth century and became
popular in the early years of the twentieth century. Its basic premise was that
second language learning should occur in the same way as first language learning,
that is, through direct exposure and not mediated by translation. In the Direct
Method, all teaching is done in the target language, grammar is taught inductively
i.e. by seeing examples and patterns but with no grammatical explanations.
Speaking and listening are prioritised and only useful ‘everyday’ language is taught.
The main weaknesses in the Direct Method are first of all its assumption that a
second language can be learnt in exactly the same way as a first, when in fact the
conditions under which a second language is learnt are very different, e.g. the
amount of exposure and the fact that a learner already has an L1 when learning
an L2. Secondly, with no explicit grammar knowledge learners may find it difficult
to self-correct and to form more complex utterances. However, the insistence
on ‘English only’, the positioning of speaking and listening as priorities and the
insistence on non-literary language are legacies which are still with us today.
AUDIOLINGUALISM
The Direct Method paved the way for the Audiolingual Method (ALM), which
became popular in the 1950s and 60s and which still provides one of the main
methodological underpinnings of several international language teaching brands
today. It was based on structural linguistics, i.e. a way of viewing the phonological
(sounds), morphological (to do with the internal structures of words)
and syntactical (to do with the ways in which words are put together in sentences)
systems of a language as the building blocks of a language. This was different from
the traditional categories of Latin grammar. ALM was also heavily influenced by
behaviourism in psychology and saw all language learning as habit formation.
O 76 O
Features
• There is no explicit grammar instruction – forms and patterns are memorised.
• The teaching of speaking and listening are emphasised before reading and
writing.
• Learners’ L1 (mother tongue) is discouraged in the classroom.
• Dialogues are memorised and used to present new language.
• The focus is on learning grammar – through pattern drills (stimulus and
response) used as the main forms of practice. These usually take the form of
repetition, substitution or transformation drills.
Here is an example of a possible stimulus-response transformation pattern drill:
Voice/Teacher: It was a great film, wasn’t it?

Student transformation: Yes, the best I’ve ever seen.
Voice/Teacher repeats so student can get immediate feedback:
Yes, the best I’ve ever seen.
The exercise continues (T = Teacher; S = Students):

T: It was a great meal, wasn’t it? S: Yes, the best I’ve ever had.
T: She’s a great singer, isn’t she? S: Yes, the best I’ve ever heard.
T: It’s a great wine, isn’t it? S: Yes, the best I’ve ever tasted.
T: It’s a great country, isn’t it? S: Yes, the best I’ve ever been to.
Disadvantages of the Audiolingual Method

• The theoretical basis proved to be weak: behaviourist theory held that
language learning consisted of imitated behaviour; whereas we now believe
that humans learn language from underlying implicit knowledge of abstract
rules.
• Pattern practice, memorisation and drilling lead to language-like behaviour,
but not to communicative competence in the real world.
• Endless pattern drilling leads to boredom and disengagement by all but the
most committed, motivated learners.
• Learners play a reactive role by responding to stimuli; they are not allowed
to initiate interaction as this may lead to mistakes (and therefore to the
formation of ‘bad habits’); they have no control over the content of the
lesson, or the learning style or pace of learning.
• The teacher dominates the class: they model the target language, control the
direction and pace of learning and monitor and correct learners’ performance.
O 77 O
USING PATTERN DRILLING TODAY
‘Deeper learning’ within Communicative Language Teaching

Over the past three or four years, Scrivener and Underhill (2012) have been
making a case for what they label as ‘Demand-High Teaching’. In their eponymous
blog they ask:
• Are our learners capable of more, much more?

• Have the tasks and techniques we use in class become rituals and
ends in themselves?
• How can we stop “covering material” and start focusing on the
potential for deep learning?
• What small tweaks and adjustments can we make to shift the
whole focus of our teaching towards getting that engine of
learning going? (Scrivener & Underhill, 2012)
In a reflective mode, the present author shares his frustration at what he perceives
as an increasing avoidance of a focus on oral accuracy in classrooms where the
Communicative Language Teaching label is sometimes used as some form of
justification for avoiding the upgrading of accuracy:
…in so many classes an emphasis is put on ‘communication’. Great, and

I’m right up there on the front line, waving my ‘Communicate!’ banner.
So communicative tasks and task-based learning feature prominently
in my classes. But just occasionally I get the feeling that ‘Communicate’
is used as a kind of opt-out: an opt-out of an accuracy focus, an opt-
out of any attempt to consciously upgrade learners’ English. It’s almost
as if we think, as long as they communicate, their English will upgrade
automatically, won’t it? Hmm, not so sure about this argument. Does
Andy Murray get better at tennis only by playing? Or does he get
specific coaching? And does he practise particular shots and moves,
repeatedly, in order to improve?
So communication and fluency by all means, but let’s give grammar
(and pronunciation and vocabulary and functions and discourse
features) a conscious focus. Let’s have lots of examples and lots of
practice. And let’s make this practice really useful practice. (Marsh,
2014)
One of the techniques proposed by Scrivener and Underhill to encourage learners

to focus on improved oral accuracy (with particular regard to phonological
features) is to repeat an utterance or exercise ‘playfully’ (Scrivener, 2014).
This suggestion can be applied, for example, to the pattern drill demonstrated
O 78 O
above. The drill is repeated, but this time learners can be asked to respond by
exaggerating pitch and intonation range in order to express wild enthusiasm
with their superlative adjectives. In this way, language is upgraded and learning
is deepened: learners combine a focus on grammatical accuracy with a focus on
phonological features.
Many modern course book exercises can be transformed into similar pattern
drills. These can be lexically-based, as well as grammatical. Below is an example
from an intermediate level (B1) course book (Crace & Wileman, 2002, p. 4) in
which learners are asked to match gradable and extreme adjectives:
hot fascinating good packed boiling interesting tired enormous

crowded bad old fantastic awful exhausted
Once this is completed, the matching adjectives can be placed in a stimulus-

response transformation drill. Learners can be asked to participate chorally and
then in closed A-B pairs.
ADAPTATION (AN A-B DRILL):
A Was it hot? B Hot??!! It was boiling!

A Was it good? B Good??!! It was fantastic!
A Was it crowded? B Crowded? It was packed!
A Was it interesting? B Interesting? It was fascinating!
A Were you tired? B Tired? I was exhausted!
A Was it old? B Old? It was ancient!
A Was it bad? B Bad? It was awful!

Stress and intonation can be exaggerated (with gusto!). Scrivener and Underhill
(2013) also ask:
What small adjustments can I make to optimise the doable demand

on the students’ learning processes? What is the minimum tweak
necessary at any point in any lesson to shift an activity into the
challenge zone?
In order to slightly increase learners’ degree of engagement in the pattern drill

above, the level of challenge can be raised by concealing the B response when
learners repeat the drill in A-B pairs, swapping roles at a point determined by the
teacher or by themselves.
Taking our cue from classroom methodology and practice springing from
Lewis’ (1993) The Lexical Approach, prioritising as it does the need to maximise
any opportunities to expand and enrich learners’ lexicons, we could expand the
O 79 O
drill to explore and then include alternatives to the extreme adjectives above. For
example:
ADAPTATION (AN A-B DRILL):
A Was it hot? B Hot??!! It was sweltering!

A Was it good? B Good??!! It was brilliant/amazing!
A Was it crowded? B Crowded? It was jam-packed!
A Was it interesting? B Interesting? It was gripping!
A Were you tired? B Tired? I was shattered!
A Was it old? B Old? It was prehistoric!
A Was it bad? B Bad? It was dreadful!

Lexis could be expanded further by adding more gradable adjectives and

encouraging learners to look for appropriate extreme adjectives. They could then
include them in a new pattern drill of their own. Examples might include: small,
hungry, thirsty, dirty, big (respectively: tiny, starving/famished/ravenous, filthy,
huge).
The same technique can be used at lower levels, for example, with adjectives
and their antonyms: the adjectives are taught, matched and practised in any way
deemed appropriate. They can then be inserted into a pattern drill, where, again,
pitch and intonation can be exaggerated for playfulness and memorability.
OPPOSITES OF ADJECTIVES
Is it good? No, it’s really awful!

Is it easy? No, it’s really hard!
Is it near? far!
Is it cheap? expensive!
Is it warm? cold!
Is it clean? dirty!
Is it safe? dangerous!
Is it exciting? boring!
TEACHER-TALK IN COMMUNICATIVE
LANGUAGE TEACHING
Within Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), a teacher behaviour that
trainees and teachers are encouraged to address and drastically reduce is that
often referred to as TTT: Teacher Talking Time. There are many valid reasons for
this:
• Excessive teacher talk limits the amount of STT (Student Talking Time).
• It often results in the teacher spending a great amount of time addressing
O 80 O
the class, which can become disengaging for learners as concentration and
pace suffer.
• TTT often means that the teacher is “telling” the students things that they
could be working out for themselves. Again, this can often lead to lack of
involvement. It also means that opportunities are limited to check whether
learners have understood.
• If TTT is purposeless and little more than babble, it can become confusing
and frustrating for learners and therefore demotivating.
• Excessive TTT often means that the teacher takes the lead in all exchanges,
which is not a natural discourse model.
• Excessive TTT often leads to an excessively controlling Teacher and reduces
learner autonomy.
However, purposeful Teacher Talk can be designed by the teacher to afford

opportunities for Live Listening (or Teacher Talk Listening): the teacher engages in
natural communication with the class. For example, they can tell a (mainly unscripted)
story, a joke, a personal anecdote, an incident that has happened to them, They can
‘rough-tune’ their language so that it is just a notch above learners’ level, but through
the use of mime, gesture, voice and other supporting techniques they can ensure
comprehension. There are several advantages, one of the main ones being that
learners are exposed to genuine, real-time communication containing all the features
of natural, spoken English, e.g. hesitations, false starts, connected speech.
Another important advantage is that by rough-tuning their language so it
is slightly above the learners’ current level of comprehension, the teacher is in
effect creating the ideal conditions in Krashen’s (1982/2009) terms for language
acquisition: the Input Hypothesis.
More generally, how do we move from stage i, where i represents

current competence, to i + 1, the next level? The input hypothesis
makes the following claim: a necessary (but not sufficient) condition
to move from stage i to stage i + 1 is that the acquirer understand
input that contains i + 1, where “understand” means that the acquirer
is focussed on the meaning and not the form of the message.
We acquire, in other words, only when we understand language
that contains structure that is “a little beyond” where we are now.
How is this possible? How can we understand language that contains
structures that we have not yet acquired? The answer to this apparent
paradox is that we use more than our linguistic competence to help
us understand. We also use context, our knowledge of the world, our
extra-linguistic information to help us understand language directed at
us. (Krashen, 1982/2009, pp. 20-21)
O 81 O
To provide such comprehensible input +1 in the classroom, the following procedure

is suggested:
1. Prepare a brief story, joke, or personal anecdote.

2. Learners listen for a first time as you tell it clearly and slowly, supported by
mime and gestures, visuals and taking care to ‘punch’ key words, to pause and
to pace delivery.
3. Prepare a handout, or write on the board or project onto the screen the
prompts/skeleton of the story.
4. Tell learners that soon they are going to tell the story to each other, using the
prompts on the board. They must tell the story in the same sequence as the
prompts.
5. Ask them to mentally prepare the story (no writing).
6. Learners listen a second time as you tell the story again as the learners follow
the prompts.
7. Learner A starts to tell the story to Learner B. After an appropriate time,
call out ‘Change’ and Learner B continues the story. Repeat the ‘Change!’
procedure several times until the story has been told.
An example follows:
THE VAMPIRE BAT RETURNS
A young vampire bat came flapping in from the night, covered in fresh
blood, with blood dripping from its mouth, and perched himself on the
roof of the cave to get some sleep.
Before long, all the other bats smelled the blood and began hassling him
about where he got it. He was tired and needing a rest, so he told them to
please leave him alone. However, it was clear that he wasn’t going to get
any sleep until he satisfied their curiosity.
“OK!” he said with exasperation, “follow me,” and he swooped out of
the cave with hundreds of bats following close behind him.
Over the mountain they flew, down through the valley, across the river
and into the deep forest. Finally he slowed down and stopped. All the
other bats excitedly gathered around him.
“Is this the place? Is this the place?” the bats asked excitedly.
“Do you see that tree over there?” he asked.
“Yes, yes, yes!” the bats all screamed in a frenzy.
“Good,” said the first bat, “Because I DIDN’T!”
O 82 O
The prompts displayed after the first telling were:
THE VAMPIRE BAT RETURNS
vampire bat returns blood/mouth perched/roof Sleep

bats/blood blood/here? tired/rest/leave me alone!
OK. Follow me! Swoops hundreds over/mountain
down/valley across/river into/forest finally slowed
stops/bats gather this/place? see that tree?
yes/scream/frenzy Well ………….!!!!
This technique can perhaps be viewed as an example of Demand High Listening: at

Step 6 the learners listen for a second time very carefully indeed to the sequencing
and the details. There is also a shift from a focus on listening towards some
intensive work on accuracy as they try and re-tell the story, which becomes, in
effect, a third listening. It also encourages learners to ‘notice’ (in Schmidt’s terms)
language features that they very likely will not have attended to in the first telling
of the joke.
PPP: PRESENT-PRACTICE-PRODUCE
The Present-Practice-Produce model is a familiar paradigm in Communicative
Language Teaching. It probably originated in the early days of CLT when there was
little focus on form and all tasks were entirely communicative. This interpretation
of CLT is often referred to as ‘hard CLT’ and, in order to make CLT more palatable
to those brought up on Grammar-Translation and Audiolingual models of learning,
the PPP model began to appear as a model for lessons which contained a
grammatical focus: ‘soft CLT’.
FIGURE 1: PPP – THE STAGES AND EXAMPLES
PRESENTATION
PRACTICE
PRODUCTION
O 83 O
The three stages of PPP, together with an example lesson designed to present and
practise used to, are included in the table below.
TABLE 1: PPP STAGES AND EXAMPLE LESSON

PRESENTATION
Example Lesson
The first stage of PPP, Presentation, often consists Learners are presented with pictures of a
of a situation or text in which the language structure young man with little money. He lives in
being taught (the Target Language) is introduced a small bedsit/room, rides a bike, smokes
and aspects of meaning/use, form and presentation cigarettes and drinks beer. They are then
are highlighted. presented with pictures of the same
man many years later: he is rich, lives in
a villa, drives a big car, smokes cigars and
drinks champagne. He is interviewed by a
journalist, who asks him questions about
his past. The rich man says:
I used to….. be poor.
I used to….live in a bedsit.
I used to …ride a bike/smoke.
cigarettes/drink beer.
Learners repeat these sentences
focussing on accuracy of pronunciation.
The teacher checks that the meaning is
clear and highlights the form
PRACTICE
The second stage, Practice, typically contains (i) Learners do an exercise which provides
exercises designed to help learners become more controlled written practice of used to.
familiar and confident with the target language (ii) Learners think of one thing they
through frequent use/repeated examples of the used to be/think/look like/wear etc. They
target language. Although traditional written work in groups of 6-10, stand up and walk
practice is included in this stage, a greater emphasis around and tell everybody in their group
is typically placed on oral practice, which can be one-by-one their used to sentence. They
of two main types: ‘Controlled’ practice tends to also have to listen to and remember
be ‘mechanical’, with very limited room for non- all the used to sentences. The teacher
target language; ‘Semi-controlled’ practice tends then asks a volunteer from each group
to be more ‘communicative’ and allows more room to repeat all the different things their
for spontaneous language (together with repeated colleagues used to (do).
examples of the target language). Typical examples
include information gap activities (also known
as communicative grammar practice activities)
and ‘communication games’. In both controlled
and semi-controlled practice activities, the focus
is on the (usually oral) production of accurate
utterances containing different examples of the
target grammar structure.
O 84 O
PRODUCTION
In the third and final stage of the sequence, Learners are divided into groups of 4.
Production (sometimes referred to as ‘Freer Learners A and B are a couple who have
Practice’), learners engage in a (semi-) realistic been married for 10 years. At first they
situation where they feel the need to actively apply had a lot of bad habits (they decide what
the language. The focus is more on fluency but it these were) but now they no longer have
is intended that the situation will engender lots of them. Their lives have also changed in
opportunities to apply the target language. other ways (they decide what these are).
Learners C and D are journalists who have
to interview the couple (A and B) about
ways in which their lives have changed
over these last ten years. They prepare
some questions. Then C and D interview A
and B in an (unscripted) role play.
The PPP model is quite straightforward and neat and is structured clearly enough
to be satisfying to learners and easily understood and used by new teachers and
teachers early in their careers. However, it has received a lot of criticism in recent
years and as a result perhaps seems to be no longer in fashion (although many
teachers when pressed will admit to using it). This is regrettable because it is
highly effective in terms of focussing on a single language point and only needs
some modification to qualify it for rescue and reinstatement.
PPP: criticisms and responses

The PPP model has received many criticisms over the past two decades. Most of
these are usefully summarised and discussed in Evans (1999). The main objections
to PPP and this author’s own responses/modifications are listed below:
TABLE 2: OBJECTIONS TO PPP AND RESPONSES/MODIFICATIONS
CRITICISM RESPONSE / MODIFICATION

PPP creates the impression that grammar is As long as in the programme/
the key to learning a new language. syllabus there is a balance of focus
on the four communicative skills
supported by work on grammar,
lexis, phonology and discourse, this
should not be a problem. PPP can
be utilised as a tool – another option
from a toolbox of options – that
can be utilised when the teacher
wants/needs to focus on a language
structure that learners are having
particular difficulty with and/or for
which a PPP approach may be the
most effective tool.
O 85 O
If learners are not willing to learn or ready to The teacher’s experience of the
learn, that particular grammar point, the whole class, and of previous classes, should
lesson can be a waste of time. be sufficient for them to be aware of
this beforehand. Less experienced
teachers can give their learners
a short diagnostic test/activity
to ascertain learners’ readiness
for instruction in this particular
grammar point
Learners never really get a chance to practise This is a valid objection. For a
realistic communication. In the third stage, any solution, see the revised PPP model
‘production’ will be so influenced by the heavy below.
grammar focus and the previous controlled
practice stage, that learners will try to
reproduce that grammar point rather than try
to communicate – they will focus on the form
and structure rather than on the meaning of
the message they are trying to communicate.
The third stage, Production, comes too early Again, this is a valid objection. For a
for the language structure to have been solution, see the revised PPP model
internalised. If the activity is motivating and below.
engaging, learners will completely forget the
structure – which is useful if the aim is really
fluency, but it isn’t: the stage is designed to
generate more examples of the target language.
Rescuing PPP: from production to ‘personalisation for speaking

fluency’
As we have seen above, a main criticism of PPP is that the third stage, Production,
does not really result in realistic communication – learners are so focused on the
form that their ‘conversation’ sounds too artificial, littered as it is with examples of
the target language. However, sometimes the activity is so intrinsically motivating
that the learners completely forget to use the target language: this is completely
understandable, not least because the target language has not had enough time to
be fully processed and internalised (acquired) yet. But although what is produced
often does seem closer to realistic communication, it does not fulfil the main aim
of the third step in the paradigm: the production of more examples of the target
language.
Can we rescue PPP? The proposed solution is to abandon the P for Production
stage and substitute it with another P: P for ‘Personalisation and Speaking
Fluency’. In this stage, learners write a true sentence about themselves using the
target language. In groups, learners can then be asked to interview each of their
colleagues in turn, perhaps with the instruction that each learner should be asked
a minimum number of questions by their fellow group members. The activity can
be modelled by the teacher, as an authentic personalised demonstration.
O 86 O
For example, with the used to example above, the teacher can write a true
and, if possible, interesting sentence about themselves, e.g. I used to (have blue
hair/play the piano/run marathons/want to be an astronaut/believe in fairies etc.).
Learners can then interview the teacher, perhaps prompted by question prompts
on the board, e.g. Why/when/how long/did etc.
The teacher answers expansively and extensively, which results in more
questions from the floor. Each learner then writes their own true sentence (they
can use the one from the Controlled Practice activity or another one – but it must
be true) and are interviewed by their colleagues for a predetermined minimum
amount of time. Afterwards, the teacher does a debriefing session when learners
tell the class surprising things they have learned about their classmates and also
follows up by a focus on some of the language used during the interviews.
CONCLUSION
For many teachers, what is important in the classroom is not whether what they
do is supported by current research and theory but whether it seems to have
beneficial effects on learners. Indeed, Swan (1985) advises us that whenever we
are presented with a new approach we should not ask, “‘Is it true?’, but ‘What good
does it do?’” (p. 87). He encourages us to “try out new techniques without giving
up useful older methods, simply because they have been ‘proved wrong’” (Swan,
1985, p. 87). Many discarded techniques and approaches can be re-examined,
slightly modified and effectively used in the modern classroom: don’t throw out
the baby with the bathwater!
[email protected]
O 87 O
REFERENCES
Crace, A., & Wileman, R. (2002). Language to go: Intermediate student’s book.
Harlow: Pearson Education.
Evans, D. (1999). A review of ‘PPP’. Retrieved November 20, 2014, from http://
www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/cels/essays/
secondlanguage/evanssla.pdf
Krashen, S. D. (1982/2009). Principles and practice in second language acquisition.
Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Marsh, A. (2014). Go cat GO!! Demand High grammar teaching: Upgrade!
Retrieved November 20, 2014, from http://www.alanmarshelt.com/
uploads/2/4/8/3/24830042/go_cat_go_demand_high_grammar_teaching.
pdf
Schmidt, R. (1983). Interaction, acculturation and the acquisition of communicative
competence. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language
acquisition (pp. 137–174). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied
Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language
instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmidt, R. (2010). Attention, awareness, and individual differences in language
learning. In W. M. Chan, S. Chi, K. N. Cin, J. Istanto, M. Nagami, J. W. Sew,
T. Suthiwan, & I. Walker (Eds.), Proceedings of CLaSIC 2010 (pp. 721–
737). Singapore: National University of Singapore, Centre for Language
Studies.
Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. N. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a
second language: A case study of an adult learner of Portuguese. In R. R.
Day (Ed.), Talking to learn: Conversation in second language acquisition
(pp. 237–326). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Scrivener, J., & Underhill, A. (2013, March). Demand-high teaching. English Teaching
Professional, 85, 16–17.
Scrivener, J. (2014, October). Upgrade! Demand high to bring a grammar lesson
alive. Presentation at the 3rd ELT Malta Conference, Hilton Hotel, Malta.
Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10(3),
209–241.
Swan, M. (1985). A critical look at the Communicative Approach (2). ELT Journal,
39(2), 76–87.
O 88 O
9
A digital
literacies primer
Gavin Dudeney
The Consultants-E, United Kingdom
In this article I examine what digital literacies are, and unpick the notion of digital literacy to work towards a
taxonomy of the sub-literacies which make up the umbrella term itself. This is done primarily with reference
to the work of Dudeney, Hockly and Pegrum (2013), but also through the lens of Belshaw’s (2012) work.
O 89 O
WHAT ARE DIGITAL LITERACIES?

It is a very wired world (albeit a predominately social one), and we live in always-
on societies where new skills are gradually being identified and coming to the
forefront in education. These twenty-first century skills are starting to appear in
curricula around the world as governments, education authorities and educators
recognize a need to equip learners with new skills to complement the old. Whereas
once the aim of traditional, formal education was to ensure that those leaving
school were sufficiently skilled in what, in the United Kingdom at least, were called
the three Rs (reading, writing and arithmetic), the focus is now gradually turning to
a need to ensure that young people leave formal education equipped to deal with
an increasingly connected world, and with a skillset that will allow them to prepare
for new jobs, and new ways of working.
In the United States one can read of the need to address ‘new media literacies’
and ‘twenty-first century skills’ in education, in Australia there is much talk of
‘digital literacy skills’, and in countries as far apart as Finland and Spain one can
find increasingly frequent references to ‘digital competences’. In most cases, these
literacies are set to play a fundamental part in the education of all young people as
they progress through their formal education.
Whilst the terminology may vary on its journey around the globe, the
concept remains the same: digital literacy, at its heart, refers to the concept of
understanding – and making best use of – the current technology toolset available
to each individual. This does not merely involve the acquisition of a set of discrete
skills (such as the ability to, for example, use a spreadsheet to take care of personal
accounts) but rather extends the use of technology into areas with which, perhaps,
it is not traditionally associated. The new digitally literate individual knows how to
accomplish goals, but also understands why these goals are important, and what
relationship they have with the wider world around them. Knowing how to use
Facebook is a skill; knowing how to use it to build a community of like-minded
individuals and to use that community for professional and personal development
is a literacy. Herein lies the difference.
Skills are not unimportant, but it is in the application of these skills, in the
way they interconnect and interact, that true literacy is acquired. As such, digital
literacies encompass a wide variety of skills and knowledge, from being able to
install new software through to an understanding of copyright, social networks,
digital footprints and beyond.
How then do we break down and categorise these new literacies?
O 90 O
A TAXONOMY OF DIGITAL LITERACIES

In recent years a variety of ways of classifying and describing digital literacies
have been proposed. Pegrum (2011; Dudeney, Hockly, & Pegrum, 2013) explores
these new literacies in some detail, dividing them into four main areas: language,
information, connections, and (re)design.
A focus on language
These are key digital literacies that focus on communication via the language of
text, image and multimedia, and include:
Print literacy: the ability to read and produce online text, such as blog
entries, tweets, emails etc. This is clearly related to traditional print literacy, but
includes an awareness of online text genres. This requires some familiarity on the
part of the teacher, particularly when working with the writing skill; as email and
synchronous chat overtake the use of more formal letter writing, an awareness of
genre, register and appropriacy will become ever more important.
Texting literacy: an awareness of the conventions of texting language
(abbreviations, acronyms, symbols etc.), and of knowing in what contexts to use
or not use it. Whilst print literacy is a familiar typology, texting literacy remains the
domain of regular mobile phone users and is much maligned in educational circles
for the purported detrimental effect it is having on literacy. In fact, as Crystal
(2008) points out, “typically less than ten per cent of the words in text messages
are actually abbreviated in any way”.
Hypertext literacy: an understanding of how hyperlinks in online text work,
and being able to produce texts with effective use of hyperlinking. Here we might
include knowing how many hyperlinks to include in a text and why, what to link
to, understanding the effects of over- (or under-) linking in a text, and so on.
Hypertext literacy also extends beyond the producer to the consumer, to issues
of focus, concentration and multi-tasking. In an age where everything is linked to
something else, hypertext literacy demands that we consider how people read
online, and how to keep them focused on particular sources, resources and tasks.
Visual, media and multimedia literacy: an understanding of how images
and multimedia (audio, video) can be used to supplement, enhance, subvert or
even replace text communication. There is also an underlying need to produce
multimodal messages ourselves, from sharing our photos on Facebook to creating
video clips for YouTube. In the age of Web 2.0 we are no longer passive consumers
who need to learn how to sit back and critique mass media (although this is still
a key skill). We are now ‘prosumers’ (producers and consumers) of multimedia
artefacts.
Gaming literacy: a macro literacy involving kinaesthetic and spatial skills, and
the ability to navigate online worlds (such as Second Life) or use gaming consoles
such as the Wii. Although at first glance this literacy may seem unconnected to
O 91 O
education, there is a growing interest in serious games for education. From flipped
classroom style game-based learning initiatives such as the Khan Academy (http://
www.khanacademy.org/) through the rise of gamification in social learning to
projects such as Mozilla’s Open Badges project (http://openbadges.org), there is
a growing recognition of the power of games and learning challenges to engage
some groups of learners. For more on gaming in ELT, see Stanley and Mawer (2011).
Mobile literacy: an understanding of how mobile technology is transforming
our world, from issues of hyperconnectivity (always being connected to the
Internet), to understanding how to use geolocation and augmented reality.
As suggested above, mobile phones themselves are perceived as somewhat
problematic in class, where issues of focus and concentration appear to clash
with having connected devices in the hands of learners. This is exacerbated in
the language class, where perceptions of a resultant lowering in the quality of
language produced by learners are coupled with teacher anxiety that an over-
reliance on translation and phrasebook style apps and resources may impact on
the independence of learners. Many of these concerns are a result of teacher
misunderstanding of how mobile devices are used by younger learners, but also
result from draconian policies that prohibit the use of such devices in school.
Key to acquiring mobile literacy and integrating it into the classroom are school
policies regarding acceptable mobile use, as well as negotiation between teacher
and learners as to best practice in class.
Code and technological literacy: apart from basic technical skills (such as
knowing how to use a word processing program, or how to send an attachment
by email), a basic knowledge of html coding can help us understand how online
tools and products are put together and, more importantly, enable us to make
changes to these to overcome limitations. As Rushkoff (2010) puts it, “If we
don’t learn to program, we risk being programmed ourselves” (p. 133). We are
not talking here about becoming fully-fledged computer programmers, but rather
about developing an awareness of the basics. Very basic coding skills can help one
customise the elements in one’s blog for example, or route around censorship
(for good or bad). A renewed interest in computer programming and related
code skills can be seen in many countries around the globe, including the United
Kingdom, where initiatives such as the Raspberry Pi (http://www.raspberrypi.org)
have brought cheap, programmable computers to schools across the country.
Social networks such as CoderDojo (http://coderdojo.com) have sprung up to fill
the knowledge gaps in the teaching body, allowing young people to jointly develop
these vital skills.
O 92 O
A focus on information
These are key digital literacies that focus on how we find information and
resources, how we evaluate them and how we store them for later retrieval. They
include:
Search literacy: the ability to search for information effectively online. This
includes an awareness of search engines beyond Google, including visual search
engines, voice-driven search engines, and specialized search engines concentrating
on single resource types. Arguably the most basic and vital of the literacies, search
literacy is increasingly important in an age where the production – and sharing –
of online resources is spiralling out of control and data management is becoming
increasingly challenging. Getting to what we are looking for is more of a challenge
than it has ever been.
Information literacy: coupled with effective search literacy, information
literacy is the ability to evaluate online sources of information for veracity, and
credibility. In this age of information overload, we also need to augment these two
skills with filtering and attention literacy so as to know what to pay attention to
and what not – and when. Information literacy requires a heightening of critical
analysis of resources, an ability to judge and evaluate the utility of those resources
and an ability to use them in the service of our learning.
Tagging literacy: knowing how to tag (or label) online content, how to create
tag clouds and to contribute to ‘folksonomies’ (user created banks of tags). As
resources become more plentiful, there is an increased need to be able to classify,
label, store and retrieve sites and information. Moving beyond simple bookmarking
in browsers, tagging literacy moves classification systems online, into a more social
space where scattered groups of users contribute to a group’s knowledge and
access to information by keeping a shared repository of relevant data.
A focus on connections
These literacies come to the forefront in social networking spaces and other
online media where personalisation occurs. They may include blogs and wikis, as
well as social networks such as Facebook. In such spaces users not only write
about themselves and their lives, but also participate in wide social groupings that
transcend more closed groupings in terms of ethnicity, religion, geography, etc.
They include:
Personal literacy: knowing how to create, project and curate our online
identity. This includes an awareness of issues such as online safety or identity
theft. Knowing what to share – and with whom – has huge implications not only for
our personal lives, but also for our professional image and our career trajectory.
What is amusing as a 16-year-old can be severely detrimental as a 25-year-old, and
understanding the potential impact of our digital footprints is key to managing
them. As Schmidt (as cited in Jenkins Jr., 2010) observes, “I don’t believe society
understands what happens when everything is available, knowable and recorded
O 93 O
by everyone all the time,” predicting that in the near future young people may be
obliged to change their identities to escape their digital pasts. If, as teachers, we
encourage the use of social and creative platforms in our classrooms, then we have
a duty of care to ensure that our learners are engaging safely and constructively.
Network literacy: the ability to take part in online networks and to leverage
these to help us filter and find information. For teachers, their PLN (Personal
Learning Network) – online professional contacts – can be useful as a means
of tapping into on-going professional development. Network literacy is about
pure connections, about how people share and transfer information from one
grouping to another. In many ways network literacy has obvious parallels in early
communities of practice theory with its core and boundary members and their
interactions inside and outside a given group.
Participatory literacy: closely aligned to network literacy, participatory
literacy involves contributing to and participating in online networks. This equates
to something over and above merely reading professional development tweets on
Twitter, but contributing your own tweets. Not just reading blog posts, but leaving
comments – or even writing your own blog. Participatory literacy is the lifeblood
of the post Web 2.0 social era of distributed computing, where what you share is
what you are. In this sense, many of the major implications of personal literacy also
hold for this skill.
Cultural and intercultural literacy: understanding digital artefacts from
other cultures, and interacting effectively and constructively with people from other
cultures takes on even more importance in our global world, where intercultural
contact via digital communication is increasingly possible and increasingly likely.
As learning projects become more globalised, more exchange-based, learning how
to interact with other cultures is key – not only to successful completion of a given
project, but further on, with wider implications in the professional sphere.
A focus on (re)design
A macro literacy that refers to the ability to repurpose or change already-made
content in order to create something new. Typically associated with multimedia
expression, the sole literacy in this group is:
Remix literacy: this refers to the modern trend of ‘remixing’ pictures, videos
and other media, to often striking effect. This may refer, for example, to the trend
for making ‘literal versions’ of music videos (http://tinyurl.com/l397zp), through
remixing music videos for political or satirical ends (http://preview.tinyurl.com/
yffhgnb) to the doctoring of digital images such as that afforded by sites such as
Photofunia (http://www.photofunia.com). This literacy is also closely associated
with Internet ‘memes’ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme). In each instance,
recognition of the ‘remix’ that has taken place is crucial to an understanding of the
media being viewed.
O 94 O
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF DIGITAL LITERACIES

Belshaw (2012) identifies eight essential elements of digital literacies:
1. Cultural: this refers to an understanding of the different digital contexts
we may encounter online, from more traditional, structured environments such
as school Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) to less organised spaces such as
Facebook. As we move between these environments we are encouraged to change
the way we interact and operate. In Web 1.0 terminology this might equate to the
notion of netiquette, whilst in language learning terms we may think of notions
such as register and genre, and a need to accommodate to different situations.
2. Cognitive: here the focus is on cognitive ability and critical awareness,
rather than on any kind of technology tools; the cognitive element is concerned
with critical appraisal of media and media sources, with an aim to helping develop
strategies for learners to “see nuance where they have previously seen dichotomy”
(Belshaw, 2012, p. 208).
3. Constructive: the constructive element refers to a more participatory and
contributory approach to content, to the concept of creating something new (either
original, or a remix of something already in existence). In this element there are clear
pointers to related concepts of copyright, plagiarism, Creative Commons, and similar.
4. Communicative: clearly much of what we do online involves an element
of communication, particularly as we move further into the production side, and
engage with the contributory aspects of networked environments. This element
refers to our ability to interact successfully in these environments.
5. Confident: this refers to a sense of confidence and well-being mediated by
technologies; a confidence born of the ability to step backwards, to undo actions
and try them again, a confidence that is inspired by working in safe environments
where experimentation is encouraged, and where ‘learning by doing’ is the norm.
It is, perhaps, the skill of using technology over being used by technology.
6. Creative: the creative element refers to understanding and defining new
ways of learning and of acquiring knowledge and experience. It is closely allied with
confident experimentation, and with learning to put new tools to work for us in
order to achieve new aims and outcomes.
7. Critical: here we need to consider the skill of evaluating, tagging and
curating the resources that come our way, understanding them at a relatively deep
and critical level. This element squares with Pegrum’s literacies with a focus on
information (Pegrum, 2011; Dudeney, Hockly, & Pegrum, 2013) and an ability to
manage the information flow and information overload.
8. Civic: as technologies afford better connections and communications, they
also encourage civic action and the development of ‘Civil Society’ (Belshaw, 2012),
more engagement on a societal level and can encourage civil action below the
usual layers of government and state. Such disruptive use of technologies is often
perceived as challenging by more traditional entities, though much of it tends to
O 95 O
reside in the practice of ‘slacktivism’ whereby social change is attempted through

disapproval and protest online.
CONCLUSION
In both explorations of digital literacies there is a clear emphasis on both the
conceptual nature of much of the content (rather than a list of practical skills
to be acquired), and also a clear suggestion that these change and mutate as we
explore them. In these early days of digital literacy it is hard to see a complete
picture. Indeed a complete picture may not be possible as new technology
affordances and demands will inevitably change and mutate the original concepts,
leading to new skills and literacies that may take on greater importance as they
become more apparent and better observed.
Clearly, then, this is a complicated mix of skills and elements to master, and
teachers can play a part in helping learners acquire some of the necessary skills by
integrating them into their classroom practice alongside the regular ‘content’ they
deal with. In this way they can make a difference in their learners’ comfort level,
helping them beyond the ‘tech comfy’ to the ‘tech savvy’ which will contribute
to their life beyond school as they move into the professional workplace and
(increasingly) knowledge-based economies.
[email protected]
O 96 O
REFERENCES
Belshaw, D. A. J. (2012). What is digital literacy? A pragmatic investigation. Ed.D
thesis, Durham University. Retrieved November 20, 2014 from http://
etheses.dur.ac.uk/3446/
Crystal, D. (2008). On the myth of texting. Retrieved November 20, 2014 from
http://tinyurl.com/yhwb5dj
Dudeney, G., Hockly, N., & Pegrum, M. (2013). Digital literacies. Harlow: Pearson.
Jenkins Jr., H. W. (2010, August 14). Google and the search for the future. The
Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 20, 2014 from http://tinyurl.
com/2efmxne
Pegrum, M. (2011). From blogs to bombs: The future of digital technologies in
education. Perth: UWA Publishing.
Rushkoff, D. (2010). Program or be programmed: Ten commands for a digital age.
New York: OR Books.
Stanley, G., & Mawer, K. (2011). Digital play: Computer games and language aims.
Peaslake: Delta Publishing.
O 97 O
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS

Daniel Xerri teaches English at the University of Malta Junior College and
lectures on the university’s MA in TESOL. Between 2011 and 2015, he chaired the
EFL Monitoring Board, a regulatory body within the Ministry for Education and
Employment in Malta. He sits on the IATEFL Research SIG committee and has
participated in a number of international projects conducted by the European
Centre for Modern Languages. Xerri holds postgraduate degrees in English and
Applied Linguistics, and is currently completing a PhD in Education at the University
of York. His main research interest is teacher education and development in ELT.
In 2013, he was awarded the Terry Furlong Prize for Research by the National
Association for the Teaching of English in the United Kingdom. At the 2014 ELTons
ceremony, the British Council awarded him and a group of colleagues from the
Junior College the Innovation in Assessment Prize. Xerri is the author of a number
of peer-reviewed articles and book chapters. Further details about his work can be
found at: www.danielxerri.com
Odette Vassallo is director of the Centre for English Language Proficiency

and lecturer in English Language Studies at the Department of English, University
of Malta. She has teaching and researching interest in applied linguistics. She read
for her undergraduate degree in English at the University of Malta, followed by an
MA and a PhD at the University of Nottingham, UK. Before joining the University
of Malta, she had a career at the University of Malta Junior College where she
taught English language and literature and pursued her research in the field of
applied linguistics. She has presented at international conferences and is involved
in a number of research projects, in the areas of applied linguistics, pedagogical
stylistics, learner corpora, SLA and the learner reader. She is actively involved in
the implementation of a support structure designed to improve and enhance
proficiency levels in English of those students reading for a degree at the University
of Malta.
O 99 O
Koray Akyazı is an English instructor and member of the academic and

professional development center in the Foreign Language Preparatory School at
Gediz University, Turkey. He holds a BA in Business Management from Huddersfield
University, a TESOL certificate from I-to-I, and a Cambridge ESOL CELTA from Izmir
Economy University. He is also on his way to gaining an MA in ELT from Bahcesehir
University. His areas of interest include teacher research, peer observation, and
reflective practice.
Mario Aquilina is a lecturer in the Department of English at the University

of Malta, where he teaches literary theory, style, rhetoric and writing. He is the
author of The Event of Style in Literature, published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2014.
Aquilina was awarded a PhD in English Studies from the University of Durham in
2013.
Larissa Attard has worked in the field of ELT in Malta for the past 25 years:
first as a teacher, then as a Director of Studies and, more recently, as a freelancer.
Active on local TEFL Cert courses as a teacher trainer, Attard also mentors on
the CertTESOL programme and is a regular contributor at local ELT workshops.
She has held posts on committees for the local authority governing EFL matters
and has been appointed Academic School Visitor and TEFL Cert Assessor in an
academic assurance capacity at national accreditation level. Attard also lectures at
local colleges and is a Senior Visiting Lecturer at the University of Malta. Involved in
writing materials for a variety of ELT-related concerns, she has recently been one
of the main contributors to an ELT course book using a CLIL approach. Larissa’s
areas of interest include action research, language use, and teaching methods.
Evarist Bartolo is Malta’s Minister for Education and Employment. He has

been a member of the Maltese Parliament since 1992, working mostly in education,
European affairs and tourism. In 1975, Bartolo graduated from the University of
Malta with a BA (Hons) in English Literature. In 1984, he was awarded a scholarship
for a diploma course in journalism at Stanford University. He then read for a
Master’s in Education at the University of Cardiff, which he completed in 1986.
Bartolo spent three years teaching at De La Salle College, another four years at the
national broadcasting station and then a further ten years as the editor and head of
news of the Labour Party media. He currently lectures in Communication Studies
at the University of Malta. Bartolo is a prolific writer, having been a consistent
contributor to the local media since his early teens. He is considered to be one of
the principal ideologists within the Malta Labour Party.
O 100 O
Simon Borg has been involved in ELT for over 25 years. He has worked in a
range of international contexts and is known particularly for his work on language
teacher cognition and teacher education. After 15 years at the University of Leeds,
where he was a Professor of TESOL, he now works full-time as an ELT consultant,
focusing mainly on the design, delivery, evaluation and study of language teacher
development programmes and projects. Full details of his work are available at
http://simon-borg.co.uk
Caroline Campbell is currently the Director of Studies of Easy School of

Languages. She began her ELT profession in 2001 in Italy, where she lived for 10
years. She has gained her experience from teaching students of all ages and levels,
both in monolingual and multilingual environments, in Italy and Malta. Four years
ago she moved into educational management and became increasingly involved
in teacher training. Campbell is keen on continuing professional development
and enjoys sharing ideas through workshops and presentations at local and
international seminars and conferences. In recent years she has designed and
delivered various training courses in ELT methodology and CLIL for European
teachers within the ERASMUS+ programme.
Kenan Dikilitaş is an Assistant Professor in the department of English language

teacher education at Hasan Kalyoncu University, Turkey, and a committee member
of the IATEFL Research SIG. He is particularly interested in language teacher
education with a focus on contemporary professional development models
based on exploration, reflection and research – process-based and bottom-up
approaches to the professional development of teachers. His major professional
interest includes supporting and facilitating teacher action research in higher
education. Dikilitaş has edited collections of teacher research studies conducted
by instructors.
Gavin Dudeney is Director of Technology for The Consultants-E, working

primarily in online training in EdTech, and in consultancy work in the same field.
Former Honorary Secretary and Chair of the Electronics Committee (ElCom) at
IATEFL, he now serves on the board of the International House Trust. A regular
contributor to journals, Dudeney is author of The Internet & the Language
Classroom (CUP 2000, 2007) and co-author – with Nicky Hockly – of the award-
winning publications How To Teach English with Technology (Longman 2007,
winner of the International House Ben Warren Prize) and Digital Literacies
(Routledge 2013, winner of the Society of Authors British Council Award). His
latest book, Going Mobile, was published by DELTA Publishing in 2014.
O 101 O
Jeremy Harmer has an international reputation as an author, teacher trainer

and expert in ELT methodology. He has trained teachers and offered seminars all
over the world. He is the author of methodology titles including How to Teach
Writing, How to Teach English, The Practice of English Language Teaching and
Essential Teacher Knowledge, all published by Pearson ELT. He is the General
Editor of the Longman Methodology List. His teaching days were spent in Mexico
and the UK and since 1983 he has been a full-time writer and freelance trainer. His
course materials and teachers’ guides are used all over the world.
Alan Marsh has been a full-time EFL teacher for 37 years. Much of his work
nowadays consists of training and developing other teachers, both pre-service
and in-service, on local and international training courses including Cambridge
ESOL CELTA and DELTA and on Erasmus+ (formerly Comenius) training projects.
He was a founding member of MATEFL, of which he is the serving President and
regularly contributes articles to teacher publications in Malta and the UK. He is the
author of Exploring English. In 2014, he was awarded the Inspiring ELT Professional
Award in recognition of his contribution to Malta’s ELT industry.
Stephanie Xerri Agius teaches English at the University of Malta Junior

College. She holds postgraduate degrees in English Literature and Applied
Linguistics. Xerri Agius is currently conducting doctoral research at the University
of Leicester. Her research focuses on the feedback practices involved in the
teaching of writing. She has also presented at a number of conferences in Malta
and abroad.
O 102 O
The Learning ELT Professional
Edited by Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo
E
ffective ELT professionals are primarily effective learners. They
value the development of their own knowledge, skills and beliefs.
They refuse to stagnate as professionals. They embrace learning,
its joys and its challenges. ELT professionals can lead by example by
demonstrating the attitudes of effective learners. They can act as role
models by being fully engaged with the lifelong learning process. The
papers in this book address the issue of ELT professionals’ learning
development by either showcasing how they can position themselves
as learners or by discussing pedagogical approaches that can enrich
classroom practices.
This book brings together the perspectives of a group of international

and Maltese experts in ELT, all of whom address the idea that learning
needs to be an intrinsic part of the identity of ELT professionals. The
book consists of a selection of papers based on talks and workshops
delivered at the 3rd ELT Malta conference. The papers by Simon Borg,
Larissa Attard, and Kenan Dikilitaş and Koray Akyazı focus on how teacher
research can act as a form of professional learning. Writing is the focus
of the papers by Caroline Campbell, Mario Aquilina and Stephanie Xerri
Agius, each author approaching the subject from somewhat different
angles. The papers by Alan Marsh and Gavin Dudeney explore the idea
that in order to better address the needs of learners in the 21st century,
ELT professionals are required to demonstrate the ability to repackage
their existent knowledge as well as develop new competences.
The world of English Language Teaching is constantly turning.

That is why the articles in this collection are so timely and so important.
— Jeremy Harmer
This book highlights ways in which ELT professionals may continue to

develop their knowledge, skills and beliefs in order for teaching to be
more effective in its endeavour to knock at the doors of learners’ minds.
— Evarist Bartolo

The Learning Elt Professional: Edited by Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Learning Elt Professional: Edited by Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Learning Elt Professional: Edited by Daniel Xerri and Odette Vassallo

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE LEARNING

PREFACE BY JEREMY HARMER

Copyright for whole volume © ELT Council 2015

Copyright for individual papers remains vested

First published 2015

Designed by John Wilson Independent Studios.

This book is dedicated to all inspiring

1. The learning ELT professional: an introduction

About the contributors 99

ELT PROFESSION IN MALTA

The composition of the ELT profession in Malta is adequately varied, consisting

ELT MALTA CONFERENCE

THE LEARNING ELT PROFESSIONAL

ways by means of which the teaching techniques associated with methodological

Conventional approaches to professional development view teachers as knowledge consumers who

TWO VIEWS OF CPD

Teachers as knowledge consumers

TABLE 1: ‘EXTERNAL’ TEACHER DEVELOPMENT

Infrequent Teachers cannot attend external events on a regular basis

The problem…is that the need to know something new is identified

Teachers as knowledge creators

FIGURE 1: MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE DEFINING FEATURES OF RESEARCH

1. It is done by teachers – i.e. teachers are the researchers.

It is important to stress that teacher research is not simply research done

Doing teacher research

Benefits of teacher research

ACTION RESEARCH AND WHERE

FIGURE 1: ACTION RESEARCH STAGES

THE ACTION RESEARCH CYCLE

FINDING AN AREA OF INTEREST

Develop a research question

Design methods of data collection

WHY PERFORM ACTION RESEARCH?

Action research is teacher-driven – it is conducted by teachers and shared with

designing methods of data collection – this paper, therefore, presents a strategy

and determine their own professional development needs as opposed to external

• Begin to understand the power implications of technical standards

Data collection tools

RQ1: What are the teachers’ beliefs about teacher research?

• Teacher research as learner-based

1. Research driven by students’ needs

These responses indicate one of the critical functions of teacher research as a

centred and learner-sensitive classroom context may be created, which supports

Teacher research as promoting classroom practices

Teacher research as a way of building up collaboration

1. Get new ideas from peers

Teacher research as a way of developing teacher autonomy

Teacher research is seen as an autonomous teacher learning strategy that can

Teacher research as a continuing professional development

Teacher research as a way of changing beliefs and attitudes

TABLE 7: CHANGING BELIEFS AND ATTITUDES

1. Change in ingrained beliefs

It is also implied that research may provide teachers with evidence or

Teacher research as a problem-solution activity

Teacher research is also understood as an activity that can empower teachers

RQ2: What are the constraints and limitations of doing teacher

What is the end result? Unclear impact

RQ3: What are the expectations of the participants from

1. Improve research skills