Page 184 - Innovative Professional Development Methods and Strategies for STEM Education

Identifying the Target Needs of Non-Native Subject Teachers

RQ2: What Is the Overall Evaluation of the Key Stakeholders-
the Subject Teachers and Course Manager- Regarding
the Language Course Segment of the Program?

To find answers to this research question, qualitative data were collected from the subject teachers and
the course manager. The data from these two sources were reported under separate subheadings below.

Views of the Subject Teachers Attending the Course

The qualitative data obtained from the subject teachers were categorized under three broad themes of
positive and negative opinions regarding the language course segment of the program.
As for the positive opinions, almost all the respondents reported to have benefitted from the program
to a great extent. They appeared to appreciate not only the language course but also the professional
development segment of the program. For example, ST 13 indicated that “I feel that the course is way
more than I had imagined. I have learned many things and developed myself both in terms of language
and professional knowledge and skills”. Similarly, ST 10 stated that “I had expected to learn English
well and to develop my skills as a teacher. When I reflect on the year, I see I have achieved most of it”.
Yet, it should be noted that some of the subject teachers also reported to have had some concerns
and doubts about the language course at the beginning. ST 27 stated that “At the beginning, I had huge
concerns, as I had not studied English before”. As could be understood, this doubt seems to stem from
the participants’ lack of English instruction. Having no or very little prior foreign language experience
was an issue for these participants as another respondent, ST 26, also said “When I joined the course…
I knew nothing at all except very little English grammar. So I was not sure if I would be able to improve
the language or not”. The length of the program also seems to have given way to these concerns as ST 29
pointed out that “At first, I thought that in 8 months, I would not be able to learn a language’. However,
these initial worries seem to have been replaced by more positive ideas later on. Especially being able to
communicate to a certain extent appears to have given the course attendees a sense of accomplishment
as ST 27 asserted that “… now as we approach the end of the course, I feel that I can communicate in
English better”.
Grammar and writing components of the language course segment were identified as more successful.
For example, ST 29 stated that “… I have made a great progress especially for writing and grammar”.
Likewise, ST 32 wrote that “… my writing has developed more than I had expected”. This finding also
supports those views of the participants about grammar (accuracy) and writing as reported in Table 9,
where a majority of them stated they found themselves rather strong on these language areas. Yet, it is
worth reminding that the participants felt they needed more practice regarding communicative target
tasks requiring writing (see Table 7). In other words, occupational and formal writing was a challenge
for these subject teachers. Therefore, this finding should be read as an indication of the participants’
present state in language learning as also stated by one of the respondents: “this course has helped us to
establish baseline knowledge and skills in English”, who also made a comparison between the past and
present concluding that “When we consider the fact that we were just beginner-level learners of English
when the course started, I believe this course has been successful” (ST 21).
With regard to negative opinions, majority of the respondents stated their dissatisfaction with the
speaking component of the course. Some of them expressed their disappointment in their development
of oral skills saying that “At the beginning of the year I thought that I would be able to speak accurately

165