Dec 14 2009
Being Critical about the Role of the Teacher: Allowing Students to Disagree
Critical mass (noun)
Definition 1. point of change: a point or situation at which change occurs
“You can’t just lump things into two categories, life’s not that simple” (Donnie Darko)
New week – new post! And a subject close to my heart – that of the teacher’s role in the classroom and teacher-centredness. I am going to sidestep the fact its Christmas soon, as I know not everyone will be celebrating and for some it’s just like any other week rather than the pre-Christmas ‘let’s go crazy in the shopping centre’ week, so I am going to focus on the topic of education 
I remember when I was doing my certificate and diploma level training (perhaps more the former) there was a lot of emphasis placed on Teacher Taking Time (TTT) as a bad thing, almost to the point where I felt that my best bet for successfully passing the course would have been to gag myself before entering the classroom and say nothing! I remember a fellow trainee dong a lesson completely in mime, and despite the bewilderment of the students, the course trainer could barely contain his excitement at the cutting edgeness of it all! I honestly thought he would combust with pride. The rest of us spent a few days feeling we would never measure up, and then I thought….there must be more to this than meets the eye. I mean miming might work once or twice, but all year, every lesson. Hmmm.
I jest of course (though that story is true), but it always felt to me like there was a fundamental flaw in the concept as the ‘problem’ was being dealt with in the wrong way. Of course it is a reaction to the classroom that resembles that in the opening picture, which none of us would condone, where the teacher is dominating at the front and students are gently snoozing or disengaged in the audience – but is silencing the teacher really the answer? Isn’t there somewhere else on the continuum where both teachers and students can have a voice in a bit more of a dialogic process and share the ‘right’ to speak? We want to provide opportunities for students to practice their speaking skills, but is the most effective way of doing this to make poor trainee teachers try and work out how they can do what they had planned through any means other than the very language they are there to teach? A paradox if ever I’ve seen one! Luckily things have moved on a bit since then.
Audio-Visual Interlude
Well I thought I’d begin by embedding a scene from one of my favourite ever movies “Donnie Darko”. It is a mastery of sheer weirdness and a classic example of deconstructive cinema – but at the same time deeply (but quietly) questioning of the way our society operates. As the main character Donnie is a school student, quite a lot of the film’s action takes place at school. Here is one of my favourite scenes which I will comment on below. Donnie and his classmates are in a class being run in what *could* have been a dynamic way – the teacher is using an audio-visual clip and encouraging participation. But it still remains teacher-centred and the teacher is abusing her power. Please watch now!
Being Critical About Classroom Power
There is so much to say on this clip, I could write a book on it (but I won’t as I know most people’s blogging patience doesn’t stretch that far!). The abuses of power by the teacher are too numerous to mention but perhaps the highlights are:
a) assumption of content – the video has a strong religious overtone that is being imposed on the class to satiate a need primarily in the teacher – this is done through a guru type ‘leader’ named Jim Cunningham (who later turns out to be something of a fraud)
b) the ‘theatrics’ of participation – all the students are forced to comply, and when Donnie questions, he is threatened with a lower mark, the ultimate abuse of teacher power. Participation is therefore not equal or a choice
c) the task itself – the lifeline forces students to ‘choose’ to go along with the teacher’s world view or risk punishment. The lifeline represents a biased view and for anyone with a questioning mind, it is impossible to squeeze their answer into the choices given
d) the lack of space for difference – for me having a student like Donnie in the classroom would be a joy as he demonstrates intelligence and insight, as well as a real wish to engage. But the teacher will not allow him to ‘play’ this role and tries to silence him – resorting to the exasperated head master and his parents when her own authority isn’t enough. She contributes to Donnie’s outburst through the way her lesson is organised, but this remains unrecognised.
*(also spot the subliminal fact that the names on the negative situation cards used in the life-line game are both non-American: another level of questioning in the script which questions negative racial stereotypes).
Implications for ELT (and education in general)
As teachers, we are faced with these sorts of situations every day. Imagine if the teacher had allowed the discussion and dissent to flow, had encouraged her students to express opinions and doubts about the certainty of life. If her own intellect and imagination had been been able to stretch beyond the binary opposites of ‘love’ and ‘fear’ – what a different lesson it might have been. She would have grown closer to the students and in the process, the learning experience may have become shared.
So I guess for me what is important about all of this is that the amount a teacher talks or doesn’t talk does not automatically lead to an open and equal classroom. *That* was always the mistake of the TTT concept for me. The open (and critical) classroom is more a state of mind that will be reflected at all levels of classroom planning. There may be days when it is appropriate for a teacher to talk more, and others less, but the important thing for me is how the classroom is set up to allow participation….of everyone. Not just as a good language model and live listening, but as a human being. The teacher in Donnie Darko may be a deliberate stereotype, but there is something recognisable in her for all of us.
I prefer to try to emulate the words of Paulo Friere when he said:
“Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world.”
This blog post is dedicated to the Donnie Darko’s of the classroom – both teachers and students!
Over to you…….
Nice post, Sara.
I loved the story of your tutor getting excited at what appears to have been a rather strange lesson…
As a tutor on similar courses I have often found myself telling trainees to talk less when they could be eliciting language, ideas, opinions from their students, but there is much more to your post and the video, of course, than mere amount of teacher talk.
I wonder, for the sake of developing this discussion, to what degree is negotiation and dissent desirable regarding content knowledge.
The teacher in the video is clearly in breach of several education principles and abusing the students with a show of power through her threats. This is at the level of method and attitude. We do not know the content of her syllabus or, to what degree she herself was misinterpreting or misrepresenting it.
The negotiated syllabus in ELT is a very old concept, as you already probably know, and one that I did have the opportunity to experience during a short beginner course in Turkish, some years ago.
However, although it is possible to negotiate the items to be learnt and the methods to be employed or the topics to be included, do you think that at that or at any other level, learners should be allowed to disagree on the actual content?
How far do you accept the concept of teacher authority, or do you not accept it at all?
Beautiful opening response Marisa – thx for your ideas and thoughts.
To begin at the end – teacher authority. Well as teachers we always have authority (unless it was a community level collective sharing of skills) as this is incribed within the ‘system’ of education. Like all teachers I have to mark work, monitor attendance etc. which goes along with that role. However, in the classroom, and in the relationship I have with my students, I prefer not to think of it as ‘authority’ (which doesn’t mean ignoring our different positions btw as that would also be disengaged from reality). It is more about trying to increase the opportunities for negotiation, discussion and sometimes dissent…yes. It is more about a shift in the balance of ‘control’ in the classroom that works in subtle ways and just helps things to come together in a way that feels less authoritarian. Does that make sense? I think it means letting go primarily of the need to control things all the time (very DOGME)!
You are totally right to separate the two parts of my post i.e. TTT and method/attitude/content. To be clear the on TTT, as a teacher educator of course you might want to be sure teachers allow students time to answer questions (something we all get wrong to begin with as our nerves makes us jump in quickly), and maximise chances for involvement and oral practice, so there is still very much a need for a balance to be struck. But perhaps the blanket “too much TTT” approach I encountered didn’t help much with that – I think today’s approach is more balanced isn’t it?
Regarding content, which I think is a key area (thanks for raising it), I do think wherever possible students should be involved in content and yes I do think they should, by default, have the right to question it – that doesn’t mean that you will remove it immediately. But it may mean that a discussion is had about the value of that particular area of the syllabus so that students feel they are being heard. For those teaching to test (most of our teachers in GR), that may mean finding an opportunity in each lesson for there to be a choice of one task – it could mean negotiating over topics and then asking S’s to bring in relevant authentic material, it could be allowing students to begin a discussion and letting it flow before rushing it too quickly back onto the lesson plan. I think that even the most restrictive type of content can still allow some space for student involvement and disagreement (again perhaps paradoxically) can help students to better reengage with the content if some of it remains unchanged after the discussion. Its only natural for all students to dislike certain parts of a syllabus and like other parts – very human.
Best case scenario is the concept of needs analysis and negotiated syllabus. I too have had the pleasure of working like that, and it was a joy! But this is a rarity as most syllabi/syllabuses (delete as appropriate)!! need to be forward planned to some degree. But the ‘details’ do not and this is where the greatest space for development lies I think.
Thanks again Marisa. Always a pleasure!
Oooh one other thing Marisa (sorry forgot above). You raised the point that we do not know how much what the teacher is doing is infact conforming to syllabus expectations – absolutely spot on. Donnie Darko is very questioning of the teaching of religion and its influence within education in the US and this teacher serves as a kind of illustration of the worst ‘abuses’ of that, with another teacher who follows a more ‘critical’ approach serving as the comparison. If you haven’t seen the film, I highly recommend it for Christmas time viewing as I don’t want to spoil it for you too much.
This is a great posting Sara.
I am really happy to read your thoughts because it is something that I have been thinking about a lot recently myself (I just submitted a talk to TESOL-Spain titled ‘Teacher Talk Time: Quality not Quantity’.)
It’s funny – I can remember a comment appearing on my own teaching observation feedback form all those years ago which said, “This is not the Jamie show!”. This was in response to an anecdote I had told my students – something relevant to whatever is was that we were doing at the time.
I changed my ways before the end of the course. Then one day during a group discussion on vegetarianism a student asked me about my views. I simply said, “Oh that’s not important. Just pretend I’m not here’. That student thought that I was a bit of a weirdy but you wouldn’t believe the praise I got from my trainer and my peers (well actually, it appears that you would believe it!).
I can just imagine the comical absurdity of a teacher using mime specifically because he has been told that TTT is bad!
Thank you Jamie. Good luck with that presentation! I’ve been to TESOL Spain once when it was in Madrid about 4 years ago and had a great time.
Yes – your experience illustates the effect of the “no TTT” rule – you actually symbolically ‘disappeared’ yourself from the class!!! The response you gave (which under that kind of pressure is what any of us would have done) goes against the conventions of human communication and could easily be seen as avoidance….amazing that something so artificial in communicative terms should score such high points. I think that is how the trainee who came up with the mime idea had the brainwave really. Well if I am not allowed to talk, but I have to do this teaching practice, what are my options? Oh I know……
The teacher sharing stories with a class is important in humanising us. Telling an anecdote related to your lesson sounds a long way from inferring it was a stand up comedy routine. Thank goodness we all moved on and recovered our voices!
I suspect we are in agreement on the basis of the argument but seem to not be agreeing on certain points merely, I think, because of a slight difference in the way each is using the terms of reference:
When I mention “authority” I am referring to an accepted term in education, which suggests that the teacher has more knowledge of the subject matter than the learner.
And by “content”, I mean the selfsame, i.e. the subject matter, most specifically the facts, not the opinions. In our case, this refers to language, its vocabulary etc.
It goes without saying that I agree about giving our students choice and that topics and themes or even the actual order or selection of the linguistic items to be taught could negotiated and accepted or rejected by the student.
Yes I think so too – we do agree. Critical educators also use ‘authority’ to denote symbolic power within the system. But I see now you mean in terms of knowledge. Yes I guess you are the one, as a teacher, who has a deeper awareness of the language in a total sense – at least until a certain level has been reached – is that what you mean? But I don’t think vocabulary/expression is always a question of ‘fact’ – well maybe some is at the level of table, chair, door but once you get into “can I have a beer please” you enter into the new level which is context rich and therefore open to intepretation (I am purposefully avoiding too much linguistic jargon here to keep things simple). There I think students do negotiate meaning with the teacher and we can help them to understand what choices are available in terms of expression, and what can be understood in terms of meaning, and what is a replica of what a NEST would say, and how they might be perceived by the listener etc etc. So there is a discussion in there about models (and whether NEST ones are the appropriate ones), but let’s save that for another post! But what I do know is that I have heard teachers of English tell their students emphatically that we cannot say this or that in English when infact that is really only their own personal view! In fact I often feel I spend a bit of time ‘repairing’ such certain views when I get a new group of students who ask me questions and say “but we can’t say X, we have to say Y – our teacher told us”. Have you had that experience?
I’d love to see Jamie’s TTQ session at TESOL Spain. The nature of teacher talking is vital cause we are the students’ primary source of comprehensible input, I think. So the idea of teacher silence is crazy.
As forthe DD clip, well she could have had them dfiscuss in pairs or small groups first. It is not always a bad idea to give an awkward dichotomy (like fear and love) if it provokes discussion and reaction – ‘it doesn’t work Miss’. But that wasn’t the teacher-character’s motivation, obviously.
The film that made me think most about teaching in 2009 has been ‘entre les murs’ (‘The class’ in English). An exemplary teacher resonds inappropriately to extreme provocation and it blows his credibility out of the water. Hmm. Worth a viewing.
Jeremy
Totally agree Jeremy – thanks for this. The task (in my case it would have to be minus the video!) is not inherently unworkable with an open minded teacher. I would drop the negatively stereotyped non-American cheating and stealing examples and get students thinking about what these terms “fear” and “love” mean as well as all the shades inbetween them! We are all provoked by our students all the time one could argue, but watching the Donnie Darko clip you can just see how if the teacher had only said “really Donnie, how do you see that working” rather than moving in with the ‘power’ move so quickly, it might all have turned out differently! As for the silence, I am relieved to hear that ‘the practice of ELT’ won’t be advocating ‘the miming approach’ any time soon then!! Thanks for your visit and glad you enjoyed Donnie as much as I did!
I found that the teacher of the video was so XIXth century!! Sara you wrote there is something of her in each of us but I hope not!! mon Dieu! And the anecdote about miming seems surrealistic. I agree about negociation of themes, tasks and type of tasks etc. (a group of Japanese once told me they were terrified to work in groups with a certain person in the group, so could I please please avoid group work). But this does not mean negociating the language itself, of course. Although when an unforseen question arises, I may need to make some research before I can answer properly, so I take a note and answer the following day.
I also found that the students (I mostly work with adults) just LOVE anecdotes. They are in front of a teacher and a native speaker one: they want to listen to her! this is a good listening and cultural exercise (they love to hear me talk about Carla et Nicolas) at first, but then they very quickly react to the anecdote, engaging in the conversation, and *in turns* tell their own anecdote : real communication !
Hi again Alice – welcome back! ooh the dangers of blogging. I definitely didn’t say that there is something of her in each of us, I said she might remind us of people we know (in my case a music teacher I once had who destroyed my faith in playing an instrument, something I have never forgotten as I am such a music lover – instead I had to sing and dance!!). So no no – don’t worry – I quite agree with your “Mon Dieu” response
I would never suggest that authoritarianism is a ‘natural’ part of us all. Quite the opposite – I think humans are naturally collaborative creatures.
Not sure though that we cannot negotiate language too. Yes probably as teachers of English we are all more ‘knowledgeable’ about language structure but I find I spend quite a lot of time helping students understand the differences in nuanced meaning between one term or another, and I don’t always convince them (as they are just as knowledgeable about context)! Perhaps as they grow more confident, their right to question grows at the language level? We all sometime need to go away and check language points. This is very human! I also agree that anecdotes are very bonding – that is how we get to know each other.
Ah! I’m sorry I completely misunderstood your sentence “there is something recognisable in her for all of us”. But then I’m reassured too!
I agree with you about negociating language regarding context.
When I wrote about answering a question the following day, I did not mean checking a language point (this may happen too, mind you), but to allow me some time to *reflect* about my knowledge of the language. I know that “rester” and “demeurer” are different, but how shall I find all the necessary different examples to illustrate the difference and deduce a simple rule from them? I need more time, and take it.
Jeremy, I really recommend “entre les murs” too! (the film has been translated by “the class” and I find it a very poor translation, as “entre les murs” describes the educational situation in France : all that happens in a class is kind of secret, no one enter the class apart from the teacher and the students, it’s a complete mystery for everyone, it happens “entre les murs”, between the four walls of a classroom.). This was why the film was such a success in France : everyone wanted to know what happens “entre les murs”! the other asset of the film is that it is not manichean : the teacher makes mistakes, asks questions, tries to find a solution, and the teenagers are very diverse too.
An “exemplary” teacher? I’m not sure, but he would make any teacher think…
Hey no problem Alice. Blogging is not an exact science and making sure we understand each other is an important part of the e-communication. Glad to have clarified!
Hi Sara,
I don’t have much to add. I really just wanted to say how much I enjoyed this post. There’s something very satisfying about it.
I do wholeheartedly agree that everyone in the classroom should have an equal right to participate and it’s important to me that all feel comfortable to do so. I have always worked with young adults and adults, though, so can only speak from that perspective.
I’m happy for students to question and negotiate the language itself as this encourages and allows them to reflect on the language they hear in the classroom and outside of it. If they come in and say, “You told us X, but yesterday I heard/read Y” then this means that they’re noticing the language around them and allows for discussion of use and context etc.
Similarly, I’ve learned new words and discovered new things about the language through students’ questions. In this last term, for example, I discovered that ‘drift’ is also some sort of car manoeuvre, and that the way I pronounce the letter ‘H’ is a particular feature of Irish English, through students questioning my definitions and pronunciation (and subsequent Twitter help!)
Carol
Thank you kindly Carol! I agree that the negotiation of language is an important part of the work we do and also perhaps has the potential to make said language more meaninful for the students? I learn from my students constantly and this perhaps is one of the great things about being a teacher.
Yes I fully agree Carol, students’ questions are very interesting and help us grow!
However, I know what Sara means about “repairing” : very often I hear “we can’t say that in French” : well, a student just said it! I feel that French people have a very normative view of the language : but like every other language, it is alive, not written in marble once and for all!
Just wanted to post a link for the film mentioned by Jeremy and Alice http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2194489/the_class_official_theatrical_movie_trailer/
I can only see the trailer as the film is not out in GR yet, but it looks excellent from the short extract I saw. All the best of French cinema and why I love it – you can ‘feel’ the realism in the dialogue. From what I have understood it also deals with issues of race and cross generation undrestandings of knowledge (I note the scene where the teachers are discussing when the students will be ready for Voltaire and that they will have problems with the enlightenment). This is not there by accident, and of course is so appropriately placed in a French context with giants like Foucault and Bourdeiu to boast of (two of my favourites).
The point here (and I am extrapolating from a film I haven’t yet seen and using the trailer as a visual stimulus) is the cross-generational aspects of this issue. These days educators might complain (as I suspect they have always done) that students don’t understand what they are trying to teach and have no appreciation for certain important values – in my experience this often gets expressed in relation to behaviour in the classroom or comments about poor language use. I think it is worth pondering if it is infact educators who are out of synch rather than students. They surely have a different understanding of the world and see it through different eyes to us 35+ people who are pontificating on twitter and blogs!! I see it as our job to catch up with them, not the other way around. What about others?
This film looks promising in tackling some of those questions. We can also tackle them here.
Another very interesting post…I always hated the “too much TTT” notes on my Certificate course evaluation sheets, and though I can understand how such an oversimplification is useful in a way (if only just to distance the basics of what’s considered good communicative language teaching as far as possible from the archetypal “college professor lecturing at length about subject he knows way more about than you do” role in the minds of new teachers), I’m glad that people seem willing now to accept a more participative role on the part of the teacher. But if you consider some of the outright lies we tell sometimes when teaching grammar, the idea that “TTT is always bad” is forgivable, is as much as its a useful falsehood that serves merely as an initial orientation towards a more complete understanding.
Of course, as our friend Donnie points out in the clip, this type of binary thinking (STT good=TTT bad) is unsatisfactory as a description of any system as complex as the teaching process or ethics and human emotion.
Fantastic film by the way, one of my favorites ever, definitely.
Yes indeed Nicky. Our world (and thinking) are often organised at the level of binary opposites. As Jeremy pointed out, and I agree, these are often useful for making us all think about what lies inbetween. So a great task might be to put up the terms “love” and “fear” and then initiate a discussion about how stable they are, what they mean to people, what other descriptions are needed to enhance them or explain them. I tend to see the binaries as more about looking at ripples of meaning (stealing that term a bit from Sassure and Derrida!) and the certainty with which they are often used as if they are self-evident. So for me, it would be about looking at what the terms mean for each person in the lesson and then arranging a discussion around that. Imagine all the wonderful vocabularly that would be elicited through *that* process. Glad you are also a Donnie fan!
Very thought provoking, and great video clip. I tend to go too much the other way and find myself in the ridiculous position of asking everyone’s opinions on a language point and trying to lead them towards the right answer when all the time I’m the only person in the class who knows and end up saying something like “I can see where you are all coming from, but actually the answer is A”. I also find students asking me all the time “Well, what do you think about it?” I think this proves that having too much emphasis on low TTT (which I am pretty much over) and too much emphasis on not appearing an authority in the classroom can sometimes lead to the same thing!
My low TTT anecdote is a lesson by a teacher in the school we observed during my DELTA, which was a discussion to which the teacher’s spoken contribution was to call out names to make sure everyone had a chance to speak. No feedback, nothing, just names. Despite already having been low TTT brainwashed, none of us could find anything good to say about the lesson to the teacher trainer afterwards and I think he agreed but had to stick to the low TTT script.
I’ve recently been concentrating on classroom language, mainly meaning teacher talk, and I sometimes imagine the “CELTA book of classroom language” with 110 blank pages… Then again, talking about low TTT is sometimes a very useful simplification in teacher training
Hi Alex,
Great ideas (as always). Just a few thoughts to follow up:
1. I also follow the “what do you think it might be” approach as this is empowering for the students and creates a sense that their opinion counts.
2. Totally agree that you should answer when students ask you questions as this is humanising for both of you. That feeds in to what I was saying before – the classroom space should be neither disempowering for the teacher or the student. If people are told to cut the T-T-T without understanding
communicational dynamics (and esp. as part of a first level training course) they might apply it with all the passion of a new convert and actually cease to speak (the most extreme example being the mime lesson).
3. I think there is a difference between guiding the lesson and controlling it (hence my decision not to use the word authority) although I accept that what I wouldn’t want is to disengage from the fact that I am the teacher and that is a fact that cannot be ignored. But a gentle hand of guidance with plenty of space for people to express their views (or not, which is also a right – I never liked the idea that in a communicative classroom you also had to drag language out of someone, no matter how reluctant they were!). No I am a firm believer in the right to silence (don’t use it myself very often, but that’s another story!)
4. Totally agree that T-T-T is needed though to help T’s
understand how to stand back and listen – I prefer to think of this as active listening skills rather than anything else as “too much….” of anything really seems a negative way to view, as Jeremy said, listening input for the students! Perhaps its time for a rename.
Don’t know why I numbered these points, but it felt like the right thing to do at the time. Be patient…long day!
Just thought I’d throw my 2p in on a very interesting discussion by attempting to situate the “no-or-low TTT” proscription.
As in most things in this profession, it seems to me we are witnessing yet another pendulum swing – this time in favour of TTT and against attempts ot kerb it, and generally I applaud a renewed interest in the role and value of teacher talk, fuelled as it has been, in part by the influence (way back in the 1980s) of Krashen’s notion of ‘comprehensible input’, and, more recently, by socio-cultural learning theory and the idea that “other-regulation” by a “better other” can lead to “self-regulation” on the part of the learner. (I actually wrote an article about how teachers need to explore the communciative value of their own talk, way back in trhe mid-nineties).
However, before we chuck out the proscription on TTT altogether, let’s recall where it comes from. When most novice teachers start teaching, their default model of what teaching is is what their high school math or history teacher used to do, i.e. stand at the board and do the whole chalk-and-talk thing. Even if they have doubts about the effectiveness of this model, it’s a very safe one to adopt, when you’re starting out, since it gives you optimum control. The idea of ‘handing over’ to the learners – even by asking them questions – risks opening up a can of worms. What if you can’t understand what they’re saying? What if they make a mistake? What if two students speak at the same time? etc etc. Moreover, as teachers in training discover the rules of English gramamr for the first time, they are often overcome by an almost missionary zeal to explain them to their learners – what Charles Curran called the “sickness to teach”.
In order to pre-empt this dogged adherence to a transmission model of teaching, trainers invoked the “reduce TTT” idea. If your teaching practice was judged on how successfully your reduced the “chalk-and-talk”, while upping the amount of student interaction, surely this wasn’t a Bad Thing? OK, so some trainers and some trainees took it too literally, and like every rule of teaching (or of life for that matter) there comes a point when you need to problematise it. But let’s be fair, the no-or-low TTT rule turned many a teacher-centred pedant into a class-centered pedagogue.
Thanks Scott, a lot richer than just 2p methinks! Thanks for visiting. You are right to locate this discussion in its theoretical context and I am grateful for your input as you obviously know more about it than I do (I confess I have thought about it mostly in terms of ELT and its liberal-humanist underpinnings rather than the specifics of ELT methodology trends etc).
I would agree that what is not a desirable alternative to no TTT is a teacher centred classroom with silent students (hence I suppose the use of the image at the start of this blog post). That is what I feel I am arguing against here. I am just wondering whether the application of the notion of no or low TTT as a way to change this is really the answer (i.e. it doesn’t really tackle what is wrong with the former model at any kind of systemic level). It sort of imposes a curfew on TTT, even though I would agree with the idea that there are real dangers in relation to “sickness to teach”. For this reason I think the motivation was probably the right one amongst those who first thought of these ideas and tried to apply them, and in those who developed the notion further (kind of as much as anything can be when it is not always thought out as thoroughly as it should be and is a bit divorced from social context). And of course how the notion is applied depends very much on the trainer. Perhaps in my case the certificate trainer who was thrilled with the miming method hadn’t really given it much thought beyond what was being presented as the new ‘trend’ and within his/her own limited training in EL.
What I am not sure about is whether it is true that “the no or low TTT rule turned many a teacher-centred pedant into a class-centred pedagogue” is really true. Is the cause-effect relationship really that simple? I mean can you map an idea like low-TTT onto someone who carries the cultural baggage of a teacher dominated experience and be sure it has resonated? Firstly, some people who learn like this don’t always teach like this. Their intellect and critique intervenes and they throw off those patterns for themselves, witthout the need for a plug-in theory to help them. Secondly, some people who learn in so-called learner centred environments don’t escape teachers wielding power in other ways. So for me, the TTT theory alone would probably not be enough – and we have no way of knowing what actually happens when teachers get back into their classroom. That is why, I guess, in my little offering here, I tried to tie the TTT notion to the idea of classroom power dynamics and teacher role. It is part and parcel of the same thing IMHO.
But where I *would* agree with you 100% is that it wouldn’t be useful to kick out the low or no TTT idea without acknowledging that there are times and situations where it is useful. I would say though in a critical way, is it useful on its own and devoid of any real and fundamental questioning of power and pedagogy in ELT and how that reflects in training methods? Well perhaps that is another discussion.
Well that’s my two penneth now!
I really liked reading this post Sara, thanks.
I’ve unfortunately not seen the film (yes get the gasps out of the way) but I am going to watch it this week – I even think it’s sitting on the DVD shelf. Friday I’m home alone so that’s the entertainment sorted.
I found one particular point made me shudder in that short clip. That was the moment at the end of the video in class, the camera turns to the teacher and she lets out the self-satisfied sigh. Perhaps an uncomfortable notion that she felt she had and was about to spiritually enlighten her class. *urg*
Some equally thought-provoking responses to your post too – it’s great reading.
I would like to quickly come back to something you mentioned in your response to Scott, which I was going to bring up:
“can you map an idea like low-TTT onto someone who carries the cultural baggage of a teacher dominated experience and be sure it has resonated?”
We all come at your post from different angles and experiences (which makes the ‘spheres a wonderful place to learn. I teach predominantly on a one-to-one basis. I have experience too of teaching mixed classes in the UK. The ‘cultural baggage’ you mention is, IMHO, more acutely sensed in the one-to-one situation and as such, one is forced to (and should) consider the classroom dynamic which which the student has experience. I remember very vividly for example teaching a Russian housewife, here in the UK with her husband, who worked in oil. She had grown up in a pre-Perestroika system in which the teacher is authority. I heard examples of questionable (as an understatement) methods and an educational system where education was there to “bring about conformity” in a big way. I know this isn’t new news to your readers by any means.
I’m honoured when students feel they can share such experiences with me and it’s something I encourage as part of a needs analysis process (but only if they are comfortable doing so – some migrants here are not so happy talking about home or any experiences to do with it). It’s a wonderful profession where we can share culture, history and experience. But here is where I (finally!) come back to the point of TTT. I am often left considering (and I find each case is to be considered on its own merits) how I as their teacher can introduce an alternative dynamic to the one they associate with the classroom. One where their opinions are valued and actively encouraged. How can I ‘prove’ that I am a good teacher, even though I don’t talk AT them, wave a stick around or impart my grammatical knowledge in a military fashion (i.e. their own benchmarks).
Therefore a lot of the time, before I even come to the question of TTT, I’m looking at how they experience education. Then we can work on a way of turning the tables and encouraging more student-led input and teacher encouragement. For student coming from authority-centred systems, this had to be a good thing.
Thanks Emma,
Great to see you here! Thanks for your thoughts on your teaching context and the content of the blog so far. Very much hope you enjoy Donnie on Friday night. I recommend a nice glass of wine to go with it! Plus, don’t try to work out the ending – it’ll drive you nuts
You are absolutely right IMHO that being a ‘good’ teacher (which is of course subjective) cannot be proved merely by lowering the TTT, tho I have my reservations (sadly) that this is one of the main ways teaching has been assessed in certificate type situations until recently which is why I brought it up. I think what constitutes good or effective teaching is something that needs perhaps to reach a deeper level of a teacher’s consciousness and awareness and shouldn’t bypass patterns of shared communication and control in the classroom (of which TTT are part), rather than just being seen as an add-on.
Of course how students experience education is key, as well as how they understand the role of the teacher. That is why all teachers should have an awareness of the background of their student body. But teachers also need to be aware of their own cultural biases and inheritance (the Donnie Darko teacher being perhaps a primary example of an the unreconstituted ‘moral majority’ in that respect! A stereotype of course, but a recognisable one). Teachers perhaps also need to be wary of drawing quick conclusions about what type of learner certain systems produce and the system does not produce the same outcome in the learner – many learners deviate from what is expected and resist conformity. To that end, I would argue that all education systems are there, in part, to bring about conformity. The appearance of the ‘right’ to question, may still be the right to question within certain parametres and understandings of the world and no further than that.
BTW I completely agree with you about the self-satisfied sigh from the teacher in Donnie Darko speaking volumes about her inability to understand why anyone else wouldn’t think the ideas she is presenting are really important. A sober reminder for all of us in there. No matter how interesting we may find something, our students may not agree. All the more reason to allow them to lead the content where possible!
Lovely to see you here Emma. Let me know if you enjoy the film!
Sara, your second paragraph of your answer to Emma is, IMHO, absolutely spot on! it is also very well written (in fact it rejoices me to see this as I feel that these are the very words I could have written if I had a better command of English.)
As for the learner’s experience of learning and being taught : yes this a key, but sometimes it is very difficult to get to this key. Mainly because a learner may not be entirely aware of it.
Alice thanks for the huge compliment about my writing! Right back at you (as they say) as I think yours is very expressive and to the point too!
Bonjour à tous,
About the film “Entre les murs”, I would like to answer Sara’s
comment “They (the pupils) surely have a different understanding of the world and see it through different eyes to us 35+ people who are pontificating on twitter and blogs!! I see it as our job to catch up with them, not the other way around. What about others? ”
Well I hope we are not”pontificating” ! eh eh… but I think the film must be seen with the whole French educational system in mind. This is a very centralised system. The national competition (not an exam) is very very academic and difficult, and the young teachers have little practical preparation before getting into a class for the first time. They can be sent to northern schools (for instance a difficult school in the surburbs of Paris) or to Calais when their home town is in fact Cannes or Cassis. No choice whatsoever.
The national curriculum is more or less the same as it was when the classes had fewer pupils and when the teaching profession was respected and the unemployment level less high.
The massification of education was not implemented along with the right means nor the right anticipation of consequences coming from it.
The film points this out : the discrepancy between the national curriculum, the teachers’ qualifications and poor preparation, and the reality of the classroom nowadays.
The teacher is alone “entre les murs”of his classroom, alone with his own doubts and mistakes, alone ith his poor preparation and alone to struggle to find ways to adapt his non existent experience to a world he may not have any idea of if he grew up in the XVIth arrondissement of Paris.
Alice thanks so much for providing us with this invaluable perspective from the point of view of the French education system and filling us all in in a way that only someone from there can. I think the mismatches you refer to between system, qualifications, syllabus, the purpose of education and societal development make for exceptionally interesting drama and discussion about how these trending patterns affect all of us working as teachers in our far flung locations across the globe. There are many parallels. BTW, how can I get hold of this film? Wd like to watch it before it comes to GR in the cinema which may be some time? Email me with details if you can at hannam@city.academic.gr.
but I think we can also try to see things from their perspective more and spend real time talking to our students (beyond the classroom) to find out how they see the world in all its complexity (and in all their diversity).
ps- yes ‘pontificating’ – good point and I guess my slight irony was not lost on you!! I used as a way of illustrating how our thinking may seem to students of a different generation. Our discussion are of course very important
Well Sara, I woke up this morning and set out to comment on this post as I read it last night, but I spent two hours getting lost in a backlog of google reader posts and twitter. Such is the life of a teacher these days I suppose
FYI I haven’t read the other comments yet. I’m hungry and want to get this done so I can go eat, so I apologize if I repeat anything
Allowing for dissent in the classroom is so important, but it’s such a complicated issue, at least in my part of the world. The very first thing you need to do (assuming you are open to opposing ideas) is to build trust. Especially in my current teaching context, new students don’t really trust each other. Social reprisal can go far beyond an angry word in the classroom and students are quite sensitive about voicing their opinions and fearful as well because they live in a culture where this simply isn’t the norm.
You have to slowly build a classroom environment where your students trust each other and learn that it’s ok to disagree. You have to show that all opinions will be respected and given ample voice. This is where the teacher needs to really step in as mediator. It’s also a fine line to walk on finding topics that will get your students speaking, but won’t cause a fist fight.
It’s also really important to demonstrate to the students that the voice of the teacher is only one among many and that the teacher can be wrong. I use and love Ken Wilson’s technique of making ridiculously untrue statements that the students point out. It shows we are fallible and willing to accept correction from the students.
After building an environment conducive to dissent, we have to worry about language as well. The questions, “What do you think?” can be terrifying for students. It’s so open and broad. What can they possibly say? Especially if the topic is one they haven’t given much thought to previously. This is why the teachers make it easy by saying, “Well, do you think it’s good or bad?” Then we can build. “Ok, bad, why bad?” “Do you really think X is a problem?” and on and on.
Moving on, the voice of the teacher is really important, as is their interest. About a year ago I had a class and we were discussing evolution. I was quite bored as all my students had the same exact information (which isn’t much round these parts) and I’d heard it a hundred times before in other classes. I knew what the students would say before they even said it. The students realized I was bored and weren’t really motivated to speak. They asked, “Well, what is your opinion?” I had no interest in giving mine because, being a good teacher with low TTT, I knew that this would turn into a one-sided discussion with me doing lots of talking and explaining. I told the students it wasn’t important what I thought, only that they discussed the matter to practice their English. Of course, the lesson was a bit of a flop.
Getting feedback on the lesson and reflecting on it quite a bit, I ended up changing my whole approach. The teacher’s voice can be incredibly motivating. If I’m not interested, why should my students be? The students want to know what I think and they will engage with the class on my discussion. Isn’t this what we want, to motivate them to communicate? As I’ve had happen, my voice may often spark a debate among the students on separate issues. The students also feel it’s important to hear my voice because they like the listening practice. So, the moral of the story is that not all lessons have to be low TTT if the level of interaction is high and engaging. Also, your relationships and connections to the students will provide the foundation for meaningful language use rather than practicing for practicing’s sake.
Regarding this:
”Education either functions as an instrument which is used to facilitate integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity or it becomes the practice of freedom, the means by which men and women deal critically and creatively with reality…”
A false dichotomy, I’m sure. It can be both (and neither, I suppose). The first part could be seen as positive, as it could open youngsters’ minds to the why and how of the system in which they live, not necessarily bringing about ‘conformity’ (emotionally charged word as it is – could be changed to ‘understanding’). The second part will teach them how to change things, if they feel it is necessary – and lead to some degree of judgement and enlightenment.
And, to be very honest, I’m fed up reading that education is either about this or that and nothing else. Who are these idiots who tell us this? Why are they trying to paint us into a corner, squeeze us into boxes marked ‘good’ or ‘bad’?
No wonder education is the poor cousin of the academic world, a critical labyrinth, a maze of interpretitive cul-de-sacs, a barrel of constructivist half-truths and deceptions. Sometimes I wish I could go back to gardening – far more honest!
Thanks Sandy for your contribution and many apologies for not moderating your comment sooner. You got trapped in my blog pipeline and a horrible email crash last week so no alerts on new posts. I take your point about not polarising things. It is very important to explore all the different dimensions of what ‘conformity’ might mean. So for me the Friere quote is more of an aspiration which I think does promote a different approach on a day-to-day level and perhaps allows discussions to go further than we might otherwise. Not sure what to say about your last paragraph. I think life is a maze of interpretitive cul-de-sacs (well you and I are interpreting things differently now aren’t we). Perhaps an interesting question might be what is the real nature of those differences and I suspect that has less to do with half-truths and deceptions than different ideological beliefs and values? I note the clue as to your former profession (gardening). I am in full agreement with you there tho I am sure there must be disagreements about the reasons and whys of doing things in specific ways (or not) in gardening too, though perhaps easier to ignore and just get on with the job in hand than education?!
Hello Sara,
I’m thoroughly enjoying reading this blog – and this is a topic I’m very interested in.
I recently completed an Intensive Cambridge DELTA course – and in my very first observed lesson – I decided I would teach it – just the way I usually teach – which usually involves sharing with students, engaging them – and lots of anecdotes.
On my CELTA back in 1993 – TTT was of course hammered home as being “negative”. But I found once I started teaching after the course – I was just too interested in engaging with my students as human beings – to teach in the way I had been instructed regarding TTT on the CELTA.
I found that if I wanted my students to dig deep and talk about personal things – or “big issues” – then it was just unnatural and in terms of “power” in the classroom – unequal for me to just sit there silently nodding.
Why? – because – for that all important atmosphere of trust to develop in the classroom – people need to feel unafraid of being authentic – unafraid of appearing foolish. If a teacher sits in silence and doesn’t share their own real opinions and feelings – they can so easily come across as aloof and “all-knowing” or “judging” in that silence – and therefore disengaged from the learners – at least these were the uncomfortable feelings I felt when experimenting with such roles.
Returning to the DELTA – I was so happy to discover that “principalled” (if there is such a word) TTT was applauded.
In terms of teacher training my own opinion is – at first to definitely address TTT – for example in the context of giving crystal clear instructions – less is clearly more.
And to try to raise new teachers’ awareness of when and why they are talking. It may be that with some teachers the tendency to talk is there because they are insecure about fielding questions – or they talk because they are operating from a “lecture” model they perhaps had at school.
By the way – something else I was taught on my CELTA course which to be honest made me cringe every time I had to do it was the method of checking instructions – asking, “Now Manuel – repeat back to me – what do you have to do?” Arghhhh – I just found that so condescending. On my recent DELTA – fortunately my tutors shared that opinion too!!
Steph you said: “for that all important atmosphere of trust to develop in the classroom – people need to feel unafraid of being authentic – unafraid of appearing foolish. If a teacher sits in silence and doesn’t share their own real opinions and feelings – they can so easily come across as aloof and “all-knowing” or “judging” in that silence – and therefore disengaged from the learners”
Brilliantly put and I couldn’t agree more! I wish for a world where everyone could feel unafraid of being authentic. And I don’t really want to buy into the ‘roles’ too much myself.
And your last comment resonates with me totally! I always had problems with that patronising instruction checking. I also disliked the giving of an instruction and then “right who can tell me what I have just asked you to do?” – if anyone said that to me, I’d feel really annoyed with them so why not students. No, there are much more subtle ways of checking comprehension than that surely!!
I really liked your contribution and glad you are enjoying the blog. Please visit again soon. Apologies for slight delay in moderation – as I explained to Sandy I had an email crash and lost all the alerts.
Nick many apologies for the delay getting back to you. End of term mayhem and all that! Thank you also for your thoughtful post on this topic. It has been an interesting discussion.
I would echo what you say about trust. An open and critical classroom has to, by necessity, also be a classroom where people feel safe. For this reason, the teacher does need to invest time building up this trust and may not see benefits immediately. I also agree that the way we ask critical questions will always affect the outcome of the discussion, and how much others will express their opinion. Certainly true in life, so why not in the classroom.
I tend to feel that the critical classroom simply needs to be a space where an extra layer of questions are asked as to the ‘why’ of things rather than just descriptions. Although these questions can, as you put it, be terrifying to a student, firstly not all students will feel the same (i.e. some will feel less bothered than others) and also perhaps as teachers we might not always expect to get a full blown discussion on every question we ask. Sometimes you can just ask the question and leave it to ‘float’ around in the classroom if noone feels like answering it.
As time goes by, and students realise that you are not going to pressurise them into taking a position or punish them when they don’t agree (we all carry educational baggage from this type of learning experience, no matter which system) students will feel more at ease about expressing opinions. I too have taught in places and cultures where it might seem there is simply no in-road, but on closer examination and with the required patience, I found that all was not as I had thought at all. Every culture, the world over, has its voice and method of criticism – the skill of the teacher is to tap into that in a non-threatening way. That’s my view!
Thanks again for your thoughts!
Hi there, I’ve just discovered your blog via a post on the ELT World forums, and hope you don’t mind if I add you to my blog roll! I’m always looking for more thoughtful TESOL-related blogs to add.
I think your nuanced approach to this issue (“TTT”) is a valuable one, by the way.
Thanks for visiting Clarissa – fine to add to blog roll. Much obliged. Happy New Year! Your blog also looks fascinating and will return the gesture and add you to mine when I get back to work and more time online next week!