When asked about the biggest influence on their teaching style, the majority indi- cated that they had been influenced by the way they were taught by at university or at school, as illustrated in Figure 5.1. Eleven teachers reported that they were influenced by the teaching approach of their colleagues in the same school. When interviewed about this finding, two teachers who filled the questionnaire said that ‘shadowing their
P a g e| 111 colleagues’ classes’ inspired them to adopt similar teaching techniques and strategies. However, the influence of pre-service training on their pedagogic practices remained the most influential factor.
Nonetheless, a couple of respondents choose to add their own answers regarding what informed and influenced their teaching methods. For example, one teacher wrote on her questionnaire that she had developed ‘her own way of teaching to allow most of students to understand what [she] explains’. This notion was further elaborated on by one of the interviewees, who stated that she came up with her current ‘teaching meth- ods as a result of the training that was provided to her when she was in Kuwait’ (Item13 Respondent, my translation).
Figure 5.1 Q1: Biggest influence on teaching
style Figure
5.2 Q8: Teaching in the same way taught by
However, these results were at odds with the answers of another tactically-designed question that asked whether teachers followed the same teaching approach they were subjected to as students. As shown in Figure 5.2, the majority of teachers replied that they did not follow the same teaching methods they were taught by.
One possible interpretation of such inconsistency between the two items is that teach- ers may have reflected on their recent ELT training which the ministry provided. It just so happened that the distribution of the questionnaire synchronized with a round of training workshops on the new curriculum provided by the MOE. It seems that teach-
0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00% Way taught at school Way taught at university Teachers in school Other 91% 9% No Yes
P a g e| 112 ers do not necessarily ‘use’ what they are/were ‘influenced’ by. Teachers’ perceptions of teaching and learning are by nature ‘influenced’ and shaped by their past experienc- es, but they could be modified by professional training. Those two items suggest there is a difference between teacher perceptions and actual practices, a finding supported by the classroom observations and the interviews conducted with observed teachers. Another mismatch between what teachers perceived and what they practised is exem- plified in item four of the questionnaire which aimed to explore how teachers felt when students talk to each other on classroom tasks. The results show that most teachers ‘feel pleased’ when students talk to each other while doing their tasks (see Q4, Appendix A). However, three teachers, females, stated that they often lost control of the classroom when/ if students talked to each other and they felt the class was ‘un- disciplined’ (see Figure 5.3). One possible explanation for this has to do with the role that teachers are expected to play in the classroom and on the type of task involved. Such views were expressed by several of the interviewed teachers who said that they would feel angry if students speak to each other without permission.
Figure 5.3 Q4: Feelings when Students talk to each other on tasks. e.g. 16 = number of
respondents
Contrary to the above view, classroom observation suggested that teachers were visi- bly not ‘pleased’ to see students talking to each other during the class. In reality, teachers played an authoritarian role determining when students could speak or should
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
P a g e| 113 keep silent (see for example sections 6.2.7 and 6.3.1). Students in turn complied with these rules unquestioningly.
In response to a question about the advantages/disadvantages of student group work, the majority of teacher responses (42.42%) considered ‘noisiness’ as the main disad- vantage. The same opinion was shared by the observed teachers who emphasised that they needed the class to be quiet in order to achieve their lesson goals. Obviously, this result does not correspond with the item that asked ‘how do you feel when/if the stu- dents talk to each other about their classroom tasks in the lesson?’ whose response shows that teachers felt ‘pleased’ when students work in groups.
The second reported disadvantage with group work had to do with students ‘copying’ each other’s work. Only one teacher thought that an advantage of group work was that teachers did not have to do all the talking inside the classroom.
Figure 5.4 Q6: Disadvantage of student
group work
Figure 5.5 Q7: Advantage of group work
Question seven asked about the advantages of group work. As shown in Figure 5.5, 17 teachers (60 %) thought that group work could be a positive experience, as students can learn from each other and develop better language skills. Teachers also acknowl- edged that group work could be enjoyable with students ‘exploring a new territory of learning’ as one teacher put it (Item7 Respondent).
27.27 18.18 6.06 42.42 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 talking less develop L skill enjoy peer learning
P a g e| 114 Because pair-work is closely linked with group work, teachers were asked about how they viewed its use inside the classroom. Despite the complete absence of such tech- niques in the observed classrooms, the majority of teachers stated that pair-work was not a waste of time as illustrated in Figure 5.6. However, not all of the teachers sub- scribed to the idea that pair-work was not a waste of time. For example, only 4 (11 %) of the interviewed teachers agreed that within the Syrian classroom context paired work is not an effective teaching strategy. One teacher stated, ‘our students cannot even answer a simple question like ‘what does he look like?’. He continued that ‘it will be too ambitious to ask students to get into pairs to work on a classroom activity as this falls beyond their capabilities’ (Item7 Respondent, my translation).
Figure 5.6 Q13: Pair-work in classroom is a waste of time
A degree of uncertainty could be traced among some of the interviewed teachers, who questioned the practicality and usability of such teaching techniques in contexts where students have always been asked to follow instructions, memorize rules, and recite what has been taught to them. It was feared that they would waste this time by chat- ting, gossiping, laughing, or even keeping silent, and thereby leaving less time to cov- er the curriculum. One teacher commented that he once wanted his students to work in pairs. So, he asked them to turn to the person next to them and spend some time talk- ing about the given task. What he ended up with, he said, was students looking at each other laughing or wondering what to say to each other (Item7 Respondent, my transla-
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
P a g e| 115 tion). What these two questions show is the fragility of the concept of group work in teachers’ minds.