Big Goals and Scheduling

Teaching for Leadership's Big Goal

This graphic is meant to describe setting a Big Goal for an specific class, not an entire program, but the concept and basic rules remain the same. As a teacher, department head, or even a principal in a school system, you won't be used to the amount of freedom that little oversight gives you. Even great resources like Marzano's Designing & Teaching Learning Goals & Objectives doesn't cover this kind of acreage.

Just like a class or course, however, we need to start with the end in mind. It needs to be big, but reachable. In order to judge what is reachable, we need to know a little about the program's scope. 

We are at a disadvantage here. We don't know what country you are in, what level your students are coming  in at, what exposure they have to English outside of school, how long you periods are, or even how many you are going to devote to the program. We can generalize, though, if we make some assumptions, which is why we are focusing on bilingual schools in Asia.

To be called "bilingual" instead of "mini-English" or some other nomenclature, most countries require subjects to be taught twice -- once in L1 and once in L2 -- meaning that we can assume half of the hours are in English. How many are there? We still don't know, but we're going to make the following assumptions based on OECD's The Learning Environment and Organisation of Schools:

1. Students in grades 1-3 study relatively fewer hours than older ES students, with six or seven periods. OECD reports about 2000 40-minute periods in the first two years. That works out to 1000 per year, with a year being approximately 35 weeks. For the sake of sticking to natural numbers in the real world, we're going to call that six periods a day for a full program. We are going to allocate three 40-minute periods per day to English content, or fifteen per week.
2. Students in grade 4-6 will have longer school days with about 50% more classes scheduled. We'll give the later years of the program twenty periods per week, or about four a day.
3. The total number of periods in the six-year program will top out at 3500.

We have to assume that students have limited access to English outside of instruction time unless we provide that directly to them. The good news is that these 3500 periods of instruction give us plenty of time to develop strong, broad comprehension skills and even good production. 

• For students who come in with little to no previous English, we will expect students to complete a third-grade level reading program, putting them on fourth-grade level as they leave the program. Math and science content knowledge should be on grade level, though specific vocabulary and reading comprehension in those courses will not be on level. Productive skills will lag comprehension, of course, but the students should be able to move on to a full international MS program or even abroad study and stay on grade level without needing sheltered instruction or remedial classes.
• For students who come in having done the basics in kindergarten (legal in some countries, not in others), we can expect even better results, putting students near fifth-grade level. Again, productive skills will lag slightly, but not as much as the lower level.

So, there we go. We have our Big Goal:

"All students will complete the program with the ability to study abroad or in international programs on grade level, without needing sheltered instruction or remedial / intensive classes. Students will test in STEM subjects on level and test in reading at the fourth grade or better."

The Freedom of Having No Oversight

Well, not exactly no oversight, but close enough. The English departments of bilingual schools and the entire international school community generally operate outside of local education requirements. Of course, schools must follow safety codes and provide qualified instructors, but they are left almost entirely to themselves when it comes to designing and implementing curriculum. They must answer only to the customers, parents who determine whether their personal goals for their children have been met.

What freedom! (Except for the din of conflicting parental expectations.)

There are no high-stakes tests to teach to. No higher authority has lain down weekly units for the teachers to follow. No. Schools are given the freedom to meet local needs completely. What an amazing opportunity.

Unfortunately, few schools have staff with the experience and drive necessary to take advantage of this opportunity. They end up throwing spaghetti at the wall and seeing what sticks. Or worse, they listen to the publishers and get sold huge amounts of material which never gets effectively used, leaving little budget for the important things. (The same thing happens in the tech sector all the time. Don't trust someone who wants your money, kids!)

Each school is different, and each set of students requires a different approach. We need the freedom to take those different approaches.

Still, having no structure leaves many schools without direction. They don't accomplish as much as they could if they had just a little more help.

This is why we are developing a bilingual framework for elementary schools in Asia. We want children and their parents to get what they pay for. Let's set realistic program goals, followed by yearly goals and reasonable objectives. Let's figure out a great way to measure these goals and how to get our students the recognition they deserve as they move forward. Let's have a complete set of curriculum and technology tools available to them for as close to free as can be managed.

One size does not fit all, though, so we are developing this framework in a free and open manner. The license will be chosen soon, but it will probably be some form of Creative Commons license. This will allow the material to be localized for teacher support or the spelling and content adjusted for American / British English without needing to obtain a special license. A CC license will also let a school simply send out material for printing if e-book readers can't be used for some reason (for example, that there isn't reliable electricity). Finally, an open license means that any school or non-profit can use the program, whether the students' guardians have the means to pay or not. Making quality education available to everyone is the reason we continue to be educators.

We will also make a choice whether to use Google Docs or GitHub for LaTeX code hosting. Will we code an SIS to Google Apps or ask the school to host something themselves? These are important decisions, but they do not need to be made yet. We are still vaporware. We will start with the big ideas first, backward design style. If schools don't like the direction we take at any point, they can fork.

English Language Learning Position Statement

Philosophy (Reflecting TESOL.org's stance, link unavailable)

The program recognizes these facets of English as a foreign language:

1. language as communication
2. language learning through meaningful and significant use
3. the individual and societal value of bi- and multilingualism
4. the role of ESOL students' native languages in their English language and general academic development
5. cultural, social, and cognitive processes in language and academic development
6. assessment that respects language and cultural diversity

The program also supports a modern pedagogy:

1. Language is functional.
2. Language varies.
3. Language learning is cultural learning.
4. Language acquisition is a long-term process.
5. Language acquisition occurs through meaningful use and interaction.
6. Language processes develop interdependently.
7. Native language proficiency contributes to second language acquisition.
8. Bilingualism is an individual and societal asset.

The program supports the following uses:

1. To use English to communicate in social settings.
2. To use English to achieve academically in all content areas.
3. To use English in socially and culturally appropriate ways.

Practical Results of the Philosophy

The philosophy laid out above impacts our practical classroom behavior in the following areas (inspired by A Challenge to Change: The Language Learning Continuum, Claire Jackson, 1999)

Area	Details
Comprehensible input (CI)	The units will be based on the concept of comprehensible input, using language which is level- and age-appropriate. Beginning students work with the “here and now” to get enough context to understand. Due to the acceptance of the interrelation between culture and language, authentic material is preferred to created material, though created material in the style of authentic material may be used.
Classroom language	Because of the emphasis on CI, English will be the expected form of communication in the classroom. Students will be equipped early on with the necessary language for normal classroom interaction. In all cases, simplified English is acceptable in order to minimize confusion.
Pace	The lessons will be paced to give enough time for proper language acquisition. Grades 3-4 will learn no more than five lexical items (words) per class and grades 5-6 will learn no more than seven lexical items (words) per class.
Unit progression	For any unit, students will be moved from managed contexts to more complex situations. Practice will be guided. Comprehension will come before production.
Course progression	New language will build on, review, reuse, and integrate old language.
Academic integration	Because we desire the students to use English to achieve academically in all content areas, units and coursework should be tied to content the students are studying in other courses at that time.
Learning styles	Since language learning occurs through meaningful use (from the student’s perspective), multiple learning styles (multiple intelligences) should be used for each language goal.
Cultural awareness	Material which accurately reflects western culture should be used when possible.
Extra time	Because we recognize that language takes a lot of time, additional activities must be provided for practice after class. Homework, tapes, CDs, interactive computer programs, or on-line features of the course will be developed after the in-class portion has been thoroughly examined.

Where does technology fit?

Sometimes a chalkboard is all you need.

There is a lot of technology available for schools. Schools have large budgets, and tech companies can make a lot of money by selling complete systems to schools, school districts, or even entire ministries and departments. Most of this money is wasted and could be put to better use someplace else. We won't be advocating the iPad, shown above.

This is a contentious issue, because image sells. iPads in schools sell seats. We know this, but we believe that results sell better than image. Since we will be focusing on results, we will recommend only technology which gets results and which costs less than the equivalent non-tech solution for the same results.

Examples of these high-return initiatives include:

• e-Books that are free to redistribute and low-cost e-readers for students;
• Computer labs based on multi-seat or thin client technology;
• Webcams used as document cameras, instead of a proprietary solution'
• Free and low-cost cloud services'
• Open-source software solutions.

I hope that makes our position clear.

Since we are focusing on making private bilingual and international programs modern and, above all, profitable, technology needs to be used wisely, only where it reduces costs or makes