Module 5 ELT Management

Introduction
Numa (2001:119) says “It is salutary to remember that all innovation is a risky business and that close to three quarters of educational innovations are likely to fail over time.” That, however, does not mean that change should not be attempted. Change can yield worthwhile results if the right conditions are being met, however the opposite is also true. More often than not, when changes are being implemented problems will surface. These include the suitability of the product, as well as cost-benefit considerations. To minimize the adverse impact of these factors and to reduce the chances of creating dissent among staff, a number of diverse elements need to be taken into account. My proposed curriculum change relates to online learning: a medium that is, relatively speaking, still in its infancy and thus one that presents ample room for refinement as well as its own specific challenges.

With the advent of the Internet, and the advances in developing tools and software to enhance its use, English second and foreign language learners (ESL/EFL) have found a new and seemingly boundless learning medium. The impact of obstacles such as time, geographical separation, differing ideological beliefs and social status, and money have been greatly reduced, creating a cyber environment where learners seeking to improve their English ability can do in new ways. Nonetheless, despite these advances, the Internet is not simply a tool for pushing passive learning on our students. To maximize its potential, it must be utilized to nurture and expand an active learning approach. Consequently, I propose a new online programme which will prepare the learners at my English language institute for their future linguistic needs.

Teaching Context
As White (1988:137) points out “Innovations do not occur in isolation; they take place in a context.” If one desires to make changes, the environment in which the change will take place must first be taken into account. In my own case, I work both in the public sector, as an English teacher in a Korean elementary school, and in the private sector, as an English teacher and manager of a Korean private language institute. Although I would like to see my proposal being accepted in both areas, I strongly believe it would be considerably easier and quicker to implement it in the private language institute. Unlike the public sector, with its strictly hierarchical top-down structure, and its obligation to comply with national education budgetary constraints, the decision makers at the private institute I work for recognize their skill lies more in maintaining the commercial liability of the institute, and, as a result, are far more accepting of proposals put forward by teachers that may enhance their competitiveness, and thus generate additional revenue. Consequently, it is possible for bottom-up innovation to both emerge and be implemented in this fertile educational environment.

Additionally, even if the project were accepted in the context of the state sector, it would inevitably undergo further changes because, once it reached the upper echelons of Korean education, I would lose control of its application. As Kennedy and Edward point out (1998:46) “There is a tendency for control of the innovation to remain at the higher levels … and for the implementers and clients to have little possibility of feeding back their views of the innovation to the levels above.”

The private language institute where I propose introducing the curriculum change has between 700 and 800 students, with their language ability ranging from beginner to advanced level. They receive, on average, six hours of English instruction from Korean and native English-speaking teachers per week. Reading, writing, listening and speaking are all taught, with the native English-speaking teachers focusing on writing and speaking primarily, and the Korean teachers teaching grammar and reading. The institute employs an online programme which requires learners to shadow read and then answer questions relating to the text. The correct answers are then posted online for the learners to compare and correct their responses.

The institute divides the year into 6 semesters, 4 semesters of roughly 13 weeks and 2 intensive sessions of 4 weeks, and report cards are sent out at the end of each term. At that point, the learners either rise to the next level or remain in their current level, depending on their overall average. The homework done online has very little impact on the level system and therefore carries little weight with the learners. The homework is simply noted as having been completed, or otherwise, at the end of the term on assessment reports.

As with the vast majority of Korean educational facilities prior to university, the primary objective of the institute is test preparation, as the overriding goal of the institute’s learners is to elevate their English ability in order to gain admittance to one of the international high schools in Korea, which in turn is seen as a vehicle for entry to a prestigious university. A second objective of the school is to develop more globally-oriented learners. This is accomplished through the learners’ exposure to articles or writing encompassing different cultural values, and by the teachers actively pushing the learners to think beyond their national boundaries.

The Proposition
Defining the concept of change in a teaching context, Kennedy and Edwards posit that “A change is a problem solving activity which leads to improvement.” (1998:5). As they see it, the results of the desired innovation will “represent an improvement or change for the better in a state of affairs that has previously been regarded as unsatisfactory or lacking.” In keeping with this, my own proposed curriculum change addresses an area of my language institute’s curriculum which I believed has proved unsatisfactory and offers room for improvement.

The change I am advocating involves the substitution of a largely ineffective practice for one that holds the promise of generating both educational and financial returns. In essence, I propose to replace the online homework element of the institute’s curriculum with one that will be more interactive and more beneficial for the future of the learners. The innovation mirrors steps taken by the Educational Testing Service (ETS) and the approach it has adopted with its ‘new’ iBT TOEFL exam by using integration of the four language areas. Furthermore, the product I am proposing will ready learners for the iBT TOEFL test, will prepare learners for high school and university English proficiency exams, will make the learners more aware of global events and will give the institute an edge over its business rivals in the intensely competitive English language educational environment in Korea.

The Innovation
As previously mentioned, this new online element will encompass the four language areas - listening, reading, speaking and writing - in an integrated manner. The improvement can be broken down into three sections; 1) the learners listen to a video, or read an article which appears in their reading book, formulate their responses and send them to the ‘tutor/teacher’, 2) to ‘tutor/teacher’ gives feedback on the learners’ work and 3) the learners listen or read the feedback they have received.

Initially, the learners listen to a video of their choosing from one of five different sources – National Geographic, Reuters, CNN, Discovery Channel, or the BBC –, they summarize the video they have watched and give their opinions regarding the topic of the report, which is recorded. They may also be asked to produce a written commentary on a reading that appears in the syllabus. In this section, integration is accomplished when the learners are asked to summarize the content of a video they have watched, and to then verbally incorporate their own ideas regarding the video.

The feedback process is the key component of the proposed addition to the curriculum. Once the recording or writing has been submitted, a qualified ‘tutor’/teacher will give feedback, either in writing or verbally, depending on the form of the submission. The teacher or tutor will respond to submissions within 48 hours of their reception and send his/her comments to the learners via a prearranged supervisor. The rapid provision of feedback is essential for the learner because the task is still meaningful to him/her and thus the comment will make more sense than if it is received a week later. Furthermore, the feedback will be based on a predetermined rubric which the ‘tutor’/teacher will refer to when commenting on the learners’ work. This is also important because the learner will be aware of the rubric the ‘tutor’/teacher is using and will therefore be able to comprehend the information given.

Once the learners have received their feedback they can listen to it or read it as often as they wish. A second key factor to the feedback is that it is personal and lasting. It is personal because the feedback is sent only to the learners, and it is permanent in the sense that learners will always have access to it unless they delete the message.

In order to implement this change and have it function well, additional factors that must be considered are management and grading. All correspondence is sent to one central area where it is distributed to teachers/tutors for evaluation, or returned to the student after this process. This ensures quality control. All ‘tutor/teachers’ receive the same training and therefore are capable of awarding appropriate grades and balanced feedback that complies with the relevant criteria they are given. In order to ensure that all learners receive similar treatment, their submissions are distributed randomly to various ‘tutor/teachers’ for evaluation regardless of the students’ English level. The grades are then entered on a spreadsheet which is available to all teachers and staff members at the language institute. This is done to ensure that staff know how the learners are performing and can respond to any questions that may arise from concerned parents.

Implementation Strategies
Kennedy and Edwards (1998:36, 37) present three styles of implementation strategies which were initially introduced by Chin and Benne (1976): coercive strategies, rational strategies and cognitive strategies. The coercive strategies basically depend on pressuring people into accepting change. This strategy is used by centrally-operated establishments such as private or public schools. Rational strategies rely on convincing people that your innovation is beneficial through the use of examples and facts. Finally, cognitive strategies rely on encouraging teachers to question their educational beliefs and practices. This strategy, unlike the previous two, does not hold that its underlying concepts are superior, and therefore must be embraced. It relies on teachers experimenting and questioning their own ideas and beliefs, rather than blindly accepting those of others.

I favour a combined coercive-cognitive approach. I would first use coercive strategies, because a reality of private language institutes in Korea is the transient nature of both Korean and native English-speaking teachers. Even though the innovation may originate from teachers, due to the fact that their tenure is often short, it is essential that higher management takes the lead to ensure that it is implemented and kept in place. Management must wholeheartedly embrace the system to foster its continued application. I would also place a cognitive spin on the strategy by asking teachers to look at the innovation and examine its purpose, its academic values and assess whether it can be incorporated into their teaching context as is, or after modification.

Principles of Change
Obviously change seldom occurs immediately. There are a number of elements that need to be addressed before one can truly contemplate introducing an innovation into a private language school. Kennedy and Edwards (1998), Rogers (1983) and White et al. (1991) present lists of factors that can negatively or positively influence the adoption rate of an innovation. For the curriculum change I envision, the following combination of factors presented by Kennedy and Edwards and White et al must be considered.
 *Planned and deliberate: it needs to be a conscious decision with objectives and expectations of predicted outcomes, and it requires a timeframe. Kennedy and Edwards (1998)
 *Originality
 *Relative advantage
 *Complexity
 *Trialability
 *Explicitness
 *Status
 *Practicality

Planned and deliberate
The decision to make the switch from one programme to another must be thought out because all those involved must be aware of the new system and be familiar with its application. As Nicholls (1983:75) mentions “… the creation of a climate in which ideas can be discussed openly, criticized and rejected, while those putting forward the ideas are accepted within the group, is more likely to lead to successful innovations.” This is key, if one wants to see an innovation last. In addition, before replacing the old system with the new one, the pros and cons must be measured, along with the cost-benefit of adopting the new programme in favor of the existing one. Doing research before the change is implemented is essential in order to produce a considered evaluation of the merits and shortcomings of both the innovation itself, and the existing system, before a decision is made to reject the status quo.

The objectives of the online programme that I am proposing are in accordance with the objectives of the school, unlike the system currently in use which is essentially counterproductive as it offers few educational or economic benefits. Changes to the online course component will expand the learners’ global awareness, it will have the potential to enhance their academic performance and it will give them a variety of tools they require to perform in the real world.

To begin, intense national pride is key component of the Korean psyche, which unfortunately often results in a myopic, insular and dislocated view of world events. The programme I propose will contribute to learners’ awareness of events around the world through viewing video news articles that originate from outside their country. In addition, the learners can further their knowledge of the topics they work on through further Internet research. Additionally, the innovation assists in test preparation and academic work by exposing learners to new vocabulary, new ideas, and, by being loosely modeled on the structure of the iBT TOEFL test, it gives learners confidence in iBT TOEFL because they are more aware of what to expect. It also creates learners that are more aware of what they write and say, it develops the habit of rereading one’s work in order to correct outstanding mistakes, and it helps learners develop their strengths and correct their weaknesses through the feedback process. Finally and of equal importance, the programme develops skills that are useful for the students in the future. It helps learners develop an ear to hear words spoken in English, regardless of the accent or speed of delivery, it builds student confidence by using websites that are entirely in English, it requires learners to write essays on a computer in English, thus familiarizing them with the English keyboard layout and English writing software, and finally it gives learners a better understanding of the world around them. All these objectives are accomplished in the less stressful environment of their home, and with topics they feel at ease with - both elements that are indispensable when trying to acquire a new language.

Helen Stephenson asserts that (1994:330) “What may be a feasible timetable of change may not be an acceptable timetable to all participants.” This idea supports Kennedy and Edwards (1998) when they argue for a more incremental approach to implementing an innovation. Even though they do not condemn the idea of a sudden change in a curriculum or syllabus per se, they do not fully support it. In fact, they find very little advantage in a sudden change by calling the tactic a “defeat”. More pertinent is the idea that if an innovation is suddenly introduced into a system there is a higher chance of seeing the innovation fail or be dropped than were it introduced incrementally. As Kennedy and Edwards say (1998:8) “Steady step-by-step change minimizes gaps between the attitudes and beliefs of those developing and those implementing change, and gives time for any mismatch to be resolved.” The timetable that I would put forward is one that would also see the incremental introduction of the system. I would start with the stronger level learners as they have a better chance of fully comprehending what is being asked of them. In addition, by moving slowly, information could be gathered from the teachers, the ‘tutor/teachers’, the learners and management to analyze what is functioning well and what needs to be improved.

Originality
White et al. (1991) mention originality as a factor which can contribute to the impediment of an innovation’s adoption rate. The idea behind their thinking is that if something is original there may be compatibility issues with the systems or beliefs of the host environment. For my innovation, I believe its originality is its strength, not its weakness, because it carries with it something that other online educational programmes do not, human feedback. Furthermore, this feature does not require retraining because it is based on a grading rubric that is already being used by the language institute. Finally, it compliments steps taken by the institute with its test preparation objectives, as it involves something that is already being done by all the teachers, except now they may have to record their voices or write the feedback.

Relative advantage
Addressing the issue of implementing change, White et al. (1991), as well as Rogers (1983), believe we must ask evaluate the new system to identify what it offers that the current programme does not. In my case, the system in use at my language institute relies on passive learning with no interaction taking place. Conversely, the programme I am advocating focuses on productive and interactive learning. Moreover, the innovation I propose provides meaningful feedback to learners because it is related to what they have done and what they are going to do. This differs from the present system, which provides no feedback. Furthermore, the idea that I am recommending offers learners a chance to hear different English accents that they may not have access to in their own home. Finally, it empowers learners in their language acquisition because they choose to what they want to listen to and they get the chance to share their opinions on the topic.

Complexity
White et al. (1991) raise the complexity factor as an element which might impede the adoption rate of an innovation. They put forward the idea that (1991:183) “The more complex an innovation is perceived to be, the less likely it is to be adopted.” In order to show how simple the innovation I propose is to use, I would first present comparative diagrams contrasting the online programme already in use with the one that I am proposing. The idea is to take away the complexity and mystic behind the innovation. Put simply, the diagrams would compare the steps the learners need to take in order to do their homework at present with those learners would need to take to do the work my innovation requires (Appendix A). Furthermore, I would demonstrate the ease with which this innovation functions by using one of the attendees to illustrate what the learners would be required to do. White et al. also mention that retraining would need to be considered, but, as mentioned earlier, this would not be a very big issue because the ‘tutor/teachers’ would be chosen from the English native speakers already hired by the language institute. They would be aware of the rubric being employed and of the requirements of the institute. A degree of training would obviously be required to ensure that all ‘tutor/teachers’ formulate their responses in a unified way, but it would not take very long to achieve this. As for new teachers entering to the institute once the innovation has been implemented, they would receive training in this aspect of the curriculum along with the training they would receive before entering a classroom.

Trialability
According to Rogers (1983:231) ‘trialability’ is “the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis.” White et al. (1991:184) point out that “Small-scale trialing or experimentation limits the risks involved in wholesale, wide-scale adoption without trial.” In order to avoid or diminish the amount of problems that could arise from a school-wide implementation, I would push for an incremental trial approach. I would begin with my own classes and conduct all of the feedback personally. I would then use my trial period as a case study programme for those teachers who would become ‘tutor/teachers’. As anybody who has experience of the Korean education environment knows, Korean mothers have primary responsibility for their children’s education and are deeply involved in all aspects of their children’s education choices. This is particularly true in the private sector where value for money is a key factor, and where mothers constantly debate among themselves the relative merits of the various institutes. As a consequence, the trial run would seek to create positive responses and reactions among the parents whose learners are the ‘guinea pigs’ in this innovation process, and, additionally, create a flow on effect where other parents want their young ones involved in the new online programme. In this context, the parental discussions that take place during this trial period would inevitably be a factor driving expansion and full-scale implementation.

Explicitness
Can you describe specifically what your innovation does and how it works? If you cannot, the chances of your innovation being taken into serious consideration may be hindered. White et al. (1991) look at the publishing side of ESL books to illustrate the importance of explicitness. They point to the fact that process-oriented books are most likely not going to become ESL printed books because the concept behind the idea is hard to illustrate. With my own innovation, I would create a booklet clearly illustrating the steps that need to be taken in order to get the work accomplished. I would also look at getting the booklet translated into Korean in order to ensure that everyone, including students’ parents, is fully conversant with how the innovation works, what it entitles and the results it seeks to achieve.

Status
How does the innovation you are suggesting place the business you are approaching on the map of things? Does the innovation elevate the status of the business within its environment, does this status remain the same, or does it in fact erode its position? Status is a key factor put forward by White et al. (1991) and it plays a big part in the private language institute business in Korea. In Korea, as in most other countries, one’s business can succeed or fail due to the success of innovations, or the lack of them. The innovation I am suggesting has the potential to enhance the status of the language institute I work for due to its unique feedback mechanism. In Korea, where the marketing power of word of mouth endorsements cannot be overstated, and where intense competitiveness is an omnipresent phenomenon owing to the combination of a large population and limited possibilities of entering prestigious universities, the feedback mechanism’s innovativeness is certain to generate interest within the education industry.

Practicality
“An innovation which places heavy demands on the school in terms of time, personnel and money will be less likely to be taken up than one which has realistic demands.”, White et al. (1991:184). I have already mentioned that the system that is in place at the moment does not support the objectives of the school and that the design that I am recommending would complement the institute’s goals. There are no websites to constantly update, which means there are no problems that can arise from mistakes on the website. In addition, because writing is done online, there is no need for the publication of writing books. Admittedly, there may be an increased workload for native English-speaking teachers due to them having to respond to speaking submissions, but this can be offset by a lighter work schedule. As ‘tutor/teachers’ already have to grade and correct written submissions, this is not additional work. The innovation actually allows greater workplace flexibility by permitting ‘tutor/teachers’ to work from home when it is convenient.

The Cost-Benefit Analysis
A cost-benefit analysis of the innovation must weigh benefits against potentially detrimental effects, including a comparison with the system it is replacing. In my situation, the advantages of adopting the online programme must be compared with the current online programme. To do this, three key players in this analysis must be considered: upper management, teachers and learners. Obviously, this involves an examination of both the educational and financial benefits.

Korean private language institutes are first and foremost businesses and, as such, are profit driven. Consequently, financial returns inevitably become the primary focus of upper management. Institutes sink or swim on the strength of their curriculum and the academic results they can produce. Institutes perceived as failing in these two key areas are quickly overwhelmed by the financial burden of falling rolls. Therefore, it is imperative that management see a financial return. This is not to say that they are not worried about the learners’ academic success because they well know that if learners are not succeeding academically, mothers will attribute blame, and that blame will fall squarely on the language institute.

I believe both tangible and intangible benefits would accrue following the adoption of the feedback programme. In simple terms, the programme would produce financial benefits by spurring parental interest in the institute and attracting new students, which would generate income. The transience of the teaching population in Korea is mirrored by an equally transient student population with mothers continually moving students from institute to institute in an attempt to locate one that gives their children the best possible chance of success. This phenomenon’s impact can be largely countered by the provision of programmes that achieve visible results.

Implementation of the programme does not require undue additional expenditure. Unlike the website that is currently in use, it requires no direct financial support. In addition, the school saves money and time because it does need to have workbooks written and published. Rather than spending money, the school can boost revenue because it is offering something other schools are not. This becomes an attractive marketing point and will generate interest in the school, which in turn will increase enrolment.

Obviously teacher support is essential to successful implementation. They should be encouraged to feel a sense of ownership; an idea Kennedy and Edwards (1991) emphasize and believe can offset negative feelings brought on by change. By constantly seeking their feedback and seeing how workable suggestions can be integrated ideas into the process, a sense of common purpose is created. Teachers who believe they are contributing to the programme will more readily accept it. Admittedly, some teachers may see their workload increase, but this can be offset by a diminished teaching schedule. I favour a combination of the ‘hygiene’ factors and the motivating factors alluded to by Carey and Dabor (1995). ‘Hygiene’ factors are extrinsic motivators, such as reduced teaching schedules, and tend to only be superficially motivating, whereas the motivating factors are intrinsic motivators such as personal growth or development, which my programme would offer to the teachers involved in its implementation.

In my opinion, the learners are the biggest winners. They receive feedback that can help them strengthen weaknesses in their writing or speaking, it gives them access to coverage of global events, and it offers them the chance to explore areas that are denied them in the state school environment. Furthermore, in class it gives them more time to actually do brainstorming and planning, as well as asking the teacher questions regarding the online reading and writing components. Finally, the learners get a chance to express themselves in the comfort of their own home away from the pressure of being judged or ridiculed in the intensely competitive Korean classroom environment.

Conclusion
British novelist Arnold Bennett once said, “Any change, even a change for the better, is always accompanied by drawbacks and discomforts.” As a teacher, primary emphasis must be placed on the needs of the learners. Though this innovation may result in a heavier workload, I would nonetheless wholeheartedly support its implementation. From management’s point of view, this innovation also makes sense because the financial rewards outweigh any drawbacks. While it would be naive to claim it would meet with universal support, the adoption of the coercive-cognitive implementation strategy I have outlined would lessen this. Regardless of these side issues, we are teachers first and foremost, not accountants or managers. Our duty lies with our students, and I firmly believe that this programme offers them the very real chance of academic improvement.