From materials development to staff development: An informed change in direction in an EFL project

FROM MATERIALS DEVELOPhlENT TO STAFF DEVELOPhlEh’T: AN INFORMED CHANGE IN DIRECTION IN AN EFL PROJECT ADRIAN

Chrisr Church The

undergraduate

Developing underwent This

language

English

in direction

investigation curriculum

motivation

from

change

the

development a means

cnvironmcnt.

could

little

have

of a staff

to carry

mini-projects

individualiscd

paper is not so much about

dcvclopmcnt was due

incrcascd

to

the

indicated

that

cnnblcd Iccturcrs

rcscarch.

dcvclopmcnt

about

schcmc per SC, but about

dcvclopmcnt

project.

the host educational

phase of the project.

This

cnvironmcnt.

in which

the main

I shall thcrcforc

focus

was materials

I shall then briefly dcscribc the ~IIC~IIS analysis and its findings. to ;I change in direction. I la the scco~d half of the paper I shall dcscribc

The

place and the staff

CDELT

ran from 3rd

took

language curriculum 1985 to IWO.

and 4th

ycx

The that

first

dcvclopmcnt trainee

I: COURSE

pcrmancncc’

which

lvould

several

of

local

Iccturcrs.

draft

(ii)

a mc;lns

analysis

for

editions. whom

tcachcrs

Two

During major

the courses

in the form

this

which

English.

faculties

inputs

of wide-ranging

to this

cnsurc

materials

process

dcsigncd.

classroom

and writing

for

of education.?

bccrrusc it was bclicvcd

would

the course

being

pointed a change

COXl\lITTEE

dcvclopmcnt

textbooks.

time

how

this paper is conccrncd. reading

Tt1ROUGH

wcrc

30 I

with

in Egyptian

bccomc

which

cmcrgcd.

spoken

focused on mntcrials

cvcntually

in the change process.

through

project,

DEVELOPhlENT

three years of the project

materials,

schcmc

the aim being to dcvclop

undcrgrnduatc

2. I’1IASE

devclopmcnt

how 3 staff

change in direction

dcvclopment. in focus

revealed

developing

It also which

schc~nc

wide-ranging

analysis

first

Iccturcrs.

in action

dcvelopmcnt.

or

means

for

University,

INTRODUCT1ON

a staff

knowlcdgc the first

to staff

without

dcvclopmcnt

schcmc grew out of ;I curriculum

begin by describing

impact

at the Centre Shams

analysis,

The

of the local university

I. This

materials

this could bc done by n1ca11s out

Ain

result

of

Kingdom

project

(CDELT),

educational

and cspcrtisc

United

development

Teaching

was

of the host

Canterbury.

curriculum

Language

a change in focus

change

that

College,

HOLLlDAlr

a dcgrcc

of

wcrc complctcd

wcrc (i) the involvement in committee

observation.

work

and

2. I Commirtre

work

There

was already

which

was to ensure

was

formed

regularly their

for

the first

members

could from

Fulbright

contribution

and two

also

out

of observation

IIuring

was al

due

to

the

I’acl

W;LS

the

classes.

the

of

new

of how much classes

whcrc

students

together

could

from might

cultures.

and other courses

observations,

within

cnvironmcnt

picture

of

gcncrally.

inevitably (see Lutr, how

the

of

Glee involving of

IO cla\\cs

suhjccts.

I.1

~llC~l-tC3ChiJl~

I

ah

bvilh

lhC

of I~xal

othcrv;\ti0ns

cltiJlographic

l;itJght

JICW

Iccturcrs OJIC

what

in

possible

chss

the

lecturers

local

was expcctccl by lccturcrs

cxpatriatcs’

classes,

the

sludc~ils

my day-toiJlIlOVi1tiOIl

classes

kjivc

and \tudcnts

in

I learnt what was fksibk could

used,

They

approach.”

during

for cvidcnce of what type of

I learnt

I was also keeping

of local collcagucs

and vice versa

Lvhich took the form

olhcr

IllySClf

how the local institution,

The

a “thick”

I shall

From

take.

how

far

the local

they and the

innoLalion.

innovation

culture

01’

arid

wcrc being

IO the curriculum culture

:lJld

From

what type of innovation cope with

fcacliirig

place whcrcvcr

1 was looking

were reacting reactions

as

evaluations,

institution.

o~lly bc by invilaliori.

took

my

own

,

unslruclurcd. they

help me to understand

of the classroom

number

19X7- I9X8.

I learnt

the classroom

pave their

wcrc of a combination

I1uIuhcr

could

thal

new

a small

was minimal,

material,

of the host

and

courses

smnll

courses,

the

English

was the means analysis,

courses

J~CW

Ihroi~ghoul

and

Iecturcrs’

Apart

the

dcvclopcr.

From

American

faculties.’

I obscrvcd 40 classes at I5 tliffcrcnl

local classroom

to

a nominal

also included

Of the local lecturers.

ob\crvations

rclativcly

SCIISC

met

on when

who came for

by local lecturers

aspects

~icw

obscrvutiolis

in

the introduction

which

using

The

as a curriculum

“normal”

the

wcrc wide-ranging,

approprintc

in terms

VSOs

thal

opporlurlistic

day work

design

Thcsc

out

of cducalion

.l’hc observations wcrc

trying

These

depending

became co-authors.

and other

of slutlcnts.

17 occasions.

faculty

OJIC

material

work

and more gave piecemeal sugpcstions.

the spoken

to the course

or Hritish

011

was varied.

three years of the project

lcclurcrs

Fulbrighlcrr courses

input

groups

local

involved

rhythms

the committees education

committee

one such committee

reading-writing.

varying

local lecturers,

in provincial

trialled

and

with

faculties,

of the course

Fulbriphtcrs

through

In my project,

English

as interested

members

of classrooms

the first

development

to the level of co-authorship

of the four

27 diffcrcnl

As well

teaching

trialling

The

The scc~>nd major

with

meet.

of committee

actual

below.

subject -spoken

two years of the project,

substantially

However. discuss

for course

of local colleagues.

a range of education

lecturers,

contributed

at CDELT

the invol\cment

each course

during

honorarium

The

a tradition

which

the committees

threw 1981: new

within light

p. 60).

courses

the

IICW

Altogether.

for

any signs

and students

gcncrally

courses

also contributed

on important were

my eyes open

lecturers

were

IO this.

impticatcd.

Observation

aspects of the wider institution

I H’U able to begin to dcvclop

interacting

with

the

host

educational

FRO51 VATERIALS

1.3

DEVELOP4lENT

TO ST.AFF DE\ EL OP\lt%T

303

The findings of lhe means anal_vsis

By the end of becoming

the third

apparent:

year of

the focus

the project,

on course

serious

defects

development

in the project

was not having

design

the effect

were

that

had

been intended:(a) Although teaching,

the new CDELT

a prevailing

was limiting taught form

this impact.

by senior

CDELT

courses

actively hiany

when.

The

with

this

open

Lecturers students

market.

Moreover,

were driven factor

could

this

by low salaries

here was the poor

afford.

and the inlluencc

the small

of CDELT

circle of committee

mcmbcrs

design.

saw the courses as infringing CDELT

courxcs.

committees

on their

which

territory.

Others

they saw as cxpcrimcntnl.

of working

and of low

in the state

sector.

course

qualily.

wcrc having

of local lccturcrs

:I superficial

foreign

in thcsc committees

stimulating

cffcct on bringing

organisations.

tiowcvcr,

IO USC the new courses

rarely

lo

put

Ihc

nor

into

the

produced

bcncfits

change at the classroom

meeting aim.

by a genuine

professional

of

in course design and stated

participation

had it been their

courses

new

was motivated

and

discussion,

was also due IO the fact that the committees,

ncccssary

monthly

to retrain

IcvcI.”

for half the year,

Iccturers

in the skill3

effect.

husk for rrronoe~rvering

However.

despite

was sufficient “hloving over

which

t hc limitations

dcvclopmcnt

had not been sufficient,

2.4. A

course

unrcliahlc

professionally

conmitmcnt This

in

in Ihc classroom.

co-operation for

of CDELT

badly received anyway,

of using

bccausc of

materials

conlxt

or any other

was low outside

and Iccturcrs

was oI’lcn

chmigc

dc\irc

courses

the adoption

books

were often

take the risk

production

about

over courses

to make ends meet. Another

of

in focused

drpartmcnts

cspccially

curriculum

influence

to compete

courses towns

courses

\vould not

(c) The

had

recommendations involved

on university

heads rarely had sufficient

to guarantee

therefore

substandard

(b) CDELT

impact university

reform.

in provincial

curriculum

a significant

in the national

was not one of pedagogic quality.‘

to produce supply

were making situation

Department

lecturers

of curriculum

competition

courses

open-market

again.

these ncgativc

basis for making

the

goal

Enough

posts”

(SW

could

aspects. the project Coleman,

be salvaged

the means analysis more effcctivc 19X%1) did from

the work

also rcvcalcd

without not

necessarily

that

signs

that

there

too much mnnocuvcring. mean

had been done

starting

all

to render

it

worthwhile:(1) CDELT’s

long-standing

co-operation

uork

had been valuable

in forming

basis

for

cxpcrtisc.

involving

local

with

a rich

local lecturers

network

through

of professional

the committee relations

and a

(2) The courses

incorporated

the large dasses

of 150 to 450 students

el-Din.

1989;

Holliday

a technically

and

appropriate

prevalent

Zikri,

198s;

methodology.

in many Egyptian

Zikri,

especially

universities

forthcoming;

for

(Taky

Holliday

er

al.

forthcoming). Although

these courses

valuable

It was suspected

that

3. PHASE The

staff

to fund

duration

the first

a throughput

a cadre

cxpcricncc

with

attachment

underway

Throuph

involving

to (a) rc;Isscss

out formative

local Iscturcrs

support

and conlinuc

while

rcaliscd

did not equip

personnel

two years of the project

to CDELT

for

by

curriculum

group

them

x

need was thcreforc

for

flexible,

rapid

;I

done by junior

they wcrc in a position would

dcvclop

t hc purpose

of

the

dcvcloprncnt

teachers

qualified

to 1’111) though

standards

rcvix

and

who

could

in classroom

potential

for

effecting

prominent

many

intlucncc

methodology,

English

they had not been conditions. applied

linguistics,

Espcricncc

scheme proved

was

compctcnt.

change.

level had a potential hours

standard,

students’

dcvclopmcnt.

dcvclopmcnt

at post-doctoral

they taught.

to ;I high

in their

classroom

curriculuIn

the staff

and taught

Icvcl. Many of these

100 arlrl 450. In other words,

of what they taught,

bccomc influential

producing

Ihc aim was

dcvclopcrs

linguistics,

of falling

and continue

high

to informally whom

projects,

(h) cvaluatc.

curriculum

foreixrr language in difficult

control staff.

and dcvclopIncrtt

recently

of bctwccn

of lecfurers

were in full

on the trainee

to gradually

In each C;ISC’,

by the project.

in thcorctical

“rc-training”

with

the retraining

PhD-holders

This

of participants

;I cadre of local

who passed through

learners

rcscarch

the problems

needed to understand

that those

with

on an aspect of curriculum

dcsigncd

were Icsturcrs

large classes

to show

on a quarter-time

change.

training

to solve

to teach English

and the skills

number

basis,

the second year of the scheme.

dcvcloprncnt,

in mini

producing

that their

or the frequently

as a whole,

the final

was five months

evaluation

already

curriculum

key professional

of them

development.

It made use of a budget provided

of local

of an increasing

the new courses

the courses

tcxhing

a

be achieved.

in the project.

dcvclop

Moreover,

they provided

DEVELOPhlENT

during

analysis.

year and five during

in curriculum

was to carry

already

The

was established

of each attachment

during

was to cnsurc

trained

core for further

a

STAFF

attachment

as intended,

course design should

mini-projects.’

maximum

Iccturcrs

provide

of the means

the part-time

three attachments

The

could

programme

to the findings

development The

they

used as widely

for how appropriate

2: POST-DOCTORAL

development

as a reaction USAID

were not being

precedent and example

were in a position in more

Ihan

multiplier

cffcct.

to supervise

one faculty,

the

Nhcrc

their peers; they were also a Icading intlucncc As they moved

in the Egyptian participants

up through

their

language

teaching

English

in cornmittccs

and symposia.”

cadre,

many

profc\sion

FROM \l;\TtRIALS

DEVELOPVENT

3.2. SatisJving local professional-academic

30s

TO ST.\1 1; DEk tlOP\ltNT

needs

One of the aims of the staff development programme was to raise the credibility

of the

curriculum project in the eyes of the theoretically oriented local lecturers. This was attempted by incorporating the writing of an academic paper as the formal outcome to each miniproject. Involved in this was an aim to develop an awareness that curriculum development generally, and more specifically the design of classroom methodology, was academically respectable and researchable. * Under the project’s guidance, lecturers with PhDs in theoretical, socio- and psycho-linguistics, therefore, carried out practical research and development mini-projects Thus,

motivation

and produced academic papers in curriculum

for local lecturers to take part in the staff

provided in that it also satisfied a professional for promotion. 3.3. Creating A significant

opportunities

to focus.

reflect.

development.

development scheme was

need to publish academic research papers

rationalise

and initiate innovation

aspect of the staff development scheme was that it released the participants

from the pressures of institutional conditions, buying them time to observe and reflect on the strange culture of curriculum dcvclopmcnt. An immcdiatcly obvious feature of the work which the participant local lecturers produced was the high dcgrec of quality and commitment, which indicated that an injection of sufficient incentive and time within an existing harsh work environment

could bring about considcrablc progress.

The division of rcsponsihility hctwccn the curriculum dcvclopcr who manapcd the schcmc the participant local lccturcr was parallel to that of a supervisor and rcscarch student.

and

This dcmandcd that the onus on initiation and originality was put into thr hands of the local Iccturcr. This was a significant break from what had been happening bcforc, whcrc local Iccturcrs had been taking part in committee work whose prime function ww to dcvclop course designs and material which wcrc initiated by the project. It was hoped that giving the local lccturcrs the ultimate responsibility for the final product, which would bc both the academic paper. which would have to involve original data collection and analysis, :mJ some form of revision. addition or rcplaccmcnt of course material, would cncouragc their indspcndcncc as future curriculum dcvclopcrs. f’rcvious curriculum documents and course materials produced by the project were given to the participant local lecturer to be considered as data for evaluation and possible revision. The intention hcrc was to make the local lecturer the primary judge of how far innovation would bc consonant with the cultural needs of the local situation. Underlying this was the principle that the local lecturer was more in a position than the expatriate curriculum developer to employ tacit knowledge of the workings of the host educational environment in designing appropriate innovation. In effect, the local lecturer was being given the opportunity and resources to do action reseurch. i.e. teacher-led rcscarch into teacher-owned problems (Kuddock and Hopkins, 1985: pp. 2-4; McNiff. 198X). 3.4. outcoI?lc~s The success of a staff dcvclopment scheme such as the one described in this paper is always difficult to quantify, especially in the short term. Howcvcr. within two years, tight senior lccturcrs from five faculties had passed through the scheme. These lccturcrs had contributed

-1I)Kl

?(Y,

significantly

to course de\clopmcnt.

of the courses

and their

These comprised: essay

classroom

for

of lecturer

attitudes 1989);

(Azer,

on a collaborative

1990),

hloreover.

1990;

Zikri,

and another

C‘DELT-related Three

activities

, a pririciplc

011

open

the

attachnicrit

rnarkct.

in the project’s

1989;

methodology

(Agameya.

courses

research for

1989);

the teaching

objectives

of

for examination

forthcoming);

in terms

on the

Kary,

and a rationale

of student

socio-linguistic

I8 colleag~c~, from two facultits, learninp about course material which

attachment

got 10 collcagues

two colleagues None

from

to attend a projcct-

two faculties

of these colkagucs

in several rncctings

had been involved

in

bcforc. in final

revision

and completion

focus on the rcvi\ion

part of a ccr1traIiscd 111 fut urc.

local

their

courses,

own

Although of csislirig

curricul11m

Icclurcrs or

chnnpc.

atlachctl lo

of CDELT

CI)Ill

this

but material xi

withir1

.I‘ coursc5,

in the schcmc

coilsitlcr

courscc.

mini-projects

thcrc

to compctc

should

ari option

also

after

bc

lhcir

ha5 finished.

f:urthcriiiorc, market

research

involved

schcrnc could

to dcsigri

of texts

el-Din,

performance

and therefore

wcrc irivolvcd

wcrc no longer

cncouragcd

(Taky

of ck~c.clfzfru/iscl/iorr was riiainlaincd.

the claff tlcvclopr1icr~l courses

learning

she was designing.

of the attachments

f lowcvcr

distance course

a sample

was able to involve

they had not before seen. Another the course

papers on the validity

forthcoming).

one of the participants

to discuss

research

pieces of classroom

course

and essay and reading

for three houry each, in evaluating, related seminar;

two

English

essay and reading

English

needs (Farap,

towards

and on the value of student

for the project’s

the spoken

spoken

x\en

approach.

(Xloustapha.

the project’s

LLILI \t

and had produced

curriculum

course

research

grammar design

of

HOI

a survey

and reading

effectiveness

overall

\?I

to improve

sccriario.

lhc production

whcrc possible.

was in co-operation

with

local

qualily

and to crisurc

co11rsc dcvclopmcrlt

through

viability

the staff

within

t hc open

dcvclopmcnl

schcrnc

publishers.

4. CON<‘I,USIONS I have tried to dcmonstrutc succccdcd in improving dcvclopment.

It is nevertheless

an investigation the project, stage. and

it would

stage. Indeed,

there then

of the host

when

the planning

how a cha11gc in direction

the ability

problematic

educational seem more

sustainability

the

of the schcmc

tlowcvcr.

bccausc

accruing

of cxpcricncc

to bc carried

of

its

of

logical

ncccssarily

of the situation,

out at the project

planning

~Jfrr

to carry

to staff

design

now

for the

was the result

ot

and planning

ot

investigations

dlrrin!:

a local staff

counterpart

dcvclopmcnt

to first

learn

scheme.

The

in question.

widc-ranging thcrc would stage.

the inception

out ncccssary

dcvelopmcnt

aim in curriculum

data had not been collected at the planning

administering

is thcrcforc

materials

at its overall

that the change in direction

in the project

work

from

to arrive

cnvironmcnt

because the rclcvant

was no provision continue

of the project

nature,

which

dcmandcd

a gradual

not have been time for the investigation

I offer

no solution

to this

problem

of how

FRO51

%l.\TERI.ALS

DE\

ELOPVENT

TO

STAFF

DEVkL

OPVENT

307

to get sufficient data sufficiently early to produce viable project plans, except that perhaps a facility for wide-ranging investigation of the host educational environment should be explicitly built into the project design from the beginning.

SOTES ’ Background to the means analysis can be found in Holliday and Cooke (1982). ’ The project was one of several ODA- and USAID-funded projects carried out in CDELT since the late seventies. See Bowers (1987) for background. ’ The Binational Fulbright Commission was a channel for USXID funding to CDELT. and provided lecturers at between five and nine faculties of education during this time. Part of their brief during the first IWO years of the project was to trial and help develop new CDELT undergraduate courses. ’ By ethnographic I mean that the observations focused on the behaviour of lecturers and students. secinp the clawoom as a culture. Ethnographic observation is open-ended and unstructured in that categories arc allowed to emerge as the observation proceeds. For a detailed diwursion of the ethnographic approach and the finding\ of this investigation see Holliday (in process). Coleman (1988. I9S9a. 1989b) alw reports the use of wide-ranging classroom observation. ’ See Wahha (1990). This type of situation is not peculiar IO Egypt. nor to the developing world (we Kelley. IOXO and Shipman. CI ul. 1974). ’ ~lolliday (IWH)) describes the mismatch bctwccn Hhat participants in matcrialx dckipn do in mcctinps and what they do in their own clasrec. throwing some doubt on fhc viablhty of a riorr,l;ltivc-rc-cdu~;ltiv~ strategy. ’ I wal Iccturcr\ who were attached rcccivcd a USAID-funded p.lrt-time \al;try through the llinational Fulhripht Commi\~ion which W;LI salculatcd to make up carninps which could othcrwiw- hc accwcd during the time taken by the aftachmcnr. Thic was very attrnctivc bcc;~uw the lccfurcr\ would tahc the attachment to rcplacc ovcrtimc work which often rcquircd con\idcrahlc commuting IO scvcral provincial \itc\. ’ In compariwn. junior \faff. which <‘I)l:I .T project\ had often fa\ourcd for \taff drvcl~~Irn~cr~tpurpow~, t;lupht fcwcr hours in only WC faculty. and in many caw\ had to tcxh hook\ prcxrihcd by wnwr staff. They wcrc ;+a more likely to %pcnd zcvcral ycwx without tcxhlnp to continue their s~urlrc\ to MA xxi l’hl) Icvcl, during which the cffcct\ of retraining would bc lo\t. “I hcrc W;L\ an cxl\ting rcccpt;~cIc for I hc\c academic paper\ in (‘Dtil ..I“* journal. f~~~w.w~~u/ /‘u~Iw\. which alrc.ldy had a\ an aun to upgrade IIIC clwlity of local i:nglish I;mguagc curriculum research and dcvclopmcnt.