17 replies

  1. Good work Marisa. I have been coming to the same conclusion as you – it is better to show it in real action than to do it as an input session. I mark the distance learning with jing, use a wiki to get them to introduce themselves to each other, and do as much without paper as I can get away with :-). The trainees seem more relaxed with the tech even before the course starts and we try to continue in the same way where possible.

    • Hi Sue and thanks for feedback – good to hear you have been working in the same direction. I wish we could also do jings for feedback to assignments but for CELTA this is not possible. It’s a good way of giving feedback on DELTA first assignment drafts though and some of these jings embedded in the trainees’ wiki have helped new candidates a lot by showing them some of the things to avoid. The feedback from trainees is very positive.


  2. Hi Marisa

    Love the way you are doing this with the insidious approach/inclusion. Agree using is key factor! I am a voc ed literacy lecturer who also teaches/supports/mentors/encourages my colleagues into e-stuff as part of my role. Little & often is so important though my key phrase is more often “many & various” as my colleagues work across many different disciplines so very definitely we don’t have “one size fits all”. I just keep “chipping” away & trying to demonstrate in my own practice as many different e-strategies/tools as possible.

    Jo Hart

  3. This is so definitely the shape of things to come. I’m sure we’ll look back in what, five years maybe? maybe even less (or possibly more?) and say, wasn’t that quaint when the trainers didn’t use any tech tools on the course or in class, when tech was a week four add-on one-hour session. Thank you for such a clear and detailed picture of how best to integrate tech into both teaching and teacher training.

  4. Yep Marisa, that’s the way to go. I’ve come to the same conclusion(s).

    Large scale, “add on”, “let’s learn technology now” types of training don’t work and tech is much better embedded and shown being used purposefully. Kind of lopped feedback.

    As you mention, teachers imitate what they in their gut feel will work for them (and their set of beliefs/skills). This approach promotes this kind of tacit knowing and professional development. It also assures that trainers aren’t teaching things “technology” that they themselves aren’t too competent in.

    I’m thinking of offering a course which will be “product” based. Teachers use technology to make a product and build a portfolio. I think this approach might work also – no classes, just get teachers “doing” and training them in a very constructivist fashion.


    • Hi David, and yes, you are so right, the trainer must feel comfortable too; a colleague who is assessing our two CELTA courses right now reports that from zero knowledge, she has tried my idea of a little and often and she herself is getting more comfortable and confident – the trainer too must be considered in this.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *