20
thAnniversary Conference of the ENET Scheme in Hong Kong
June 23, 2018
Mary Shepard Wong Azusa Pacific University
Collaborative Innovation in Creating Effective English Language Leaning:
Lessons from ELT Schemes in Korea,
Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong
Presentation Outline
Part I
• Overview of 4 NET schemes and points of comparison
• Key findings on research on NET Schemes
• Key concerns on research on NET Schemes
• Key recommendations on research on NET Schemes Part II
• Considering the value of collaboration, creativity, and innovation has for teaching and the risky alternatives
• The synergetic relationship of collaboration, creativity, and innovation
• The potential, challenges, and examples of collaboration,
creativity, and innovation
• State-run schemes that recruit and hire foreign English language
teachers include the English Programme in Korea (EPIK), the Foreign English Teachers in Taiwan (FETiT), the Japanese Exchange and
Teaching (JET) Programme, and Hong Kong’s NET Schemes.
• Four of the six recommendations identified in a recent British Council report which compared these schemes, highlight the importance of teacher collaboration (Copland, et al., 2016).
• While studies have identified challenges faced by stakeholders in
these schemes, effective team teaching has been found to positively impact student learning under certain conditions.
• With this in mind, how might the themes of the 20
thAnniversary of
the ENET Scheme conference, “collaborate, innovate, and create,” be
applied to enhance ELT in Hong Kong?
Comparison of NET Programmes in
Southeast Asia
Japan S. Korea Taiwan Hong Kong
Start date and number of foreign teachers
• 1987: start date
• 2015: 4,786 T from 43 countries
• 2020 goal = 6,000 T
• 1995: start date
• 2014: 1,165 T
• 2008: start date
• 2013: ~300 T
• goal=3,300T, one in each prim & sec school
• 1998 :(E)NET started
• 2002: PNET started
• 2016: total T 800+.
Recruit-ment criteria
• BA? Yes
• Teaching Exp?
No
• Teaching Qual?
No
• Linguistic skills?
Yes
• BA? Yes
• Teaching Exp?
No
• Teaching Qual?
No
• Adapt to K?
Yes
• BA? Yes
• Teaching Exp?
Preferred
• Teaching Qual?
Yes
• NS equivalence ? Yes
• BA? Yes
• Teaching Exp?
Preferred
• Teaching Qual?
Yes
• NS equivalence ? Yes
Reasons to start
• Established out of concern for economics and cultural insularity
• Other languages and sports
• Recruits NNESTs for both P & S
• Usually team teaching
• Scaling back
• Started after joined WTO
• Concerned with remote areas
• Communication with LETs issue
• Enhance English environment
• Increase exposure of students to English
Comparison of NET Programmes in
Southeast Asia
Japan S. Korea Taiwan Hong Kong
Terms used for foreign and local English teachers
● 90% ALTs: Assistant language teachers
● 10% CIR, Coordinator for International Relations
● A few SEA, Sports Exchange Advisors
• ELIs: English
language instructors
• NESTs • NET
• Local English Teachers
• Advisory Teachers (AT)
• Regional NET Coordinators (RNC)
Stated purpose
● Increase cultural understanding
● Improve foreign language proficiency
● Move toward CLT
● Improve English of Ss and Ts
● Cross-cultural exchange
● Reform methods
● Upgrade English proficiency of Taiwanese
● (see website, as PNET and ENET differ.)
Duties: ● Team teach
● Assist JTE in teaching
● Professional
Development (PD) of local English teachers
● Team teach
● Develop materials
● PD of local English teachers
● Team teach
● Develop materials
● PD of local English teachers
● Team teach classes
● Develop materials
● PD of local English teachers
● Enrich the English language environment
Copland, Davis, Garton, & Mann (2016) conducted the first investigation of multiple schemes to investigate which countries have schemes, how they operate, what happens when LETs and NETs co-teach, how co-teaching might be improved, and what type of support can be offered.
• Six countries, 23 interviews, 15 observations, multiple document analysis.
• The study found “considerable diversity” in the way the schemes operate, the roles of the actors, and the experiences of the LETs and NETs (p.3).
• Two types of schemes were identified, those that required teacher qualifications and experience and those that did not. The former offered better contracts, higher
status, and more responsibilities to NETs.
• Key factors in successful co-teaching (collaboration) were:
• Communication (with ongoing discussions of expectations and roles)
• Planning (a joint venture, LETs/NETs as partners, with release time)
• Cross cultural understanding (from both LETs and NETs)
• Flexibility (or “accommodation where deemed necessary” p.3)
Copland et al. (2016)
Study of NET Programmes in
Southeast Asia
Copland et al.’s (2016) other findings
• A common stated purpose of all the programmes is to increase the English proficiency of students.
• A common duty of foreign teachers in all the programmes is to team-teach with local teachers.
• It appears that only Hong Kong has conducted and published external evaluations.
• Hong Kong also appears to have the highest standards for recruiting teachers and the most developed professional development support, which extends to local teachers and curriculum development that in many cases requires and supports co-planning and co-teaching.
Thus Hong Kong’s NET Schemes have higher standards for incoming teachers as well as a more fully developed support system for professional and curriculum development compared to what is found in Japan, Korea, and Taiwan.
Copland et al. (2016)
Study of NET Programmes in
Southeast Asia
Copland, et al. (p. 3, 2016) list of recommendations
• Induction programmes should not be limited to NESTs but should be provided for both NESTs and LETs.
• Induction should include time for NESTs and LETs to discuss their expectations of their roles. Ideally the discussion should be between partner teachers and be on- going.
• Teachers should be encouraged to maintain a healthy regard for the value of L1 and L2 in the classroom.
• Time should be made available for planning, especially where the NEST is peripatetic and moving from classroom to classroom or school to school.
• Planning should be a joint endeavour between the LET and the NEST and time should be created to allow this to happen.
• On schemes that do not require NESTs to be qualified/experienced, status issues between LETs and NESTs should be carefully monitored. LETs and NESTs in these contexts should be given opportunities to discuss the impact of their roles.
Copland et al. (2016)
Study of NET Programmes in
Southeast Asia
Key Concerns found in Studies on NET Schemes
• Problems emerge when roles of NET are not clearly identified and there is insufficient co-planning time
• Effectiveness of team teaching varies a great deal due to experience of teachers and teaching styles, the level of collaboration, and NESTs
experience in the local context
• Some concerns are that team teaching reinforces the dichotomy between LETs and NETs and leads to sense of inferiority among LETs and greater lack of confidence over the language as English teachers
• the Schemes unintentional consequence in some countries could be the jeopardizing the professional identity of LETs (Wang & Lin 2013)
Concerns found in
Studies of NET Programmes
in Southeast Asia
Concerns found in
Studies of NET Programmes in Southeast Asia
Japan S. Korea Taiwan Hong Kong
Lack of clarity and understanding of NETs’ role
● Crooks, 2001
● Marcheesseau, 2014
● Rabbini et al., 2003
● Mahoney, 2004
● Carless, 2006 ● Griffin & Woods,
2009
● Storey et al., 2001
● Carless, 2006
Lack of team teaching skills of both teachers
● Crooks, 2001
● Rabbini et al., 2003
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Carless, 2006
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Carless, 2006, p.344
● Ahn et al., 1998
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Luo, 2013
● Luo, 2010
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Carless, 2006
Lack of time to co- plan for local English teachers
● Carless, 2006
● Mahoney, 2004
● Carless, 2006 ● Luo, 2010 ● Carless, 2006
Lack of support from programme or stakeholders
● Crooks, 2001
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Carless, 2006
● Robinson, 2000
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Carless, 2006, p344
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Chang, 2013
● Luo, 2010
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Carless, 2006
Lack of teaching experience of NETs
● Crooks, 2001
● Marcheesseau, 2014
● Rabbini et al., 2003
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Ahn et al., 1998
● Wang & Lin, 2013
● Wang & Lin, 2013
Concerns found in
Studies of NET Programmes in Southeast Asia
Japan S. Korea Taiwan Hong Kong
Need for professional development
● Crooks, 2001
● Rabbini et al., 2003
● Robinson, 2000
● Luo, 2014 (TESL Cert needed.)
• Not found to be a concern
Need for NET counselling or peer support
● Crooks, 2001
● Rabbini et al., 2003
● Robinson, 2000
• Not found to be a concern
Need for more national support
● Crooks, 2001 ● Robinson,
2000
● Chang 2013 • Not found to be a concern
Need for
Guidelines and expertise from specialists
● Crooks, 2001
● Marcheesseau, 2014
● Rabbini et al., 2003
● Chang, 2013
● Luo, 2014 (all stakeholders involved in reform)
• Not found to be a concern
What does
it mean for teachers to . . .
Collaborate Innovate Create
What is the opposite of
collaborate, innovate, create?
The alternatives to
collaborate, innovate, create are . . .
What are risks of not engaging in collaborative practices to both students and teachers?
Isolate Stagnate Replicate
My working definitions
• Collaboration: Working together as equal partners to accomplish a common goal by sharing expertise to problem solve.
• Co-teaching: A form of collaboration that involves equal partners contributing different types of
expertise to the process of planning, implementing, and evaluating co-created teaching activities and practices that seek to enhance student learning.
• Creativity: the use of imagination to conceive of something original. (To brainstorm new ideas is
creative, but not an innovation if never implemented.)
• Innovation: implementing a new method, idea, or
product.
collaboration
creativity
innovation
collaboration creativity
innovation
What is the relationship of
Collaboration, Creativity, & Innovation?
Creativity
Collaboration
!
Innovation
What is the relationship of
Collaboration, Creativity, & Innovation?
Creativity Innovation
Ideas Ideas
LETs
NET Ss
Implementa tion
Collaboration
What is the relationship of
Collaboration, Creativity, & Innovation?
Collaborate
Examples of co-teaching:
• Human tape recorders, marginalized assistants
• Mutually planned and dynamically executed
The potential of co-teaching:
• Builds a learning community (Honigsfeld & Dove, 2010)
• Breaks isolation and allows for “respecting,
acknowledging, and capitalizing on differences in expertise” (Elmore, 2000, p. 25)
• Can result in higher student achievement
The challenges of co-teaching:
• Spraker’s (2003) synthesis of research on co- teaching found these factors affect the quality:
support, training, clarity of goals, longevity of teams, planning time, integrative content.
Co-Teaching
Collaboration &
Co-Teaching
Celebrating the Past
Awakening Possibilities
How (and how well) have you engaged in collaboration and co-teaching
in the past? What new type of collaborations can you engage in now?
How (and how well) have you engaged in collaborative professional practice in past? What type of collaborative professional practice
Collaborative Professional Practice:
Celebrating the Past Awakening Possibilities
Create
Examples of creativity:
• What if we . . . ? (film Not One Less)
The potential of creativity:
• Can inspire students and make learning more engaging
• Models thinking differently
The challenges of creativity:
• May take more time to prepare for and deviates from the norm
(experimental)
• May not always work (risky)
Creativity
Creativity
Celebrating the Past
Awakening Possibilities
How (and how well) have you engaged in creativity in past?
What type of creativity or creative teaching might you engage in now?
Innovate
Examples of innovation:
• Student joint publication in an ESL writing class
The potential of innovation:
• Can motivate students and prevent teacher burnout
• Can demonstrate to students critical thinking
The challenges of innovation:
• May be difficult to accomplish alone;
but may work best when done in collaborative teams and provided support
Innovation
Innovation &
Innovative Teaching:
Celebrating the Past Awakening Possibilities
How (and how well) have you engaged in innovative teaching or
been part of an educational innovation in past?
Conclusion
It is encouraging to see that in a comparison of NET schemes by outside scholars (Copland et al., 2016), the Hong Kong Scheme is valued for its requirements that Native English teachers recruited to serve in secondary schools should have both experience and training.
The major findings of studies of NET schemes were that communication and planning were key factors for successful co-teaching, and that cross-cultural understanding and flexibility were crucial in forming successful partnerships.
Co-teaching has great potential when defined as a form of collaboration that involves equal partners contributing different types of expertise to the process of planning, implementing, and evaluating co-created teaching activities and practices that seek to enhance student learning.
Collaboration, creativity, and innovation are synergetic and when used in the
sometimes isolated and compartmental context of schools, they can have a positive impact on both student learning and teacher growth.
