|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
grayskies
Joined: 03 Dec 2013
Posts: 67
|
 Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 5:42 am Post subject: |
 |
|
I am very happy to see that some PYP/Foundation programs are of an academic nature, rather than tourist English acquisition centers.
There are 2 points that I would like to discuss with Mashkif:
Firstly, I don't understand why people with doctorates fill the positions as academic English instructors. It is an unnecessary expense accrued by the university.
If the program is set up properly, level 1 students will begin learning APA style mechanisms of paragraphs which lead to rhetorical essays. Each level progresses towards 5 essays (includes the portfolio) by level 3.
These PYP/Foundation programs have been teaching academic English for a decade. All instructors should teach it. These programs should be taught by anyone with a Celta, Delta or a degree in the field, and not limited to Ph.D holders only.
Secondly, some may argue that students should have 'x' amount of fluency in English, before (the above) skills are taught.
How does that happen? Students receive 4 hours a day of English instruction in one year. Usually, they will only speak English within the 4 hours at school.
In my experience, very few students read English books, or do homework on a consistent basis. Also, in my experience, if you push them, they will rebel and make complaints. So, how does fluency (determined by depts) come with a year?
The whole point is to provide language skills necessary for success in the academic environment.
It is my opinion, we, as instructors, focus on our limitations and adjust our program with these confines. We need to refine through demonstration the integrated skills that will enable students to engage effectively and responsibly with academic texts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rostom
Joined: 16 Apr 2014
Posts: 102
Location: UK/Veteran of the Magic Kingdom
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grayskies wrote: |
| Firstly, I don't understand why people with doctorates fill the positions as academic English instructors. It is an unnecessary expense accrued by the university. |
I think this a 'political' question, which needs a 'political' answer!
I guess in the Magic Kingdom most of the universities prefer candidates with Masters and PhDs for their foundation programs. In addition, there are a lot of candidates with PhDs in English who are either unemployed or under-employed and are competing with other candidates with less qualifications.
I do not think universities in the Magic Kingdom think about expenses when hiring candidates with or without PhDs.
You can consider my above answer as a 'political' one!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 17644
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In my experience in the Gulf, all of the Foundations programs were teaching Academic English. That said, the level of so many of the students is so low at admission (nearly zero to low beginner) that a combination of traditional EFL basic courses were needed for them. There were few, if any, PhDs teaching in these programs... and those that had them were usually NOT native speakers. The lowest students ended up doing up to 2 years in the program.
Until they fix the K-12 systems and start Academic English at Secondary Level, they will have to have these mixed Foundations programs.
VS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grayskies
Joined: 03 Dec 2013
Posts: 67
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the IEP/PYP/Foundation programs where I was employed, only 2 used benchmarks to assess language skills. If their placements scores were too low, we would not accept them into our program.
It does not seem feasible to set up multiple programs within a IEP department. Implementing levels 1 through 3 within a year is sufficient.
At the end of the day, a good program director is the key to success. A competent director creates a productive and pleasant working environment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mashkif
Joined: 17 Aug 2010
Posts: 178
|
| Posted: Tue May 20, 2014 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| grayskies wrote: |
I am very happy to see that some PYP/Foundation programs are of an academic nature, rather than tourist English acquisition centers.
There are 2 points that I would like to discuss with Mashkif:
Firstly, I don't understand why people with doctorates fill the positions as academic English instructors. It is an unnecessary expense accrued by the university. |
That is something you'll have to take up with the various ministries in the region. For some reason, they maintain that a person is not competent to teach at a college level (beyond foundation and teaching assistanceships) unless they hold a Ph.D. One could have earned a dozen master's degrees or have decades' worth of industry experience; all that counts for jack.
That inevitably produces a number of absurdities.
For one, in certainly disciplines - such as art and design - doctorates are rarely, if ever, awarded and may even be unheard of. The terminal qualification in art and deign, for instance, is an M.F.A. Yet, the ministries in Bahrain and Kuwait (that I know for a fact; quite possibly other Gulf states, too) insist that higher education institutions employ at least a set quota of Ph.D. holders, including in fields in which they may be nonexistent.
Academic English is another such area. Because in many establishments such courses are part of the majors programs, those who teach them are required to have doctorates. Now I ask you this: Whom would you sooner trust to effectively teach academic English: A master's degree holder who will have written perhaps not a doctoral dissertation, but a fair number of research papers and most probably a master's thesis, or someone who spent the past 3-5 years jacking off on some theoretical drivel about gender-neutral language or such and who has not seen the inside of a classroom that entire time or even longer?
| Quote: |
If the program is set up properly, level 1 students will begin learning APA style mechanisms of paragraphs which lead to rhetorical essays. Each level progresses towards 5 essays (includes the portfolio) by level 3.
These PYP/Foundation programs have been teaching academic English for a decade. All instructors should teach it. These programs should be taught by anyone with a Celta, Delta or a degree in the field, and not limited to Ph.D holders only. |
Ah, here we have another issue, to wit: Would most instructors who hold a C.E.L.T.A. or similar be actually able to teach academic English? Such certifications focus on teaching methodologies, etc. Not for nothing, but, having witnessed my fair share of T.E.F.L. teachers' level of writing, I highly doubt they'd be able to knock up a semi-passable research paper themselves, let alone teach these kids how to do it.
| Quote: |
Secondly, some may argue that students should have 'x' amount of fluency in English, before (the above) skills are taught.
How does that happen? Students receive 4 hours a day of English instruction in one year. Usually, they will only speak English within the 4 hours at school.
In my experience, very few students read English books, or do homework on a consistent basis. Also, in my experience, if you push them, they will rebel and make complaints. So, how does fluency (determined by depts) come with a year? |
Yes, that is the perennial quandary we find ourselves in around this region. The students here lack the intrinsic motivation to pursue and engage with the language (or, really, any kind of academic field or even personal interest). I generalize, of course: I have had fantastic students, some of whom were avid chess players, pianists, violin players who eve put on a concerto, a ballerina or two, and so on. Then there are students who go to private and international schools and who spend their summers in New York, San Francisco, Singapore, and London. At the university at which I now work it is not unusual to walk down a hallway and hear the students (Kuwaitis) converse with one another in English.
As you correctly note though, on the whole the idea is for a student to go from zero to hero in a year on nary a few hours of classroom English a day. That, of course, is unrealistic and simply preposterous. How do you solve it? Well, as others have opined, impose an entrance floor whereby those below a certain level of English can't enter even the foundation program; they should get their language up to scratch elsewhere and then come back.
Fat chance! Most universities would rather such cases pay money to them to improve their English than to, say, Berlitz or the British Council. And so lower levels are continually added and students eventually - and undeservedly - passed from them.
An alternative - which many serious institutions espouse - is to just keep a student in foundation for as long as needed, until he/she either gives up or deservedly earns a pass, without anybody getting on anybody's case about the proportion of fails and so on. Again, at my current university we routinely have 20-40% fail rates (research courses), but - by Jupiter - the students DO know how to write a academic paper and conduct serious research once they are out of the program. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grayskies
Joined: 03 Dec 2013
Posts: 67
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2014 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Mashkif,
I would like to work with you. I know, I would learn a lot from your experience.
Unfortunately, the majority of the universities where I have worked used language school English in their program. They use Headway, Cutting Edge, etc., then expect the students to fully function in academia.
What I don't understand, is instructors should have the ability to teach Academic English even with their C.E.L.T.A's (  ), English is English. You can put lipstick on it, but it's still a pig.
Thanks Mashkif! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
veiledsentiments
Joined: 20 Feb 2003
Posts: 17644
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 21, 2014 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| grayskies wrote: |
| Unfortunately, the majority of the universities where I have worked used language school English in their program. They use Headway, Cutting Edge, etc., then expect the students to fully function in academia. |
The problem is that the student level is NOT ready for anything more. You can't run before you can walk. When 90% of the students arrive unable to write one grammatical one clause sentence, obviously they are not yet ready for 5 paragraph academic essays... or grasping the concept of research, paraphrasing, and citing.
I taught writing at all levels, and while we all have to pretend that these students are ready for university... they are not... and the vast majority would require 2 full years of intensive English... at which time they 'may' be ready for real university level academic writing. None of the Gulf countries are willing to invest the costs to actually prepare these students for university level English.
Meanwhile the teachers do what they can with what they have to work with... IMHO, it is our job to first get down to the student level and then help those who sincerely want to improve to get up to the best level that they can in the couple semesters. Sadly the administrations think this is possible... and if we want to keep our jobs, we have to play along.
VS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
