Original Post: 2012.11.30
A quick review of my TPI indicates that what I believe and what I do are two different things. I don’t feel much conflict or hypocrisy about this, however, as I can very easily identify the reason behind this discrepancy: I teach English in Korea. That’s not meant to be dismissive or antagonistic toward Korea, it’s a statement of the culture I teach in, its expectations of how I should teach, and the content that is not much under my control. Korea still expects – and follows – a direct instruction paradigm, and within that there is a strong reliance on the Grammar Translation method of language instruction; two pedagogies that found their way to the archives of popular opinion in other countries years ago. Strother (2003) argues in East Asia teacher-centered pedagogies are culturally reinforced in China, Japan and Korea, but differ only in matter of degree. My experience here certainly echoes his findings.
Dominant: Nurturing
Back-up: Transmission, Apprenticeship, (Developmental)
Recessive: (Developmental), Social Reform
These results indicate that I am more concerned with my students’ self-confidence, and that’s true; that’s what I’m instructed to concern myself with. The primary purpose of my existence as a “native speaking instructor” in the classroom has little to do with any (perceived) expertise and more to do with making my students comfortable talking to a non-Korean in English without getting so embarrassed and shy that they collapse into a black hole of themselves. I wish I were exaggerating, but on most accounts this is true. Any opportunity I have to assist them in making gains in their abilities (which really are mostly under-practiced; any Korean students of English probably know more grammar rules than their native-speaking teachers), their social views, or other areas of their lives is pure icing on the teaching cake.
So if my job is merely to being a comforting figure that boosts her students’ confidence and helps them with a few errors along the way, why do I stay? What drives me into a graduate program that demands resources both financial and temporal when it’s not going to make a difference to my job requirements? Looking at my score, my stronger beliefs around Apprenticeship, or what Pratt and Collins (2001) refer to as the teacher-as-highly-skilled-practitioner role, I see my own desires to improve and become a better teacher.
My higher score in Transmission likely also assists in driving me forward. While it is not high on my Beliefs score, it is higher enough in Intentions and Actions to push it to second position in my results. The Transmission perspective also relies on an expert teacher, and that is also an expectation of my students. I have oft been told that in Korea, the teacher knows everything, the students are empty vessels and come to be filled. While I have my own personal disagreements with this philosophy of teaching, I need to find balance between how I view teaching should be, and how my students expect me to act. As such, the Nurturing perspective, which balances care and expectations, is a natural fit.
I also notice that my scores are not strongly opinionated; that is to say, I don’t display a strong set of convictions according to this profile. This may reflect the natural evolution of my teaching philosophy, one that has grown out of trials-by-fire, time in the classroom, and conversations with others navigating their way through the mire of possibly pedagogies without the aid, advantage or influence of formal, professional training. Indeed; I did not go to university planning to be a teacher, but it is what I do, and at the end of the day, I want to be good in my practice. And while I’m certainly after the credentials, it makes sense to me to develop my craft and work toward becoming better, to the best of my ability.
Retake: 2013.5.15
Dominant: Apprenticeship and Nurturing (38).
Backup: Development (32)
Borderline: Social Reform (31)
Recessive: Transmission (27)
Well, a few things have certainly changed, and probably reflects my changes in instruction methods and thoughts about how I’m going to teach vs. what is expected. In short, I’ve thrown a fair number of expectations to the wind and have gone with what feels right in my heart.
From left to right on the scale, my Transmission score has dropped from second to last place (-6 points), Apprenticeship (+8) is now tied with Nurturing (+3) for first place at 38, followed by Developmental (+5) and Social Reform (+7).
Looking again at the descriptions, I can see that the drop in Transmission is likely related to a shift from a teacher-centered model to an increasingly student-centered, constructivist model based (where possible) on problem-based activities. This is all while continuing to work in classes segregated by language skills (speaking, reading, listening, writing); an old set of divisions being replaced by the ACTFL delineations (interpretive, communicative, presentational). This drop in Transmission isn’t to suggest that mastery and careful pacing have become less of a concern. Quite the opposite, in fact.
A large part of what I’m doing (and learning), however, is reflected in the massive jump in Apprenticeship. This is highlighted as “socializing students into new behavioral norms and ways of working” (Summary of Five Perspectives, “Apprenticeship” section). The students, through both student-centered learning activities with a problem-based learning focus is absolutely a shift in behaviour and ways of working. Students and instructor are learning how to make this work. Another new implementation has been standards-based grading. In combination with rubrics now shared with the students, they are learning how to master language in stages, what it looks like, and exactly what they need to be working on to reach the next stage.
This is also reflected in the Nurturing score, where I want my students to understand success is possible, by the students themselves, and that we are all in the learning process together. Standards-based grading allows me to be sensitive to effort, nurturing students in exactly the right ways to bring them closer to achieving the goals for the program. My students know that it’s not about when they learn, but that they learn. We each learn differently and at different speeds, and as long as they show progress over the semester I’m happy.
Finally, for the backup, if Developmental is a measure of student-centeredness, this jump is obvious. I’ve switched from being primarily teacher-focused to intensely, intentionally focusing on how to make my classes more about my students (because I certainly know the material!). An upside of this shift has not only been for my students, but I think also for me as a person. The less I focus on me, what I want and how best to get there, and instead focus on empathy, I’m happier, and so is everyone else.
Re-test 2: 2013.12.3
Here are the results; I’ll have to post an analysis and commentary later.
References:
Pratt, D., and Collins, J., (2001). Teaching Perspectives Inventory. Retrieved from http://www.teachingperspectives.com/html/tpi_frames.htm
Strother, J.B., (2003). Shaping blended learning pedagogy for East Asian learning styles. Professional Communication Conference, 2003. IPCC 2003. Proceedings. IEEE International, 21-24. doi: 10.1109/IPCC.2003.1245513 Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org./stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1245513&isnumber=27908
