Incorporating a language

improvement component in
teacher training programmes
Richard Cullen

Most training programmes for teachers of English as a foreign language, at

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

both in-service and pre-service levels, offer a fairly traditional blend of ELT
skills training on the one hand, and language awareness, e.g. grammar and
phonology, on the other. Although there is no doubt that these two
components should form an important part of any ELT training
programme, the fact remains that for a substantial number of non-native
English teachers, especially those in primary and secondary schools, the
overwhelming desire is to improve their command of the language itself.
With the propagation and increasing acceptance around the world of the
principles of communicative language teaching, there is arguably more
pressure on teachers than in the past to be fluent in English so that they can
use it naturally and spontaneously in the classroom. Yet training courses in
ELT rarely take into account the language demands which the com-
municative approach makes on teachers. This paper discusses a model for
an in-service training course in which language improvement is the central
element. In this model, the experience of language learning provides the
input for the other components of the programme: skills training and
language awareness.

Introduction Teacher training courses in English as a foreign language around the

world, at both pre-service and in-service levels, usually consist of a fairly
predictable set of component parts. Firstly, with few exceptions, there will
be a methodology/pedagogical skills component, in which different
methods and techniques for teaching English are explored, and the
various classroom skills the trainee needs to teach successfully are
discussed and practised. This component is of course sometimes divided
into a number of sub-components, such as methodology (usually the
theoretical part), micro-teaching, and practice teaching, but for the
purpose of this paper they will be treated as one component, since they
basically share the same objective, that is to develop the trainees'
classroom skills for teaching EFL. Secondly, there will invariably be what
we might term a linguistics component, a primarily theoretical
component, which would include one or more of the following topics:
theories of language and language learning, the place of English in society
and the school curriculum, and awareness of the language itself. This last
aspect often includes a study of the English grammatical and
phonological systems, with the emphasis on increasing the trainees'
understanding of how the language operates, rather than their mastery in

162 ELT Journal Volume 48/2 April 1994© Oxford University Press 1994
 the use of it. Thirdly, there is often a literature component, particularly on
pre-service courses, where the trainees may be required to study
'classical' or indigenous English literature, both to increase their
knowledge and appreciation of the texts themselves and to help them
teach some of these texts to their more advanced examination classes.
Finally, there may or may not be a language improvement component
aimed at improving the general language proficiency of the trainees. This
component may be specifically linked to the kind of language the teachers
will need to use in the classroom, e.g. for giving instructions, eliciting
ideas and suggestions from the students, a kind of ESP for English
teachers, following descriptions of such language, as suggested, for
example by Willis (1981) and Hughes (1981). On the other hand, the
component may take the form of a more general course in English, aimed

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

as closely as possible at the general level of the particular group of
trainees. How to incorporate a language improvement component into a
teacher training programme is the subject of this paper.

Language It is probably true to say that in most parts of the world the main emphasis
improvement in in English language teacher training, especially on in-service courses, is
teacher training on methodology, and that the teacher's proficiency in the language itself is
courses: some largely taken for granted. There are of course exceptions: in China, for
problems example, Hundleby and Breet (1988) and Berry (1990) report on a
situation where teacher training is seen principally as a process of raising
the language level of the trainees, to the virtual exclusion of methodology,
a situation which, on courses apparently designed to improve teachers'
practical skills, would itself appear inappropriate, and would doubtless
lead to problems of a different nature. Alternatively, language
improvement may become confused with the subject matter of the
'linguistics' component, with the emphasis on increasing knowledge and
awareness about the systems of the language, rather than an ability to use
this knowledge in real communication. This is often the result of a number
of unavoidable constraining factors, such as the limited time available for
the course, or the large number of participants attending it. It is less time-
consuming, for example, to describe the usage of the main structures
which the trainees will need to teach in their classes, than to devise and
conduct activities which give extended practice in using them. This is not
to deny the value of language awareness activities, particularly if
conducted in such a way as to enable the teachers to discover the
underlying rules of language use for themselves. Such activities help to
deepen teachers' understanding of how the language works, and may also
contribute indirectly to their proficiency in using the language itself.
However, they should not be confused with activities designed to do this
directly. The fact is that few teacher training courses have either the time
or the resources to provide a sufficiently intensive language improvement
course which stands a reasonable chance of achieving its purpose, that is
to improve the trainees' communicative command of the language, rather
than their knowledge about it. Yet it is probably also a fact—albeit
undocumented—that in most parts of the world where exposure to
English is limited, and where English is not the medium of instruction but
Language improvement in teacher training 163
 a compulsory foreign language on the school curriculum, the main
concern of English teachers in primary and secondary schools is precisely
this: the need to improve their own command of the language so that they
can use it morefluently,and above all, more confidently, in the classroom.
An in-service teacher training course which fails to take this into account
is arguably failing to meet the needs or respond to the wishes of the
teachers themselves.

Teachers' wishes Berry (1990) reports on a questionnaire he conducted with two groups of
and needs secondary school English teachers in Poland, asking them to rank the
components of methodology, theory (a term he used to refer to theories of
language learning and teaching), and language improvement, according
to what they thought they needed most. The first group were participants

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

on an in-service programme that Berry was running, whereas the second
represented a cross-section of teachers in various secondary schools. For
both groups, language-improvement was ranked as the most important, a
clear favourite with the second group, and a close winner over
methodology with the first group. Theory came in a poor third with both
groups. The result is perhaps not surprising: as Berry himself points out,
'there is very limited contact with native speakers and their culture (for
most the only regular possibility consists of listening to English language
radio stations), opportunities for travel are few, and so the English they
most frequently hear is that of their pupils'. He added, though, that 'this
loss of proficiency is quite possibly more a problem of perception than of
fact, and that it is their confidence rather than their proficiency that needs
bolstering.'
If this is the case in Poland, it is likely to be the case in many other
countries where similar conditions exist. It would almost certainly be true,
for example, in Egypt and Bangladesh, both countries in which I have
been working over the past seven years in the field of in-service teacher
training at secondary school level. Both countries share the following
features:
1 English is taught as the compulsory foreign language on the secondary
school curriculum, and in Bangladesh it is also taught right through
primary level. It is not, however, used as the medium of instruction at
either level in the education system.
2 In both countries, a substantial proportion of the English teachers
employed at secondary level have had no special training to teach
English, having specialized in other subjects at their training colleges
or faculties of education. Their previous experience of formal
coursework in English often dates from the time that they were at
secondary school themselves, and their command of the language,
especially of the spoken language, is frequently very shaky.
3 As in Poland, teachers' contact with the language is very limited,
especially outside the main towns, where it is likely to be virtually non-
existent.
4 The English curriculum places great emphasis on the use of English, as
164 Richard Cullen
 opposed to the mother tongue, in the English classroom a policy which
is reinforced by the school principals and more especially the school
inspectors, who are likely to assess English teachers on their ability to
use English in their classes.
5 Both countries have recently introduced new 'communicative'
textbooks at secondary level, which have arguably placed more
pressure on teachers than in the past to use English easily andfluentlyin
the classroom. Teachers following a communicative approach are
expected not merely to initiate set responses from their students (as was
often the case with earlier audio-lingual, structure-based materials) but
rather to initiate a wide range of unpredictable contributions from
students and to respond naturally and spontaneously to them. This in
turn requires teachers to 'continually adjust (their) speech to an

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

appropriate lever of difficulty' (from class to class and student to
student) and to 'solve unpredictable communication problems from
moment to moment' (Mitchell 1988). In the words of Marton (1988),
the 'communicative strategy' requires teachers 'to be prepared for any
linguistic emergency'. They are also expected to handle authentic or
semi-authentic reading texts, often posing cultural as well as linguistic
difficulties, and are not likely to be reassured by the bland
pronouncements they hear on training courses that 'it is not necessary
to understand every word.' This may be appropriate for the students,
but not for most self-respecting teachers. In short, communicative
materials and methodology demand of the teacher a higher level of
proficiency in English than in the past, and the confidence to use it over
an extended period in the classroom. Yet how many pre-service or
in-service training programmes take this into account?

Strategies for A poor or rusty command of English undermines the teacher's confidence
addressing in the classroom, affects his or her self-esteem and professional status,
language needs in and makes it difficult for him or her to follow even fairly straightforward
teacher training teaching procedures such as asking questions on a text (cf. Doff 1987), let
programmes alone fulfil the pedagogical requirements of new, more communicative
curricula. Low levels in English among the teaching force are thus not just
a concern among the teachers themselves but should also be a concern of
those involved in planning both pre-service and in-service teacher
training programmes. Faced with this problem, there are a number of
general approaches the course planner might adopt. I shall consider four
possible approaches:

Tackle the problem Ignore the problem, or rather try to tackle it indirectly. This approach aims
indirectly to improve the trainees' English by ensuring that the other components of
the programme, e.g. methodology, are conducted in the medium of
English, with plenty of opportunities for the trainees to discuss issues in
English, read widely around the subject matter, and to practise micro-
teaching units from the textbook. It is true that over time such a policy
should lead to a general rise in the level of English of the participants.
However, many programmes, especially in-service ones, do not have the
Language improvement in teacher training 165
 time, resources, or opportunities for the kind of exposure to English which
such an approach would require to be effective. Furthermore, in the light
of the foregoing discussion, it would appear that something more direct is
required, and wanted by the teachers themselves.

Include a language Include some kind of language improvement component alongside the
component other parts of the course. Many teacher training courses, as in the example
of China already referred to, attempt to do this, but it may be questionable
whether the aims of all components are satisfactorily achieved as a result.
Once again there is usually a problem of time. It is difficult to introduce a
separate major component such as language improvement into a training
course without sacrificing other parts of it, in particular, the methodology/
pedagogical skills component. This would be particularly true of in-

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

service courses where time and resources are usually more at a premium.
There is also the danger, mentioned above, that pressure of time will
change the character of the language improvement component—
emphasizing the presentation of a given list of language items on the
syllabus, rather than development of language skills.

Link methodology Make methodology the content of a language improvement programme.

and language For example, one could use reading and listening passages about various
improvement methodology topics, and, where appropriate, devise 'loops' in which the
content is conveyed through the process which is being described: a
dictation about the principles and procedures for giving dictations would
be an example of this (see Woodward 1991 for this and other examples).
This approach clearly goes some way towards overcoming the problem of
time, since it seeks to combine language improvement and methodology
and make it one component. However, the restriction of the subject matter
of the course to one major topic (i.e. methodology) would seem to limit
both its usefulness and its appeal to teachers as a course in general
language improvement.

Make language Make language improvement the central element of the course, and plan
improvement the other components around it. In this approach, the 'content' of the
central methodology and language awareness components would be derived
from the language course which the trainees would undergo. The
language course would thus be the central element, and provide the input
for the other components, in particular methodology/pedagogical skills.
The trainees would first have direct experience of a particular teaching
approach, or technique, as genuine language learners, before discussing
the approach or technique as teachers. To some extent, this may seem
similar to Berry's proposal (Berry 1990) for a 'language improvement
course, which, in addition to its primary role, will have the secondary
effect of providing a model of teaching behaviour.' However, it should be
stressed that the aim is not so much to provide a model as an example for
discussion. The 'model' is open to discussion and analysis and may be
rejected, and almost certainly modified by the trainees as a result of this
process.

166 Richard Cullen

 Few training courses in my experience adopt this approach, and it may not
be appropriate on many pre-service courses due to the requirements of the
syllabus and the final examinations. However, it may well provide an
answer to the in-service training needs of teachers in many parts of the
world, where what is required is both improvement of the teachers'
command of the language and upgrading of their professional skills as
teachers. Such an approach potentially offers both, and moreover, seeks to
deal with issues of methodology in a way that is likely to be quite different
to the teachers' previous experience at pre-service level, i.e. through
actual experience followed by a process of analysis and reflection. It is
time now to consider how this approach might work in practice.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

Incorporating a In Bangladesh I was involved with a team of college lecturers in the
language planning and teaching of a language improvement component for English
improvement teachers following a one-year post-graduate diploma course at the
course in a Teacher Training College in Dhaka. The students were a mixture of pre-
teacher training service and in-service trainees, primarily the latter, most of whom had
programme: an completed two or three years' service after graduation. The need for a
example language improvement course was plain, yet there was no room on the
timetable for such a programme without cutting into other areas of the
diploma syllabus. Consequently, we decided to run an optional course for
the students in 'free' periods for four hours a week (two free afternoons)
over a period of three months. It was stressed that the course was optional
and would not count towards the students' assessment on the whole
course. The attendance—80 per cent of the total number of those taking
English—was encouraging, and testified to the teachers' own frequently
expressed feelings that language improvement was a top priority for them.
The course we devised was based on their results on a proficiency test we
had previously set, which showed their average ability to be at the
standard expected of Grade 8 students, i.e. an intermediate level mid-way
through the secondary school cycle. Consequently, we devised a general
intermediate/upper intermediate course in English designed to last forty-
eight contact hours, and based loosely on selected units of a standard,
reasonably communicative coursebook (with which the trainees were
unfamiliar), supplemented by reading texts from a variety of sources,
often of local interest. By the end of the course, it was clear that many of
the trainees seemed to be as interested in the methodology to which the
course exposed them as in the language content of the course itself. This
interest suggested that there was potential for exploiting the course for
purposes beyond the primary goal of language improvement, and that if
we were to run the course again for future groups of trainees, it would be
worthwhile to consider how to try to achieve these ulterior purposes.
Unfortunately, it proved impossible the following year to run the course
again due to a variety of reasons beyond our control, and consequently,
any plans to try and link this language component with work on
methodology/pedagogical skills never bore fruit. This paper therefore
attempts to put forward a number of ideas for consideration rather than
report on an attempt to put forward ideas into practice.

Language improvement in teacher training 167

 The general Figure 1 shows the basic approach envisaged on an in-service course
approach which aims to link language improvement with other components, and in
particular, with methodology. The starting point (the 'Input' stage) is
always the language lesson, which will be part of a language course which
has been specifically designed to meet the needs of the group of teachers
Figure 7
INPUT PROCESSING OUTPUT
Language lesson Trainees analyse and evaluate Trainees:
Trainees experience lesson data, drawn from: —write own lesson
lesson as students —teachers' notes/lesson plans plans
—learning materials —devise own
—trainees' notes/diaries activities
—audio tapes/transcripts of —micro-teach
lessons

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

—observer's notes

in question. This lesson—usually selected parts of it—constitutes the data

for the second 'Processing' stage, during which the lesson is subjected to
a process of description, analysis, and evaluation. Finally, there may or
may not be an 'output' or 'transfer' stage, in which the trainees plan ways
of transferring an idea (e.g. a teaching strategy or classroom technique) to
their own teaching situation. The trainees thus go through a process of
experiencing a language lesson as learners, recalling what happened
(usually with the aid of various types of lesson data, to be discussed
below), analysing the data in some structured way, evaluating it (for
example in terms of the lesson's effectiveness), andfinallyreflecting on it
with reference to their own teaching practices and teaching situations, a
process which may or may not lead to integration of certain strategies and
techniques into the individual trainee's own teaching repertoires. This
process would of course be repeated again and again throughout the
course. How much time would be spent on each part of the process, i.e. the
allocation of time to the language course itself as opposed to the
methodological analysis, will be discussed later.

Recalling the Central to this process is the need to describe the lesson, or the specific
lesson: sources of parts of the lesson which the trainees wish to focus on, as accurately and
data objectively as possible. If the data is unreliable, in other words, if the
trainees cannot agree on what happened, the subsequent analysis and
evaluation of the lesson will be largely academic. Figure 1 outlines some
possible sources of data on the lesson, which could be useful for analysis
and discussion. These include:
Teachers' notes/lesson plans: Although not a record in themselves of
what actually happened, they show what the teacher intended to happen,
and are thus useful for a discussion of the rationale for what the teacher
had planned. They can also help to jog the trainees' memories of what the
teacher did or did not do in the lesson. This would also be true of the
learning materials used in the lesson, e.g. copies of dialogues, reading
texts and tasks, writing exercises, etc., which could be used for a similar
analysis, focusing, for example, on the purpose of a particular exercise, or
168 Richard Cullen
a particular question, how 'meaningful' or 'meaningless' it was, and
whether it was effective as a learning exercise for the trainees.
Trainees' lesson notesldiaries: Data can also be supplied by the trainees
themselves in the form of notes on the lesson either written immediately
afterwards, or as a daily diary, in which each trainee records any aspects of
the day's lesson which he or she found particularly interesting, helpful for
learning, or just confusing. These notes could then be shared and
discussed with the whole group in the first session of each day's work.
The discussion would focus on why they found a particular procedure
interesting, helpful, or confusing, what the rationale for using it was, and
what alternative procedures might have been followed.
Audio tapesl transcripts of lessons: Another, more objective source of data

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

would be taped recordings of the lesson itself, preferably backed up by
transcripts of the selected parts which the trainer or trainees wished to
look at. Such data could obviously not be used until the day after the
lesson in order to allow time for the transcripts to be prepared. However,
the information from the transcripts would be potentially very fruitful,
leading to an analysis and exploration of a variety of crucial areas in
teaching, such as the extent and quality of classroom interaction and the
kind of teacher talk used, both to promote such interaction and generally
to direct operations in the classroom. An analysis.of teacher talk would
also bring the trainees back to the area of language again, this time with
the emphasis on classroom language—the language used for giving
instructions, for example, or for asking questions to elicit ideas or
information from the class.
Two further advantages of using transcripts ought to be mentioned here.
Firstly, it does not have to be the trainer who makes them. Once the
trainees are familiar with them, each day a different trainee could be asked
to take home the audio cassette and to make a transcript of a short part of
the lesson (about five minutes) in which he or she (or the class) was
interested. This in itself is a valuable learning exercise for any teacher,
requiring as it does a detailed and thorough exploration of what is
happening in a given segment of a lesson. Secondly, transcripts remain
reasonably anonymous: students' names need not be recorded (or can be
changed) on a transcript, and so the trainees are not 'exposed' to their
colleagues in the event of their making errors or being unable to answer
the teacher's question. The only person exposed is the trainer who taught
the lesson. Video tapes of the lessons taught would not be suitable sources
of data because they cannot offer anonymity. Video might also have the
effect of intruding on the lesson itself and possibly inhibiting the
performance of both teacher (the trainer) and the students (the trainees),
all of whom would be aware that their efforts would be played back, warts
and all, to be scrutinized and analysed after the lesson.
Observer's notes: Another source of data on the lesson would be notes
made by an observer, who might, for example, be one of the other trainers
involved in teaching the course. Independent notes of this kind made
during the lesson would normally be more reliable than notes based on the
Language improvement in teacher training 169
 recollections of the students and the teacher after the lesson had finished,
and they would be particularly useful for showing points of departure
between what the teacher had planned and what actually transpired in the
lesson. The observer, assuming he or she was one of the course tutors,
would then also be in a position to conduct the follow-up session.

Using the data: an Not all these different sources would be used with each lesson taught—
outline of a rather a selection, depending on what aspect of methodology/pedagogical
training session skills the trainer or the trainees wished to focus. Below I have suggested
an outline of a training session in which three of these sources of data
(trainees' notes, teacher's notes, and an audio tape of the lesson) are
utilized. The session would probably last about one hour, and could
follow any lesson that has been taught.

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

Step 1: Following a procedure suggested by Ramani (1987: 5) the
trainees begin by noting down immediately after the lesson which parts
they considered most satisfactory and why, and which parts they
considered least satisfactory and why—the object being to elicit from the
trainees their 'real and subjective responses to the lesson', as learners.
While they are doing this, the trainer does the same thing, from his or her
point of view, as the teacher—a quick, personal evaluation of how the
lesson went, and what extra work might be needed.
Step 2: The trainees discuss their impressions in small groups, and then
report back, each group presenting its conclusions on the most
satisfactory and least satisfactory parts. After their presentations, the
trainer presents his or her own impressions of the lesson and compares
these with the trainees' comments.
Step 3: The trainees are shown an incomplete outline of the lesson based
on the trainer's lesson notes, and showing only the main stages of the
lesson. In their groups they try to complete the outline based on their
recollections of the lesson, and assisted by the notes they made in Step 1
and the discussion in Step 2.
Step 4: Different groups report back and a complete outline is built up on
the board. The rationale for each stage and the sequence of stages is
discussed with the whole class. The main purpose here would be to look at
principles of lesson planning, and to discuss briefly the rationale behind
various commonly-used techniques and exercises, which would be
specified in the lesson outline (e.g. the reason for setting pre-questions on
a reading text, or the purpose of a particular gap-filling exercise used in
the lesson). The trainees' own impressions of the lesson could also be
matched against this outline—to establish whether there was a particular
stage of the lesson which seemed to work better or worse than other
stages, and if so, why.
Step 5: The trainer or trainees choose a particular stage of the lesson to
look at in more detail, for example, the warm-up stage, in which a reading
or listening text is presented. The trainees could be asked to expand the
original notes to include, for example, the questions the teacher might ask
the students at this stage, the actual instructions which might be given for
170 Richard Cullen
 a particular activity specified in the plan, and any words or phrases written
on the board. After the trainees have noted down their own ideas (which
will be partly based on their recollection of the lesson) the audio tape of
this part of the lesson could be played to compare their own suggested
classroom language with that actually used by the teacher. This in turn
would lead to a more detailed examination of the procedures used, for
example, questioning procedures such as how the teacher nominates
individual students to answer questions, the 'wait time' allowed between
asking the question and nominating a student, how the teacher reacts to
students' responses and follows up on them, etc.
Step 6: The trainees and trainer consider together the effectiveness of
this particular stage of the lesson in the light of their original impressions
recorded in Step 1, and any subsequent re-assessment which might have

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

resulted from the deeper analysis suggested in Step 5. As a result of this
discussion, the trainees or the trainer might suggest alternative procedures
which the teacher might have used.
Step 7: Finally, the trainees consider the applicability to their own
classes of the procedures they have been focusing on. Are they similar to
what they already do? Is there anything new which they have not tried
before? Was it effective for them as learners? Would it work in their own
classes? If not, why not? etc. This is the stage at which the trainees are
required to reflect on their experience as language learners in the light of
their experience as language teachers, and of their knowledge of their own
classrooms and students. To facilitate the process of transfer into their
own situations, it is important that the classroom conditions in which the
language improvement course takes place replicate as closely as possible
the classroom conditions in which most of the trainees work themselves.
By the same token, technological aids which are not available to teachers
in their schools should be avoided on the course.
The steps described above constitute one of many ways to proceed with the
task of describing, analysing, and evaluating the data provided by a
language lesson which a group of trainees have been taught. It could either
be done as one session immediately following the lesson itself, or divided
into two sessions, with the second session beginning at Step 5 on the
following day. This would have the advantage of giving time for a transcript
to be made of the particular part of the lesson being discussed. The transcript
could then replace (or supplement) the audio tape used in Step 5.

Follow-up: some The 'Processing' stage described above could of course be followed by an
considerations 'output' or transfer stage (see Figure 1), during which the trainees might be
asked to prepare a warm-up activity for a reading passage in their textbooks.
This would arguably be a logical follow-up activity. However, one should
guard against over-extending the methodology work so that it takes over
from the language course. The primary aim of the programme is to improve
the teachers' command of English so that they can perform with greater
confidence in the classroom. An over-emphasis on the methodology
employed will use up valuable time and interrupt the momentum of the
language course. The purpose of the methodology analysis is essentially one
Language improvement in teacher training 171
 of consciousness-raising: to deepen the trainees' understanding of the
principles and processes involved in language teaching (as a result of the
learning experience), in the hope that this increased understanding will
inform their own practice as teachers. For this reason, a balance of two hours
of language work to one hour of methodological analysis and reflection
would probably be what I would aim for.

Conclusion In this paper, I have attempted to describe a way of addressing the issue of
language improvement on in-service teacher training programmes in
parts of the world where there is a clear need and a desire for it. The
programme I have suggested attempts to combine language improvement
and methodology by using the learning experience which the trainees
have undergone during the language lesson as the content for follow-up

Downloaded from http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ at New York University on May 3, 2015

work on methodology. In my view the approach has a number of facets
which would recommend it to many groups of trainees working in the
kind of situation I described earlier. Firstly, the focus of the programme is
primarily on language improvement. As such, it aims to respond to many
teachers' actual wishes and to meet their most pressing needs. Secondly,
the methodology component is 'practice-driven' rather than 'theory-
driven', arising as it does out of the trainees' direct experience of the
methodology as learners. It will thus be rooted more firmly in reality than
the more theory-based methodology which many of the trainees would
previously have studied on their pre-service courses. Finally, the process
of describing, analysing, and evaluating the events which took place in the
lessons is a way of training the teachers on the course to observe and
reflect on their own and their colleagues' teaching when they are back in
their schools, thus contributing to their continued professional develop-
ment after the course.

Received February 1993

Note
This paper was originally presented at the IATEFL
Silver Jubilee Conference held at Lille, France, 23-26
October 1992.
References
Berry, R. 1990. 'The role of language improvement
in in-service teacher training programmes: killing
two birds with one stone'. System 18/1: 97-105.
Doff, A. 1987. 'Training materials as an instrument of
methodological change' in R. Bowers (ed.)
Language Teacher Education: An Integrated
Programme for ELT Teacher Training. ELT
Documents 125: 67-71. Basingstoke: Macmillan
for Modern English Publications.
Hughes, G. S. 1981. A Handbook of Classroom
English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hundleby, S. and F. Breet. 1988. 'Using
methodology notebooks on in-service teacher
training courses'. ELT Journal 42/1: 34-6.
Marton, W. 1988. Methods in English Language
172 Richard Cullen
Teaching. New York: Prentice Hall.
Mitchell, R. 1988. Communicative Language
Teaching in Practice. London: CILT.
Ramani, E. 1987. 'Theorizing from the classroom'.
ELT Journal 41/1: 3-11.
Willis, J. 1981. Teaching English through English.
Harlow: Longman.
Woodward, T. 1991. Models and Metaphors in
Language Teacher Training: Loop Input and Other
Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The Author
Richard Cullen has worked for the pastfifteenyears
in the field of teacher/trainer training and curriculum
development in Nepal, Greece, the UK, Egypt, and
Bangladesh. Since March 1992 he has been working
as a teacher trainer at the Centre for Tutor Training in
Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania, as part of the ODA/
Government of Tanzania's English Language
Teaching Support Project. He has an MA in Applied
Linguistics from the University of Reading.