Hall of Fame Teachers

                                                                       By Marisa Constantinides, CELT Athens
                                                                                                                                                                           
To those involved in teacher education and development programmes, the determining factors which separate the competent professional from the rest are issues of constant self-questioning, of endless discussions in the staff room and frequent soul-searching meetings with other professionals in the field. This constant process is an attempt to standardise criteria when assessing the performance of teachers in the classroom with as much objectivity as is possible in a situation where one’s personal style may affect one’s judgment very strongly. This article is an attempt to compare criteria set out for assessing teachers, against attributes mentioned by young and older learners as characteristic of teachers who have rightfully gained a place in their private “hall of fame”.
The views of good teachers that I am about to present to you come from different places in the classroom: one is the observer’s corner, often obscured by a thick haze filming the eyes of the shaky-kneed teacher being observed and assessed. The other view comes from various points of the classroom wherever learners may happen to be seated. A collated picture of their own descriptions - both of adults as well as of young and adolescent learners is presented here for reflection.

FROM THE OBSERVER’S CORNER
As supervising tutor and moderator on the RSA / Cambridge Diploma, I frequently find myself in the back of a class trying to look as inconspicuous as possible - watching teachers teach. Back in the staffroom, these instants are the subject of endless conversations with colleagues, during which some have been caught in the act of waxing dangerously lyrical, mentioning words like “magical” , “a sheer poem” (!) or other words to that effect while describing a lesson or a teacher whose performance in the classroom was considered excellent... Now, magic is not a very objective criterion , don’t you think? Hence it ought to be analysed and subjected to as close a scrutiny as one can so that expressions like those of the previous paragraph do not become daunting for the rest of the teachers who would reach those heights if only they were not made to appear like a very great mystery or even a gift from the gods...

The list of criteria for a high quality “peformance “ in the classroom as set out by RSA/Cambridge for purposes of assessment of teachers in the classroom is quite detailed and, interestingly enough, not quite the same for native and non native speaker teachers - although soon this distinction will be eliminated. I have not included them here for reasons of space, but instead, will include those excerpts from the RSA Diploma Manuals to Practical Assessors which separate the “black sheep from the white” given by way of guidance, especially for cases when assessors are in doubt about what grade to assign and whether one teacher’s performance is at pass, fail or distinction level.

The RSA/Cambridge DTEFLA manual lists the following broad features of a lesson as the ones of primary importance in assessing the preparation and implementation of a lesson:
- The timetable fit, i.e. that the lesson observed is not a “one-off” showcase lesson but ”is clearly related to an ongoing scheme of work”.
- Lesson Planning, with clear, suitable, achievable overall aims & appropriate stage aims and activities.
- Language Awareness of the candidate, which must be of a high level.
- Achievement of Aims, in that the acitivities should be “relevant to the achievement of aims specified
- Sensitivity of the Candidate towards the group and individuals within the group with regard to learning, language and personality factors.
- Management of Group Activities which should be clear and confident
- Teaching Techniques and Materials appropriate to the learners and the aims, demonstrating a degree of professional skill expected of “a good experienced teacher of EFL”.

The description above, although written in a neutral tone, obviously to ensure that observing tutors and assessors have a number of objective standards to go by, does not however include specific details on each category, e.g. which techniques and materials are considered below the level of “a good experienced teacher of EFL”. The objectivity falls apart further when one reads the description of what is considered a Distinction grade lesson. From the same manual:

WHAT’S IN A DISTINCTION?
“The candidate will have shown exceptional ability in all respects under “Factors to be considered”. The learners would normally be very clear about the focus and aims of the lesson and appreciative of its value. They would also have enjoyed the lesson.
The key factors are the exceptional nature of the lesson, and the consistency of this across all the features of the lesson.”
Although I have observed hundreds of lessons, I must say that it is not always possible or indeed, even accurate, to decide whether a class was “appreciative of the value of a lesson” as there may not be any external indicators of such behaviour or, whether a class - though made aware by the teacher - can be fully & explicitly appreciative of the value of the aims set in the long or short term.

From the manual for DOTE Practical Assessors and Moderators, here is the description of Grade A (Distinction) in the Practical:

“An exceptionally able performance. Very few teachers earn this grade. The suggestion is that a teacher who earns an “A” grade is worthy of a mark of Distinction in Practical Teaching in the final examination. Teachers will, of course, show signs of this quality in some parts of some lessons, but an overall “A” should be hard to earn and it is rare for there to be more than 3 or 4 percent of teachers who achieve it.”

There is some vagueness in these descriptions and it is a very great mystery and extremely sad fact that only 3-4 percent achieve this high mark of distinction, a mystery which has plagued many a moderators’ and assessors’ meeting with heated arguments flying about and individual assessors saying incomprehensible things, such as that a Distinction lesson possesses a certain kind of “Oooomph!” not evident in your ‘run-of-the-mill’ lesson. Perhaps the dimensions of excellence defy objective descriptions?

In a talk in Athens in November 1994, Cambridge/ RSA representative, Ms. Rosemary Wilson, TEFL Subject Officer at the time and responsible for those two Diplomas, attempted to give us a clearer distilment of the criteria she considered important. According to these then, a good teacher (or, in her own words, a whizzy and responsible teacher) ...
        ... knows their subject
        ... can explain their subject
        ... knows what resources are available
        ... knows about their learners
        ... can plan appropriate lessons
        ... can assess their own strengths and weaknesses
        ... can respond to to other people’s comments
        ... is enthusiastic about teaching and learning
        ... has a good rapport with their learners
        ... can motivate their learners
        ... can present language in different ways
        ... can select appropriate materials
        ... can provide variety in their lessons
        ... wants to develop professionally

The list of attributes makes it clear that there are certain things a good teacher must “know” (professional understanding), things a teacher “can do’ (technical know-how) and others that a good teacher must ‘be’ or ‘have” (personal qualities). These “categories for success” could also be descriptive of teachers of various subject areas, not just TEFL and the picture given is that a good teacher cannot be someone you have ‘brought in from the street’, not an unlikely occurrence in a multitude of cases in the local scene, that they should be a well trained professional who has in depth knowledge of their subject matter and a certain kind of personality which emerges as ‘enthusiastic’, ‘sensitive to’ , with ‘good rapport’ and professional aspirations.

There is no information available as to whether these profile statements were created through experience and intuition or whether they are the result of some research. In general, the research in TEFL that informs these objective descriptions as indicators of effective teaching is not extensive and TEFL informs itself from general education studies, such as the work of Ryans (1961), and Rosenhine & Furst (1971). Both specify these as “observable indicators”. Ryans’ (op.cit) description includes contrasting pairs such as “warm & understanding vs. cold and aloof”, “organised & businesslike vs unplanned and slipshod”, “stimulating and imaginative vs. dull and routine”. Rosenhine & Furst (op.cit) include the following correlates about teachers: “enthusiastic, businesslike and task oriented, clear when presenting instructional content, able to use a variety of instructional materials and procedures and providing opportunities for students to learn the instructional content”.

FROM THE LEARNER’S SEAT
It is time to turn to the learners and see what they have to say about all this. A number of learners (50 adults and approximately 60 younger learners) were asked to describe a teacher who has remained ‘unforgettable’ to them, to tell us what they used to (or still) do and what sort of person they were ( or still are). The second question invited the learners to give new/novice teachers of English some advice so that they, too, could one day enter their students’ private halls of fame.
The list of attributes which follows is an attempt to present a mass of data which was not always described in the very same words by everyone - though there was no ambition other than to explore the views of learners and conduct an interim study which could be followed by more systematic work. Keeping in mind that this is not a numerical quantitative research, a rough ranking has been attempted.
(See table of results below )

                  Figure 1 Contrasted Rankings of Young Learners vs. Adults

Rankings 1-10 received the highest attention mentioned by more than 60% of the respondents. Adult learners’ top 10 categories indicate some differences in their preferences. Adults and children agree on what teachers they associated with unsuccessful learning experiences were like or did (adults) or as advice to new teachers in terms of what to avoid (children). In random fashion, as these are things are not mentioned by enough learners to really be able to rank in any way, they don’t want teachers who are:
... always in a bad mood
... “know-alls’
... do not inspire respect
... are always negative
... are indifferent to teaching
... show no love for their subject
... do not explain at all
... make them feel anxious
... rude to them
... sarcastic
The rankings, show a tendency of younger learners to value certain personal qualities more and dwell less on subject knowledge and technical perfection, while adult learners value the teacher’s subject knowledge and technical know-how to a greater degree. Adults are challenged by teachers who use sophisticated and motivating techniques, while children, even if bored to tears by the lesson, can be captivated by a high degree of energy, enthusiasm and a teacher who smiles and is affectionate.
Some of the dimensions described in the objective analyses we have seen so far seem to matter to learners as well. Although we do not expect them to have the same degree of sophistication which would enable them to articulate their thoughts in quite the same technical and objective way, the similarities should not be difficult to identify.
What is notable in this investigation is the very great emphasis all age groups place on the personality of the teacher, a crucial key determinant to the success or failure of a lesson, a class, a learner - a factor often neglected by many colleagues who presume that if only they were methodologically perfect, they would be able to reap Distinction grades like magic. Unfortunately, this does not quite work out.
To reach the high standards of a professional educator, it seems just as as important to develop personally as well as professionally in order to finally obtain one’s rightful place in one’s students’ HALL OF FAME .

CAN IT BE ACHIEVED?
This is really the Big Question. The notes for RSA Diploma assessors are not very encouraging (only 3%-4% achieve a Distinction), but what we may also need to consider is that a Distinction may not secure a place in the Hall of Fame and vice versa. Surely, there should be some ways in which these elements might be combined and a compromise be reached.

On the other hand, how is it that some teachers really do get in there without any effort, while others struggle on? This is food for thought and further investigations to confirm or reject the suspicion that it is all in the teacher’s persona and personal aura, these being able to cover up for technical or other weaknesses.

The need for teacher training and development, improvement of classroom skills , work on one’s language performance and awareness, and a broader view and depth of professional understanding are very necessary. Yet, the learners are telling us that all the knowledge and skills needed, expected and demanded, are as nothing if they do not pass through the filter of a personality which is mature, aware of self, sensitive and unbiased and ready and game for challenge and change.

The message from our learners is clear and unambiguous though this does not make the way to achieving those ends any smoother or easier.
It does present us though with an exciting challenge and, I should add, with food for thought and scope for work to last us for three, not just one lifetime. Those who have the ‘passion and enthusiasm’ for the profession demanded by our learners will not be frightened, will find their own way to professional growth and personal and professional fulfillment, even though the task may look daunting. After all, isn’t this the reason they chose this job in the first place?

References
Rosenshine, B, & Furst, N.F., 1971, Research on Teacher Performance Criteria. Research in Teacher Education: A Symposium, Ed. B.O. Smith, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall
Ryans, D. G. 1960, Characteristics of Teachers. Washington D.C.: American Council on Teachers
RSA/UCLES, 1997, Notes for the Guidance of the Conduct of Assessments, from the DOTE & DTEFLA manuals issued to all Recognised RSA Centres
Wilson, R., 1994, Finding and Keeping Whizzy and Responsible Teachers, paper presented at the Balkan Conference in Athens and reported in the CELT Athens Newsletter, No 3, January 1995.

About the Author
Marisa Constantinides is Director of CELT Athens, Supervising Tutor on all courses for teachers, including RSA/Cambridge Diplomas DOTE & DTEFLA. She holds an RSA Diploma (DTEFLA), an M.A. in Applied Linguistics from the University of Reading, and has been involved in teacher education for far too long to be willing to specify dates. Very keen on helping teachers to fulfill their potential, she is just as keenly interested in music, has studied classical singing and the piano and writes songs for children and for fun. She has written materials for young learners (Basic Grammar Workbooks 1, 2 & 3), activity materials for literary texts and many articles on education, linguistics and language teaching methodology. She is an RSA DOTE Moderator and since 1994, Local Tutor on the Masters in Education (in ELT) offered in association with the University College of St, Mark & St.John & the University of Exeter..

    Note: This article first appeared in Issue No.11 of the CELT Athens newsletter and was later reprinted in ELT News