STUDENT TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ABOUT COMMUNICATIVE

LANGUAGE TEACHING METHODS

LINDSAY MILLER

City University of Hong Kong

DEBORAH ALDRED
Sheffield University

Abstract

This paper presents some aspects of student teachers’ perceptions

about the suitability and usability of communicative language teaching
methods (CLTM) in the language classrooms of Hong Kong. Teacher
education around the world emphasises a move towards more
communicative teaching methods with interactive student-centred
learning encouraged. But for student teachers who have grown up in
cultures which often have teacher-centred classrooms, examination
and curriculum constraints, and large classes, there is often a mismatch
between theoretical methods and reality.

The paper describes how a research initiative used to gain an

understanding of some of the student teachers’ perceptions of CLTM
became incorporated in an awareness raising exercise in the
methodology course. This move was an attempt to make the course
more relevant for the local student teachers involved and provide more

support in training them for the classroom. Ultimately it is hoped

that such initiatives will encourage student teachers to have more
positive attitudes to communicative teaching methods.

Introduction

Richards and Lockhart (1994) describe the many factors which influence
teachers’ development of their beliefs and attitudes towards teaching. One of
these factors is attendance at teacher education courses. However, what student
teachers learn about in their pre-service education frequently has to compete
with other factors which make up their beliefs system, for example, their own
experience as language learners and established practice within education
systems. As Richards and Lockhart illustrate, it is often difficult to know what
teachers’ beliefs about language learning are because of these competing factors.

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 According and Hewson (1989), one way to find out what
to Hewson
teachers believe is to talk to them, to &dquo;analyse their conversations through
discussions&dquo;. Allowing teachers and/or students to talk about their beliefs
and attitudes about language education enriches our insights into the process
of language learning and teaching. Studies over the past fifteen years have
indicated that what one party thinks about language education is often not
shared by other stakeholders. For example, Brindely (1984) interviewed
teachers and students in a language school in Australia. The teachers were
using a communicative approach in their classes and their comments about
how they view language learning are consistent with using the CLTM. For
example:
-

Learning consists of acquiring principles through encountering

experiences.
-

The teacher is a resource person who provides language input for the
learner to work on.

Language data is to be found everywhere - in the community, and

in the media as well as in textbooks. (p97)

The students of these teachers, on the other hand, held very different views
about their learning, for example:

I just want a program so I know what I have to learn. They’re the

teachers. They know their jobs.

-
Without grammar you can’t learn the language. _

-
I want something I can take home and study. We do a lot of speaking
but we never see it written down.
(Brindley 1984:96)
Other studies investigating teachers’ and students’ perceptions about the
teaching and learning environment yield results similar to Brindley (cf.
Willing 1988, and Nunan 1988). These studies reveal that there are clear
mismatches between teachers’ and learners’ beliefs about language learning.
They also provide insights which demonstrate a little of the complexity in
trying to define the concept of classroom roles for learners and teachers.
Problems can therefore be predicted when there is a mismatch between

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

perceptions and expectations of roles and actuality (Tarone and Yule
1989:10).

Over time many different approaches to teaching have emerged and it

is suggested that methodologies can be placed on a cline stretching from
teacher-centred to learner-centred, Figure 1. Many teacher education courses
advocate a move towards learner-centred approaches with the use of more
communicative teaching methods.

Figure 1: Teaching Methodology Cline

These shifts between methodologies require changes in roles for both

students and teachers and these changes are hard to effect. Eighteen years
ago in Hong Kong there was an official revision of the English language
teaching method from ’form’ to ’function’ with the introduction of
communicative language teaching (CLT) (Curriculum Development
Committee 1981:13-14). However, Evans (1996) states that since its
introduction into classrooms in the late 1980’s, CLT has had little impact on
the way English is taught. He suggests that the lack of CLT methods in
schools can be attributed to two factors. These are

~
the examination syllabus which encourages many of the traditional
classroom practices;
~
textbooks which are influenced by the public examination and teacher’s
lack of specialist training. This has resulted in textbooks which are
somewhat traditional, examination-oriented and ‘teacher-proof’ .

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 Tomlison (I988:105) further suggested that
.
a teacher committed to introducing CLT in a conservative school in Hong
Kong risks alienating his/her students’ colleagues and principal, as it
encourages noise, initiative, and disorder, which conflicts with the school,
the textbooks and the examination.

If student teachers’ are to be able to adopt a specific methodology teacher

educators have two main responsibilities. The first is to know as much as
possible about the student teachers’ beliefs about language education. This
will allow teacher educators to approach discussions about methodology from
a similar perspective as the student teachers. The second is to ensure that

appropriate and adequate support is provided to these pre-service language

teachers so that they can adopt the roles required of them when teaching
in a communicative way.

This paper presents the findings of a study which investigates student

teachers’ beliefs and perceptions about CLT methods in the Hong Kong
teaching/learning context. It then continues by showing how the initial data
collection and the results of the data collection were incorporated into the
methodology course itself. The purpose of this was to raise the student
teachers’ awareness of the issues involved in using a ’new methodology’
and to attempt to develop a methodology course which would accommodate
the student teachers’ beliefs and perceptions.

Approaches to Teacher Education

The issues raised in this paper are situated in what Holliday (1994:1)
refers to as &dquo;... the methodology for doing English language education&dquo;, that
is, teacher education. The approach taken to most teacher education courses
is largely prescriptive. A teacher educator passes on knowledge about the
theories and practices of language education to students who eventually have
to assimilate and align them with their own beliefs before incorporating them
into their teaching. However, as Holliday (1994:3) says, &dquo;... the literature
is full of models and checklists about now to do and WHAT to do; but hardly
anywhere is there advice on what we need to know about people, and how
we can find this out.&dquo;

In a teacher education context in which the teacher educator is from a

different background to the student trainees it becomes crucial that the teacher

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 educator has some way of gaining access to the student teachers’ ways of
thinking and doing things, and beliefs about methodologies and contexts.
This will assist the educator to tailor the methods course appropriately and
to empathise with the problems which student teachers have in transferring
theory to reality within specific contexts.
Gaining insights into a different cultural context can be done in several
ways, e.g. review the literature, if any, about the context; conduct
questionnaire surveys; talk with practising teachers; and observe lessons
being taught. However, one inherent difficulty in trying to find out about
a cultural context is that the responses may not reflect the reality. The literature

may be dated or portray the situation from a very different perspective from
what the teacher educator needs to know; questionnaire surveys may yield
only part of the picture and unless they are conducted with a large sample
size and are carefully designed and they can be unreliable; teachers may say
one thing to an ’expert’ but practise something very different; lessons which
are observed may be staged and ’unrealistic’. Therefore, in an attempt to
understand the context in which language education exists, natural methods
of data collection must be attempted. In this paper one of these was used,
the focus group. Groups of student teachers were asked to discuss issues
about the use of CLT methods. These discussions were recorded and then
analysed.

Methodology

Participants

The participants in this study were 24 second-year BA TESL students,

aged between 20 to 22 years old, most of whom had entered the course directly
from secondary school. In their first-year of study these student teachers
undertook mostly proficiency language courses with some theoretical input.
In their second and third-year the focus changed and their studies oriented
them more towards the theory of TESL and applied linguistics.
-

The Courses

Data was collected during two courses: Special Topic in Methodology

in year two of the degree programme, and Teaching Speaking Skills, in year
three. Both courses use CLT as the focus methodology, that is, the
methodology in which we frame the course content.

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 The overall aims of the courses are, in the first, to examine the practicality
of using CLT methodology in general and, in the second, how to promote oral
skill development in classes in Hong Kong. There are three objectives for the
courses: to enable the students to understand both the theoretical and

pedagogical principles underlying the method used; to assess the relevance

of using different teaching techniques in teaching English in Hong Kong; and
how to use the methods effectively.

The tutor variety of presentation techniques: lecture delivery,

uses a

demonstration, quiz, viewing of the technique, and discussion with

video
students about their own experiences of being learners of English in a Hong
Kong secondary school. This combination of explanation and discussion of
personal experiences grounds theory of the method firmly in the classroom.
the

Data Collection Method

As part of a research project investigating student teachers’ perceptions

of roles in language classrooms and communicative language teaching, students
were given a set of questions to look at and consider before meeting to discuss
them (see Appendix 1). The questions were generated from a review of the
literature and our insights from discussions with the student teachers in previous
tutorials. By having the student teachers discuss these questions we hoped to
gain insights into the perceptions they had about comrnunicative language
teaching. The students met in a dividable video-lab and were asked to group
themselves into four focus groups. The groups were then asked to consider
the questions they had been given and have a general discussion about issues
they wished to raise from the questions or from their experiences of teaching
observation. Each group’s discussion lasted one hour and was videotaped. After
the focus group session, each video was transcribed and the data analysed by
both researchers first individually, then together. This allowed the researchers
to identify the main areas of discussion and build up a framework of student
teachers’ perceptions. Because of the guided questions, each group tended to
focus on similar areas in their discussions. This is in keeping with the principle
of focus groups to &dquo;...collect qualitative data from a focussed discussion&dquo;
(Krueger 1994).
Focus Group Data
In this section the main points from the student teachers’ focus group
discussions are reported. The main points in their discussions can be grouped
into three categories:

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 -

Chinese culture and the idea of the traditional role for learners and
teachers in the classroom ,

Pedagogical differences when teaching English and Chinese

languages
-

Appropriateness of CLT methods and problems in using CLT methods

in Hong Kong classrooms

There four focus groups. The direct quotations listed under the
were

categories below are representative samples of the views constantly expressed

by all members in all focus groups. The group number precedes the quotation.
Each category is followed by a brief discussion of the points raised.

Chinese Culture and the Idea of the Traditional Role for Learners and
Teachers in the Classroom.

Perceptions of roles and the influence these have on classroom behaviour

are an important aspect to consider when introducing any ’new’ teaching
practice. The following excerpts from the discussion give some insights
to the beliefs the student teachers have regarding the relationship between
Chinese culture and student and teachers’ roles.

.
perceptions of students’ roles
Gl : The role of the learners should be active, but in HK it is the tradition
that Chinese culture does not allow them to do this... Chinese culture
-
avoid making mistakes, keep silent, no-one students likes to raise
their hands.

_
G2: In Chinese culture students should be obedient, quiet, they should
not ask questions. This is the Chinese way. Usually passive, seldom
ask questions.

G3: Not very communicative, spoon-feeding teaching so the role of

the learner is passive. Sit there to learn and listen attentively. During
the Chinese lessons the students can understand more, but they will
still not want to ask questions or be actively involved in activity.

G4: They are more passive in English than Chinese.

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 .
perceptions of teachers’ roles
G2: The teacher is superior... whereas in western culture the gap
between teacher and student is smaller.

G3: The teacher hates to be challenged. The teacher must be respected

and whatever he thinks is correct.

G4: The teacher is the boss.

.
cultural stereotyping
Gl: Hong Kong students are affected by the Hong Kong tradition. In
Chinese culture you should avoid making mistakes, so students keep
silent and no one student would like to raise their hand, no need to use
initiative, the teacher must call out names. This is because students
may feel that a student [who answers freely may] wants to show off.
From a psychological point of view there is shared responsibility, ’why
should I answer for the class?’

G2: Students are treated as naughty if they speak out and ask questions
all the time.

G3: The role of the learners should be active, but in Hong Kong it
is the tradition that the Chinese culture does not allow them to do
this. They don’t like to be active because it’s the tradition.

G4: CTL tries to get students involved and challenges them but Chinese
culture prepares students to just receive what you teach them but not
to challenge and ask questions. This may be a conflict between CLTM
and Chinese culture.

.
habit forming behaviour

G 1.’ ...from primary 1 to form 7 no one student would like to raise

their hand to answer a question. They only answer if the teacher calls
their name. They wait for the teacher to ask their name, it’s just a
habit.

G2: In Chinese lessons the students are more willing to talk, not tied

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 by lack of vocabulary but it depends on the activities. If they can use
their mother tongue in English [lessons] they will be more involved.

G4: Students’ behaviour is that [they] don’t want to speak as others

may think it is showing off.

These comments suggest that for all the student teachers, school pupils
may have ingrained perceptions which should be (but seldom are) considered
when incorporating interactive communicative teaching into lessons. From
the discussions all the student teachers appear to agree in their beliefs that
Hong Kong learners are passive, that this is the ’Chinese way’ and that
individuals do not want to accept responsibility for answering for the group.
This presents problems when expecting learners to respond to open questions
in class and has to be overcome by the use of direct questioning with names.
The aspects of cultural stereotyping complicate the issue further with the
problem that even if a teacher uses a name, the student teachers believe that
learners do not want to answer as they do not wish to make a mistake, or
be seen to be showing off (see Wong 1984).

The role of the teacher is described the student teachers as being

by
dominant, and always right. S/he tries being discovered if wrong.
to avoid
They see these as the behavioural expectations which the learners have for
the teacher. This would suggest that for student teachers the changing of
any of their roles is complex as these roles are interconnected with socio-
cultural behavioural rules and expectations which underlie any social ethnic
group.

Pedagogical Differences when Teaching English and Chinese Languages

Another area of interest for teacher educators is that of the pedagogical
differences between teaching English and Chinese languages. It is important
that student teachers are aware that learners may have certain expectations
about the way to learn a language, which are transferred from Chinese to
English language learning. The comments below can help the teacher educator
understand some of these differences.

.
learning activities

Gl: In Chinese lessans ... there is no need to design activities, it is

based on reading, and grammar, [the teacher] seldom checks

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 discussion and speaking. Lessons are divided chapter by chapter.
[Teacher’s] role is always dominant.
In English Language lessons most teachers prefer to teach grammar
...

in the syllabus rather than fluency. They teach only the language
structure not the culture. Lessons are divided by skills, listening,
vocabulary, etc.

G4: The way we learn Chinese conflicts with CLTM.

.
ethnic solidarity

G.l: In Chinese lessons ... Teachers will speak more, closer to the
students, more friendly and more willing to respond...
.
cultural issues

G3: They teach only the language structure not the [British, American,
Australian] culture.

Gl: They can deal with emotional problems and can teach culture
and the language.
.
learner centred activities and students’ concerns

Gl: teachers seldom use a learner-centred approach because it is

...

difficult to control the students especially in large classes.

Gl: ... [students are] just concerned about examination, they never
think about the Hong Kong education system, syllabus, teaching
approach. We never think about CLT before we study this course.
Role-plays and debates are not seen as exam oriented because the
learning focus is not identified.
G2: [a learner-centred approach] will sometimes create chaos -
students need to behave well but it is the dream of students to make
jokes and have fun so when they have the chance they exert the fun
to the maximum. If the teacher cannot control the class well then it
creates chaos.

G2: If students can speak in Cantonese they say more. They are less

10

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 willing because of their ability in English. The teacher is often just
an interpreter. The teacher is dominant and then the students are

suppressed. They may be treated as naughty if they speak out and

ask questions all the time. The good students are the customers and
the poor students are just transparent.

G3: It is a new method and so they are not trained in this method.
Some students think that the teacher is lazy and not prepared if students
are asked to ’discuss’. The teacher should give input, be a resource,
that’s why they (students) like the traditional methods.

G3: The role of the learners should be active, but in Hong Kong it is
tradition that the Chinese culture does not allow them to do this. They
don’t like to be active because it’s the tradition.

G4: CLTM slows down pace of learning, teacher can’t spend time
on CLTM as they have the pressure of exams.

These pedagogicalissues reflect differences in the way the material is

organised forlessons, the aims and objectives of learning, the type of
activities/tasks and classroom organisation. Underlying these issues are
concerns which learners have about the activities, i.e. what they perceive
as relevant to their needs, and their priorities (exams); the role of the teacher;
and the amount of training that teachers have in ’new methodologies’. An
outcome from this is that teacher educators should encourage the student
teachers to be able to fully assess the aims of the activity which they are
presenting. They must then be able to relay this purpose to the learners so
that the learners can feel it has meaning and relevance to their needs and
priorities. In addition to this, it is important that student teachers are able
to give the input which is needed to fully exploit and develop communicative
tasks. This will enable learners to have sufficient language in order to achieve
objectives and have confidence in the methodology.

Appropriateness of CLT Methods and Problems in Using CLT Methods

in the HK Context

During their focus group session, student teachers were asked to discuss
theappropriateness of communicative teaching methodology in the Hong
Kong context and any problems they thought they would have using CLT.
From the data all four groups stated only four reasons why they thought

11

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 communicative language teaching methodologies were appropriate for the
HK context. These were that:

1. Students can learn English in a more active way.

2. It is especially good for the oral component of examination.

3. It improves the atmosphere in the classroom.

4. Teachers can raise the interest of the students, then most will participate,
and they do not want to be bored.

In contrast to these four positive attributes of CLT methods, once again,

all four groups stated the 17 problems listed below. These were:

1. Class sizes are too big and classroom sizes are too small.

2. A lack of language support for activities (students need a lot of guidance

in order to do the activity).

3. It is difficult to use CLT to teach grammar.

4. It slows down the pace of learning in the classroom

5. Teachers do not have the time to prepare, as CLT requires a lot of

preparation.
6. It depends on the policy of the school whether CLT can be used.

7. CLT needs a lot of teacher education.

8. It is a controversial issue within the schools as to its effectiveness.

9. An exam system cannot use CLT. The curriculum matches the

examination orientation, but CLT does not fit this.

10. Students only want to learn how to pass the test

11. Most of the students’ language proficiency is too low.

12

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

12. Students can make a lot of mistakes.

13. May be the schools will not allow pair work as it is too noisy.
14. It can work especially if there is a foreign teacher.

15. It is heavy on resources.

16. It needs the support of the whole school.

17. Students may think the teacher is lazy if the teacher just asks them to
discuss.

There are several points of interest within this group of reasons why
communicative language teaching methods are difficult to use in Hong Kong
schools. These range from classroom organisational issues, school
management, teacher education, the exam priority of the education system,
to beliefs about learning and roles.

A Development

Originally the aims of the research would have been complete after the
collection and analysis of the student teachers perceptions of communicative
teaching methods. However, in the collection of subsequent assignments it
was noted that the student teachers had evaluated communicative teaching
activities in textbooks positively while criticising activities which had a more
traditional orientation. This led the teacher educators to set up a second round
of focus groups in order to investigate whether the student teachers
perceptions of communicative teaching methods had in fact changed. In
addition to completing the courses the student teachers at this point had
undertaken three weeks of teaching practice. The follow up focus group
session was set up as the first with student teachers again being given a set
of questions (see Appendix 2) to consider before meeting

Follow Up Focus Group Data

In the follow up focus group session many of the student teachers talked
about the teaching environment - large classes, outside noise, naughty pupils.
However, when discussing the methods they used to teach, all of them reported

13

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 using some form of CLT: e.g. pair work, group work, information gap activities,
role-play, games, dialogue building, student initiated talk. The student teachers
were divided about the success of the activities, but as was pointed out several

times, this was the first time many of the pupils had experienced this type of
teaching.
After initial discussion of the questions the student teachers were then given
the list of statements which had been generated from the first focus group
sessions although the student teachers were not aware where the statements
had come from. They were asked to individually tick or cross if they agreed or
disagreed with the statements in Table 1. Eighteen of the original twenty-four
students completed this task and the results of their responses can be seen below.

Table 1: Appropriateness of CLT methods and problems in using CLT

methods in the HK context

14

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 As can be seen from the table, the students were still firmly behind the
positive statements regarding the appropriateness of CLT in the Hong Kong
context. What is surprising, though, is the shift in perceptions regarding the
negative statements. Some of the statements are still supported by the student
teachers as being a problem for them in using CLT methods, for example,
students need a lot of guidance in order to complete a task; teachers do not

15

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 have enough time to prepare for using CLT in class; CLT needs a lot of training.
However, other statements were now not supported so fully, for example,
class sizes are too big for CLT; CLT slows down the pace of a lesson; students
make a lot of mistakes when using CLT; and only foreign teachers can use
CLT.

Whilst the two sets of data were collected by different methods due to
the developmental nature of the research, it is argued that the data does
demonstrate changes in beliefs and perceptions. The original data was
collected from the group discussions in which all members of each group
had supported the statements in Table 1. From the student teachers
assignments it was evident that some had changed their perceptions of
communicative teaching language methods. In order to investigate how many
statements were now supported an individual questionnaire of the statements
in Table 1 was given. Considering that in the first data collection all students
had supported the statements either explicitly or tacitly (hence the benefit
of videotaped focus groups, the researcher can see nods and smiles of
agreement), the final questionnaire shows many individual changes.

Discussion

A New Approach
By a process of using naturalistic research methods to investigate student
teachers’ perceptions of communicative teaching methods, that is focus groups,
an awareness raising exercise was incorporated into a course. By talking about
their beliefs and perceptions, student teachers were able to situate their training
within their own framework about language education, and they were then
able to rationalise what they are attempting to do in the language classroom.
This process also gives the teacher educators an insight into the student teachers’
viewpoints. As a result of the naturalistic method used in the study, the student
teachers were able to critically evaluate textbooks, use communicative teaching
methods in the classroom and then reflect critically on their original perceptions.
This forms process of Discussion, Evaluation, and Reflection. The process
a
was Discussion about held beliefs and perceptions; Evaluation of learning
activities and their appropriateness to the Hong Kong context; Reflection on
beliefs and perceptions after a period of teaching practice in which CLT methods
were used.

16

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 As Richards and Lockhart (1994:2) state, critical reflection on one’s
teaching practice: &dquo;... helps achieve a better understanding of one’s own
assumptions about teaching as well as one’s own teaching practices; it can
lead to a richer conceptualisation of teaching and a better understanding of
teaching and learning processes; and it can serve as a basis for self-evaluation
and is therefore an important component of professional development.&dquo; The
natural approach used in the study presented in this paper, for talking about
and reflecting on issues of methodology, proved valuable for both the student
teachers and the teacher educators. It is believed that such a process should
be an integral part of all teacher education courses.

Conclusion

Various writers have already made teacher educators aware of the need
to tailor pedagogy to the local contexts (see Holliday 1994; Kramsch and
Sullivan 1996; and Ellis 1996). As teacher educators it is our responsibility
to ensure that the student teachers have knowledge about teaching methods.
However, teacher educators also have to be aware of the conditions under
which student teachers will eventually work and adapt courses to suit the
needs of the local culture. The study presented here has revealed a wealth
of information for both student teachers and their teacher educators. By the
process of qualitative data collection and analysis, via focus groups, both
parties have become better informed about the beliefs and perceptions of
the student teachers, and because of the information received future
methodology courses can be tailored to suit some of these beliefs and
perceptions. It is believed that the process of discussion, evaluation and
reflection has to be built into teacher education programmes and that it should
not be seen as an adjunct to such courses but an integral part of them.

References

Aldred, D. E. 1996. What are the Implications of Students’ Perceptions of

Role for the English Language Classroom?’ Conference paper. RELC

Singapore

Brindely, G. P. 1984. Needs Analysis and Objective Setting in the Adult

Migrant Education Program. Australia: AMES.

17

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 Curriculum Development Committee 1981. English (Primary 1-6). Hong
Kong: Government Printer.

Ellis, G. 1996. How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach

ELT Journal. 50(3): 213-218.

Evans, S. 1996. The context of English language education: The case of Hong
Kong RELC Journal, 27(2): 30-55.

Hewson, P.W., and Hewson, M.G. 1989. Analysis and use oftask for
a

identifying conceptions of teaching science. Journal of Education

for Teaching 15:3. 191-209.

Holliday, A. 1994. Appropriate Methodology and Social Context.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Johnson, R. and Lee, P. 1987. Modes of instruction: Teaching strategies

and student responses. Language education in Hong Kong. Edited
by R. Lord and H. Cheng. 99-122. Hong Kong: Chinese University
Press.

Kramsch, C. and Sullivan, P. 1996. Appropriate pedagogy. ELT Journal,

50:3. 199-211.

Krueger, R. A. 1994. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research.

London: Sage.

Lai, M-L 1996. A Reality Shock - Teaching English Through English or

Chinese? Education Journal 24: 2. 173-190.

Nunan, D. 1988. The Learner-Centred Curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Richards, J. C. and Lockhart, C. 1994. Reflective Teaching in Second

Language Classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Tarone, E. and Yule, G. 1989. Focus on the language learner:

approaches
to identifying and meeting the needs of second language learners.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

18

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

Tomlison, B. 1988. Conflicts in TEFL: Reasons for failure in secondary
schools. Hong Kong Institute of Language in Education Journal 4:
103-110.

Willing, K. 1988. Learning Styles in Adult Migrant Education. Sydney:

NCELTR, Macquarie University.

Wong, C. 1984. Sociological factors counteract the instructional efforts of

teaching through English in Hong Kong. University of Washington
Unpublished MSc Thesis.

19

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 Appendices

Appendix 1: Focus Groups Questions (First round)

Please read over the following questions and be prepared to discuss them
at our next meeting

20

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 21

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016

 Appendix 2: Focus Groups Questions (Second round)
Please think about your teaching practice experience and the questions below,
and be prepared to talk about these at our next meeting.

1. Describe your experience of practice teaching.

2. What worked well in your class?

3. What did not work well in your class?

4. Describe the different roles you took on while teaching.
5. How appropriate do you feel communicative language teaching (CLT)
methods are in HK classrooms? Did you use CLT methods?

6. How did your students react to your use of CLT methods?

Bio data

Lindsay Miller is an Associate Professor in the English Department at City

University of Hong Kong. He teaches methodology on BA and MA TESL
courses. His recent publications include Establishing Self-Access: From

Theory to Practice (with D. Gardner) Cambridge University Press.

Deborah Aldred has taught in the Far East for 12 years. She is currently
completing her PhD at Glasgow University and is a Senior Teaching Fellow
in the Education Department at Sheffield University.

22

Downloaded from rel.sagepub.com at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on May 11, 2016