Florencia HenshawDirector of Advanced Spanish

Charlie WebsterDirector of the German Basic

Language Program

University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign

Di Donato (1983)

Pre-service trainingo TA Orientation (3-5 days) should include a discussion of both

university and departmental administrative procedures, as well as videotaped microteaching

In-service trainingo Multiple class observations of each class (by more than one person

and preceded by pre-observation conferences)

Student participation in TA evaluations should be encouraged (e.g., mid-semester surveys)

Azevedo (1990) Training components:

o Pre-service orientation (overview of program and administrative tasks)

o Methods course

o Class observations by supervisors, peers and other faculty

o Videotaping classes

Education components:o “Regular meetings for discussing learning activities, syllabus content,

and problems encountered in the different sections.”

o Participating in activities outside of the Department (e.g., workshops, professional organizations)

Ervin & Muyskens (1982)

Survey of 204 TAs and 99 faculty members

What aspects of training TAs to teach foreign languages are viewed as most wanted and needed?

o High-priority: learning practical teaching techniques

o Low-priority: handling administrative matters

Brandl (2000)

Survey of 56 FL TAs within the same institution

Mean ratings (1 = little influence ; 5 = very strong influence)

o TA Orientation: 3.76

o Observations by supervisor: 3.65

o Methods course: 3.42

o Workshops: 3.06

o End-of-course student evaluations: 4.06

Do language program directors and teaching assistants differ in terms of…

o …their perceptions of how useful different training components are?

o …their expectations of the scope and procedures of TA training?

Anonymous survey administered online

Likert-scale and open-ended questions

5 sections:1. Demographic questions

2. General opinions about language teaching and teacher education

3. Rating the usefulness of different training practices

4. Expectations of training (how it should be), compared with current practices at their own institutions

5. Ranking topics for inclusion in the methods course

145 responses collectedo 74 graduate Teaching Assistants (TAs)

o 57 language program directors (LPDs)

o 14 faculty members with no course coordination experience

We will focus on the data from the 74 TAs and the 57 LPDs

TAso 55 female, 19 male

o Average age: 29 (range: 22-52)

o 72 PhD students; 13 MA students

o Average teaching experience: 3.6 years (range: 0-10)

o 65 from Research Universities; 8 from Liberal Arts Colleges; 1 from a State University

o All except for 1 had taken a language teaching methods course

o 11 had course coordination experience

LPDso 43 female, 14 male

o Average age: 47 (range: 25-73)

o Highest degree: 16 MA; 41 PhD

o Average teaching experience: 19 years (range: 1-40)

o 49 from Research Universities; 6 from Liberal Arts Colleges; 2 from State Universities

o All except for 4 had taken a language teaching methods course

• 37 of them had taught one

TAs

LPDs

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Arabic Chinese ESL ESL &Other

French German German &Dutch

Korean Latin Spanish SPAN &Other

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

13%

9%

32%

28%

41%

49%

14%

14%

TAs

LPDs

TAs get adequate training

1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree

5%

2%

25%

18%

44%

56%

25%

25%

TAs

LPDs

My Dept. should do more to train TAs

1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree

25%

26%

57%

70%

14%

4%

3%TAs

LPDs

“Good teaching” is a natural talent; it can’t be taught

1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree

35%

53%

51%

40%

11%

5%

3%

2%

TAs

LPDs

Teacher training has no effect on the graduate student’s competitiveness in the job market

1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree

TAs LPDs

6. Peer observations 6. Meetings with course supervisor

7. FL teaching workshops 7. Peer observations

8. Meetings with course supervisor 8. Reviewing videotaped classes

9. Reviewing videotaped classes 9. Course surveys

10. FL pedagogy reading groups 10. FL pedagogy reading groups

TAs LPDs

1. Class observations (by a supervisor) 1. TA Orientation

2. Methods course 2. Methods course

3. TA Orientation 3. Class observations (by a supervisor)

4. Course surveys 4. Mentoring program

5. Mentoring program 5. FL teaching workshops

14% 42%

26%

45%

74%

TAs

LPDs

Not at all Somewhat Very

How helpful is TA orientation?

5%

2%

43%

23%

51%

75%

TAs

LPDs

How helpful is the methods course?

8% 49%

30%

60%

70%

TAs

LPDs

How helpful are class observations (by a supervisor)?

Novice TAs rated TA Orientation and meetings with supervisors as more helpful than experienced TAs.

5%

38%

35%

14%

8%

1 day

2-3 days

1 week

2 weeks

other

11%

47%

30%

5%

7%

How long should TA orientation be?

TAs LPDs

49%

36%

15%

Yes, not videotaped

Yes, videotaped

No

47%

39%

14%

Should TA orientation include microteaching?

TAs LPDs

7%

57%

29%

7%

part of semester

1 semester/quarter

2 semesters/quarters

other

4%

56%

40%

How long should the methods course be?

TAs LPDs

55%

20%

11%

14%

each department

cross-listed

more common & LCTLsseparate

depends on factors

42%

21%

18%

19%

Should each Department have their own methods course?

TAs LPDs

86%

12%

2%

76%

23%

1%

yes, required

required, but dependson experience

recommended, notrequired

Should the methods course be mandatory for all TAs?

TAs LPDs

38%

54%

8%

semester/quarter prior toteaching

concurrent with 1stteaching semester

other

47%

46%

7%

When should TAs take the methods course?

TAs LPDs

9%

81%

10%15%

78%

7%

traditional gradseminar

grad seminar /practicum

blended

What format should the methods course have?

TAs LPDs

26%

48%

26%

Once per academicyear

Once persemester/quarter

More than once persemester/quarter

44%

56%

LPDs

How often should TAs be observed?

TAs

16%

34%27%

23%no, if TAs can accessform before

only if TA requests

yes, e-mail - not inperson

yes, always

18%

10%

28%

44%

LPDs

Should there be pre-observation meetings?

TAs

Who should conduct class observations?

TAs LPDs

1. Course coordinator (79%) 1. Course coordinator (81%)

2. LPD (72%) 2. LPD (77%)

3. TA mentor / head TA (51%) 3. TA mentor / head TA (39%)

4. Other faculty members (39%) 4. Other faculty members (19%)

5. Other peers (5%) 5. Other peers (4%)

LPDs’ and TAs’ perceptions differed with respect to:o The value of FL teacher training

o The helpfulness of TA Orientation, methods courses, and class observations

o The helpfulness of course surveys/student evaluations

o The length of TA Orientation

o The frequency of class observations

o The need for a pre-observation meeting

Taken together with Brandl’s (2000) results, the pattern that emerges is that TAs seem more concerned with their individual needs, specific to their backgrounds and courses, whereas LPDs tend to think more globally and collectively.o This would partially explain why TAs value course surveys or

student evaluations much more than LPDs.

TAs want training that is hand-on, course-specific, and tailored to their experience and commitment level.

Discuss expectations and rationale for specific training components

Spread training over a longer period of time, rather than “cramming” content into a three-day orientation or a one-semester methods course

Move from practical, immediate concerns in the first year to more global professional development later on.

Instead of dismissing student feedback, incorporate it into TA Training

Assess the usefulness of required training components on a regular basis and tailor them to your TAs’ needs

Differentiate training from evaluation

Comparing American TAs and international TAs

Follow-up interviews with both LPDs and TAs on the value of mid-semester and end-of-course surveys

The anonymous TAs, LPDs and language faculty who completed the survey