EPTA. Defining Coteaching
A1: Dictionary Definition, Extremes, and the Ideal Definition.
What is Coteaching? The definition of it seems so simple and yet it includes so many complex and potentially sensitive peripheral meanings. Let’s start with the definition, since it’s the easiest thing to go over. For the purposes of this paper and the ensuing discussion, Coteaching will be defined as:
Two teachers teach one class while implementing a variety of different interaction methods.
Maybe that’s not the most accurate definition, but it will suffice for most practical purposes. But the interesting part of analyzing the concept of Coteaching is the potentially dangerous issues hovering around it. Just off the top of my head, let’s explore some of these more sensitive connotations:
One teacher impinging upon another’s territory with their own thoughts, presence, charisma, thereby serving as an impediment to teacher/student communication as well as the teacher’s own confidence.
One teacher dominating the classroom while the other sits quietly in the back.
This can go both ways: Native speaker as walking dictionary and pronunciation producer, or Korean teacher as translator and discipliner
These two definitions show are perhaps the most offending of the possible interactive models between coteachers, and perhaps it’s easy to understand why when we view them upon a “cooperation spectrum”, where one side shows a lopsided relationship, while the opposite side shows a conflict scenario where both teachers attempt to impose their views upon the other. From that perspective, the two possibilities shown above are polar opposites in terms of their cooperation level and are at the extreme end of possible interactions. Extremes usually beget harsh reactions and hurt feelings, and Coteaching is no different in this regard.
How, then, should we define a productive Coteaching experience. I’m sure everyone has a different definition for this, and in terms of discussion it would be great to get everyone’s idea on the table, but for the purposes of this paper I will define productive coteaching as a relationship where the main teacher and the coteacher trust each other and are equally active in instruction, monitoring, assisting and explaining without points of conflict or ego-battles. I believe Korean coteachers shouldn’t try to “convert” a class over with their Korean and that the Korean language should be a powerful tool in helping understand the English. I also think Korean teachers should try to “boast” their English speaking abilities as much as possible in class while not being too afraid of errors or the judgment of students after those errors. In fact, I feel like pronunciation as a whole should be de-emphasized in medium to low level classes for everyone, and even though it may be impossible to isolate the problem of pronunciation when attempting to understand spoken Korean-accent English, there should be a large effort in making the “pronunciation environment” comfortable by both coteacher and teacher.
That would be the ideal. However, we have to balance the ideal with the practical, even after eliminating the all-too-occurring incidents of the extremes listed several paragraphs above…
A2. How practicality affects our view of Coteaching
The practical reality behind Coteaching is that it creates a conspicuous divide, especially pronunciation wise, between the quality of English from the Native speaker and the Korean teacher. Judgments run rampant from the all-attentive ears of our students. The Korean teacher continuously feels pressure to “prove” not only their English, but in many aspects their self-worth. After all, being a Korean English teacher is a respectable and necessary position in today’s academic environment in Korea, and the Korean teacher benefits greatly in terms of social status and job security solely through their perceived level of English skill. Plus, the time investment of years of studying in high school, universities, academies, and privately for TOEFL/TOEIC/TESOL exams is put to the stake. That means that, especially in Korea’s subtle and contextual society, a Korean teacher risks respect, credibility, his/her sense of self-worth, and in extreme scenarios his/her job by speaking English with the Native Teacher.
Thus when practical eyes view Coteaching, the “ideal” definition never comes to fruition simply because of cost/benefit analysis by the Korean teacher. If the Korean teacher has a heavy Korean accent, he/she faces the prodigious cost of a huge risk in credibility when being an active participant. Yet in terms of benefit, he/she gains very little by participating, with the greatest being an unnecessary reaffirmation of his/her position as an English teacher. With the cost outweighing the benefit by such a large margin, it’s easy to see why many Korean English teachers decline to make the Coteaching experience a more interactive and communal one.
Once we put on our “practicality-shaded” glasses and view Coteaching again, we can define Coteaching as:
A nice idea, but a huge risk for Korean teachers
A reminder of pronunciation deficiencies (where they are actually present)
A working relationship that allows a relatively unqualified person who just happened to be lucky being born in an English speaking country to have more credibility than a teacher who painfully had to pass the nationwide Teacher exam as well as some combination of TOEIC, TOEFL and TESOL. (This is an extreme definition, but knowing my own jealous nature I wouldn’t be surprised if there weren’t more Korean teachers who felt this way.)
B. OK that sucks. Now what?
What we need to do, then, is to create a coteaching environment that makes our coteachers feel comfortable and lowers their affective barrier! Isn’t that almost hilarious? We spend so much time worrying about the affective filter of our students, how we can be more humanistic in our teaching and make them feel comfortable to share their efforts with us. Yet, if I as an English teacher wants to work in a Coteaching environment where my teacher is A.) not deadweight, and B.) not trying to fight me for dominance, then I need to make sure my teacher feels comfortable to participate in the Coteaching without feeling threatened.
Cool story bro, but how? There are a couples avenues which immediately jump to mind in making our coteachers more comfortable and hopefully, more active in participating with us: 1.) De-emphasize pronunciation as the standard to which language proficiency is assessed, 2.) Determine “roles” for our coteachers that are manageable, significant and expandable if they so desire.
B1: De-emphasizing pronunciation.
Any classes below the highest level (“Apple” classes) need to immediately de-emphasize pronunciation as an important part of English Conversation. This might seem counterproductive but in actuality it will help our students and Coteachers feel less burdened – and consequently, less hindered – by pronunciation in their quest to learn English. Those of you who subscribe to an interlanguage continuum theory know that perfect pronunciation comes along the way and towards the end and that it comes gradually as components of the L1 mix with the L2 and eventually are replaced. Creating an environment that de-emphasizes “proper” pronunciation also gives credence to English as Lingua Franca (World Language) where the number of non-native English speakers currently outnumbers native speakers. Most of the non-native speakers have non-native accents and yet are able to communicate with each other proficiently through English. Perhaps it is our own bias and a sense of possession of the language that causes us to be inflexible in deciphering accents. Whatever the case may be, a scenario where a student is too shy to produce original language because he/she is afraid of pronunciation errors is far more obstructive than a student who practices languages confidently with pronunciation errors. Hopefully, and according to some experts, the pronunciation will come later.
B2: Establishing Clear and Attainable Functions for Coteachers
Fact: These classes are ours and the onus of lesson planning lies on us. This is something we should all accept, and the dream scenario of a teacher co-planning and perhaps ameliorating our difficulties with lesson planning should be pretty much erased. They’re busy with their own lesson plans and their own lives. We shouldn’t expect them to babysit us with our lesson plans.
However, another fact is that if co-teachers increase their participation rate in our class, it lessens the burden and stress for Native teachers within the classroom. This is always good. So how do we get them to be more active? We give them small, manageable and yet significant roles in our classes that best utilizes their skill-set of English knowledge and Korean fluency. For example, we can give them practicable roles in any dialogues we intend to use. Or we can have them be in charge of icebreakers: give teachers a ten minute slot every two weeks where they can use English-related icebreakers that practices the target language.
But the place where I feel Coteaching can be most useful is in giving students greater opportunities to share feedback in a large classroom. With a class of 30 kids, it’s impossible to accurately analyze the language production being made. Asking students to share their responses is great, but time factors make it difficult for a significant portion of students who, while feigning non-desire, actually want to have their voices and ideas heard.
This is not as much of a problem with smaller classes. Our Apple classes currently hold about 15 kids, and I think a 15 to 1 student/teacher ratio is an achievable and adequate ratio for student feedback opportunities. However, in Banana classes where it is arguably more important that lesser-performing students have the opportunity to share their language production for analysis, we currently have a 30 to 1 ratio. Since we are using a Coteaching method, I find it strongly favorable for the second teacher to evaluate language production by taking in feedback through a Parallel teaching model.
This brings in itself many questions. A parallel class will require a 50/50 student division in separate areas of the classroom, which leads us to our first question: is there sufficient space in our classrooms to create such a separation? Also, how do we divide the students? Do they sit or stand? Should we switch it up or not? Finally, how much preparation does the coteacher to be able to fulfill this task?
These are answers that will not come easily and cannot come alone; but with the help of our coteachers a valuable consensus can be reached. By implementing the Parallel teaching method and getting our Coteachers active, we give students language production opportunities that will be of great benefit in their learning.
C. Conclusion.
Yeah that’s about it. Affective filter doesn’t just affect our students but also our coteachers. They face a huge risk in being in a classroom with us. Our jobs can be easier if we can get them to be more active. We can do that by de-emphasizing pronunciation in lower level classes and giving them clear and manageable roles in our class. And now I’m going to home wtf am I doing at school at 8pm writing this paper for.
