jueves, 16 de enero de 2020

English Certifications for Students.


Hello everyone!

It's taken me a while to write this new entry, but it's been impossible as the first couple weeks have been hectic in my workpplace. In any case, I would like to share my thoughts with you on the topic of ESOL certifications for students.

As everybody knows, this type of certifications have existed for quite a long time, but at present there is such a wide variety that it's very difficult to choose the most appropriate one for your students. Cambridge, Trinity College, TOEFL, Oxford... There are so many possibilities that some students find it really diffficult to select one. This happes to me every year and nowadays even more due the the mobility that exists both at an academic and a professional level.



However, having in mind a clear idea of what your students want to do with it and with some research online, it's not a real problem to help them choose the certification that best suits them. Nonetheless, it is undeniable that Cambridge certificates are the most recognized one nearly all over the world, but competitors are on the rise and their standards are being accepted as well in many places.

Why do so many students take these examinations? To be honest, there is a demand at academic and professional levels and they even have pressure coming straightaway from their parents. Actually, I sometimes feel that these examinations have lost, in terms of social perspective, their real focus. They are designed to assess the level students have in English (or whatever language they're learning).




By this I mean the "need" for certificates is a truth which is affecting the primary purpose of taking these exams (I won't talk about the business of the institutions and the profit they make) and, ultimately, education and the pocess of learning themselves. And this poses some real problems.

First of all, I'd like to focus on learners who may not pass these examinations. Occasionally, I come across some who feel demotivated because they haven't succeeded in these exams, but whose level is even higher than the one they have to demonstrate in the exam (this rings a bell, doesn't it?). Then, it is very difficult to convince them that their level is "X" despite the examination they took says the contrary, which makes it extremely difficult for teachers to "recover" them or help them get over this issue. Moreover, when we're talking about young learners and teenagers, learners have the extra pressure of their families, which of course affects them at a personal level. Psychologically speaking, it is a real blow and teachers have to be very careful and act as counsellors so as to help students.




Second, external assessment is positive and I support it. We, as teachers, need to know if what we are doing is right and how to improve our teaching practice. And this is when these exams play an important role. Nevertheless, we might feel "trapped" as well, as we might receive pressure from the Administration, the board of an institution or the director of the school as well. In other words, we may need to show good statistics as they "indicate" whether we are good professionals or not.

This leads to the third point I want to mention: the fact that an amount of teachers (under pressure) change their teaching style and focus on examinations, not on learning. We've seen this happening in countries like the USA, where external assessment may have become, in my opinion, a burden rather than an advantage. In other words, teaching might be transformed into just a means of production to comply with official requirements.

I do believe in the positive aspects of external assessment, but the world we live in draws constant comparisons and analyses learners in terms of data and statistics, which shouldn't happen. I am aware businesses and the academic world use these as it is a quick way to differentiate (or set apart) candidates. However, is this the correct path? According to many companies, it isn't and that's the reason why they interview candidates in the second language they're looking for. And I agree with them. Some learners may have problems succeeding at these examinations even if their level is even higher: it isn't a problem related to their English skills, but a problem with the format of the examinations.

This is just some food for thought and we should all think about it to check if all these pressures I have been talking about are affecting the way we teach in a positive or negative manner.

Wish you all the best.

David.


10 comentarios:

  1. Este comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.

    ResponderEliminar
  2. Hi David,

    First of all, let me say I really like your blog. You've raised some interesting issues not only in this last article, but in the previous ones as well.

    I agree it may not be fair for companies to consider only the candidates' official certificates and that's where the interviews in English come in. Having said that, it also depends on who the interviewers are - they may not be proficient English speakers themselves and therefore may not be so good at assessing other people's English.

    As regards examinations, we could argue that no exam is perfect, but I believe Cambridge exams, such as First or Advanced, are quite well-designed, and unlike some other tests, they are virtually impossible to pass if you do not have a good command of English. One of the issues is that people need certificates (often ASAP) in order to get a job or study abroad, which is why they often sing up for an exam course that is above their level and end up feeling frustrated and consequently demotivated because they can't keep up.

    Another problem you refer to is backwash - teaching to the exam (I'm currently doing the DELTA module 3 paper so it's definitely one of the things to be taken into consideration when teaching for exams). There are teachers who simply go through a number of practice tests, thinking or hoping that this will be enough for the students to pass the exam. However, what they may not realize is that they also need to teach their students something. Exam classes should not focus only on exam practice, but also on improving students' general English as well as on equipping them with effective exam strategies.

    One of the greatest challenges, however, may lie in the fact that many students do not know how languages are learnt (or I'd better say acquired) and the main culprits may be their primary and secondary school teachers (luckily, there are always excpetions :-)) who taught them too much grammar and insisted on accuracy but did very little to improve their fluency. But that is a topic (or an idea for you to consider) for another article :-)

    Bozidar Nikic

    ResponderEliminar
    Respuestas


    1. Dear Bozidar.

      In the first place, I would like to thank you for your great comment and your encouragement. I truly appreciate it, as it is sometimes difficult to find time so as to write the entries.

      The point you've made about the interviewers is absolutely logical and correct. I don't own a business, but I guess I would like to have the best professionals in my team. Thus, I'd try to make the slection process as effective as possible and I'd make sure a diligent and accurate interview in English takes place. However, companies which aren't so big might not be able to do it due to the economic investment that could convey (externalizing this department) or the difficulties when finding potential interviewers themselves whose level of English is good enough. Thus, it is obvious why English certications have become essential.

      I am also with you on the imperfection of exams. Having a perfect exam to assess levels is utopian, as you know, but it is also true they have a format that needs to be prepared. This applies to Cambridge and the items that appear on the Use of English tasks and parts in the oral component. What I mean is there are candidates who prepare the format thoroughly and they succeed because of that rather than because of their level of English. I'm not stating their command is not good, but working with the format is key to passing these examinations. Another case is your ASAP comment. I completely agree, mainly when New Year's Resolutions are still active. Jokes apart, some people aren't realistic about their objectives and we, as teachers, should tell them they won't get a certain level in a short period of time. Any learning process is gradual and a certain amount of time is required to really internalize and master the new contents. Nonetheless, it is out job to warn them to avoid frustration and demotivation.

      You also comment on the effect of backwash. You make a great point: combining exam preparation and English. You're absolutely right. The problem is striking a balance due to the pressures you may come across (from students, families, administration...). In my case, I focus on English and then exams. Obviously, students need to know what they are going to face in an exam, but I feel the tasks you prepare for them should be just exam focused. Actually, I move to the latter type once my students have showed me they know the contents.

      Finally, primary and secondary school teachers. I can see your point, and I'm a Secondary teacher myself (hahaha!). Even though we're still far, it's absolutely true that some teachers at these stages primarily focus on grammar, vocabulary and accuracy rather than fluency. Luckily, this situation is changing but we can't forget the contents that need to be covered and are given by the curriculum. In my case, too many contents. I focus on fluency, but when we have external assessment, fluency is not the real objective, but accuracy. I feel really frustrated and angry because this situation is unfair and doesn't help to improve our students' level and "forces" us to emphasize just the written component. Anyway, there are more and more teachers focusing on fluency and finding a real balance with accuracy, grammar amd vocabulary. I include myself in this group, and to be honest, focus more on fluency and communicative skills. Communication is the key, the real objective of learning a language.

      Again, thanks very much for your comment!

      Eliminar
  3. Bozidar Nikic, do you actually believe that these examination boards would hire assessors who are ‘not proficient speakers of English’ and therefore not able to assess accurately? Do you know the screening they undergo with their qualifications and the training they are obliged to complete? If you don’t, please research. These are internationally-recognised companies and I assure you, the standards are pretty high.

    ResponderEliminar
    Respuestas
    1. Dear Krassie. Sorry, I answered your second comment first. I feel Bozidar might be pointing out that some of those assessors may not have the convenient level of English. That's happened to me as an interviewee on a couple of occasions: applying for the position of English teacher and the interviewers' level of English didn't even have a B2 and they were in charge of the department. If you extrapolate this situation, it isn't so uncommon. Thanks it is changing as assessors tend to be fully prepared nowadays, but still some aren't. Thanks very much for your ideas!

      Eliminar
  4. Although I agree with you, David, about exams not being the best way to assess candidates and that, yes, every learner s to be seen as a whole person, in their own circumstances, how do you practically suggest this is done? How would a UK university assess the ability of each of thousands of international candidates of their courses, if not via a test? Provided that most of the candidates do not live in the respective country as well?

    ResponderEliminar
    Respuestas
    1. Dear Krassie.

      Thanks very much for joining. The question you ask me is difficult to answer, to be honest. However, what about videoconferences or a test created and designed by the university itself to check whether the candidate's level of English to fulfill the requirements? Apart from that, many universities send specialized staff around the world to check whether a candidate is suitable. If they can't, there is a gap in the market that can turn quite interesting in terms of business.... These are just the first ideas that come into my mind without really sitting down and thinking about it. All my best!

      Eliminar
  5. Hi Krassie,

    I have to say I have very little experience with job interviews, but I was once interviewed for an HR position by a person whose level of English was way below mine. OK, it may not be the best example as I'm an English teacher and the interviewer was not, but I have another one to illustrate my point. A private student of mine, who is at the moment taking exams (English being only one of them) to become a police inspector, told me today that the interviewers are actually also inspectors whose English (at least the pronunciation) is such that most candidates can't understand them.
    I'm sure that many companies make sure those who interview applicants have a good command of English, but then again there are certainly some exceptions. Anyway, the fact that David has been interviewed by some not so proficient speakers only proves my point. The main point I was actually trying to make is that Cambridge exams are standardized and then it's no surpise they are internationally recognized.

    ResponderEliminar
  6. David,
    When it comes to state school teachers, I didn't mean most of them were bad - just that in many schools thay are still using the old methods and that the classes could be much more communicative.
    I really liked my English teacher in high school and I thought she was the best, but when I graduated and become a teacher myself, I realized she had used a Grammar Translation method and that there was still a lot to learn when it came to teaching a foreign language. Most teachers in my home country, Serbia, are still teaching using these old-fashioned methods (the classes mostly consist of reading and translating texts and doing grammar exercises) and I believe one of the reasons is that they themselves are not very proficient speakers so it is much easier to teach and test grammar. I've only been in Spain for over a year now, but from what I could hear from my students, the situation in some schools in not so dissimilar to that in Serbia. Of course, I am not saying that the teachers who work in academies are much better (especially some natives with no certificates), but that is again another topic.
    David, I hope I've given you an idea or two for another blog :-)))

    ResponderEliminar
  7. Bozidar,
    Of course not all teachers are bad, but it is true merhodologies were nearly non-existent some years ago, or at least the access to them. In my case, Spain "suffered" from a similar problem. Most teachers of English when it was implemented in the curriculum were teachers of Spanish Language and Literature. They were paid an English course in England that didn't last much and started teaching once they were back home.
    Then, the so-called specialists ESL teachers started but still many used grammar and translation as the basis for their lessons. Needless to say, there were exceptions who made use of a more communicative approach, though.

    Nowadays, methodologies and teacher training are at hand, and I've witnessed a real change in young teachers (and some not so young), but they need time to gain experience, as any professional in any field. Things are getting better, but there is still a long way to go!!

    Thanks for your ideas!!!

    ResponderEliminar