Step-by-Step to Great
Results:
Cambridge Competition for Teachers of English
In September 2004 Cambridge University Press office in Moscow announced
a competition for those teachers of English who use Cambridge materials for First
Certificate preparation. The competition was held together with the Studio Cambridge
Language School that was celebrating its 50th anniversary by offering a number of
scholarships for teachers of English worldwide. Cambridge University Press and Studio
Cambridge decided to share the expenses so that the winners could come over and have a
free two-week teacher-training course in Cambridge in July 2005.
The competition had two stages. The first stage was writing a one-page
informal report in English about teaching productive writing within an FCE preparation
course. The reports were to focus on both achievements and problem areas in developing
productive writing skills, illustrated by at least three papers written by students and
sent to the CUP Moscow office by 15 January 2005.
We received many reports from teachers of secondary schools,
universities and language schools and enjoyed reading all of them. But we had to send them
to Cambridge where they were assessed by ELT professionals who selected several best
reports. Their authors were invited to participate in the second stage of the competition
– their FCE-preparation classes were attended by a young colleague from Cambridge in
April 2005. On the basis of her observations, three winners were selected and they turned
out to be Pavel Krichevsky, a teacher from Secondary School No. 3 (the town of
Chekhov, Moscow region), Tatyana Kuznetsova, a teacher form Novopodrezkovo Secondary
School (Moscow region), and Olga Vinogradova, a teacher from Secondary School No. 57
(Moscow). All three winners were also teacher-trainers and methodologists in their schools
and regions, with long experience of preparing students for international exams, FCE in
the first place.
In her report on teaching writing, T. Kuznetsova writes:
“Effective writing is focused on the topic, has an organizational pattern that enables
the reader to follow the flow of ideas; it has a beginning, middle and end, contains
supporting ideas that are developed through the use of details, examples, vivid language
and mature word choice, and follows the conventions of standard written English”.
Tatyana’s students had problems understanding the differences between various genres of
writing, particularly between article, report and composition. Teaching these differences
is an important part of FCE preparation, and Tatyana gave samples to her students to
analyse and practice at home as well as in class.
O. Vinogradova believes that writing is not only important for
exam preparation but also necessary for current and future life. She writes: “The aim of
a teacher is to help students master the structures conventional in English-speaking
culture, as well as promote development of logical thinking and creative expression of
ideas”. To achieve this, she uses different types of assignments: from purely
reproductive tasks through guided writing to creative work, such as writing a story or an
essay in which students give opinions and generate ideas to support them.
P. Krichevsky distinguishes between a training approach and
testing approach to writing: “The latter involves setting students a large number of
compositions and then simply marking them. The problem with this approach is that students
are interested in their marks more than in analyzing their strengths and weaknesses and,
as a result, their skills are not developed properly”. Pavel prefers the training
approach, that includes writing the first draft, which the teacher reads and gives back to
the student for revising and editing: “The teacher’s feedback is a crucial stage in
the writing process”. The students’ papers provided by P. Krichevsky to
illustrate his ideas contained detailed teachers’ comments on the content, vocabulary,
register, paragraphing, cohesion and other aspects of writing.
By Ludmila Gorodetskaya
Below is Pavel Krichevsky’s account of his stay in Cambridge.
From the 4th till the 16th of July 2005 I was studying in the Studio
Cambridge school of English in the U.K. as one of the winners of the scholarship provided
by Studio Cambridge together with Cambridge University Press in Russia.
We arrived in London on the 3rd of July and at 8.45 the next morning,
just in time for the first lecture, we were at the Abbey College in Cambridge where our
classes were due to take place.
There were two groups formed at our course, with representatives from
Poland, Italy, Spain, Japan, Mexico, Brazil and Russia. Our teacher trainers were all high
professionals but, as it usually happens, some of them made greater impressions on me
mainly because of my personal interest in the material they were delivering.
The curriculum of the course contained practically all the most
important spheres of ELT: analyzing different methodological approaches (including
Meaningful Games, Providing Learner Autonomy, Drama Activities, etc.), studies of British
life and culture (here the most exciting lectures were about British humour, youth culture
and Cambridge writers), teaching grammar, pronunciation, reading, register, writing,
fluency, using videos, etc. What I liked a lot was that special attention was paid to
different aspects of teaching and learning vocabulary. Those were: techniques for learning
new vocabulary and collocations, contemporary language. Idiomatic and colloquial language,
its functional and social varieties, were also under consideration.
We were all fascinated with the content of the lectures, as well as the
relaxed and informal way in which they were delivered. We also enjoyed extracurricular
activities, both intensive and exciting, that were offered practically every day. They
were equally captivating, though not a single one repeated another: a tour of colleges
together with the history of Cambridge, Stratford-upon-Avon and a visit to Shakespeare’s
birthplace, Shakespeare Festival in the College Gardens with plays staged just on the
lawns under the crowns of trees, a visit to Ely Cathedral and Oliver Cromwell’s house…
We also had an opportunity to get acquainted with such an old Cambridge traditional fun as
punting, and to have a cup of cream tea and listen to the poetry recited by our respected
teachers in Grantchester – a place, so much appreciated by Lord Byron, Rupert Brooke,
Virginia Woolf and other remarkable literary figures.
There were other professional impressions which are worth mentioning. I
mean receptions at Cambridge University Press and its bookshops. A new wonder of teaching
engineering was introduced to us – Hitachi Whiteboard, which at once became a sweet
dream of everybody witnessing this magic and a hospitable place. As for Cambridge
bookshops, it goes without saying that by the end of the trip our luggage consisted mainly
of new catalogues, textbooks and other teaching materials, as well as English poetry and
modern prose.
Speaking about our visit to Great Britain I can’t but mention two
social events, which coincided with our stay – appointing London the home city of the
Olympic Games 2012 and the most dramatic day – the 7th of July – the day of blasts and
carnage made by terrorists in London. Of course, we were a bit upset when London and not
Moscow won in the Olympic competition, but at the same time it was difficult not to share
the pride and joy which the faces of common people expressed. But alas – not long… The
twist of fate – we were just studying British Life and Institutions and the question
under discussion was: “How has the UK, unlike the USA and Spain, managed to avoid terror
attacks?” when it appeared to be that, no, Britain hasn’t managed to avoid terrorist
attacks and suffered from them that very morning… From that day on and till the end of
our stay in Britain we were following newspapers and TV news trying to be in the know of
the investigation and of course sharing grief and sorrow with the British people.
Days are passing, but the impressions of the gripping time spent in
Cambridge are still becoming brighter and more vivid. Isn’t it proof of the great
professional luck we experienced?
By Pavel Krichevsky
|