Roles for a teacher

in context-sensitive
education

educator
teacher

Steph en Bax
In recent years a good deal of attention has been paid to making language
teaching methodology
more appropriate
to the contexts in which we
teach. In teacher education there has been a corresponding
movement to
ensure that our approach is as relevant as possible to trainees teaching
contexts. This article examines the effects that this more context-sensitive
approach will have on the role of the teacher-educator,
and on the attempt
to ensure that teacher education
programmes
encourage
longer-term
productive change.

Itrodu c tion

In recent years the move towards appropriate

methodology
has been
steadily gaining momentum.
In language teaching, this has led to critical
re-examination
of past attempts to transfer methodologies
developed for
predominantly
private Western language teaching contexts, for example,
to non-Western
contexts where they may not be suitable (Holliday 1994;
see also Volume 2 Number
1 of The Journal published
by TESOL
France
1995). Questions
have been raised about such archetypal
communicative
techniques as pair work and group work (Hyde 1993).
The main focus in teacher education
has been on responding
more
sensitively to the working contexts of teachers in training-making
our
work more client-centred
(Nunan
1989) or context-sensitive
(Bax
1995a, 1995b). The rationale
for this is that much traditional
teacher
education
has been unduly
trainer-centred
in both approach
and
content.
The trainer-necessarily
an outsider-is
thought
to have
succumbed
too often to the temptation
of offering suggestions
and
input in a transmission
mode. While this may have conformed with how
trainees sponsors and institutions
perceived the role of the trainer, to a
large extent it prevented
trainees from drawing on and reflecting on
their own experience.
I have argued elsewhere
that dependence
on
published materials which offer ready-made
recipes for trainers tends to
reinforce this transmission
approach (Bax 1995a). The result may well
be a form of tissue rejection (Holliday 1992) in which the hoped-for
innovation
fails to materialize, owing in part to the fact that the trainee is
not convinced
of its value, though the fault may lie with the contextinsensitive teacher educator as much as with the jaded trainee: It wont
work in my class/school/country
is a common reason, or excuse, for not
attempting
to change (Nolasco and Arthur 1986). When presented with
arguments
for a more context-sensitive
and trainee-centred
approach,
teacher educators might respond that the argument
has already been
won, that they have already accepted that these principles are essential

232

ELT Journal Volume 51/3 July 1997 Oxford University Press 1997

for productive change. However, although no statistics are available on

the issue, informal observation
of language teacher education
around
the world suggests that while the principles may be generally known and
accepted, teacher educators still tend in practice to adopt transmission
approaches
(Tollefson
1995: 1). One example from my own recent
experience
was a trainer whose subject was the teaching of listening
skills. Her session consisted
of a lecture telling trainees what they
should and should not do in their listening classes, based on the ideas of
exclusively Western experts, most of whom had probably never been to
the country in question. The discourse was entirely within the applied
science model described by Wallace (1991) - a top-down approach, in
which trainees are supposed to receive and implement
expert wisdom.
Experience elsewhere suggests that this approach to teacher education is
still the norm rather than the exception.
A more context-sensitive
approach would, by contrast, be more traineecentred,
involving
trainees
in ways which would ensure
that the
programme has as close a bearing as possible on their teaching concerns
and contexts. The trainer would probably tend to eschew ready-made
materials, since these might tend to draw attention away from trainees
own experience
(see Bax 1995a).
Although much work in English language teacher education has aimed
at making it more context-sensitive,
the precise implications
for the
trainers role have not yet been fully explored. This article attempts to
examine what the teacher educators role might be in a context-sensitive
framework. It attempts to identify ways in which the trainer, aiming to
ensure maximum
effect in the teaching time available,
may need to
modify his or her approach to make it more sensitive to trainees current
or future teaching contexts.
A number

of caveats

should

be mentioned

at this point:

a. This article does not attempt to identify all aspects of the teacher
educators role - only
those which seem to be most typical of a
context-sensitive
approach.
b. None of the roles described should be treated as rules - a trainer
might deliver a perfectly effective session while adopting quite
different roles.
c. Although
the roles described might be best suited to in-service
teacher education,
many, if not most, are also relevant to preservice work.
d. Although this discussion may be particularly
useful in cases where
the trainer and the trainees are from different
cultures, many
aspects should still apply where they share the same culture.
e. Some of the roles described will work well in training sessions
conducted in some countries but may not be suitable in others. The
trainer will obviously need to be sensitive to local norms when
planning and delivering a session.
Elsewhere
(Bax forthcoming)
I have argued for a set of indicators of
good practice in teacher education
as a means of identifying
ways in
Roles of a teacher educator

233

which the trainers role will need to change (see Table 1 for a summary).
Of course, other aspects, not mentioned in Table 1, may also play a part,
and, conversely, a good session might not include all or even any of these
indicators-which
is precisely why they are indicators rather than criteria.
Table 1:
lndicators Of good
practice in contextsensitive teacher
education

Aspects of teacher
education
1 Affective
interactional

Learning

Indicators

principles

of good practice

Trainees will learn better when

involved as much as possible.

Productive interaction and trainee participation

during the session, at a culturally appropriate
level.

Trainees will tend to learn better

when they are relaxed and feel
valued.

A relaxed atmosphere, conducive to learning,

in which trainees experience is respected.

aspects

C Traineeswill tend to reflect more

if occasionally challenged by
opposing or different viewpoints
and ways of doing things.

Occasional and appropriate challenging of

trainees views, and proffering of contrasting
ideas and ways of doing things.

D Teachers
classroom
work is
carried out in the wider context
of their personal lives, which
must be taken into account.

Trainees are allowed scope for long-term

personal growth as well as professional skills
and acquisition of knowledge.

Trainees will feel more involved

and convinced if they know the
aims of the session.

Trainees are aware of the aims of the session.

Type of
activities

Work should
be tailored
trainees preferred learning
styles to ensure maximum
uptake.

Analysis of trainees learning

concessions to them.

Order of
Activities

G Activities/pace
should be varied
in an attempt to stimulate and
suit everybody.

2 Aims

3 Structure
to

styles and

Variety of activity and pacing.

Learning
is often effectively
Element of experiential
achieved if trainees experience
the target approach, rather than
simply hear about it.

Key points to
be addressed

Relevance is enhanced if the

session tackles trainees areas
of concern.

Trainees areas of concern are known and dealt

with.

Frame in
which points
are put across

Relevance is enhanced if the

session appears to relate
directly to trainees home
contexts.

The frame in which key points are discussed

directly relevant to trainees home contexts.

Cultural
aspects

The trainer cannot know

appropriate classroom
behaviour in their contexts. So
trainees should be allowed to do
this to ensure appropriacy.

Trainees are allowed scope to decide for

themselves appropriate classroom behaviour.

Transferability

Trainees
should be seen
potential trainers themselves,
formal or informal settings.

The trainer takes a wider view of trainees

future roles. In particular, activities and key
points of the session could be used by trainees
themselves in future co-operative
development.

Structure

of

learning.

4 Content

234

as
in

is

5 Follow-up

M Trainer and trainees benefit from

an enhanced awareness of the
sessions aims and
achievements.

Mechanisms to ensure appropriate evaluation

of the session, with results available to trainer
and trainees.

6 Context

The session takes place within an effective

longer-term programme of teacher education.

Stephen

Bax

Learning is a long-term process;

educational change may require
extensive work.

The role o f t h e
train er

If these indicators
are taken as generally valid and representative
of
good teacher education, they may offer the basis for a description of the
trainers evolving role in contrast with his or her role in more traditional
approaches. We can draw from them a number of areas in which trainers
might attempt to modify their practice.
A session is only as good as the overall teaching education programme
of which it is a part. It is not likely to effect lasting productive change if it
takes place in isolation, for example, with no follow-up. The first of the
trainers roles which we can identify, therefore, is:
1 The trainer should attempt to ensure that the larger teacher education
programme of which the particular session is a part is appropriate,
context-sensitive, and likely to encourage reflection and long-term change.
More frequently, the trainers
gives us a second role:

role is limited

to that of researcher,

which

2 In order to prepare for the session, the trainer should investigate the
trainees backgrounds.
In investigating
the trainees
following questions:
What
What
What
What

backgrounds

the trainer

might

ask the

are trainees preferred learning styles?

kind of participation
do they consider to be appropriate?
are their key worries in the area of pedagogy to be covered?
personal and professional experience do they bring to the session?

While preparatory
research is important,
the first axiom of this contextsensitive approach to teacher education is that it will never be possible
for the trainer to prepare trainees for all the contexts in which they work
now or may work in the future. Even when all participants
share the
same cultural background,
there is bound to be a distance between the
trainer, as outsider, and the trainees, in cultural, emotional, experiential,
and other areas.
It seems
gap - the
sensitivity
Delivery

to me that for this reason - which

trainer is obliged, in the following
in the session itself.

I shall call the context

areas, to adopt a context-

Where factors such as class size and classroom

conditions
allow, a
participatory
approach to teacher education is probably more effective
than one in which trainees listen to received wisdom. This view is
supported by the kinds of arguments
that Barnes (1976), for example,
offered for favouring an interpretation
approach to education
over a
transmission
approach.
The second
axiom of a context-sensitive
approach to teacher education
is that emphasis should be placed on
learners integrating
new ideas into their own experience
in a creative
and constructive
way, instead of merely receiving ideas.
Reference
to trainee
participation
might be taken to mean that
trainees
should speak as much as possible during the session, and
that the trainers role is to encourage
them to do so. This, however,
Roles of a teacher educator

235

would be to confuse maximum participation

with maximum trainee
talk. I am arguing for the former rather than the latter, for two main
reasons.
In the first place, as Holliday
(1995) has pointed
out, there are
considerable
dangers in assuming - as
many do in language teaching as
well as in teacher education1 - that
a lot of vocal participation
is
invariably
the best way of learning; this would be to impose on others
what may be no more than a particular cultural preference.
Secondly, it
is possible, even likely, that a particular
trainee
from a particular
culture, at a particular stage of development,
in a particular mood, may
learn more from listening and considering the views of others than from
speaking.
Trainees
who talk a lot are not necessarily
listening
and
thinking;
in fact, it is common
in my experience
for trainees2
to
concentrate
so exclusively
on formulating
and delivering
their own
views that they fail to value or take in other Peoples. When this
happens, maximum oral participation,
means minimal mental participation, and minimal development.
We are led to the conclusion that although the trainer may encourage
participation
to ensure engagement,
the kinds of participation
which are
encouraged
may vary widely according
to what is appropriate
to
particular cultures and individuals.
In short, the third role is:
3 The trainer should attempt to ensure participation of trainees at a level
and in a way appropriate to the cultures and individuals concerned.
Extensive
negotiation
sometimes
leaves trainees with the impression
that the session has no direction
or aim, and this can be counterproductive.
To avoid this happening,
at some point - probably
at the
start of the session - trainees
should be made aware that the session has
aims, and be clear what they are (Indicator E in Table 1). This gives the
fourth role:
4 The trainer should ensure that the aims of the session are known to
trainees at the appropriate point in the process.
Atmosphere

In order to encourage appropriate

participation,
the trainer will need to
allow and encourage
the kind of atmosphere
conducive to interaction
(Indicator
B in Table 1). He or she should also cater for the varied
learning styles identified before the session, and make concessions
to
them in terms of the variety of activities and the pace of the session. In
addition
to this, it might be useful to train trainees
in styles and
approaches
which are unfamiliar
to them. Experiential
approaches
(Indicator
H in Table 1) have probably become the most widely used
tool to this end, with well-established
effects (see Hopkins
1986, in
particular
Chapter 6, and Woodward
1991), allowing the trainee to
experience techniques and approaches from the learners viewpoint as a
means of stimulating
productive reflection.
However, the fact of the context gap means that our methodology
must
allow for variations
in response
and comprehension
and preference

236

Stephen Bax

which we cannot predict. In my view, the only way to deal with this is to
ensure variety of approach. This gives us the fifth role:
5 The trainer should make concessions to the varied learning styles and
preferences of trainees, so far as these are known. This willprobably mean
the use of experiential approaches, and in any case will be as varied as
possible to help overcome the context gap.
Challenge

and input

The second axiom of the context-sensitive

approach
includes
the
attempt to involve trainees as far as possible in the process of their
own development,
which in turn means that their own views about their
teaching contexts will probably
be given prominence
in the teacher
education session.
This is probably the most difficult aspect of the trainers role (Indicator
C in Table 1). Being sensitive to trainees contexts might seem to imply
meekly accepting their points of view, when in fact challenging
their
assumptions
and proffering new ideas will probably lead them to reflect
more on their work than if they were left to express their views without
an outsiders criticism or suggestion. In other words:
6 The trainer should challenge old ideas, and offer new ones, in a
sensitive and appropriate way.
This may be trainercentred,
but it is clearly an aspect of teacher
education
which trainees themselves
see as valuable. In an interesting
survey of trainee teachers views, Edwards and Deignan (1994) report
trainees frustration
at having too little trainer input and direction, and
too much negotiation.
In their conference
handout
they cite the
comments
of a Malaysian
teacher
who had recently
completed
a
training course:
The problem is only with the negotiated learning which we have not
been used to. . . sometimes when we are asked to negotiate we are not
very sure what to come up with and in the process we could have left
out some areas which we ought to have included.
Another

(Estonian)

teacher

in their survey

says that

People [i.e. trainers] have been very careful not to impose their
ideas . . . but I think we are all grown up and we can think critically,
and some things could have been made more explicit.
These teachers
and
overt, trainer-centred
feeling.

others surveyed
would clearly appreciate
more
input at times. I suspect this is a common

Of course, it is difficult in practice to achieve a good balance between

using and accepting trainees experiences
in negotiation,
and offering
ones own contrasting ideas or criticisms. This aspect of the relationship
must be handled sensitively,
with careful attention
paid to discourse
patterns.
As Rossiter
(1993: 40) suggests,
the trainer
might offer
suggestions in question form (Do you think . . . ? What about
. . ?)
Roles of a teacher educator

237

rather than statements. The trainer should be sensitive

between participants which might affect the discourse,
or her discourse which might discourage participation
or imply the lack of a clear agenda on the other.

to power relations
and aspects of his
on the one hand,

Content An emphasis

on trainee participation
accords with what I consider an
appropriately
wide, holistic view of teacher development,
as opposed to a
narrow goals-oriented
approach (Indicators
D and L in Table 1). As
Bolitho (1990: 30) implies, we should allow other aspects of teachers lives
besides the professional to enter the developmental
process, so as to allow
the possibility of connections
between their work and their experiences
elsewhere. In my view, this will tend to increase the likelihood of deeper
personal engagement
with the matter at hand, and give trainees a better
opportunity
to appropriate the content - making
it their own, rather than
seeing it as something alien (see Auerbach 1995: 22).
It follows that, ideally, teacher education sessions should concentrate
as
much on wider issues as on narrow issues of technique or procedure. If
we accept descriptions
of the stages of teachers development
such as
that proposed by Pennington
(1995), in which teachers progress from a
narrow focus upon classroom procedures and survival strategies, in their
early work, to a more developed sense of the social and cultural aspects
of the classroom when they are more experienced,
then we as trainers
will presumably
aim to show trainees
what is ahead of them, by
increasing
their awareness
of classroom
complexities,
rather
than
concentrating
exclusively on issues of methods and procedures.
This approach has three aims: to encourage
a wider view of what the
classroom means in all its dimensions,
to allow trainees to apply the full
range of their experience to their work, and to encourage them to adopt
other roles besides that of classroom teacher - such
as facilitators of cooperative
development
in their schools (Edge 1992). This can be
summed up by saying:
7 The trainer will take a wide view of teachers development in the selection
of issues, material, and activities for the teacher education session.
As a further
consequence
of the axiom of maximum
participant
participation,
the content of sessions will, ideally, be negotiable,
rather
than decided exclusively by the trainer. The reasons for this have been
discussed extensively elsewhere (e.g. Bax 1995b) and ways of achieving
this using, for example,
transcripts
of participants
own words as
recorded before the session, have been proposed (Bolitho and Wright
1995). Furthermore,
the key points of the session will be those identified
through discussion and negotiation
with trainees before or during the
session (Indicator
J in Table 1). Finally, the frame in which the key
points are examined - the
examples used and the classroom contexts
described while the key points are discussed - will,
ideally, be clearly
relevant to trainees contexts. To summarize:
8 The trainer should attempt to ensure that the content of the session is
negotiable.

238

Stephen Bax

9 The trainer should attempt to ensure that the key points are as relevant
as possible to trainees working contexts, probably by deriving them from
trainees themselves.
10 The frame in which discussion takes place should be as relevant as
possible to trainees working contexts.
The ultimate
decisions
about classroom
practice should be left to
trainees themselves (Indicator
K in Table 1). It may seem strange that
this point needs to be made at all, since it must be obvious that teachers
are almost always in the best position to decide on their classroom
practice, on the basis of their knowledge
of the complex network of
social, personal,
and professional
factors inaccessible
to outsiders.
Nonetheless,
trainers have sometimes
felt that in order to be helpful
they should specify the precise ways in which a teacher should, for
example, make the class behave, or correct errors, or get students to
participate.
However, this is potentially
counter-productive,
given the
context gap. For a trainer wishing to discuss error correction,
for
example, making a specific recommendation
such as correct errors
loudly
so that all students
can hear you might be culturally
inappropriate,
because it would humiliate
the students concerned.
It
would be more useful for the trainer to make suggestions
at a higher
level of generality,
to discuss with trainees the whole issue of error
correction to raise their awareness, and let them decide how precisely
they could correct in their own contexts. In other words:
11 As far as possible, trainees should be left to decide specific classroom
practices for themselves.
Evaluation

No teacher education session should be treated as an isolated incident.

This means that its effectiveness
needs to be evaluated, either formally
or informally,
with a view to improving
future sessions and also to
involving
all stakeholders
in the process.
It is clear that open
evaluations,
used sensitively
and fairly, and accessible
to all stakeholders, can be a useful mechanism for productive change. It may be, of
course, that evaluations
are relatively
informal,
and may not be
immediately
visible to an outside observer.
In addition,
evaluation
might take place not immediately,
but later, when the sessions place
within a wider programme
has become clear.
Morrow and Schocker (1993) and Mackay, Wellesley,
and Bazergan
(1995) offer good examples of how evaluation
can be integrated
into a
programme
in such a way as to have a clear and immediate
impact on
the thinking
of all participants;
similar thinking
could allow equally
fruitful evaluation
of individual sessions. In short:
12 The trainer should attempt to ensure appropriate evaluation of the
session. with results available to trainer and trainees.

Conclusion

There are a number

of areas in which the teacher educator
might
attempt to modify his or her practice in order to make teacher education
sessions as relevant as possible to the contexts in which trainees work - a
Roles of a teacher educator

239

context-sensitive
teacher education. Isolating and discussing these roles
could assist us in other ways - in formulating
evaluation instruments,
for
example, in trainer training, and elsewhere.
It is not suggested that the roles described will suit everyone, nor every
context, nor that they are necessary or sufficient in themselves to bring
about good teacher education.
However, it seems to me that the roles
identified here, if adopted in appropriate
ways, are likely to lead to
greater
acceptance
of innovation
among
trainees,
and a greater
likelihood
of productive
change, than more traditional
approaches.
They are likely to lead, in the longer term, to more effective teacher
education, and ultimately to more effective language teaching.
Received

March

1996

Notes

1 This assumption, mistaken in my view, can be

seen most graphically in the way in which
and
Hughes-Pelegrin
Bashiruddin,
Edge,
(1990), discussing participation
in sessions,
imply that those who do not participate
vocally-outsiders
and women, for exampleare somehow not participating appropriately, or
with enough enthusiasm. They do not appear to
suspect that other, non-verbal forms of participation might have their own merit, or even
result in better intake.
2 Many of the particular trainees I am referring to
happen to be British males operating in mixed
nationality groups, which perhaps reflects their
cultural and gender-based perceptions of appropriate participation
in spoken discourse. This
experience
fits in precisely
with trends
described by, for example, Tannen
(1992)
(discussing gender and discourse), and Bashiruddin,
Edge, and Hughes-Pelegrin
(1990)
(discussing the ways in which males and insiders
tend to dominate vocally).
References

Anivan, S. (ed.). 1990. Language Teaching Methodology for the Nineties. Singapore: SEAMEO.
Auerbach, E. 1995. The politics of the ESL
classroom in Tollefson (ed.).
Bashiruddin, A., J. Edge, and E. Hughes-Pelegrin.
1990. Who speaks in seminars? Status, culture
and gender at Durham University in Clark,
et al. (eds.).
Barnes, D. 1976. From Communication to Curriculum. Harmondsworth:
Penguin.
240

Stephen Bax

Bax, S. 1995a. Appropriate

methodology:
the
content
of teacher
development
activities.
System 23/3: 347-57.

Bax, S. 1995b. Principles for evaluating teacher

development
activities. ELT Journal 49/3:
262-71.

Bax, S. (forthcoming).
What are we training
trainers to do? Evaluating teacher education
sessions within a context-sensitive
framework.
Proceedings of the Edinburgh University Seminar on Learning to Train, 15-17 November
1995.
Bolitho, R. 1990. An eternal triangle? Roles for
teacher, learner and teaching materials in a
communicative approach in Anivan (ed.).
Bolitho, R. and T. Wright. 1995. Working with
participants ideas and constructs. Workshop,
Edinburgh University Seminar on Learning to
Train, 15-17 November 1995.
Clark, R., N. Fairclough, R. Ivanic, N. McLeod,
J. Thomas and P. Meara. 1990. Language and
Power. London: CILT and BAAL.
Edge, J. 1992. Co-operative Development. Harlow:
Longman.
Edge, J. and K. Richards, eds. 1993. Teachers
Develop
Teachers Research. Oxford: Heinemann.
Edwards, C. and A. Deignan. 1994. Teacher
training and cultural appropriateness.
Talk at
IATEFL Annual Conference, April 1994.
Holliday, A. 1992. Tissue rejection and informal
order in ELT projects. Applied Linguistics 13/4:
403-24.

Holliday, A. 1994. Appropriate Methodology and

Social Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holliday, A. 1995. The politics of participation in
international
English
language
education.
IATEFL Conference, York, 1995.
Hopkins, D. (ed.). 1986. In-Service Training and
Educational
Development:
An International
Survey. Beckenham: Croom Helm.

Hyde, M. 1993. Pairwork: a blessing or a curse?

System 21/3: 343-48.

Mackay, R., S. Wellesley, and E. Bazergan. 1995.

Participatory evaluation. ELT Journal 49/4:
308-17.
Morrow, K. E. and M. Schocker. 1995. Process
evaluation in an INSET course. ELT Journal
47/1: 47-55.
Nolasco, R. and L. Arthur. 1986. You try doing it
with a class of forty! ELT Journal 40/2:
100-106.

Roles of a teacher educator

Nunan, D. 1989. A client-centred

approach to
teacher
development.
ELT
Journal
43/2:
111-18.
Pennington, M. 1995. The teacher change cycle.
TESOL

Quarterly 29/4: 705-30.

Rossiter, A. 1993. Teacher educators and classroom research: practising what we preach in
Edge and Richards (eds.).
Tannen, D. 1992. You Just Dont Understand:
Women and Men in Conversation. London:
Virago.
Tollefson, J. (ed.). 1995. Power and Inequality in
Language Education. Cambridge:
Cambridge
University Press.
Wallace, M. 1991. Training Foreign Language
Teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press.
Woodward, T. 1991. Models and Metaphors in
Language
Teaching.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
University Press.

241