Running head: DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT

Director Interview Report EDAE 590 Zakia Alhashem Colorado State University October 2013

DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT Director Interview Report On Thursday, October 24th, 2013,I went to interview an ESL program director at INTO Colorado State University. The director was Nancy Berry. Nancy and I met at 9 a.m. This report summarizes the directors answers to different questions related to the instructional material, standardized assessment, informal assessment used in class, language skills incorporated in the lesson plans, professional development opportunities, and the use of computer based learning in the ESL classroom. In addition, the report includes the writers points of view. The first question was about how the director and the instructors selected instructional materials. Nancy indicated different ways followed in selecting the instructional materials. The first way was getting feedback about the textbook from instructors at the end of each term. Instructors make comments about how useful the textbook was, what challenges they encountered while using this book, and if they believed that they used enough of the book. These comments are directed to the curriculum supervisor who oversees that particular skill area. Then, the supervisor calls for a meeting in which he/she gets input from teachers who experienced teaching this book, suggestions are made for other textbooks where other books may be tried for a couple of terms and their effectiveness examined. In some cases, instructors will create their own pack of materials that they believe was tailored to their objectives and goals. In addition, the program gets feedback from students through course evaluation sheets about the textbook. The director said that sometimes they get complaints from students about the textbook but the program continues using the book due to more important reasons. She also considered the short period of the term as a problem in choosing the textbook because in many cases

DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT the book is designed for a semester course so a great amount of the material is not being integrated in the term instruction. The other was teacher-generated material. Since the program has its own set of goals and objectives, it provides the teacher with material on a share network drive, which was being constantly added to. In addition, teachers can bring their own material that they believe would work better than other material and can share it with their colleagues. The program also gets feedback about this material from students and if they think that it was relevant to what they were learning. Finally, the program was designed for equipping students with the academic skills they would need to study in U.S. universities, so the instructional materials were selected from that perspective. People who wanted to learn English for other purposes such as communication and learning about American culture would be directed to the general English program. One of the challenges the program encountered was eliminating the material that was no longer relevant to the learning situation. I found these strategies very appropriate in selecting the instructional material. It seems that this program has a long history with teaching English as a second language, so the instructional material was selected and elected through multiple filters. The program uses skill-specific textbook. According to Parrish (2004), textbook is one of the sources a teacher uses to develop the curriculum. In addition, the choose of a textbook is effected by different factors such as the learner and the program and through using supplement materials the gap between the textbook and students need will be filled. I see that the programs way of selecting material is somehow similar to what Parrish recommended. I believe that through these three different ways of selecting materials, the program is a student-centered learning program.

DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT The second question was about the programs preparation for students to take the standardized assessments. What techniques are used for student preparation? The director answered this question by explaining three points: The first one was that the program used to give a TOFEL preparation course when enough students expressed their desire for taking the preparation course. The second point was that this program did not give an ILETS preparation course because the ILETS was not available in the testing center in Colorado State University. The third point was that since the previous program turned into INTO Colorado State University, students in this program could join Colorado State University after the completion of the Pathway program and achieving a certain CSU GPA. In some majors, students are required to achieve a certain score in the GMT or GRE tests. If students express their need to take a preparation course for these tests, the program would give preparation courses. Some of the techniques used in these preparation courses include introducing students to exam strategies, test practice in order to develop students confidence for test taking, feedback on written exams, how to approach these exams, and what to expect when taking the exam. In addition, the director expressed the programs readiness to give preparation courses if students asked for them. I found these techniques very useful in helping students coping with standardized assessment tests, but I indicate the importance of making the students aware of the portion of certain area material, the importance of it, and how many points will be on each area. I believe that this will help students mange their time well in these tests in order to achieve the desired score. The third question was about how instructors in this program use informal (alternative or performance-based) assessment tools in their classes. Nancy discussed different ways of assessment used in this program. She announced that assessment

DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT sometimes is done through asking questions, pair/group work, homework, tests, and other ways. She gave examples of different ways that instructors in this program do informal assessment in different classes. For example, the speaking skill and pronunciation might be assessed through audio-dairies, presentations, and conversations. She indicated that the instructors might use alternative tool assessment if the learner was deemed to have specific learning difficulties, and these difficulties have shown that they could not do well in regular assessment activities. She gave an example about a student who failed to pass a grammar course two times and was about to take it for the third time. It turned out that he absorbed the grammatical rules but could not go get through the final exam. He was instead assessed through his writing works and speech. I found that the director of the program and the instructors had awareness of these difficulties and had the flexibility to use alternative assessment tools. This was a very good point, but I believe that this difficulty could not have been specified and assessed before joining this program because learners come from different countries where such difficulties might not be identified and sometimes the learner is not aware of the existence of these difficulties. The fourth question dealt with the five language skills and language components that should be incorporated into lesson planning. Nancy explained how the four language skills, reading, writing, listening, and speaking, should all be incorporated into a lesson plan and how each skill is related to the other skills. She gave an example about the reading class and how the students need to speak to express their comprehension of what they have read, they also need to write to reflect on the reading material and listen to know what the requirements are. She mentioned critical thinking as a fifth skill that should be incorporated in a lesson plan. She explained the importance of this skill to success in U.S

DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT universities. She also said that many students come from different learning systems where critical thinking is not a learning component nor is it required. In the INTO CSU program, students are required to possess critical thinking skills; understand what they read, to read different sources and compare what they find in these sources, the credibility of these sources and how to use them in supporting their arguments. In U.S universities, students are not expected to demonstrate their understanding through memorizing and reproducing what they memorized. She said that this was a huge jump for many students and many students liked it. Another language component was vocabulary and grammar. She said that instructors should focus on these two points because they were important for academic success. The last skill was the set of study skills, which made the students aware of their role in their own learning. For example, it was expressed in each course syllabus what the learner was expected to fulfill and his/her responsibilities. I consider these skills very important skills to be incorporated into the lesson plan because learners come from different educational systems with different expectations and perspectives of the learning process in the U.S.A. The fifth question was about professional development opportunities that the instructor would recommend me to pursue. The director suggested five different ways to enhance professional development: The first was professional reading to find answers for the writers questions by using the available sources. The second one was visiting the TOSEL website where I could find different articles and could take online courses. The third way was to attend developmental professional sessions. She gave an example of free sessions that the INTO program would offer for free next week. These sessions would be led by INTO instructors about some new ideas they implemented in their

DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT listening/speaking classes. The fourth way was observing ESL instructors classes, and establishing discussion groups with ESL teachers. The last one was finding a monitor to monitor the writers professional development. I viewed these suggestions as effective and practical suggestions. The last question was if the program incorporates computer-based learning into the ESL classroom, and why. The director answered this question by saying Yes, and she gave explanations of the use of computer-based learning in the ESL classroom. She said that in each classroom, there is a computer connected to a projector. She also indicated that since the last term, they have started using the RamCT system for communicating with students, grading, and to give the students access to certain links that would be useful for their learning. The program integrated computer-based learning into classrooms because instead of resisting the existence of technology, the instructors could take advantage of this technology by asking students to Google something that they do not understand or to use online dictionaries. In addition, instructors used digital feedback in writing homework, because some students could not read the hand written feedback correctly. Another reason was to prevent the students and the program from incurring the copying cost. Finally, Nancy emphasized that she encourage the use of computer-based learning in ESL classroom if it was the most appropriate way to introduce information. I found this answer satisfying and convincing. Through following the logic of this answer, different students needs could be met differently. In conclusion, this report included the directors answers to six questions accompanied with my own points of view about them.

DIRECTOR INTERVIEW REPORT Reference Parrish, B. (2004). Teaching Adult ESL: A practical introduction. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill ESL/ELT