TESOL Teacher Education Standards

Work Teaching English in Taiwan
1


TESOL Teacher Education Standards

The current NCATE/TESOL teacher education standards are prescriptive, impractical, foster an instrumentalist worldview, and as such are fundamentally flawed and endangering the quality of teacher education programs. As our students (teacher trainees and ESL/EFL students) seek better opportunities in life, they depend on our ability to provide them with quality instruction. What we need is an effective accreditation system relying on peer accreditation in an environment of mutual respect, accountability, and qualitative assessment methods.

Such qualitative assessment could take place through evaluation of narratives in which each domain as defined by NCATE/TESOL (language, culture, planning/implementing/managing instruction, assessment, and professionalism) would be addressed. Reviewers would be able to evaluate these texts based on criteria accepted in the academia (for instance, consistency, treatment of theory and empirical research, adequacy to local needs, and so on). This system would be based on professional evaluation methods such as peer review, self-assessment, and demonstration of knowledge of theory and research. This is the professional model of accreditation.

Unfortunately, instead of such professional model, TESOL focuses on expected candidate outcomes ? the prescribed outcomes model. The professional model is ideal for the post-modern world in that it allows multiple approaches and solutions; a prescribed outcomes model promotes a homogeneous curricular mindset based on positivist philosophy and canonical knowledge and ?best practices.?

Some other problems with the new TESOL standards:

  1. There are as many as thirteen standards and no less than seventy performance indicators
  2. As any ESL teacher knows, aspects of teaching cannot be isolated
  3. Some areas of important knowledge cannot be found in the standards

The present prescriptive form of the document is dangerous because:

  1. it tries to justify control and creates a false impression of uniformity
  2. it fosters micromanagement
  3. it promotes an instrumentalist philosophy (teacher as a mere technician, not a researcher or an independent thinker)

The prescriptive, instrumental, and impractical TESOL/NCATE standards must be changed to accommodate the new professional model of teacher training and education accreditation. In their present form, they are degrading to us as teacher educators and of little practical use to our trainees and students.

Reference

Newman, M., & Hanauer, D. (2005). The NCATE/TESOL Teacher education standards: A critical review. TESOL Quarterly, 34 (3).

english.iup.edu/dhanauer/web/

2

Hi and welcome to Forumosa.

It helps if you introduce your topic a little instead of launching straight in.

[quote=“TESOL/NCATE Standards for P-12 ESL Teacher Education”]A growing number of elementary and secondary schools in the United States are charged with
the education of students from linguistically and culturally diverse backgrounds, many of whom
speak no or limited English; these students are referred to as ESOL students in the remainder of
this document.[/quote]So you’re talking about some standards in the States for what was traditionally called ESL and is often now called ELL.

This is of interest and I’ll read both the standards document and your critique of it when I get time.
ncate.org/documents/ProgramS … /tesol.pdf
english.iup.edu/dhanauer/web … Review.pdf

In the meantime, however, would you mind telling us what, if any, particular relevance this has to teachers of English in Taiwan?

3

  1. Standards set by TESOL International are international (even though NCATE is an American organization).

  2. Is the teacher education accreditation system in Taiwan really different? Does it rely on peer review and qualitative assessment methods?

4

Ｉdon’t agree with either of those points.

First, the NCATE is only international as much as it is accepted internationally. Just saying “these are international standards” doesn’t make it so. The people of Taiwan, particularly the English teaching community here, would need to adopt them or they don’t mean much of anything.

Secondly, teacher accreditation in Taiwan for ESL/EFL/TESOL/ELL/ETC. teachers is virutally non-existent. For the vast majority of teachers it is a non-issue. The climate here and the climate back in the US (where collaboration and professional development are enshrined as guiding principles) is completely different. Here, most teachers are not fully trained or competent and will leave just about the time their experience would help out. Either that or they are well trained, but work under managers for whom educational quality is a distant second to marketing successs.

No, applying standards developed (or to be developed) in North America to the situation in Asia is not something that can be lightly addressed. There are very serious business/work culture and qualification concerns that need to be taken into account.

I’m not saying Taiwan couldn’t use a standards based accreditation system. It most certainly could. But you have to frame your proprosal in a way appropriate to Taiwan’s working and learning environment.

5

I don’t get it. Are you buying, selling or ranting?

6

[quote=“TESOLResearcher”]1) Standards set by TESOL International are international (even though NCATE is an American organization).[/quote]What do you mean? The NCATE website says: " NCATE is the professional accrediting organization for schools, colleges, and departments of education in the United States." And the very document that is being criticised defines its usage of the word TESOL as meaning ESL in the States. What is international about this? English language education in many countries is not “TESOL” under that definition!

I searched for “TESOL International” and found this website: tirfonline.org/
It doesn’t mention anything about the NCATE standards for TESOL, though. What’s the connection?

The de facto international standards for EFL are dominated by Cambridge University. (Trinity College qualifications are seen as equivalents to the Cambridge ones). This may change in the future, but until now it has been like this.

Anyway, rather than asking us how English education in Taiwan differs from whatever you imagine it to be, why don’t you reach out to us and explain the relevance of what you posted above? You must have had something in mind.

7

I was referring to TESOL International:

tesol.org

By the way, I am not the author of the article. I just think the information can be of interest to teachers of English. I have asked my Taiwanese friends (all English teachers) about the ESOL teacher education accreditation system in Taiwan, and it does not appear to be based on qualitative assessment methods (again, correct me if I am wrong).

Do you think that if such new standards become accepted in the US, the Taiwanese Department/Ministry of Education will follow suit? American English seems to be preferred in Taiwan, and I would imagine that with many Taiwanese doing their MAs/PhDs/EdDs in TESOL in the US they would have some influence on the teacher education standards accepted in Taiwan. Am I right?

8

You’re right that Taiwanese accreditation is not based on qualitative assessment standards. It isn’t based on any standards because there really is nothing to determine accredited and unaccredited teachers.

Taiwan would not likely follow suit if the US adopted a set of standards for its public school teachers in the TESOL field. And if it did follow suit, the MOE’s adoption of such standards would like be so poorly enforced that it would actually make matters worse.

But if done right, it would be a vast improvement. But then, that’s a very big IF.

9

[quote=“TESOLResearcher”]I was referring to TESOL International:

tesol.org[/quote]Thank you for the link. Seems like an interesting organisation. Though much of the information on the site is about ESL in the States, I found this page at least on EFL:
tesol.org/s_tesol/sec_docume … 66&DID=366
I see they also organize conferences in various countries.

[quote=“TESOLResearcher”]Do you think that if such new standards become accepted in the US, the Taiwanese Department/Ministry of Education will follow suit? American English seems to be preferred in Taiwan, and I would imagine that with many Taiwanese doing their MAs/PhDs/EdDs in TESOL in the US they would have some influence on the teacher education standards accepted in Taiwan. Am I right?[/quote]Well, people from Taiwan have been doing postgraduate study in the US (as well as in the UK, Australia and other countries) for quite some time but it doesn’t seem to have had much effect on state school teacher training here yet!

If anything, European, not US, standards are getting more dominant. See this page from the government’s Language Testing and Training Centre website:
lttc.ntu.edu.tw/englishcomparativenew.htm
The columns on the left concern tests designed and administered by the LTTC (used only in Taiwan). The middle column shows the corresponding levels of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. The two columns on the right show the corresponding tests from Cambridge and BULATS, which are now officially recognised in Taiwan.

That page is concerned with assessment of learners, not teachers, but in addition the Cambridge TKT (Teaching Knowledge Test) is now available here and seems to be gaining popularity.
cambridgeesol.org/TKT/index.htm

(Note for people who are hoping to get their CELTA or Trinity Cert. TESOL: the TKT could be seen as a step towards one of those qualifications.)[quote]After taking TKT, teachers who want to develop their knowledge further can progress to Cambridge ESOL’s well-established teaching awards, such as ICELT (In-service Certificate in English Language Teaching) and CELTA (Certificate in English Language Teaching to Adults).[/quote]

10

Not surprising, who’re the biggest and best known EFL publishers in this area?

Oxford Univ. Press
Cambridge Univ. Press

What about the other British Publishers that you can name?

Pearson
owners of Longman, ft, penguin books, et al.
…

The British publishers have been expanding their reach for years internationally because the domestic market was so small. It’s not surprising that the American’s are playing catch up.