The effective language teacher

Isaías Carvalho

in: New Routes, #8, 29 de Novembro, 1999, Disal S.A., São Paulo. p. 12-18. (ISSN 1516-3601 / Qualis B4). Observação: artigo de capa.

Outras publicações acadêmicas de Isaias Carvalho - aqui.

"In fact, the diversity of opinions as to what constitutes effective teaching confirms an assumption: that there is no formula for good teaching, that very different people make good teachers for very different reasons.” Prodromou, 1997

Introduction

It seems everyone can remember a good teacher they had, be it that kindergarten “princess” or that math “master” who used to tell jokes in high school. By analyzing my own students’ formal written feedback in the first semester of 1998 (March - June, daily classes) - through the student feedback forms used at Associação Cultural Brasil – Estados Unidos (ACBEU), where I teach (see appendix 1) - I’ve drawn the following impressionistic list of characteristics our students expect their teachers to have, or perhaps how they picture an ideal teacher (although here we will consider closely the foreign language teacher):

The above qualities were ranked according to the analysis of the feedback forms that my students turned in related to my classroom performance. It is necessary to emphasize that this is only a rough picture of the reality of the center since the forms were filled out by my 80 students in that period - which represents around 1% of the students in the institution (and one teacher). Therefore, I decided to do this research in the second semester of the same year with a larger number of students and, consequently, more teachers (it would be impossible to say exactly how many, since the students were supposed to write neither the names of their teachers nor their own).

The main assumption underlying this research was that the students at this center - and from my own experience, I would say that most students in any other setting - give significantly more value to the qualities related to personality than those related to techniques and methodology, although we know it is hard to define exactly where one domain ends and the other begins. As the principal result of this survey, I expected to have a better picture of the relationship between the social/affective components and the professional aspects of language teaching - or perhaps teaching any subject matter - after this survey data were analyzed. That is precisely what will be shown here.

Methodology

Participants

Students at all different levels and at varied ages (from 11-year olds to 54-year olds) in the institution took part in this survey. Their cultural/racial background is almost as eclectic as the one we can find in the city itself. Most of them are middle to upper middle class students at regular schools and colleges or professionals in many different areas. There was also a concern regarding the balance in the percentage of students from each program the institution offered at the time (Junior, Basic, Advanced, and ESP courses). Therefore, students that were provided with 3 or 5 hours of EFL instruction per week and students in their second term, at least, were picked out in order to assure the consistency of this work. Other than that, there were no pre-established criteria on the basis of which the subjects were chosen.

Instrument and Procedure

Since the 9 items above provide us with a somewhat inaccurate - and maybe too "perfect" - picture of what a student at this center expects from his/her teachers, I decided to devise the two questionnaires found in appendix 2 – QUESTIONNAIRE 1: "The Ideal Language Teacher" (I assume, however, they have answered it based on the image they have of an "ideal" teacher in general, perhaps an archetypal picture of a "father", a "mother" or "him/herself") and QUESTIONNAIRE 2: "The Real Teacher" – both based on Luke Prodromou's "The Good Language Teacher" (in: English Teaching Forum, April 1991).

Each questionnaire is composed of 34 statements to be answered "YES" (it is a fundamental quality/ability for a teacher), "+/-" (it is not necessarily fundamental) and "NO" (it is not fundamental at all). A little detail, which can make a huge difference, is that the item #35 (see appendix 2) was left blank in both questionnaires. With that we can make sure the survey is complete in the sense that the students were allowed to add any information they deemed pertinent. Also, for the sake of reliability, the statements were in the students' mother tongue - Portuguese.

In reality, the content of the two questionnaires is the same, but they served different purposes as revealed in the choice of titles and equally related to the instructions to be carried out. The first is an idealization, whereas the second is a possible "real" portrait/profile of the teachers employed at the center at the time. It is also important to mention that I am not a teacher who encompasses all nine qualities that are mentioned, but that is precisely what feedback forms and research projects are all about: material to help us reflect and also aimed at bringing about improvement.

Individually, neither my 9-item list nor Prodromou´s students' long set of qualities were precise enough to depict "The Ideal language teacher" for the center in question. Therefore, my questionnaires are an adaptation and a fusion of the two, so that it meets the specific needs of the institution's reality. Quoting Prodromou:

However, as the forms in appendix 2 and this survey itself, I continued to search for the minimal observable qualities and/or principles that most effective EFL teachers have in common. I worked towards developing the most accurate picture possible of what makes an effective teacher.

503 - close to 10% of the total enrollment figure - out of the doubled 600 questionnaires handed out to students, were answered. Thus, we can have two consistent pictures to contrast and compare.

Results and Analysis

As we expected, when the final results of the two questionnaires were compared, more affirmative answers were found ("YES" - especially because almost all of the statements in the forms have been often considered qualities of effective teachers in the field – see appendix 2) for the ideal language teacher – questionnaire 1 - than for the "real" teachers they had in their classes – questionnaire 2 - which is more than natural and human. Moreover, there are certain qualities more related to the personality of the teacher (items #1 to #15 - see appendix 2) and others more specifically linked to the professional aspects of the teacher's performance in his/her classroom (items #16 to #34 – see appendix 2). These are the areas which will possibly offer the most useful information, and can hopefully serve to improve the preparation of new teachers, as well as to lead experienced teachers to reflect on their multiple roles and to make the relationship between the teacher and the students more effective at the center under investigation. At this point, it is worth mentioning that we count on a highly well trained professional staff, which is recognized locally, nationally and abroad. Anyway, the analysis here may reveal some interesting points for reflection and action.

Table 2

The characteristics ranked in table 2 are the ones that were mostly regarded as fundamental for an "ideal" teacher by the students of the center in question. For tabulation reasons and for the sake of clarity, the "+-" answers were not considered as a distinct point, that is, they were taken as "NO" answers. Although there is a considerable distance between "no" and "perhaps", it would become too intricate to have all the three answers represented in tables and endless analysis. Anyway, I kept that option because the students could have felt uneasy otherwise (it could have sounded a little radical to have just either "yes" or "no"). For the same reason, the age groups were not analyzed distinctly, although that might be an interesting perspective to be looked at. Also, in order to list the qualities above, only the items which reached over 75% were taken into account and ranked accordingly.

The assumption I had as to the value students give to personality traits over professional skills was confirmed. Of the 15 first characteristics in table 2, 9 are related to the social/affective aspects of teaching. That proves what is already common sense in the field: a good teacher does make a difference. And more for his/her character and/or interpersonal abilities than for his expertise.

Here, I feel the need to refer to an article by Anne Yoshida - Teachers' Physiognomy - recently published in New Routes[1]:

We selected from the Internet 22 portrait pictures of women averaging between 20 and 50 years old. All the pictures [...] were displayed on a screen for 120 children to select which of the picture portrayed their ideal teacher and why. We computed all the adjectives they gave to their ideal teacher as they chose her on the screen, and we here below display the adjectives by decreasing order of their recurrence:

1. Friendly

2. Lively

3. Cool

4. Beautiful

5. Intelligent

6. Explain well

7. Look like someone I know and like

8. Calm

9. Nice

10. Not argue

11. Extrovert

12. Natural

13. Not boring

14. Understanding

Except for numbers 4 and 6, all the others relate to a teacher's affective skills, which comes to reinforce the results of the present survey and its implications.

Moreover, the qualities in table 1 (introduction) encompass most of the ones in table 2. It has to be admitted, however, that the latter gives a much more consistent picture of a possible "ideal language teacher". Besides, it was based on a much larger universe of students and, consequently, teachers. Although we know there is no such a thing as an "ideal" anything, it is healthy to aim at perfection with the feet on the ground. That is why I believe this survey is an objective tool towards that assumption.

Classroom Implications and Extensions of this Research Project

Now, let's look at a more practical aspect of the present survey - its applicability to the reality of the institution where it was done. Table 3 shows the difference between that "ideal" teacher most students have in mind and the "real" teachers they have in their classes in the institution analyzed. If we consider the average ideal/real discrepancy (12.8%), we will come to believe that the teachers currently working at this center are almost perfect, a "dream team" of teaching professionals, who do not need to worry about how their students see them individually. However, we must be very careful not to overgeneralize what is already quite general. We know that some individual teachers would fall either at a lower level or at an even higher level of classroom performance. What's more, some items deserve more attention than others due to the larger ideal/real difference or similarity.

The items checked with 4 stars (#4, #13, #16, #17, #29) should be considered critical areas for improvement and reflection within our staff. The items #4, #13 and #16 relate to how patient and caring a teacher is when dealing with the students in the classroom. That may tell us our students want more attention and affection, which I think is also a problematic aspect in most human settings. On the other hand, items #17 and #29 have to do with how creative and varied our classes are. Whether the teacher sticks almost entirely to the coursebook or brings varied and meaningful materials and techniques into his/her classroom seems to be quite important to our students. Our job now is to find ways to improve in those areas, which are, in many ways, related to how teachers' personality and beliefs affect their classes. Beyond the professional, what our students really want is a human being.

By no means am I suggesting that we should neglect the methodological development of teachers. On the contrary, we should invest more and more in the combination of the two aspects, trying to make the human become more and more involved with the professional. I also believe that the result of this survey might not only be suitable for this institution's teacher profile, but also for that general idea of an "ideal” language teacher Prodromou himself searched for. At this point, it is necessary to mention that the results of this survey may not be valid for other cultures. Thus, it would be very helpful to have it done in Japan or Russia, for instance. That is a suggestion.

Table 3

* from 1 to 5 (“technically” ideal) ** from 7 to 13 (close to ideal)

*** from 15 to 19 (attention!) **** from 21 to 27 (critical)

Last but not least, ranked below are some of the comments the students made freely (item 35 of the questionnaires). Out of 61 for the ideal teacher and 28 for their real teachers, these comments summarize the most frequent ones. They also, and perhaps mainly, serve as a source of meaningful information both for teachers and for the institution. Something very pertinent, however, is the fact that most of the notes written by the students refer to personal aspects somewhat linked to the professional performance of the teacher.

An Ideal teacher...

1 - doesn't show any preference for individual students;

2 - feels pleasure in teaching;

3 - never humiliates the students;

4 - does activities with the students outside the classroom.

My real teacher last term...

1 - spoke way too far about his personal life;

2 - was too authoritarian;

3 - was friendly, but demanding;

4 - was sensitive to the different individual learning processes.

Acknowledgements

The present paper is an expanded version of the final research project report for the TDC (Teacher Development Course) I took at ACBEU. I would like to acknowledge Athiná Leite and James Riordan for the powerful insights and for the chance to learn how to grow not only as a professional but also as a human being.

I also appreciate the comments provided by Antonio Bacelar and Silvana Pessoa. Finally, I am very grateful for the willing cooperation and engagement of the teachers and anonymous students who participated in this study.

................................................................................................................

Appendix 1

A Associção Cultural Brasil-Estados Unidos – ACBEU – is a non-profit, philanthropic, cultural, educational, binational center in Salvador, Bahia. Its main goal is to strengthen ties between Brazil and the United States by promoting a broad range of bicultural enrichment programs and educational exchanges as well as teaching English as a Foreign Language. With respect to the latter, it has taught English to more than 250,000 people since 1941.

Appendix 2

Questionnaire 1: “The ideal English Teacher"

Your Level/Book: Your age (IMPORTANT!):

Circle YES, NO or +/- according to the idea you have of what makes a GOOD ENGLISH TEACHER (an ideal teacher): Add whatever you consider to be pertinent in item 35. (YES: it's fundamental; +/- : a good teacher doesn't necessarily have to have/do that; NO: it's not fundamental.)

into account ....................................................................... YES +/- NO

matter .................................................................................. YES +/- NO

in class (Not even with beginners) ........................................... YES +/- NO

................................................................................................................................

Questionnaire 2: "your real teacher"

[Everything here is the same as in QUESTIONNAIRE 1, except for the title and the instructions below]

Circle YES, NO or +/- according to what you can remember from your teacher in the last term at ACBEU (new students are not supposed to answer this questionnaire).

[1] Published by Disal S.A., São Paulo, Brazil (issue #4, November 16^th, 1998).

Acesse o blog:

Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz

poéticos acadêmicos parentéticos

isaiasfcarvalho@gmail.com

Itabuna/Ilhéus, Bahia, Brasil

Imagens dos temas na base da página por: Wellington Mendes da Silva Filho