In partnership with

CC is for Customisable Coursebooks and Creative Commons publishing

May 18th, 2010
by Valentina Dodge


Lindsay Clandfield over on Scott Thornbury’s blog in his guest post on C is for coursebook outlines what’s wrong with many coursebooks:

  • They all look the same.
  • They all follow the same syllabus.
  • The grammar is wrong or misleading.
  • Texts serve merely as a pretext to teach discrete language items.
  • Texts and topics are Anglo- or Eurocentric and/or promote a western consumerist ideology.
  • Texts and topics are safe, bland and vapid.
  • Coursebooks are too big.

The 50+ comments that the post has attracted to date have reiterated some of the criticisms being made by many educators around the world.

1.    It’s difficult even for a teacher to identify the aim of coursebook pages
2.    Learning is non-linear, by nature course books are linear.
3.    Language learning is a dynamic, idiosyncratic coursebook aren’t.
4.    Publisher-driven projects often have the wrong focus.
5.    Coursebooks are often artificial and a construct of “some other world”.
6.    Cost are often prohibitive.
7.    Sheer number of different coursebooks can be overwhelming.
8.    Content is very often inappropriate.
9.    Coursebooks can alienate learners from the process of learning English.
10.    Coursebooks often teach a fossilized form of English
11.    They can be overly prescriptive and descriptive (to the point of giving the learners ‘nothing’ to cling to).
12.    They are predicated on a linear and incremental progression through a (fairly arbitrary) sequence of discrete grammar items.
13.    Materials that have been devised for a global market cannot easily accommodate local – and personal – needs and interests.
14.    The whole process is very top down.
15.    Coursebooks are mostly written for teachers (for parents, and head teachers, and ministries and inspectors and exam bodies ) rather than student
16.    There’s a belief that ‘progress’ can easily be measured.
17.    Publishers are bound to produce what is authorised by the ministries.
18.    After 20+ years of market-led material people are tired of it.
19.    Don’t include enough unscripted dialogues featuring non-native speakers
20.    …. and the list goes on…..

    From the  50+ comments so far we can see some of the suggestions or ideas that need to be incorporated to make the ideal coursebook or course material/resources

    • The internet
    • More user-generated content
    • Make it authentic because it is set up such that the student creates the content
    • Adapt and change according to the teacher’s preference
    • Make it customisable
    • Allow teachers /students to add specific local content / their content
    • Integrate with self-publishing elements
    • Educators can work with major publishers rather than against them or outside of them
    • Throw educators’ support behind innovations
    • Push publishers to consider and incorporate more changes
    • Teach unplugged
    • Use the text book as a grounding and supplement it as is relevant to the learning styles and personalities of the learners

    At present the Cambridge University Press material in the system is All Rights Reserved with the setting others may use but not change. I would simply add, real shift is happening now as educators are sharing content too. It’s great to be part of a project that promotes Creative Commons (CC) and seeing authors or course providers selecting “Others may copy and change your work.”.

    English360 creative commons

    This is an important move forward and I hope more authors will come on board prepared to do just that so that the 360° degree perspective can evolve further.

    Material is currently being authored for the platform under the CC licence, that’s evolutionary I find!

    2 Comments

    BESIG 2009

    November 25th, 2009
    by Cleve Miller


    Attended the BESIG conference in Poznan last weekend, with fellow English360′ers Paul Colbert and Brian Anderson. As always it was great to actually meet with colleagues that had previously been only virtual: met Karenne and Anne face to face finally. Discussed an interesting new project that Cornelia and Paul have cooked up. Met with lots of folks that I only see once a year.

    Vicki Hollett’s plenary and subsequent session were great. My take away was her discussion on teaching functional language for authenticity when establishing relationships, whether they be business or social relationships. Main point: those nice lists of functional phrases we have in BE coursebooks need an upgrade.

    Another highlight was Jeremy Day’s session on “Results-focused ESP”.   Jeremy gave us an observation that was new to me. I’m paraphrasing here but he was discussing the question “Who is the most important person in the learning process?” and we were all thinking “the student” (as opposed to teacher-centered, or materials-centered classes of course). Jeremy’s point was that another perspective, especially in ESP, is to see that the most important person isn’t even in the classroom. If we are teaching English for nursing, the most important person is actually the patient, who will be communicating with the nurse (our student). If we are teaching English for students who work in a call center, the most important person is the customer, who will need our student to resolve an issue with a product. This expansion of who we prioritize as stakeholders in the learning process is spot on.

    10 Comments

    In-company language training in 1915

    August 9th, 2008
    by Cleve Miller


    ESL instruction at Ford in 1915

    The Ford Motor Company provided language instruction to immigrant workers 90+ years ago. A major  objective was worker safety at the factory…the same goal of a project I did for an energy company several years ago.  Evidently the teachers used a direct method similar to Berlitz.

    From the .ppt A Brief History of EFL Instruction on the CAELA resource page (4th bullet down).

    Hat tip to Larry Ferlazzo.

    1 Comment

    Brain candy: universal grammar, teacher credentials challenged

    July 18th, 2008
    by Cleve Miller


    The New Yorker magazine is in the news this week because of its controversial cover.

    But, there are two resources inside that are extremely interesting for language teachers.

    The first is an article on the linguistic professor Dan Everett and his work with the Amazonian tribe the Paraha. Their language has a zen-like focus on the present, and…get this…no recursion. Since Chomskians hold that recursion is the essence of humans’ unique cognitive/linguistic capabilities, Everett’s claim is, as Stephen Pinker terms it, ““a bomb thrown into the party.” Fascinating article.

    Second is a video of a presentation by Malcolm Gladwell that discusses teacher credentials and how they have zero correlation to teacher quality. It’s about 15 minutes and much of it involves discussion of US sports, but it’s all very much to the point and highly recommended.

    No Comments

    The modern language teacher as a shouting deity

    April 22nd, 2008
    by Cleve Miller


    From Arts and Letters Daily, here’s a fascinating article from The New Yorker about the EFL teacher Li Yang and his school Crazy English in China. It’s an amazing story:

    He has built an empire out of his country’s deepening devotion to a language it once derided as the tongue of barbarians and capitalists. His philosophy, captured by one of his many slogans, is flamboyantly patriotic: “Conquer English to Make China Stronger!”…Li, who is thirty-eight, has made his name on an E.S.L. technique that one Chinese newspaper called English as a Shouted Language. Shouting, Li argues, is the way to unleash your “international muscles.” Shouting is the foreign-language secret that just might change your life.

    His boot camp, mass psychology approach has lead to accusations of demagoguery, racism, and “huckster nationalism”, and even worse it would appear that he doesn’t use the communicative approach. But instead of dismissing his approach out of hand, I think it’s actually worth thinking about, because the Crazy English phenomenon touches on many interesting questions for language teachers.

    Teacher as motivator
    In China, Li Yang is the “Elvis of English, perhaps the world’s only language teacher known to bring students to tears of excitement”. Chinese newspapers describe him as a “demagogue,” and his classes “like cult meetings” and asked if he was “one of those cults where the leaders insist on being treated like deities.”

    Li’s cosmology ties the ability to speak English to personal strength, and personal strength to national power….To his fans, Li is less a language teacher than a testament to the promise of self-transformation. In the two decades since he began teaching, at age nineteen, he has appeared before millions of Chinese adults and children. He routinely teaches in arenas, to classes of ten thousand people or more. Some fans travel for days to see him. The most ardent spring for a “diamond degree” ticket, which includes bonus small-group sessions with Li. The list price for those seats is two hundred and fifty dollars a day—more than a full month’s wages for the average Chinese worker. His students throng him for autographs. On occasion, they send love letters.

    Students repeat “English is a piece of cake. I can totally conquer English. I will use English. I will learn English. I will live in English. I am no longer a slave to English. I am its master. I believe English will become my faithful servant and lifelong friend. . . .”

    In his intensive courses, students run together at dawn and walk on burning coals after class.

    Limits of traditional classroom approaches

    He mocks China’s rigid classroom rules…He strives to be as unprofessorial as possible. On book covers, he wears a suit and tie, with his cuffs rolled up to the elbow, like a bond trader. It affirms his image as the anti-intellectual who has wrested English from the grip of test proctors and college-admissions committees.

    Role of the affective filter

    Li’s real power, though, derives from a genuinely inspiring axiom, one that he embodies: the gap between the English-speaking world and the non-English-speaking world is so profound that any act of hard work or sacrifice is worth the effort. He pleads with students “to love losing face.” In a video for middle- and high-school students, he said, “You have to make a lot of mistakes. You have to be laughed at by a lot of people. But that doesn’t matter, because your future is totally different from other people’s futures.”

    ELF and the status of the native speaker

    Li professes little love for the West. His populist image benefits from the fact that he didn’t learn his skills as a rich student overseas; this makes him a more plausible model for ordinary citizens. In his writings and his speeches, Li often invokes the West as a cautionary tale of a superpower gone awry. “America, England, Japan—they don’t want China to be big and powerful!” a passage on the Crazy English home page declares. “What they want most is for China’s youth to have long hair, wear bizarre clothes, drink soda, listen to Western music, have no fighting spirit, love pleasure and comfort! The more China’s youth degenerates, the happier they are!” Recently, he used a language lesson on his blog to describe American eating habits and highlighted a new vocabulary term: “morbid obesity.”

    ELF, ESP and English language instrumentalism

    His philosophy, captured by one of his many slogans, is flamboyantly patriotic: “Conquer English to Make China Stronger!”…A vast national appetite has elevated English to something more than a language: it is not simply a tool but a defining measure of life’s potential. China today is divided by class, opportunity, and power, but one of its few unifying beliefs—something shared by waiters, politicians, intellectuals, tycoons—is the power of English….English has become an ideology, a force strong enough to remake your résumé, attract a spouse, or catapult you out of a village.

    What an amazing phenomenon - humans are endlessly fascinating.

    Is it superficial and gimmicky? Yes.

    Does much of it elicit the “yuck” response? To me, yes.

    Do many students learn more English than they would have in a traditional classroom? My guess: absolutely.

    And that’s what makes it interesting.

    1 Comment

    Cultural frames and group activities

    April 1st, 2008
    by Cleve Miller


    Extremely interesting article.

    No Comments

    BESIG Conference in Berlin

    December 6th, 2007
    by Cleve Miller


    Fortunately I was able to attend the BESIG conference in Berlin in November - there were many very useful workshops and presentations, and it was great to be able to finally meet many of the folks I’m in contact with online.

    Probably the most interesting session for me was David Graddol’s plenary talk on the future of business English. He made some intriguing points:

    • according to his research, 74% of business conversations take place among non-native speakers
    • as a result, there is a growing recognition that “intelligibility” is as important as accuracy
    • employers are now less interested in exam scores and more interested in what the employee can do with English
    • the number of people learning will English will peak globally at around 2 billion in the year 2010
    • after 2010, the number of English learners will start to drop off, because national curriculums are starting English much earlier in primary school, and then moving into content classes (i.e. history class, but the language of instruction is English). Thus learners are reaching an advanced level (say, C1) by the time they enter university.

    Much of this will be familiar to anyone who has read Graddol’s latest research, English Next, which was commissioned by the British Council. You can download the .pdf here.

    Karen Richardson has a nice write-up of the conference for One Stop English.

    I was also a speaker, and gave a presentation on “Web 2.0 as a Business English catalyst”. Lots of excellent questions after the talk. I spent some time pointing out how the new approaches to the web (”web 2.0″) correspond strongly with the principles of social constructivist learning theory, and how this relates to teaching business English. I then gave the audience a sneak peak of the English360 platform and showed how we have pulled those new approaches into a collaborative, web-based teaching tool.

    (photo below) Here I was doing a brief overview to be sure everyone in the audience was on the same page regarding “social constructivist” approaches. It was interesting that many in the mostly European audience were unfamiliar with the “sage on stage” vs “guide on side” terms…maybe these terms are more common in the US?

    (Photo below) Here I was showing the relationships between different approaches. The inner circle is the more traditional “teacher lecturer” model, which focuses on what happens cognitively in the brain (mostly remember and reproduce). The second, larger circle represents the communicative approach with a social constructivist foundation: the focus moves from the individual to the group, which works together on tasks involving info exchange. A key point is that the second circle doesn’t negate the first, it expands it…people can and do learn through “passively” absorbing a lecture (I also discussed this here, maybe a bit too aggressively!). But, then working with that new knowledge with others, to produce a result, will usually solidify that learning.

    But much of this is classroom based. The third circle represents how web 2.0 approaches can pull this classroom-based activity into the real world, which is, after all, the whole point.

    You can get the slides here off the BESIG site (I’m J4, way at the bottom, and -warning- it’s a heavy file download.)

    2 Comments

    What does this say about accuracy and error correction?

    April 27th, 2007
    by Cleve


    I have to think about this more, since it’s too easy to make a superficial judgement. Anyway it’s a neat story. And if, like me, you suffer from perfectionism, good advice in general:

    A ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of the work they produced. All those on the right would be graded solely on their works’ quality.

    His procedure was simple: On the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the quantity group; 50 pound of pots rated an A, 40 pounds a B, and so on. Those being graded on quality, however, needed to produce only one pot — albeit a perfect one — to get an A.

    At grading time, the works with the highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity.

    It seems that while the quantity group was busily churning out piles of work — and learning from their mistakes — the quality group had sat theorizing about perfection, and in the end had little more to show for their efforts than grandiose theories and a pile of clay.

    From Penelope Trunk.

    6 Comments

    Another teacher outs the emperor

    November 14th, 2006
    by Cleve


    We’ve posted on Project Follow-Through before, and here’s another reference, from the linguist John McWhorter, on bilingual education and the Norse.
    Via Arts and Letter Daily.

    No Comments

    Sandy’s take on dogme

    May 5th, 2006
    by Cleve


    There’s a lot to love about dogme and dogme-influenced classroom approaches. With individual students, we tie dogme principles to performance support, which leads to an emergent syllabus, and that’s it..with the right teacher that’s the most powerful BE environment that we have found.

    That said, Sandy’s send up of dogme is too funny. If you’ve spent any time on the dogme Yahoo group this will crack you up. (Warning: may be offensive to some.)

    2 Comments