Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Aston University]On: 03 September 2014, At: 11:58Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Innovation in Language Learning andTeachingPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rill20
Supporting good practice in teachereducation through the EuropeanPortfolio for Student Teachers ofLanguagesDavid Newby aa Department of English Studies , Karl-Franzens University , Graz ,AustriaPublished online: 24 Oct 2012.
To cite this article: David Newby (2012) Supporting good practice in teacher education throughthe European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, Innovation in Language Learning andTeaching, 6:3, 207-218, DOI: 10.1080/17501229.2012.725250
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2012.725250
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
Supporting good practice in teacher education through the EuropeanPortfolio for Student Teachers of Languages
David Newby*
Department of English Studies, Karl-Franzens University, Graz, Austria
(Received 21 August 2012; final version received 21 August 2012)
2007 saw the publication of the European Portfolio for Student Teachers ofLanguages (EPOSTL), a tool for reflection and self-assessment to be used ininitial teacher education. Whilst innovative in nature, its effectiveness dependson how it can be used to supplement existing teacher education programmes andthus to foster good practice. A follow-up EPOSTL project focused on triallingthe EPOSTL in a number of teacher education institutions across Europe. Inthis paper, drawing on the experiences of users of the EPOSTL, both teachereducators and students, I illustrate what ‘good practice’ might mean and indicateseven ways in which the EPOSTL can play this supportive role.
Keywords: teacher education; portfolio; reflection; self-assessment; teacherautonomy; teachers’ competences; teaching practice; Common European Frame-work of Reference
Introduction
Since its publication in 2007 the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages
(EPOSTL) has found widespread acceptance among teacher educators. Not only is
it used extensively in many European countries but it has been translated into14 European languages; in addition, two Japanese versions (JAPOSTL, JAPOTL)
have been produced for use in pre- and in-service teacher education (TE), respectively.
The EPOSTL is intended as a flexible document which can be incorporated into
TE programmes in different national contexts. Moreover, it can be used in various
spheres of TE � pre-service education, teaching practice and in-service teacher
development. Whilst innovative in nature, its role is not to revolutionise or radically
change TE programmes but to provide support to existing programmes and to foster
good practice. The aim of this paper is to illustrate what ‘good practice’ might meanand to indicate seven ways in which the EPOSTL can play this supportive role.
What is the EPOSTL?
The EPOSTL is a didactic portfolio which helps to prepare student teachers of
modern languages for their future profession by providing a framework for reflection
during their TE course. It was developed under the auspices of the European Centre
The EPOSTL can be downloaded free of charge in several languages from http://epostl2.ecml.at/publication*Email: [email protected]
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching
Vol. 6, No. 3, November 2012, 207�218
ISSN 1750-1229 print/ISSN 1750-1237 online
# 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2012.725250
http://www.tandfonline.com
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
for Modern Languages of the Council of Europe (ECML) by a team of teacher
educators from Austria, Norway, Armenia, Poland and the UK, who were requested
by the Governing Board of the ECML to design an instrument which would make
a contribution to ‘harmonising teacher education’ across Europe. Its content builds
on the ‘competence-based’, ‘action-oriented’ approach of the Common European
Framework of Reference and the European Language Portfolio and draws on insights
from the European Profile for Language Teacher Education.
Designed to help student teachers reflect on and assess their developingknowledge, skills and values in a systematic and comprehensive way, the EPOSTL
comprises three main sections:
� an introductory personal statement section which provides tasks for student
teachers at the beginning of their training course to encourage them to reflect
on general questions related to teaching;
� a self-assessment section which identifies a core of 195 didactic competences
expressed as ‘can-do’ descriptors, which enable reflection and self-assessmentat different stages of TE;
� a dossier which encourages the student to provide evidence of progress and to
record examples of work relevant to teaching.
The main aims of the EPOSTL are as follows:
� to make didactic competences explicit and transparent;
� to encourage students to reflect on the underlying knowledge which feedsthese competences;
� to promote discussion between students and between students and their
teacher educators and school-based mentors;
� to facilitate self-assessment of students’ competences;
� to provide an instrument which helps chart progress.
In the meantime, the EPOSTL has been supplemented by two additional publica-
tions. The first is the book related to a follow-up ECML project ‘Piloting andImplementing the EPOSTL’, completed in 2011. This comprises a collection of
case studies by teacher educators from eight different countries and bears the title
Using the EPOSTL (Newby, Fenner, and Jones 2011). In 2012 a second book,
Insights into the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages (Newby
2012a, 2012b), was published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing. This focuses on
theoretical aspects which underlie the EPOSTL such as reflection, learner autonomy
and culture awareness; further, it explores the relationship between the EPOSTL and
other European documents such as the Common European Framework of Reference.It also includes case studies of how EPOSTL can be implemented. Reference will be
made to these two publications in the following discussions; quotations from
students are taken from the first of these books.
Good practice
This paper is concerned with how the EPOSTL can be used to support good practice
in TE. Before answering how this can happen, it is necessary to outline what mightconstitute good practice. One way of identifying and implementing good practice
208 D. Newby
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
would be to make use of the comprehensive specification provided by Kelly and
Grenfell’s European Profile for Language Teacher Education: A Frame of Reference
[online], which focuses on both structural and content aspect of TE programmes.
However, my present concern is with a theoretical level underlying good practice
which reflects, in my view, a broad current consensus among researchers and
methodologists concerning language learning, language teaching and TE. The focus
is therefore on models, rationales, theories and principles.
Various researchers of TE have identified ‘models’ of education (for example,
Wallace 1991; Grenfell, Kelly, and Jones 2003). Terms such as ‘applied science
approaches’, ‘competence-based models,’ ‘reflective modes’, ‘craft models’ have been
proposed as representing competing approaches. Rather than opting for a particular
model, EPOSTL-based TE will seek to incorporate aspects of each. Clearly, using
the EPOSTL entails of necessity adopting a ‘competence-based’ approach, since this
goes hand-in-hand with the use of didactics descriptors and reflects modes of
language description in both the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)
and the European Language Portfolio (ELP). At the same time, it will require a
strongly reflective mode, without which the descriptors are meaningless. In addition,
discussions of theories of language, learning and culture will take a central role
in TE courses since they lie, like icebergs, below the surface of all descriptors.
On the other hand, a ‘craft model’ and intuitive feelings for what works in a
classroom will be an additional, though not exclusive, controlling element for student
teachers in their teaching practice and indeed throughout their career.
Since there is a clear link between the EPOSTL and the CEFR, a quite different
way of arriving at indicators of good practice would be to apply the ‘criteria’ which
the CEFR identifies as necessary in order to ‘fulfil its functions’ (EPOSTL 2007, 7):
that its descriptive framework should be comprehensive, transparent and coherent.
These criteria apply equally to EPOSTL-based TE concerning various types of
specifications: content, objectives, didactic competences, etc. Examples of how the
EPOSTL reflects these criteria will be found in a later section.
A further set of terms, or rationales, which will help to define good practice, are
two which have figured strongly in discussions of learning and teaching in recent
years; these are the complementary concepts of autonomy and collaboration. As far
as the former is concerned, discussions of learner autonomy have been extended to
incorporate not only learners of languages but teachers of languages too (see Lamb
and Reinders 2008). In her chapter on ‘Learner Autonomy and its Implications for
the EPOSTL’ in Insights into the EPOSTL, Hanna Komorowska discusses ‘‘‘learning
to teach’’ processes in which the trainees engage’ (2012, 74). She identifies one of
these as ‘training in self-regulation, i.e. helping students to plan, evaluate and
monitor their own work so that they should not remain dependent on teachers’.
As will be seen in the following discussions, the EPOSTL can play an important role
in fostering this self-regulation among student teachers too. As far as collaboration
is concerned, dialogue and cooperation between students, teacher educators and
school-based mentors is clearly a vital component of TE. Yet, as emerged in the
course of the EPOSTL project, collaboration is often poor. It is of interest, therefore,
to explore how EPOSTL might play a role in bridging this collaborative gulf.
Based on these differing theoretical perspectives, I shall identify seven categories
of good practice (in bold script) which are implicit in the EPOSTL and which can
be supported and fostered by its use in TE. These are as follows:
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 209
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
1. fostering teacher autonomy;
2. supporting a reflective mode of TE;
3. underpinning of rationales and approaches to learning and teaching;
4. making the scope and aims of TE transparent;
5. helping to make competences explicit;
6. providing a tool for self-assessment;
7. supporting coherence in teaching practice.
Fostering teacher autonomy
One hazard of TE programmes is that students are sometimes cast in the role of
consumers of researchers’ theories and methodologists’ teaching techniques, which
they read about or hear about in lectures. It is therefore essential that TE foregroundsthe development of autonomous modes of thought and action among student
teachers, who must be prepared for their future profession by a context and form
of training which requires them to take a pro-active role in both cognitive and
practical operations. In cognitive terms, they must acquire the ability for what
Widdowson (2003, 27) terms ‘theorising’ about teaching, which he defines as
‘engaging in theory’ and ‘abstracting ideas from particular experience’. He further
says that ‘the value of theory is not that it is persuasive but that it is provocative. You
do not apply it, you appraise it’. This view is reflected in the EPOSTL descriptor:‘I can draw on appropriate theories of language, learning, culture, etc. and relevant
research findings to guide my teaching’ (EPOSTL 2007, 17). The emphasis here is the
ability to ‘draw on’ theories. At a practical level, students need to acquire not only a
repertoire of classroom activities and techniques but the ability to evaluate these
activities in a principled way. A further reason for promoting autonomous actions is
that if autonomy is to be fostered among learners, then student teachers must
experience themselves the principles and applications of autonomy. As Fenner states
(2006, 29),
unless TE courses include both principles and practice of autonomous learning as wellas a theoretical framework which enables student teachers to look beyond the principles,learner autonomy will not be practised as an integral part of foreign language learning.
An autonomous orientation is linked to many areas of TE, and various elementswill be seen in the discussion of following categories.
Supporting a reflective mode of TE
The descriptors of didactic competences contained in the EPOSTL have two generalfunctions: to facilitate reflection and to provide a tool for self-assessment. In her
comprehensive discussion of reflection, Fenner (2012) states that reflection goes well
beyond mere individual contemplation and stresses the dialogic, social role which
reflection should play in a TE programme. This includes dialogue between students,
between students and their educators and between students and their school-based
mentors. She describes the reflective process, quoting Boud, Keogh, and Walker
(1987, 25), as ‘a process which generates critical ideas or theories about the validity
of the questions which are considered and the inferences which are drawn, and thereconstruction of new ones’.
210 D. Newby
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
All three main sections of the EPOSTL � Personal Statement, Self-Assessment,
Dossier � provide opportunities for reflection on aspects of teaching. The main
function of the Personal Statement section, with which students will begin their TE,
is to ‘help you to reflect on aspects related to teaching in general and to think about
questions that may be important at the beginning of your teacher education’
(EPOSTL 2007, 9). In this section, students are given a series of reflective tasks, the
first of which requires them to take a critical look at the language teaching they have
already experienced while at school: ‘As learners of language in school, you already
have had a lot of contact with teaching. What aspects � teacher’s qualities, practices
etc. � of your own language teaching might influence how you wish or do not wish
to teach?’ This is an important first task in ‘generating critical ideas’ and examining
the ‘validity’ of teaching practices since it has often been recorded that not only
student teachers but newly qualified teachers are strongly influenced by how they
themselves were taught at school. In her chapter on ‘The Use of the Personal
Statement’ in Using the EPOSTL, Kaarina Makinen lists some of the positive and
negative aspects of school teachers’ practices identified by Finnish students. She
concludes that ‘Dealing with the Personal Statement section . . . encouraged a joint
exploration of further theoretical and practical aspects of foreign language teaching.
It also familiarised them with the concept and function of reflection’ (2011, 53).
At Graz University, the comments made by students in answer to this question have
led to a very specific outcome: the compilation of a list of ‘Do’s and Don’ts for
language teachers’.
Clearly, the self-assessment descriptors provide a wealth of topics for dialogic
reflection. In my own methodology courses, I have incorporated into all materials
EPOSTL-related tasks for in-class discussion, for example:
I can apply appropriate ways of reading a text in class (e.g. aloud, silently, in groups etc.).(EPOSTL 2007, 26) Consider when you might use these different ways of reading inyour own teaching.
It is important to discuss this issue since virtually all my student teachers have
experienced the practice whereby pupils are provided with a text and one pupil is
asked to read a text aloud, while other pupils read it silently; reading is often
interrupted by questions from the teacher. So common is this practice that students
tend not to question its validity until they consider various alternatives. By discussing
this descriptor with other students in a principled way, students see this practice in a
more critical light.
A tool which supports reflection in written form is the Dosser section of the
EPOSTL. Its primary function is ‘to help support claims that your self-assessment of
the ‘‘can do’’ statements is an accurate reflection of your specific skills and abilities.
You can do this by building up a ‘‘dossier’’ of evidence’ (EPOSTL 2007, 59). In her
chapter on ‘What goes into the EPOSTL Dossier and why’ in Using the EPOSTL,
Cecilia Nihlen (2011) considers some of the advantages of a written record of both
theoretical and practical aspects of teaching. One of her (Swedish) students says:
‘sometimes after a lesson when you talk about it you might not touch upon the
really important things. Sometimes you think it is awkward to bring up certain issues,
you don’t want to be too nit-picking . . .But if you have it on paper it is easier to
bring it up.’ The Dossier can be used in a variety of ways. One is to carry out
EPOSTL-related written tasks given in connection with course materials, which help
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 211
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
to reinforce the course content. One task I recently gave to my students in connection
with discussions of culture is the following:
I can evaluate and select a variety of texts and activities to make learners aware of theinterrelationship between culture and language. (Culture, p. 29)
The Austrian curriculum states: A foreign language is an expression of culture and waysof life. Can you give some examples of the ‘relationship between culture and language’?
Another way in which some teacher educators provide for written reflection is
by means of online reflection journals: for example, when students make a self-
assessment of a descriptor they are required to write reflections on why they have
assessed themselves in a certain way.
Underpinning of rationales and approaches to learning and teaching
It is one of the claims of the Common European Framework of Reference that its
specifications are ‘non-dogmatic’, i.e. ‘not irrevocably and exclusively attached to
any one of a number of competing linguistic or educational theories or practices’
(Council of Europe 2001, 8). However, the CEFR is clearly based on a commitment
to principles such as an ‘action-oriented’ view of language, which is at the heart
of a communicative approach to language description and teaching, the promotion
of plurilingualism and autonomous learning.
Teacher educators who adhere to these principles and who base their TE
programmes on them will find support in the contents and underlying rationale
of the EPOSTL. Four theoretical approaches can be identified as underlying both
the CEFR and the EPOSTL. These are the following:
1. A ‘communicative’ view of language and language teaching. This can be seen
at a macro-level in the Methodology section (EPOSTL 2007, 20 ff.), which is
organised according to the six skills common to both the CEFR and the
communicative approach. It can be seen within specific sections � for
example, the first seven descriptors of the Reading section (EPOSTL 2007,
26) reflect stages in the design of reading activities commonly identified in
‘communicative’ methodology, beginning with:
I can select texts appropriate to the needs, interests and language level of the learners.
and concluding with the following:
I can evaluate and select a variety of post-reading tasks to provide a bridge betweenreading and other skills.
At a micro-level it can be seen in individual descriptors which reflect CLT, such as
the following:
I can evaluate and select a range of meaningful speaking and interactional activities todevelop fluency (discussion, role play, problem solving etc.). (EPOSTL 2007, 21)
212 D. Newby
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
2. A cognitive, constructivist view of learning; one descriptor which shows this
is as follows:
I can take into account the cognitive needs of learners (problem solving, drive forcommunication, acquiring knowledge etc.). (EPOSTL 2007, 16)
3. An adherence to principles of autonomous learning, as in the following:
I can guide and assist learners in setting their own aims and objectives and in planningtheir own learning. (EPOSTL 2007, 36)
4. A strong focus on different aspects of intercultural awareness; for example:
I can appreciate and make use of the value added to the classroom environment by learnerswith diverse cultural backgrounds. (EPOSTL 2007, 17)
It should be noted that here only single examples are given. For a more detailed
discussion, see Newby (2012a, 2012b, 15ff.).
Making the scope and aims of TE transparent
It is a central aim of the Common European Framework of Reference to make
communicative competences explicit and therefore transparent to learners and
teachers. This aspect is also a core feature of the EPOSTL, though in this case
the competences are didactic. This explicitness brings several advantages both at a
macro-level � providing an overview of competences to be acquired by student
teachers � and at a micro-level � making specific objectives transparent.As far as the macro-level, or scope of TE, is concerned, this can be illustrated with
reference to two criteria in the design of both the CEFR and the EPOSTL: that its
specifications should be comprehensive and coherent. The descriptors of the EPOSTL
are categorised under seven general headings: Context, Methodology, Resources,
Planning a Lesson, Conducting a Lesson, Independent Learning, Assessment of
Learning, which seek to describe a set of core competences language teachers seek to
acquire. Moreover, the order in which they are listed (e.g. Lesson Planning 0Conducting a Lesson 0 Assessment) reflects a coherent sequencing of pedagogicaldecisions which teachers make in their professional lives.
For students, being provided with a comprehensive list of descriptors has various
advantages. From the beginning of a TE programme, they receive an overview of the
competences they will need to develop, which is explicit, and therefore transparent,
through the wording of the descriptors. As the TE programme progresses, the
descriptors provide a means of charting the growth in their competences. A
Norwegian student stated: ‘it gives us a good overview of what we know and what
we don’t know.’ A Czech student1 stated: ‘the EPOSTL lets students know howcomplex the teaching profession is and what it feels like to be a good, skilled teacher’.
In my own methodology courses I have abandoned my pre-EPOSTL attempts to
define what ‘didactics’ and ‘methodology’ mean; I now allow the categories of the
EPOSTL and their descriptors to do this for me.
The overview of competences within specific sections is often seen as positive
by students. For example, by reading through the section on Assessing Learning
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 213
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
and Teaching, students gain a quick entry into diverse aspects of testing which
teachers need to address. The section ‘Planning a Lesson’ seems particularly helpful
when students are preparing for their first teaching practice as it helps them to
consider systematically the steps that need to be taken and the decisions that need
to be made before entering the classroom.
The coherent sequencing is also an aspect appreciated by students. A Swedish
student said:
Working with the EPOSTL has been a new kind of experience for me. Not thatI have not reflected or thought about my progression and development as a teacherin previous courses; it is just that I have never had the opportunity to do it in suchan organised way as with working with the EPOSTL.
At a more specific level, the explicitness and transparency provided by the EPOSTL
facilitate the setting of descriptor-based objectives. In my course Introduction to
Foreign Language Didactics at Graz University, each unit begins with a list of unit
aims, accompanied by corresponding EPOSTL descriptors. For example, in my Unit
Developing Reading Skills, one aim is listed as ‘to consider what the skill of reading
entails.’ This aim is complemented by descriptors such as I can set different activities
in order to practise and develop different reading strategies according to the purpose of
reading (skimming, scanning etc.) (EPOSTL 2007, 26). When used in combinationwith self-assessment at the end of the unit, students get a more concrete picture of the
knowledge and skills they have acquired and the progress they have made.
In this particular case, the selection of descriptors is made for the students.
However, in many cases students themselves will select both sections of the EPOSTL
or specific descriptors depending on what they wish, or feel they need, to focus on.
One interesting application of the overview provided by the EPOSTL descriptors
lies in the area of curriculum design. Barry Jones (2011) reports how the use of
the EPOSTL identified ‘gaps in the range of training and teaching experiences’.
In her study of students’ reactions to the EPOSTL, Vesna Bagaric (2011) shows an
interesting correlation between a low self-assessment of their didactic competences
by students and what she sees as deficiencies in the TE programme of her institution,
which led to subsequent changes in the curriculum being made. ‘The students’
self-ratings provided a good insight into the strengths and weaknesses of our TE
programme, and gave us guidelines for improvement’ (80).
Helping to make didactic competences explicit
One of the principal achievements of the CEFR, and the related ELP, is that they
provide explicit statements of what comprises communicative language competences
and proficiency. The wording of the descriptors addresses the age-old question of
what language competence is and how it can be assessed. As far as the descriptors of
the EPOSTL are concerned, the role is quite different. In the CEFR, a descriptor
specifies language proficiency; in the EPOSTL, a descriptor is merely an entry pointto specifying what didactic proficiency is. Whereas the CEFR seeks to provide
answers, the EPOSTL asks questions, which have to be answered by the students
themselves.2 A descriptor such as I can create a supportive atmosphere that invites
learners to take part in speaking activities (EPOSTL 2007, 21) raises the question of
how a teacher might do this.
214 D. Newby
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
When first using the EPOSTL and on reading a descriptor such as the one just
quoted, a student will occasionally look at me, pen poised at the ready, expecting
me to provide a recipe of how to do this. It is one of the most important aspects of
the rationale of the EPOSTL that students create their own criteria for determining
what a specific competence might entail based on reflection, discussion, their
readings, teaching practice, etc. Included in many of the descriptors are open-ended
formulations � ‘meaningful speaking activities’, ‘assess homework according to valid
and transparent criteria’, ‘texts which are appropriate to the needs, interests and
language level of the learners’, ‘grammatical exercises and activities which support
learning’ � which open up a Pandora’s box of theoretical and practical issues. As a
Swedish student wrote, ‘that is the problem with the EPOSTL, it asks a lot of
questions that you might not know how to answer. But then again, that is also the
advantage of the EPOSTL; it makes you think.’ In this way, the EPOSTL helps
students to generate examples of good practice based on principles, experiences,
classroom techniques, etc., which derive not just from textbooks on methodology or
input from lectures but from their own perceptions of theory and practice.
This ‘personalised’ view of competence can be clearly seen in the reflective
journals that some students write in connection with teaching practice. One example
provided by a Czech student will be given:
I can adjust my time schedule when unforeseen situations occur. (EPOSTL 2007, 39)
During my practicum I thought of many interesting activities and games and I alsofound some on the Internet. So I made my personal database of these and always hadsome activities in mind in case there would be some time left or in case some studentswould be done with their work fast. I think it is always good to have a ‘plan B’.
Providing a tool for self-assessment
Each EPOSTL descriptor includes a means of self-assessment of competences;
this takes the form of a simple bar, together with a forward-pointing arrow,
found below the respective competence. This bar contains no grading or numerical
form of calibration. It is up to the students themselves to quantify their competences.
Students make a self-assessment by colouring in a portion of the bar and add the
date of the assessment. The following shows a bar in which self-assessment has been
made at three points of time during the student’s TE.
6.3.11 24.10.11 18.1.12
The facilitation of self-assessment is one of the most valuable functions of the
EPOSTL and follows a general trend in language teaching, reflected in the European
Language Portfolio. A Czech student said: ‘It is good to know yourself if you can do
this or that. If you do not ask yourself you never understand.’ Self-assessment
provides not only a current snapshot of a student’s competence but, when used in
the way shown above, leads to a visible record of the progress that has been made.
The snapshot aspect of assessment does not merely serve a retrospective, summative
function but is prospective and formative. A Czech student said: ‘The EPOSTL
advised me where to go and what to explore in my profession.’
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 215
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
Supporting teaching practice
It emerged during the two EPOSTL projects that the teaching practice which
students undertake is considered to be a problematic area in many countries. Three
principle problems which were cited are (a) poor communication between university-
based teacher educators and school-based mentors; (b) insufficient preparation for
teaching practice; (c) unfocused nature of feedback from mentors. It is has been
found that the EPOSTL can play a strongly supportive role in tackling all three of
these problematic areas.
In her chapter ‘The EPOSTL in Iceland: getting the mentors on board’, Hafdis
Ingvarsdottir reports on efforts to create a ‘learning community between university
and school.’ She states that ‘the EPOSTL has (. . .) brought the partners closer
and has narrowed the gap between university and the partnership schools’ and that
‘there is consensus between university lecturers and mentors that the EPOSTL is
on its way to becoming an integral part of our programme’ (2011, 70). Two major,
and related, factors in bridging this gap are the explicit specification of competences
and the common language provided by the descriptors. By this means, students,
mentors and lecturers have a common referential framework. This, in turn, helps
to solve the other two problems referred above: with the help of the descriptors,
both preparation for teaching and feedback on teaching can be more focused and
concrete. Concerning preparation, a Czech student said: ‘The EPOSTL helped me to
spot my weaker aspects of teaching (. . .) Thus I was able to improve them before
my practicum and I felt less anxious in class.’ One widely appreciated use of the
EPOSTL, and that reported by Barbara Mehlmauer-Larcher (2011), is that during
teaching practice students and mentors are asked to select a specific number of
descriptors which will both guide the students’ preparation and be used as the
basis for feedback, and possibly assessment, from the mentor. A Czech student
commented on this: ‘I showed my EPOSTL to my teacher at school. She took into
consideration my personal targets for the practicum, she always referred to them
when we discussed my classes.’
An interesting aspect of EPOSTL use is reported by Anne-Brit Fenner (2011, 43)
in connection with teaching practice. She notes that the EPOSTL causes not only
students but also mentors themselves to reflect on their competences; supervising
their students thus contributes to their professional development.
Conclusion
As has been seen, the EPOSTL can help in various ways to reinforce and foster
good practices in TE. These lie within three general areas and can be summarised
as follows:
� Rationale of TE: it supports reflective modes of education and guides
students to achieve a greater degree of autonomy; it underpins approaches
to teaching such as the Communicative Approach.
� Content of TE: it helps to make aims and outcomes explicit to students; it
aids the harmonisation of bottom-up, needs-based objectives and top-down
curriculum planning; it aids the comparison of TE programmes.
� Organisation of TE: it promotes dialogue and facilitates communication andcooperation between students, lecturers and mentors.
216 D. Newby
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
Notes
1. Comments by Czech students compiled by Orlova (2011).2. For a discussion of the relationship between descriptors in the CEFR and the EPOSTL
see Newby (2012b).
Notes on contributor
David Newby is associate professor of linguistics and language teaching methodology andresearch at Graz University, Austria. He has coordinated several projects for the EuropeanCentre for Modern Languages and is the co-author of the European Portfolio for StudentTeachers of Languages. He has worked extensively for the British Council and has heldlectures and workshops for teachers in a wide variety of countries. He is the author ofschool textbooks and reference grammars. His main academic interest is the theory andpractice of pedagogical grammar.
References
Bagaric, V. 2011. The role of the EPOSTL in the evaluation and development of teachereducation programmes in Croatia. In Using the European Portfolio for Student Teachersof Languages, ed. D. Newby, A.-B. Fenner and B. Jones. Strasbourg/Graz: Council ofEurope Publishing.
Boud, D., R. Keogh, and D. Walker. 1987. Promoting reflection in learning. London: KoganPage.
Council of Europe. 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning,teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, Modern Languages Division/Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
EPOSTL � Newby, D., R. Allan, A.-B. Fenner, B. Jones, H. Komorowska, and K. Soghikyan.2007. European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages. Strasbourg: Council ofEurope Publishing.
Fenner, A.-B. 2006. Learner autonomy � One of the most widely touted terms in recentdiscussions of language teaching? In Coherence of principles, cohesion of competences:Exploring theories and designing materials for teacher education, ed. A.-B. Fenner andD. Newby. Graz/Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
Fenner, A.-B. 2011. The EPOSTL as a tool for reflection in three contexts of language teachereducation. In Using the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed.D. Newby, A.-B. Fenner, and B. Jones. StrasbourguGraz: Council of Europe Publishing.
Fenner, A.-B. 2012. The EPOSTL as a tool for reflection. In Insights into the EuropeanPortfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby. Newcastle: CambridgeScholars Publishing.
Grenfell, M., M. Kelly, and D. Jones. 2003. The European language teacher. Berne: Peter Lang.Ingvarsdottir, H. 2011. The EPOSTL in Iceland: Getting the mentors on board. In Using
the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby, A.-B. Fenner, andB. Jones. Strasbourg/Graz: Council of Europe Publishing.
Kelly, M., and M. Grenfell. European profile for language teacher education. A frame ofreference. http://ec.europa.eu/languages/documents/doc489_en.pdf.
Komorowska, H. 2012. Learner autonomy and its implications for the EPOSTL. In Insightsinto the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby. Newcastle:Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Jones, B. 2011. The use of the EPOSTL in a bilateral teacher-education programme. In Usingthe European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby, A.-B. Fenner, andB. Jones. Strasbourg/Graz: Council of Europe Publishing.
Lamb, T., and H. Reinders, ed. 2008. Learner and teacher autonomy: Concepts, realities andresponses. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Makinen, K. 2011. The use of the personal statement. In Using the European Portfolio forStudent Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby, A.-B. Fenner, and B. Jones. Strasbourg/Graz: Council of Europe Publishing.
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 217
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
Mehlmauer-Larcher, B. 2011. Implementing the EPOSTL in the early phase of pre-service EFL teacher education. In Using the European Portfolio for Student Teachers ofLanguages, ed. D. Newby, A.-B. Fenner, and B. Jones. Strasbourg/Graz: Council ofEurope Publishing.
Newby, D., ed. 2012a. Insights into the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages.Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Newby, D. 2012b. The EPOSTL and the Common European Framework of Reference. InInsights into the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby.Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Newby, D., A.-B. Fenner, and B. Jones, eds. 2011. Using the European Portfolio for StudentTeachers of Languages. Strasbourg/Graz: Council of Europe Publishing.
Nihlen, C. 2011. What goes into the EPOSTL dossier and why? In Using the EuropeanPortfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby, A.-B. Fenner, and B. Jones.Strasbourg/Graz: Council of Europe Publishing.
Orlova, N. 2011. Challenges of integrating the EPOSTL into pre-service teacher training.In Using the European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages, ed. D. Newby,A.-B. Fenner, and B. Jones. Strasbourg/Graz: Council of Europe Publishing.
Wallace, M.J. 1991. Training foreign language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Widdowson, H.G. 2003. Expert beyond experience: Notes on the appropriate use of theoryin practice. In Mediating between theory and practice in the context of different learningcultures and languages, ed. D. Newby. Strasbourg: European Centre for ModernLanguages/Council of Europe Press.
218 D. Newby
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Ast
on U
nive
rsity
] at
11:
58 0
3 Se
ptem
ber
2014
