Tony Gurr

Is the Global Scale of English (GSE) Really the “Love-Child” of Lucifer and Empusa?

In Assessment, Curriculum, ELT and ELL, Teacher Learning on 23/10/2017 at 6:41 pm

Love Child

Unless you have been living under a rock (in the Nevada desert…close to Area 51) for the last couple of years, you will have noticed a ‘new kid’ playing in the ELT Learning Outcomes (LO) sandbox…

8

The Global Scale of English (GSE) came into this world, kicking and screaming…with ten fingers and ten toes, in 2014-15. The Pearson GSE Team described the ‘delivery’ as long and painful – but well worth the time, effort and money they had invested (and ask the CEFR Team – that’s just the tip of the iceberg) to co-create the world’s first ‘truly global English language standard’.

The CEFR, which had done much to put learning-driven curricular on the map for us, was essentially an EU initiative – and it was just a matter of time before someone picked up the ball and helped spread the word to our friends across the pond and down-under!

The BLUE Books (both of them) 2

Pearson’s stated ambition was to allow learners to measure their progress accurately and easily (like the CEFR – whose stated goal was to help learners take real ownership of their own learning…hence the whole CAN-DO thingy – this was about what learners CAN DO not what teachers WILL TEACH).

CEFR and GSE Aims

8

The GSE Team took this a step further and was also seeking a way to help learners answer 3 simple questions:

  • How good is my English?

  • Am I progressing?

  • What do I need to do next?

The questions are simple! The answers…not so much!

 

Now, I’m not going to get into the ins and outs of the GSE (you can explore this here and the other hotlinks – the red links – below).

GSE LO Booklets 2

Suffice to say…not too shabby – a very useful project (for students)!

8

Pearson even went so far as to create an on-line GSE Teachers Toolkit to help schools ‘audit’ their curriculum outcomes and syllabi and create their own sets of learning outcomes (LOs)…from a huge array of learning outcomes for YLs, EAP / EGAP students, ESP learners and folk interested in General English (whatever that might be)!

Oh, and did I mention that all this was OPEN-SOURCE and…

Free (hanging labels-red) 2

Yes, FREE of CHARGE!

8

I have to admit I fell in love with this chubby, little baby as soon as I saw her…and I watched her grow as she began to play with Grammar and Lexical learning outcomes, too.

She’s not quite there with those ones…but she is making rapid progress and Pearson’s better use of research, corpora and technology suggests she’ll get there soon…inşallah!

8

Now, you might ask ‘why’…why I grabbed her rosy, little cheeks and said I just wanna eat you all up’!

Well, in my work I spend a lot of time working with schools on Curriculum Renewal initiatives. Back in the bad, old days…I would spend months helping teachers learn how to write Learning Outcomes (LOs).

The teachers I was working with would also spend hours sending me ‘hate-mail’…saying things like:

  • I am not qualified to do this…

  • This is killing me…I just can’t cope…

  • All this is wasting my time…I just want to be in the classroom…

I felt many of these ‘pains’, I did!

8

However, I recognised that many teachers:

  • Had fallen into the ‘trap’ of textbook-driven teaching…

  • Were running lessons that were little more than activity-based or content-driven classroom ‘TO-DO’ checklists…

  • Lacked the curriculum and assessment ‘literacy’ to design the type of lessons that linked clear outcomes to effective learning opportunities…

Yani, many teachers were not doing the type of things they wanted to do (deep down…in their heart of hearts)…they were not using the creativity they had…and were (frequently) getting more and more frustrated (and burned out) by this.

8

Perspective

Using the GSE outcomes allowed me to jump-start the Curriculum Renewal process and help teams focus on the high priority areas for their syllabi, help them focus on a Curriculum Planning model that made more sense (than textbook page-turning…like a burger-flipper at McDonalds) and focus on planning better lessons.

In a nutshell, using the GSE helped teachers develop their curriculum and assessment literacy levels – and helped them ‘TAKE a curriculum PERSPECTIVE’ (rather than simply just ‘HAVING a PERSPECTIVE on curriculum’).

That is:

  • Take a clearer position on the power of Learning Outcomes (LOs)

  • Better see the ‘links’ between OUTCOMES – ASSESSMENT – CLASSROOM IMPLEMENTATION

  • ‘Walk-their-talk’ more when planning, designing and reflecting on the lessons they create

8

Now, maybe I was being a bit naïve…I looked at the GSE as a tool and I used it to help people I work with!

After playing lots of ‘familiarisation games’ with GSE descriptors (often with a bit of mild competition), we’d brainstorm the most effective ways to assess these descriptors and gather evidence that our students CAN, in fact, DO this stuff fluently and automatically. We wrapped up these sessions by planning ‘mini-lessons’ describing how we could help our students get there.

Backwards Lesson Planning 2

It was this last phase, the mini-lesson planning – done collaboratively, that began to put smiles back on teachers faces. As they shared ideas, critiqued the order and sequence of activities and input and double-checked they were ‘hitting’ the correct LOs and eliciting the best evidence they could…they realised they could use all that creativity they have inside!

This is ‘real’ PDTeacher LearningReflective PracticeI remember thunking to meself!

8

Hey, and did I say…it is OPEN-SOURCE and…

Free (hanging labels)

8

However, and as usual, there is always a BIG…

8

but...

Pretty soon, I began to realise all was not well in the state of Denmark and the sandbox our GSE baby was playing in!

8

I started to see some less than positive reviews of the GSE coming out on social media and blogs – some of them before most people had even had the chance to work out what the GSE was…let alone review the draft LOs that were coming out!

Some of these were linked to the advance of ‘learnification’ in education. To be honest, I still really do not get this (how the bloody hell can more of a focus on learners and learning possibly be ‘a bad thing’…maybe, I’m just really thick)!

LEARNing Quote 01 (Steve)

8

The name-calling also began early on with GSE being referred to as ‘the Son of CEFR Frankenstein Reanimated’ (my use of Empusa is much smarter!)…and built on the views of some that the CEFR has been indiscriminately exported for use in standards-based education and assessment in non-European contexts (Fulcher, 2010) and has reduced diversity and experimentation in pedagogy and research (Davies, 2008). Geoff Jordon, whose views I usually have a lot of time for, expanded on this and suggested that Pearson’s ‘Grand Vision’ is one of world domination, sorry Geoff, ’standardised everything’.

Illuminati and GSE

Again, a lot of this is pure speculation (by CEFR and GSE ‘outsiders’) fuelled by what can only be described by a conspiracy theory orientation.

Besides, I have always found that it is schools and school administrators that are more obsessed with ‘standardisation’ – falsely assuming that if teachers cover the same pages (at the same time), students will ‘learn’ the same amount! Teachers, for their part, are often terrified of being seen not to follow their ‘pacing guides’ or ‘weekly plans’ (to the letter, page or activity) and come to believe that ‘standardisation’ is the best way to ‘cover-their-own-arse’ – just in case something is on the test!

Nothing could be further from the truth…students do not learn more because we standardise ‘inputs’ and any publisher worth their salt knows they can sell more (or at least curry favour with teachers) by promoting creative use of textbooks and materials and ideas to personalise activities and textbook tasks.

8

Gunpoint (cat)

The bottom line is that no one can be ‘forced’ to adopt the tools or materials offered by Pearson – free will (and after-sales service) play a much bigger role in the creation of real-world book lists and school adoptions than these commentators know. The truth of the matter is that schools themselves do more of the arm-twisting…and end up harming the morale and motivation of both their teachers and students in the process!

The other criticism that has been raised is that of the ‘granular’ nature of the GSE. This is true but it is this very fact that makes the GSE a more ‘precise scale of proficiency’. A key ‘weakness’ of the CEFR ‘levels’ was that they were not ‘granular’ enough (this is why feedback from teachers…yes, I said teachers…not publishers, led to the addition of the A2+, B1+, B2+ levels).

If students, as the CEFR originally envisioned, are to take more control of their own learning and the very language they are engaging with, they need ‘granular’they need accessiblethey need transparent!

This is what the GSE has done…

8

Thinkers wanted (blog ver 02 TG)

Unlike many of ELT’s ‘blue bloods’, I read…a great deal! I totally get the criticisms from SLA experts that suggest that:

  • ‘CAN-DO‘ outcomes may not evolve in the way the CEFR and GSE describe them

  • Many current LOs in the CEFR and GSE are not as ‘meaningful’ as they could be

  • We do not have the corpora to link grammar and lexis to the various levels and scales we are using

  • ELT (and educational sciences in general) needs to prioritise evidence-based practice (not Eminence-Based EDUmyths from EDUquacks)

However, teaching is as much an art as it should be a science. Sadly, we are not quite there with the science…

8

Now, some of you might say, “Tony, you naïve little boy! Wake up, smell the coffee and see that ELT has become an industry dominated by Illuminati-type publishers”!

Blog Post (Curric Pt 02) Image 05 230717

I haven’t got time to worry about imaginary threats of world domination. Like everything on the planet (except God…and my darling wife), nothing is perfect.

8

Yes, Pearson is a huge company…that wants to make money (nothing wrong with that – I am the same…need to put bread on the table for my family and in my dog’s bowl) – but there are so many challenges we face as teacher educators:

Most of us work in the real world where we face very real problems:

  • Schools and universities operating without a ‘written curriculum’ – and extremely low levels of curriculum and assessment literacy (even among school leaders)

  • Teachers with little real, practical classroom training (even after graduating from an Education Faculty) blindly using textbooks

  • Testing Teams inflicting unfair and unreliable tests on students

  • Students unprepared to take responsibility for their own learning – because schools and teachers do not ‘walk’ their student-centred ‘talk’

I could go on…YOU could add to this, I’m sure!

8

GSE Tools (more the better)

We need all the help (and tools) we can get our hands on! And, I repeat again, no one is being forced to adopt the GSE (just like no one was forced to adopt the CEFR, the Communicative Approach or Task-Based Learning)!

They are simply ‘tools’tools to be exploited as we see fit or dismissed.

8

By the way, did I mention that not all of us are as well-paid as our colleagues in Finland and when we are given an open-source ‘gift’…we should:

Blog Post (Curric) Image 02 220717

…and say ‘Thank You’!

8

Telling the truth (TG ver) 080517

I do not work for Pearson. I have not been paid to produce this post (I earn nothing from any of my bouts of bloggery).

However, I do work with Pearson (as a training and consulting partner) and Pearson do sponsor some of my work with their key clients and, occasionally, I do support those clients with a keynote or seminar at a conference.

In all these duties, I am never required to engage in any form of product placement – I work in the best interests of the schools, teams and teachers that choose to work with Pearson.

 

Advertisements

So…What Exactly Should Curriculum Planning Look Like – for 2017/18? (Part 02)

In Curriculum, ELT and ELL, Our Schools, Our Universities, The Paradigm Debate on 22/10/2017 at 12:35 am

Urbanski Quote

Have you ever done a blog post that totally leads people down the garden path – then promises to make up for it by saying that Part 2 will be more focused, useful and better-written?

Have you ever forgotten to write that Part 2?

Whoops!

8

So, as I was saying – ELT has been using this ridiculous, ‘best practice’ model for curriculum-developing and syllabus-making for over 40 years (teachers have also incorporated it into their lesson-planning)!

CPD Blog Post 170717 slide 09 TG

8

It just don’t work…and we have (in our heart of hearts) known this for years!

Why not?

8

Well, it ain’t that hard to work out:

Screaming Teacher

8

OK, OK – I get that when we look at our ‘content’, we get pretty scared:

Curric Content

8

We can panic about much of this ‘content’ we have to ‘cover’ in the limited time we have available with our learners – especially, if we are also working in an EGAP or EAP context:

8

Academic Literacy

Academic Literacy is a total bi’ach to plan for!

8

Covey Quote

But, the solution is NOT to ignore the learner…it is to make sure we put the learner at the heart of our decision-making.

Wiggins and McTighe Quote 2

8

We have to recognise that more of the same is not the solution…

Do Different ZAMANI

Indeed, we just have to listen to some of the ELT Jedi Masters (although they may be few in number)…

ELT Jedi Masters

8

Recognising the power of questions…

Mackenzie Quote

8

Wiggins and McTighe gave use a new planning model with 3 phases:

OUTCOMES

ASSESSMENT

IMPLEMENTATION

…and gave use us 3 disarmingly-simple questions to help us get it right!

8

The first of these drew attention to the fact that learner outcomes (not teacher inputs) are here to stay – and, if we are to have a hope in hell of expanding and improving student learning and success, we have to begin with the end in mind or recognise that curriculum-developing needs to begin where it ends – with the learning of individual students.

Backwards Model (1st questions) 2

That’s the essence of the job, guys – always has been!

8

The second phase has frequently raised a few eyebrows – because we, so often, just tag on assessment at the end of the learning process. We forget that, for students, assessment IS the curriculum!

Backwards Model (2 questions) 2

Come on! How many times have you heard a student say:

“Hocam, that was a great lesson! I loved the way you combined the 21st century skills of critical thinking and collaboration with a truly communicative, task-based activity based on a meaningful information gap…and the way you supported us with just-in-time instruction and helped with all that emergent vocabulary and lexis – you are a great teacher…I love you”!

How many times have you heard this one?

“Hocam – will this be on the test…or what”?

You get the point…

8

The fact is that if a teacher really knows and understands the nature of the assessment processes and tools that students need to engage with (and these are more than simplistic, high-stakes, multiple-choice tests) they can create lessons that promote more of a learning-driven culture…where learners welcome the type of formative feedback that helps them grow and succeed.

8

Backwards Model (all 3 questions) 2

The final phase is where teachers can get creative – developing a lesson (or series of lessons) that both meets student needs and is engaging and, dare I say it, useful! Rather than starting with a textbook (and following up with content-driven and activity-driven lessons), we design learning opportunities and tasks that can make a difference…and be fun!

Surely, I do not have to sell this any harder…it just makes so much sense!

8

OK, I may have simplified things a wee bit – but just jump back to Part 01 and tell me this is not an improvement…that this approach can’t help us deal with the challenge identified by Rogers…over 35 years ago!

Rogers Quote 1982

How to Spot and ‘Nail’ an EDUfraud!

In Conferences, Educational Leadership, News & Updates (from the CBO), Our Schools, Our Universities, Quality & Institutional Effectiveness on 21/10/2017 at 1:23 pm

 

As I was finishing up the 2017-18 Conference Calendar yesterday, I was also glancing at a couple of the more recent conference programmes and biodata of speakers. It dawned on me that so many speakers describe themselves as consultants, trainers, teachers and coaches – all in the same breathe!

Fraud alert (sign)

Oh, and the worst one is when they feel the need to tell you ‘I’m the FOUNDER of so-and-so (insert Company Name here)’ – that’s when you know you have got an egotistical twerp who loves to exaggerate or stretch the truth to breaking point!

I did actually talk about these wonderfully-talented, multi-skilled individuals – who love nothing more than to project the image that they are ‘the smartest and most experienced guys (or gals) in the room’in an earlier post.

Lucky for us…they very rarely are!

8

However, I did not really come up with any suggestions or solutions for how we can ‘pop their little bubbles’, expose them for what they are, and protect ourselves from them:

Snake Oil Sellers (TG ver) 080517

or

Blog Post (Curric Pt 02) Image 02 230717

8

It’s actually not that difficult to sniff them out:

  • Their biodata just seems too good to be true!
  • Their actual age just does not seem to match the number of years experience they claim to have!
  • Their ‘sessions’ are just not as authentic or passionate as those from ‘real’ teachers who really know their stuff – and smell like they have been ripped off from some blog listicle!

8

I know, I know…you just can’t trust anyone these days!

8

Questions (Chinese proverb and donkey) Ver 03

8

I’ve often found that a good way to sort the wheat from the chaff is to corner one of these EDUfrauds and Snake-Oil Salesmen and ask them a few simple questions:

  1. So, how many actual (full-time) years of experience have you had in the classroom?
  2. What type of teaching qualifications do you have? Where did you get them? Was there a practicum component?
  3. What about your coaching qualifications – where / when did you get those? Did you complete every module?
  4. And, teacher training? What type of experience and training have you had for that? Where they accredited programmes?
  5. So, a consultant? I guess you have an MBA or PhD, then?

8

Some of these chaps can be quite entertaining (with their unlikely but well-rehearsed stories) and are often voluble and verbally facile – so put them on the spot:

  1. What type of formal leadership positions have you held in institutions? How long did you hold these positions?
  2. What type of training did you find most useful to help you succeed in these positions?
  3. What successes are you most proud of implementing when you were in these roles?
  4. Tell me about 3 or 4 of your long-term coaching relationships. What areas have you helped clients develop in? How many coachees do you currently have?
  5. What about your consultancy projects? Could you give me a list of 5-6 recent clients that I can approach for references?

8

These questions are also great when these people come cold-calling trying to ‘flog their wares’ – and really help you sort out who has the experience and talent to help you…from those who are just ‘faking it till they make it’.

8

Take care…sadly, it’s a jungle out there!

8

That having been said, it’s always good to know:

Doner

Photo Credit – Elwyn Gabriels (“Keser döner sap döner gün gelir hesap döner.”)