Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, UniversityCollegeDublin, 7-10 September 2005

European Profile for Language Teacher Education

Michael Grenfell

University of Southampton, UK.

Introduction

As the European Union continues to deepen and widen, and physical and fiscal barriers are slowly being broken down by increased integration, it is becoming apparent that linguistic barriers need to be tackled more urgently. If Europe’s ambition of free mobility for citizens across the Union is to be achieved, it is evident that language teaching and learning need to form part of this project.

At the same time, the construction of European unity depends on respect for cultural diversity, of which language, as a cultural marker, plays a huge part. Following the last round of enlargement in 2004, not only has the population of the European Union increased, but so too has the number of languages spoken in it. In an enlarged Europe, there are 21 official national languages, and over 50 regional or minority languages, in addition to the languages of immigration and trade. The European Union has accordingly launched a number of initiatives to encourage citizens to learn two languages besides their mother tongue and to preserve those languages that are not as widely spoken, in the face of English as the emerging lingua franca. In direct relation to this, the EU is also looking at the ways in which the teaching of foreign languages can be improved.

It is in this context that the European Profile for Language Teacher Education has been developed. The Profile builds on the findings of the European Language Teacher project (Grenfell, Kelly, and Jones 2003) which examined the provision of language teacher education in 32 European countries. Its focus was on innovation and good practice and developed the notion of European Language Teacher status. This is a language teacher who has completed further training and developed additional competencies that leads to European-wide recognised status.

This paper presents the research carried out over the past five years on European Language Teacher Education. It sets out the background to the research and the actual projects themselves. Methodology detail is also provided. The principal aim of the paper is to present the most recent outcome of the project: the European Profile for Language Teacher Education.Detail of the Profile is provided. However, this detail is also framed by theoretical issues of teacher education and models of teacher education. It also sketches work and the ‘way forward’ as well as reflecting on the advantages and disadvantages of carrying out this form of research.

Background

The Research is based on two EU-funded projects. In 2002 a groundwork exercise was carried out to gather information on language teaching and learning in Europe. The exercise was undertaken with the objective of producing a discussion paper in 2003, intended to feed into the drafting of a policy statement by the European Union. This policy has three aims:

  • The promotion of linguistic diversity, and encouragement of European citizens to learn the less widely used and taught languages;
  • The objective that every citizen should be able to speak their mother tongue plus two other European languages (consistent with the EU White paper 1995);
  • The improvement of the quality and quantity of foreign language learning and teaching.

As part of the information gather exercises, a project was commissioned on recent development in the training of language teachers in Europe. Data for this report was collected from 32 European countries (EU, EEA and Socrates, Leonardo participants) over a four month period from February to June 2002. Examples of good practice were sought in terms of:

  • Tailoring of pedagogy to the needs of particular groups of language learners;
  • Greater emphasis on communicative aspects of language learning;
  • Introduction of intercultural dimensions;
  • Bilingual and multilingual education approaches;
  • Use of new technologies, and of autonomous, open or distance learning approaches in teacher training, as well as training in their use;
  • Use of mentoring systems in teacher training, and the training of mentors who are not themselves teacher trainers;
  • Increased focus on school-centred initial teacher training;
  • Europeanisation and internationalisation of teacher training programmes;
  • Improving the competence of teachers in the foreign language and culture they teach.

One of the outcomes of this project was a Profile. The professional profile summarised the key components in the training of language teachers, as identified in this study. It encapsulated examples of good practice and the aims and objectives toward which training should be directed. Taken as a whole, it represented a composite profile of the ideal twenty-first century language teacher in Europe, and of the training that might be offered to produce such a teacher. The Profile was therefore a synopsis of the areas that might be addressed in the European benchmark. It also set a standard against which actual teachers and training might be compared. Some of the items were already widespread practice, while others would be more difficult to achieve. The Profile was offered as an enabling context of organisational infrastructure, and it therefore referred to features of an infrastructure that would ideally support and accredit teachers.

A second project was then commissioned by the EU in 2003, specifically to develop the Profile. The aims of this project were:

  • To develop a Profile for language teacher education in Europe;
  • To move towards a coherent framework for co-operation in language teacher education;
  • To facilitate mobility, the development of new qualifications and mutual recognition of training components;
  • To provide a shared understanding of the issues and future lines of development.

Methodology

The project set out to draw on the expertise of policy makers and educators in the field from a wide range of European countries, through a series of case studies, questionnaires and consultation. The following data sources were used:

  1. A consultative Expert Group;
  2. A three-stage Delphi Study;
  3. Case Studies;
  4. Theoretical Scrutiny and Further Exemplification;

Unlike the initial project, it did not seek to identify centres of innovation and excellent practice for it case study visits. Rather, it took the Profile into a range of countries and national contexts in order to see how current practice matched the profile items. We anticipated three distinct responses:

1)we are already doing these items;

2)we are not doing these items and would like to;

3)we are not doing these items and do not want/ need or they are not appropriate.

Project planning, data collection and analysis took place over a six-month period.

The Profile

The outcome of the second project was a revised Profile. It presents 40 key elements for language teacher education courses. It details how courses might be structured and delivered to give trainee teachers access to essential learning opportunities during initial and in-service teacher education. In particular, it focuses on innovative teacher education practices and ways of promoting cooperation, exchange and mobility among the new generation of Europe’s language teachers, whilst taking into consideration the application of the Bologna process and the Common European Framework scales.

Who will use the Profile?

The Profile is a valuable resource for European, national and institutional policy makers in the field of teacher education. It also addresses teacher educators who want to introduce trainee teachers to some of the European initiatives in language teacher education.

The Profile is an important frame of reference for its stakeholders, whether they specialise in primary, secondary or adult learning. It contains information for those qualified teachers and teacher educators involved in in-service education, especially in the areas of mentoring, exchanges and international cooperation.

In addition, the Profile should be seen as a flexible framework for language trainee teachers and language teachers themselves, since it deals with independent learning strategies, life-long learning and new learning environments. The Profile is built on the conviction that language teacher education is a life-long process that should occur both inside and outside organised teaching and learning contexts.

Organisation of the Profile

The European Profile for Language Teacher Education – A Frame of Reference contains 40 items describing important elements in foreign language teacher education in Europe. The Profile is divided into four sections: Structure, Knowledge and Understanding, Strategies and Skills, and Values.

i. Structure

This section contains items describing the different constituent parts of language teacher education and indicates how they could be organised.

ii. Knowledge and Understanding

This section contains items relating to what trainee language teachers should know and understand about teaching and learning languages as a result of their initial and in-service teacher education.

iii. Strategies and Skills

This section contains items relating to what trainee language teachers should know how to do in teaching and learning situations as teaching professionals as a result of their initial and in-service teacher education.

iv. Values

This section contains items relating to the values that trainee language teachers should be taught to promote in and through their language teaching.

The four sections should be viewed holistically as the composite parts of teacher education. Teacher education is a multi-faceted, multi-disciplinary activity which is reflected in the division of the Profile. The sections interact to form a comprehensive guide to teacher education programmes in the 21st Century.

The European Profile for Language Teacher Education

Below are the headings for the 40 Profile items. The full Profile, available in the main report and the brochure, gives a detailed explanation of what is meant by each of the headings, how they can be implemented in real terms and issues which arise from them.

The European Profile for Language Teacher Education proposes that foreign language teacher education in the twenty-first century should include the following elements of initial and in-service education:

Structure

1. A curriculum that integrates academic study and the practical experience of teaching.

2. The flexible and modular delivery of initial and in-service education.

3. An explicit framework for teaching practice (stage/practicum).

4. Working with a mentor and understanding the value of mentoring.

5. Experience of an intercultural and multicultural environment.

6. Participation in links with partners abroad, including visits, exchanges or ICT links.

7. A period of work or study in a country or countries where the trainee’s foreign language is spoken as native.

8. The opportunity to observe or participate in teaching in more than one country.

9. A European-level evaluation framework for initial and in-service teacher education programmes, enabling accreditation and mobility.

10. Continuous improvement of teaching skills as part of in-service education.

11. Ongoing education for teacher educators.

12. Training for school-based mentors in how to mentor.

13. Close links between trainees who are being educated to teach different languages.

Knowledge and Understanding

14. Training in language teaching methodologies, and in state-of-the-art classroom techniques and activities.

15. Training in the development of a critical and enquiring approach to teaching and learning.

16. Initial teacher education that includes a course in language proficiency and assesses trainees’ linguistic competence.

17. Training in information and communication technology for pedagogical use in the classroom.

18. Training in information and communication technology for personal planning, organisation and resource discovery.

19. Training in the application of various assessment procedures and ways of recording learners’ progress.

20. Training in the critical evaluation of nationally or regionally adopted curricula in terms of aims, objectives and outcomes.

21. Training in the theory and practice of internal and external programme evaluation.

Strategies and Skills

22. Training in ways of adapting teaching approaches to the educational context and individual needs of learner

23. Training in the critical evaluation, development and practical application of teaching materials and resources.

24. Training in methods of learning to learn.

25. Training in the development of reflective practice and self-evaluation.

26. Training in the development of independent language learning strategies.

27. Training in ways of maintaining and enhancing ongoing personal language competence.

28. Training in the practical application of curricula and syllabuses.

29. Training in peer observation and peer review.

30. Training in developing relationships with educational institutions in appropriate countries.

31. Training in action research.

32. Training in incorporating research into teaching.

33. Training in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL).

34. Training in the use of the European Language Portfolio for self-evaluation.

Values

35. Training in social and cultural values.

36. Training in the diversity of languages and cultures.

37. Training in the importance of teaching and learning about foreign languages and cultures.

38. Training in teaching European citizenship.

39. Training in team-working, collaboration and networking, inside and outside the immediate school context.

40. Training in the importance of life-long learning.

Teacher Education Research

The Profile and the individual components needs to be set beside what we know about the processes of teacher education in general. Teacher education has a long tradition, stretching back into the nineteenth century and beyond. Nevertheless, it was not until the last quarter of the twentieth century that teacher training became a prerequisite in many countries for those wishing to become a teacher; although certain European states still do not require it. It is therefore perhaps unsurprising if research into teacher education was slow to become established as an activity worthy of academic study. Wideen and Tischer (1990) write that a ‘quantum leap’ took place in research on teacher education in the U.S.A. in the 1960s. Still, as an academic discipline, it has been described as lacking in a clear ‘epistemological base’ (Shulman 1986) and ‘pre-paradigmatic’ (Pope 1993). This lack of maturity, noted by writers, have since been addressed by a positive explosion of research into teacher education. For example, the work and publications of the Association for Teacher Education in Europe has established a firm network of research practice. The early preoccupation with dealing with teacher education as a sociology of professionals, has been eclipsed by a interest in teacher’s ‘craft knowledge’ as part of an edification of their practice (see Brown and McIntyre 1993, Calderhead 1987). Yet, still teacher education research lacks a clear consensus over its theoretical frame of reference and thus epistemological focus. The result is often the reporting of a plethora of individual case studies and policy evaluations.

Clearly, there is the issue of the distinction between general approaches to teacher education and subject-specific. In terms of language teacher education, there is in fact comparatively very little research on subject specific teacher training, aside from one or two subject exceptions; certainly, there is little that discusses the processes of second language teacher training (see Grenfell 1998). Some research (for example, Evans 1988) suggests that ‘language people’ are characteristically distinct, and that learning languages involves processes of personal transformation. Wallace (1991) lists three distinct approaches to language teacher training: craft; applied science; reflective practitioner. More recently, a fourth approach might be added: competence based teacher education. Whilst it is unlikely that any one of these ever exists in a pure form, they do each lead to clear difference of principles, processes and practice.Wilson et al (1987) conceptualise teacher knowledge as being made up of a series of different knowledge bases. One of these – pedagogical content knowledge – refers to the way a subject knowledge (for example, a foreign language) is‘re-framed’ in pedagogic terms; in other words, a new pedagogical knowledge is developed around the subject knowledge and used to teach it.

The Way Forward

It is necessary to keep these theoretical concepts in mind when considering the Profile in Theory and Practice. In a sense, each of the models of referred to in the last paragraph might be seen to be present in European Teacher Education to a greater or lesser extent. There are questions of context, appropriateness, and application. For example, the Profile might be seen as a rather ‘top-down’ prescriptive list imposed from above. However, it can also be used as a references point, a source of reflection, or a check-list for programme development. One further extension project is to develop a core ‘portfolio’ of competences, knowledge and values required by language teachers which can be used as a tool for reflection by students during their initial training. This Portfolio for Language Teacher Education is intended to bring together the Profile, the Common European Framework, and the European Language Portfolio.

Other ways forward include:

Networking and Dissemination

‘Lead’ centres working within the parameters of the Profile;

Organisational infrastructure: seminars, workshops, conferences.

Quality Issues

Quality Assurance and Enhancement;

Self-evaluation to the Profile items;

Bench marking;

Kite-marking.

Information Resourcing

Access;

Virtual, online resource networks.

Mentoring

Defining the competences of the ‘European Language Mentor’;

A model of mentoring within the context of the European Profile for Language Teacher Education;

Involvement of Network Centres to establish a European Mentor Team.

Conclusion

This type of research has certain characteristics. It is commissioned by the EU DG ‘Education and Culture’. It is carried out intensively over a short period of time with quite a large research team. A vast amount of information and data has to be analysed and reported. Issues of accuracy and interpretation are constantly at stake. Both the process and report are open to scrutiny by the EU office. There is a tension between academic freedom and the political issues involved in outcomes. A major advantage of this type of research is its topicality and practical relevance. Conducting the research itself leads to the development of a large research network which is subsequently invaluable for dissemination and follow-up work. It is therefore a useful vehicle for connecting research with policy and practice. However, there is obviously a wide range of practice across Europe. Questions of expectations and standards do arise; as well as entry requirements, not to say the current popularity, and hence demand, for language teachers in individual European states. Policy recommendations can never be prescriptive, and can only be offered as facilitative for individual states and training institutions. Furthermore, there are questions of ownership and integration within EU institutions themselves. There are currently various departments and agencies which deal with Teacher Education generally and Language Teacher Education specifically; for example, The European Council; European Centre for Modern Languages; DG ‘Education and Culture’; Expert Groups, etc. There are politics concerning the relationship between these in terms of moving towards an integrated policy. Moreover, who should do the research on future projects? Having developed a centre of expertise, it is difficult for Southampton to receive further EU sponsorship in the light of current sensitivity over corruption at the heart of the EU. As such, as well as giving rise to valuable product and developmental process, a project such as the European Profile raises a number of important issues about EU research, its funding, limitations and potential.