I thought of this question as I read the preface to Language Curriculum Design (LCD) (Nation & Macalister, 2009). At the head of the preface they include a quote from The Prince (Machiavelli, 1513):
There is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage than the creation of a new system. For the initiator has the enmity of all who would profit by the preservation of the old system and merely lukewarm defenders in those who would gain from the new one.I am no expert on The Prince, but it's my understanding that Machiavelli was not overly concerned about the morality of the claim he made. But, it seems difficult to me to deny the general truth of it. What concerns me is that in the context of the education of young people especially, is that teachers and administrators have a moral duty to
I understand to a certain degree why institutions and their administrators feel the need to consider the bottom line. After all, if students don't enroll and stay enrolled, the very survival, let alone success, of the institution may no longer be possible. And what advantage is it to the student if the institution should fail? Still, administrators must realize that there is a balance to be found as giving students the best possible education and experience can help it to flourish.
However, what really gets me riled up is when teaching committees put first interests that are at odds with the welfare of students. These interests can include easing the workloads of committee members, compensating for the incompetency of teachers/administrators, and job security for either committee members or for a certain class of teacher. In that last category, I'm afraid that TESOL-trained teachers are often seen as a threat to literature teachers, who often occupy these committee seats. And, I am probably missing some other types of self-interest that take priority over the quality of education.
Let me now say that I am aware that this is not always the case, that many committee members do their best to look out for the interest of the students and that TESOL-trained teachers are not angels. But, TESOL-trained teachers do tend to be more aware of the research and practices that can lead to better course design.
***************
Let me finish this post by quoting from the preface of LCD about curriculum design itself (p. xv):
Curriculum design involves the integration of knowledge from many of the areas in the field of Applied Linguistics, such as language acquisition research, teaching methodology, assessment, language description and materials production.It is my hope that by sharing what I am learning in LCD side by side with UbD to sharpen my understanding of TESOL course design. I hope it will help you too and that you will share what you are learning and/or have learned that we can design the best courses we can for our students.
I leave with a few questions again:
- Is there a moral aspect to course design?
- How should we cope when the politics of institutions seem to interfere with the best interests of students?
- How important is it for course designers and teachers to be aware of language acquisition research?
And, I invite anyone who would like to make a guest post, or become a co-author of the blog to let me know.
Morality is a tough one...
ReplyDeleteThere is no TRUE morality... it is fluid and changes from culture to culture, so we cannot expect to integrate our version of it (whatever it may be) into an ESL lesson plan.
I think ethics may have more bearing in this conversation, but morality is impossible to craft an argument for or against.
The better question of how administrators and institutions can often interfere with the best interests of students (through our perception) requires a great deal of consideration, however.
I have been disappointed with some of my experiences involving the requirements on the bureaucracy and how I view it as being at odds with what helps my students the most.
The best thing we can do as teachers is speak out against it and try to convince the administration to reconsider their stance (often an exercise in futility). If we don't speak up, no one else will. It's a bit like voting. Just DO it. Don't leave it up to other people.
Of course, it is unlikely your voice will have any REAL effect unless you have a great deal of pull in the system. In these instances it is important to do what it takes to KEEP YOUR JOB! You can't help the students if you aren't in the classroom! My recommendation is to at least pay as much lip service to the politics of the system as they pay to the interests of the students... Find the spots where flexibility exists and push hard in those areas to carve out a niche in which you can institute YOUR plan for helping the students. There are always areas of a lesson plan that no administration can control. take them. use them. exploit them for your own gain! those are the places where you can bring your own ideas of what is best (call it morality if you will) into the classroom and your curriculum.
Thanks for the comment, Drew! I disagree with you about morality, but it would distract from my points in the post and your other points in your comments to focus on it.
ReplyDeleteIn particular, I agree that it is important to speak up when you can like you wrote, but not to the point of risking your position. However, if we are able to find ourselves in positions where we can have an impact on course design, we should defend and promote what is ethical or moral.