Beyond the practicum experience

Jessica Williams

The practicum is an important part of most TESL programmes; however, many

novice teachers seek practical experiences beyond the practicum as part of their
preparation for entering the profession. Collaborative projects between
language learners and pre-service language teachers can offer such valuable
practical experiences for both groups. The service encounter collaborative project is
an example of an activity that provides an important link between the academic
and experiential aspects of a teacher preparation programme. It is also
a simple and practical way for new teachers to investigate authentic language use.
In this project, pre-service teachers develop materials based on language
samples they gather in collaboration with language learner partners. For the
language learners, the programme provides access to authentic input, an
opportunity for interaction with native speakers, as well as valuable cultural and
sociolinguistic information.

The practicum in Most TESL programmes, especially those at the post-graduate level, strive to
teacher education offer a balance between a broad theoretical and pedagogical foundation and
opportunities for practical experiences. For these programmes, a recurrent
theme is the need for focused and well supported practical activities that
prepare teachers for the classroom (Crandall 2000; Johnson 1996).
Students with little background in teaching are particularly eager to expand
the experiential aspects of their training. To this end, most T ES L
programmes include some sort of practicum or student teaching
experience. The current Directory of Professional Preparation Programmes
in TESL in the United States and Canada (Christopher 2005) describes
more than 80 per cent of the TESL MA programmes in the United States
and Canada as offering or requiring a practicum of some kind. Typically, the
core of the practicum is a guided teaching experience, but it may also
include observations, analysis of videotaped classes, reflective journals, and
periodic meetings with mentoring teachers and/or faculty supervisors.
Practice teaching experience is not limited to post-graduate programmes.
Brandt (2006) reports that of the over 700 shorter, more intensive courses
offered through institutions in the United Kingdom, most include
a teaching practice component.
In general, practica are considered opportunities to apply theoretical
knowledge and skills, previously gained in the classroom, to authentic
educational settings. Daresh (1990) stresses that students professional
development is best fostered through participation in a variety of practical
experiences throughout their training, suggesting that, in the case of TESL

68 E LT Journal Volume 63/1 January 2009; doi:10.1093/elt/ccn012

The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.
Advance Access publication March 5, 2008
 students, such experiences should perhaps not be limited to a capstone
student teaching assignment. Indeed, some pre-service teachers feel
unprepared for teaching when they begin their practicum and wish that
other activities had been available to prepare them for subsequent student
teaching.
Many teacher preparation programmes have found creative ways of
expanding student teachers practical experiences beyond student
teaching. Some have established partnerships with schools, most of them
at the primary level, in which pre-service teachers make occasional
classroom visits and participate in tutoring programmes or other kinds
of service learning (for example, Ariza 2003; Hillyard, Reppen, and
Vasquez 2007; Vann and Fairbairn 2003). In fact, partnerships between
university programmes and schools or community groups are relatively
common and are an essential element of teacher education. According
to Crandall,
Partnerships between programmes of language teacher education and
language teaching programmes or schools provide opportunities for
contextualising and integrating preservice and inservice teacher
education, encouraging prospective and experienced teachers,
administrators and researchers to learn together as they also provide
enhanced programmes for language learners (op.cit.: 35).
Successful cross-institution partnerships in teacher education have several
characteristics (Allum 1991; Sirotnik and Goodlad 1988):
n they involve teachers in the development of partnership activities,
n their goals are clear and jointly agreed upon by the parties,
n they provide benefits to both parties.

One programmes Several years ago faculty of the MA programme in T E S L at the University
solution: of Illinois at Chicago was looking for ways to extend the practical
investigating the experiences of pre-service teachers in the programme. However, because
service encounter this programme prepares teachers primarily for adult education,
a university-school collaboration was not appropriate. Instead we looked
within our own institution for a partnershipto the universitys intensive
English programme (I E P). Our MA TESL programme has maintained
a policy of collaboration and cooperation with the I E P, including
observations of ESL classes by the MA students and the placement of
student teachers in classes under the supervision of experienced mentor
teachers. In addition, the two programmes have maintained
a conversation partner programme, in which MA students are paired with
low proficiency IEP students, who have little other opportunity for
interaction with native speakers. The programme had been moderately
successful, but had not flourished, perhaps in part, because the
arrangement did not have clear goals. The participants were not quite
sure what they were supposed to be doing together, so conversation often
lagged, or the I E P students wanted their partners to assist them with
homework, something the I E P administration had explicitly requested
that they not do. This situation, along with the MA students call for
better integration of these experiential activities with their coursework,
challenged us to re-examine our conversation partner programme and

Beyond the practicum experience 69

 to try to shape it to meet the goals of both programmes in the partnership
more successfully.
We had several goals in reformulating the activities for the programme. We
wanted them to
n become goal-oriented, rather than simply conversational;
n become more integrated with both programmes course work, allowing
for follow-up activities in the two groups respective classes;
n add value for the MA students, providing experience and useful material
for their resumes or portfolios;
n provide the I E P students with what Hillyard, Reppen, and Vasquez (op.
cit.:126) call multiexperience, that is, exposure to a variety of authentic
English language input, while providing some level of support for that
input. This was considered particularly important for low proficiency
students, who often find participation in American life very challenging;
n remain simple enough to allow low proficiency learners to perform
them successfully.
With these goals in mind, we felt we had incorporated at least the last two
characteristics of a successful partnership: our goals were clear and there
would be a clear benefit to both programmes. Next we needed to design
activities that would meet our stated criteria.
After consideration of a variety of possibilities, the course instructors in the
IE P and MA programmes decided that the conversation partner project
would focus on service encounters, that is, transactional interactions in
commercial settings. The MA students would assist the ESL students in
participating in real world interactions, and they, in turn, would gain
insight in how these encounters occur, specifically the language and
structure of the interactions, and how context influences language choice
(see Gilmore 2004). Examples of service encounters include purchasing
items at coffee shops and convenience stores, dropping off dry cleaning,
and buying a train ticket. This focus was chosen for several reasons.
Specifically, these kinds of interaction are familiar to learners; they occur in
all cultures, yet may differ across cultures in how they are accomplished.
They are short, and usually have a fairly straightforward structure of
recurring elements. These elements, which will be described in greater
detail below, are routinized and reasonably predictable. These features
make the interaction, and the language in it, generally accessible to low
proficiency learners. In addition, learning to navigate service encounters
in a new culture would be extremely beneficial for these students, many
of whom have been in the United States for a short time. Finally,
although the structure and function of service encounters are relatively
simple, they can provide a window into the rich social web in which they
are embedded. This too affords language learners a useful way into the
host culture, an advantage that may be missing from purely classroom-
based instruction. Thus, the service encounter seemed ideally suited to our
needs.

Integration of the We changed the free-standing nature of the conversation programme and
project into the embedded it, along with the service encounter project, within an MA course
existing curricula on curriculum and materials development. One aspect of materials

70 Jessica Williams
development stressed in this course is the importance of incorporating
authentic native speaker input into instructional materials. As part of this
course, students learn to critically evaluate commercial materials. Often,
they almost automatically conclude that such materials use idealized,
rather than authentic, language. The debate as to what constitutes
authentic language and its value in the classroom goes back at least
thirty years. More recently Taylor (1994) has argued that authenticity is
neither an abstract nor absolute quality of any text and maintains that it
must be viewed not just in terms of the language, but in terms of the
participants, the setting, and how the language is used. Most important,
he notes that the classroom is an authentic setting and what might be
considered sanitized or less than genuine in another setting might be
authentic in the classroom. In fact, Guariento and Morley (2001: 348)
argue that especially for lower proficiency learners, the use of authentic
texts may not only prevent learners from responding but lead them to
feel frustrated, confused, and, more importantly, demotivated.
Furthermore, in spite of pre-service teachers championing of authentic
language, often they have little idea of what authentic language actually
sounds like. It has long been known that our intuitions are an unreliable
indicator of what speakers actually do and as a result, not necessarily
a good basis for pedagogical decisions (Wolfson 1989). We therefore
decided that the collection of authentic native speaker data would beneficial
for the MA students as well as good exposure and practice for the I E P
students.
The project was introduced to the MA class in such a way as to involve them
as much as possible in its developmentone of our original goals. It began
inductively with a series of role plays of service encounters by several
members of the class while the rest of the class observed and took notes.
Following the role plays, they were asked to make generalizations:
n How did the encounters begin?
n Who initiated the interaction?
n What was the next turn?
n What was the response?
n How did the encounters end?
The MA students then observed several actual service encounters. In the
next class, in groups, they developed ways of describing elements of service
encounters. Their goal was to simplify the data collection process, in
particular, to provide a framework that would make the task accessible to low
proficiency learners. The sequence of turn types below is a result of their
analysis and represents a compromise between strict authenticity, which
is undoubtedly far more complex, and the simplicity necessitated by the
proficiency of the I E P participants.
Typical turns in service encounters
1 greeting
2 offer
3 request
4 response to request
5 response

Beyond the practicum experience 71

 6 money exchange
7 thanks
8 closing.
Their next task was to turn this information into some sort of data collection
instrument and to decide on the procedures for using it. In groups, the
MA students developed a graphic organizer that the pairs could take into
service encounter, one that could easily capture the interaction. Each
year, the result differs slightly, but Figure 1 is typical. It allows pairs to collect
language samples, information about the interaction, such as turn order,
as well as demographic information, such as customer age and gender, and
basic information about the location. Figure 1 shows the instrument
with sample data gathered by one pair.
The pairs collected data from at least four service encounters. In the first
two, the pair observed together, and the MA students modelled the
process of filling out the form. In the third encounter, the MA student
participated, with the I E P student watching and taking notes. It was not
expected that the I E P student would be able to take the interaction down
verbatim. The MA students subsequently reviewed the encounter with their
partners and helped with the transcription. Normally, it is difficult to
participate in an interaction and subsequently recall its details. However,
because these were so simple and brief, the MA students were usually
able to help fill in parts that the I E P students had missed or misunderstood.
In the final encounter, the I E P student participated, with the MA
student taking notes.

From data to Once the data were collected, the two programmes used them in quite
pedagogical different ways. As part of the requirement of their materials development
materials class, the MA students used the authentic data as the basis for developing
MA students pedagogical activities. The project produced a considerable amount of
data, in most years, about 100 encounters. Students posted their findings
online, along with collection tips and descriptions of their experiences. In
this way, students could draw on a considerable amount of data in writing
their materials. Their assignment was to develop materials based on the
data. They were free to write for any proficiency level and target any skill.
Typically they used it to exploit a language or culture focus (for example,
modal use or making polite requests in transactional settings) for a low
proficiency class. They developed communicative tasks using the language
structures and functions. Figure 2 is an excerpt from the project of one
student with little teaching experience that was fairly typical of these efforts
(Caldwell 2006). She chose to develop a listening comprehension activity
for low proficiency students. She used the authentic data from service
encounters in a coffee shop, and then had two native speakers record the
interactions to reduce ambient noise and to ensure that the speech was clear.
Each of the interactions is very shortabout four to five turns long. They are
variations on the same conversation: a reciprocal greeting, followed by an
offer, a request for a beverage, the transaction, and thanks/leavetaking,
much like the interaction in Figure 1. Each recording offers slightly different
language for each turn (for example, How ya doing? Hows it going?/
Can I help you? What can I get you?/Id like a small coffee with cream
and sugar. Ill have a large orange juice./Thanks. Have a good day.).

72 Jessica Williams
figure 1
Data collection
instrument for service
encounters

Beyond the practicum experience 73

 The first two steps were designed to allow students to listen for gist and a few
details. The third step turns their attention to the structure of the interaction
with a brief functional analysis of the language, followed by a role play.

figure 2
An example of material
produced by MA
students based on
authentic data samples

The students projects, which also included print and digital materials, as
well as lesson plans for using them, were included in the final portfolios that
all students produced as the final course requirement.

IEP students The IEP instructors have also utilized the service encounter experiences of
their students in a variety of ways, depending on the proficiency level of the
students and the skill focus of the class. The most successful activities have
involved lower proficiency students. Following their meetings with the
partners, these students wrote journal entries, describing what they had
done and reporting words and phrases they had learnt. In class, they
practised the language functions they had learnt in class, much as described

74 Jessica Williams
 in Figure 2. Higher proficiency students created entire scenarios of
service encounters, complete with props and costumes, which they
rehearsed and videotaped. At a gathering at the end of each semester
since the projects inception, the I E P students have shared these results with
the MA students, with journals, posters, skits, and videos. Some of their
journal observations have provided the MA students with important
insights into the experiences of the language learners. One student wrote
that prior to this project, he had only bought food at vending machines or in
supermarkets where the transactions could be accomplished silently.
After the project, he had begun trying out his new languageand eating
much better!

Assessment and It is important that new components of a curriculum be assessed regularly.

reflection Yet, it would be difficult to attribute any specific aspects of language or
professional development for the I E P or MA students respectively, to
this project alone since, for both programmes, it was part of courses
with many other components. However, it has been possible to assess
student satisfaction and to have students offer their own views on the
project. The final stage of the project for the MA students included reflection
on their experiences. The opportunity to examine and reflect on practical
experiences is a crucial part of teacher preparation (Crandall: op. cit.). They
were asked to post responses to their experiences on an online discussion
board. Although many felt that the time devoted to the data collection
portion of the project was a heavy burden given their already hectic
schedules, most reported valuable learning experiences. Several observed
that they had gained new insight into the struggles that second language
learners faced. One student commented directly on the materials
development aspect of the project:
I really enjoyed the opportunity to develop materials from the ground
up. I never realized how complex even simple routines like service
encounters can be, and how much they are embedded in social
conventions. Maybe that is why people always looked at me funny
during service encounters in Thailand. I was probably doing them all
wrong! My partner was saying, I want this. I want that. People probably
thought he was rude.
Another wrote:
It was a lot more interesting to develop materials for teaching modals
knowing that this information could really make a difference in
a learners everyday life, especially one that I know personally.
We have used suggestions from these reflections to refine the project over
the years, allowing us to provide better instruction to the pairs on how to
structure their time. For example, we now provide more time in class for
them to get acquainted before beginning any observations and we have
established procedures to deal with problems we had not anticipated,
such as how the participants should contact one another and what they
should do when communication breaks down.
For the low proficiency learners in the IEP, extended reflective responses are
too challenging, so we have used a survey that allows them to respond more

Beyond the practicum experience 75

 briefly to multiple-choice questions. Here again, most of the responses were
positive, with about three quarters of the students responding that they
strongly agreed or agreed that the conversation partner programme had
helped them to improve their English and learn about American culture.
The biggest negative for most of the IEP students was the ephemeral and
ambiguous nature of the relationship between their partners. They wanted
an American friend, one that would last beyond the few weeks of the
conversation partner programme. Although a few relationships did last,
most did not. The MA students are extremely busy. They have families and
established social networks; most are full-time students, and many have
part-time jobs as well. They viewed the partnerships positively but as an
educational and service experience, not as personal relationships. We are
working to make sure that expectations on both sides are well informed and
realistic. We are also developing additional data collection projects for low
proficiency learners that investigate other speech events such as greeting
routines, and for higher proficiency learners, speech acts, such as
apologizing, interrupting, and asking for favours.

Conclusion The service encounter project is constantly evolving, but in large

measure, has been successful. It has allowed us to expand the practical
component of the MA T ES L programme, to include experience working
with non-native speakers prior to the teaching practicum. The students were
involved in the development of the programme and they continue to
participate in refining it. It provides an important bridge between work
in their courses and their future work in the classroom. It has provided
them with insight into language use in authentic discourse and how the
structure of speech events may influence language use. It also offers them
a natural springboard for the creation of learner tasks and materials. For
the ES L students, it provides goal-oriented interaction with native
speakers, giving them access to authentic input and cultural information
that they might not otherwise get. Finally, it has strengthened ties
between two programmes with mutual interests.
Final revised version received July 2007

References Crandall, J. 2000. Language teacher education.

Allum, K. 1991. Partners in innovation: School-
college collaborations. E D U C O M M Review 26/3:
2933.
Ariza, E. 2003. TESL tutor time homework center:
A collaboration of volunteer preservice teachers in
a public elementary school. Urban Education 38/6:
70824.
Brandt, C. 2006. Allowing for practice: A critical
issue in T ES O L teacher preparation. E LT Journal
60/4: 35564.
Caldwell, C. 2006. Service encounter project:
linguistics 583. Unpublished course work,
University of Illinois.
Christopher, V. 2005. Directory of Professional
Preparation Programs in T E S O L in the United States
and Canada (20052007). Alexandria, VA: T ES O L.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 20: 3455.
Daresh, J. 1990. Learning by doing: Research
on the educational administration practicum.
Journal of Educational Administration 28/2:
3447.
Gilmore, A. 2004. A comparison of textbook and
authentic interactions. ELT Journal 58/4: 36371.
Guariento, W. and J. Morley. 2001. Text and task
authenticity in the E F L classroom. ELT Journal 55/4:
34753.
Hillyard, L., R. Reppen, and C. Vasquez. 2007.
Bringing the outside world into an intensive English
program. ELT Journal 61/2: 12634.
Johnson, K. 1996. The vision versus the reality: The
tensions of the T ES O L practicum in D. Freeman

76 Jessica Williams
and J. Richards (eds.). Teacher Learning in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sirotnik, K. and J. Goodlad. 1988. School-university
Partnerships in Action: Concepts, Cases and Concerns.
New York: Teacher College Press.
Taylor, D. 1994. Inauthentic authenticity or
authentic inauthenticity?. T E S L- E J 1/2. http://
www-writing.berkeley.edu/T E S L - E J/ej02/a.1.html.
Vann, R. and S. Fairbairn. 2003. Linking our worlds:
A collaborative academic literacy project. TE S O L
Journal 12/3: 1116.
Wolfson, N. 1989. Perspectives: Sociolinguistics and
T ES O L. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Beyond the practicum experience
The author
Jessica Williams teaches in the MA TE S OL
programme at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Her research interests include second language
writing and the effect of instruction in second
language learning. She has written several
professional reference books and textbooks, the most
recent: Academic Encounters: American Studies
(Cambridge University Press).
Email: jessicaw@uic.edu
77