Freeing The Teacher:
A Supervisory Process
Jerry G. Gebhard
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
ABSTRACT Directive and clinical approaches supervisors who use a clinical approach, such as
to teacher supervision, while appreciated by Abbott and Carter (1) and Gaies and Bowers
some teachers, are also problematic. The most (19), take teachers through what Cogan calls
obvious problem is that teachers are not pro- “the cycle of supervision.” The supervisory
vided with much opportunity to develop their cycle begins with a pre-observation to plan a
decision-making skills about what and how to lesson and make decisionsabout those aspects of
t m h . Thefocus of thispaper is topresent and the teacher’s instructionon which to focus attenillustmtea p m x w through which thesupervisor tion. The supervisor then observes and records
can provide teachers with opportunitiesto make events of the classroom and subsequently meets
their own teaching decisions by leading them with the teachers to discuss observationsand opthrough a process of explomtion. Thisprocess tions for improvement. The processthen recycles
includes teaching teachers how to observe to decisions about those areas of teaching on
classroom intemction, code and analyze intemc- which to focus next.
Although both directive and clinical aption, interpret patterns of classroom behavior,
and make informed decisions about teaching proaches to supervision offer teachers opporbased on the analysis and interpretation. In ad- tunitiesto gain skillsthey need to operate in the
dition, in order to enhance exploration, the classroom, they do not directly address how
supervisor is encouraged to bring teachers teachers can learn to make their own informed
together to work on activities which center on decisions about what and how to teach. A
serious problem with the directive model is that
teaching.
it forces compliance with the supervisor’s
prescriptions, thus keeping the decision-making
Introduction
There are a number of supervisoryapproaches, with the supervisor. In this model, teachers are
but two stand out as predominant.One approach not provided opportunitiesto develop decisionis directive supervision in which the supervisor making skills. Even with a clinical process, in
sets behavioral objectives for the teacher and which the supervisor collaborates with the
then observes classes to evaluate how closely teacher, decisions about what and how to teach
teachers are able to implement these behaviors are quite often framed by the supervisor’s
(Freeman, 16, 17; Gebhard, 21). The second perceptions about what needs to change in the
approach is clinical supervision, which evolved teacher’s teaching.
Accordingto Jarvis (26),in order for teacher
from the work of Cogan (9)and Goldhammer,
Anderson, and Krajewski (24). Foreign language educatorsto be truly responsive, they must shift
the responsibility for decision-making to the
meet this objective, an
Jerv G.Gebhurd (Ed.D., Columbia University) is Associate classroom teacher.
Professor of English at Indiana University of Pennsylvania, alternative way to approach supervision is
needed. The supervisoryapproach explainedin
Indiana, PA.
Foreign Language Annals, 23, No. 6,1990
517
518
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - DECEMBER 1990
this paper is based on Fanselow’s (12,14) concep- (34) point out, judgments can cloud objective
tualizations about supervision and aims at pro- observation with emotional involvement.
viding opportunities for teachers to make their
During a second viewing of a short segment of
own informed teaching decisions through a pro- the taped lesson teachers are asked to write statecess of exploration. This process affords teachers ments of description, rather than judgments. As
chances to learn how to observe teaching, this point, teachers usually present statements
describewhat they observe, recognize patterns of such as: “The teacher told the studentsthey were
teaching from their descriptions, interpret these going to do a jigsaw reading. She put the stupatterns, and make decisions about what to do dents in groups of five. She then gave each student a different paragraph. After the students
next in the classroom.
The purpose of this article is to present and il- readthe paragraphs aloud to each other, they put
lustrate this supervisoryprocess which consists the paragraphs together to make a story.”
of teaching teachers (1) basic observation skills,
The purpose of this part of the lesson is to
including how to describe teaching behavior show teachers how detailed an observation can
through the use of an observation system, (2) become. Often when teachers first learn to
how to analyze the descriptions of teaching for describe observations, many details are
patterns of interaction, (3) how to interpret what overlooked. Fbr instance, in the above statement,
the patterns mean in relation to learning and the teacher gave only a skeleton of the “jigsaw
other factors, and (4) how to explore new reading” activity.
To show teachers how they reveal more detail,
teaching behaviors by, first, making decisions
about what to do next in the classroom which the taped lesson can be viewed again with
will predictably result in a different pattern, and guiding questions. For example, while studying
second, trying the new teaching behaviors out, the “jigsaw reading’’ activity, teachers can be
and again describing and analyzing the class- asked the following questions: What went on
room interaction to see if the pattern changed. between the students while they read the
It is through this process that the supervisor can paragraphs to each other; while they put the
free the teacher because the teacher will have the story together? What was the teacher doing
means to describe, analyze, and interpret what while the students put the paragraphs together?
goes on in the classroom and the ability to make W h o asked the most questions during this activity? Who responded to these questions? Who
more informed teaching decisions.
talked the most? Who didn’t talk? As teachers
An Initial Step: Teaching Teachers Basic
answer these questions, they usually become
more aware of how detailed a description can be.
Observation Skills
A first step in the process of freeing teachers
The advantage of using tapes is that teachers
is for the supervisor to provide teachers with can listen (audio tapes) or view (videotapes)
lessons on how to observe One way to introduce segments of a lesson many times, thus filling in
observation is by means of videotaped class ses- more and more details. n p e d segments also prosions. As teachers report their reactions to obser- vide the means by which teachers can make
vations, they are asked to identify those that in- transcripts of short segments of teaching to
dicate judgment. Teachers commonly come up study. llachers quite often discover aspects of an
with statements such as: “This activity was ex- instructional context through concentration on
cellent;” “this activity is better than that one;” the transcription. It is not necessary for teachers
or “he shouldn’t have talked so much.”
to spend long periods of time on transcription as
One purpose of this part of the lesson is for much can be learned from a few short segments
teachers to learn to recognize a judgment about (Fanselow, 13,14; Gebhard 20,23).
Teachers are also introduced to the use of
teaching, whether positive (“the teacher has
good rapport with the students,”) or negative observation systems. Many such systems,
(“the teacher’s instructions are terrible”). originally designed for research purposes have
Another purpose is to consider why recognition been used in teacher education (Allwright, 3;
of judgments is important. As Simon and Boyer Jarvis, 25; Long, 27; MalamahThomas, 28;
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS -DECEMBER 1990
Moskowitz, 29). Day (lo), for example, explains
how observers can use check lists and seating
charts to study which studentsare off task, how
transitions are made from one task to another,
and which student behaviorsare rewaded by the
teacher. Allen et al. (2) explain how teachers can
519
study interaction for activity type, lesson content, materials used, participant organization,
and student modality.
In Faselow’s system, FOCUS (11,13), two main
questionsform the basis for observation,“What
is being done?” and “How is it being done?”
TABLE I
FOCUS: Five Major Characteristics of Communication
Move
Message
What is being done?
How is it being done?
Who or what is
communicating
to
whom or what?
What is the
purpose of the
the communication?
What mediums
are used to
communicate?
Soume/Target
Move Qpe
Medium
structuring
linguistic
How are the
mediums used
totakeinor
communicate
content?
Use
attend
What amas
of content
are communicated?
content
life
characterize
teacher
soliciting
nonlinguistic
procedure
present
student
relate
responding
paralinguistic
study
reproduce
other
reacting
unspecified
silence
Bold print categories are abbreviated
In this system, two sub-questionsguide observation in terms of what is being done 1) Who or
what is communicating to whom or what? To
answer this question, the observer considers
sourceharget combinations (i.e., teacher as
source/studentsas target, book as source/student
as target). 2) What is the purpose of the communication? To answer this question, the
observer considers whether the purpose is to
structure communication (i.e., give a lecture, give
background information, give instructions),
solicit information (i.e., make a request, ask a
question), respond to a solicitation, or react to
structuring, a solicitation ,or a response.
In order to observe how classroom communi-
set
cation is being accomplished,three subquestions
are asked 1) What medium is used to communicate content? ’lb answer this question, the
observer considers whether or not communication is being expressed through a linguistics
medium (i.e., speech, writing), a nonlinguktic
medium (i.e, use of objects or pictures), a paralingisticmedium (i.e, gestures, exaggerated facial
expression,writing words in the air), or silence 2)
How is the medium used to communicate content? ’lb answer this question, the observer considers whether or not attention is placed on communicating (is., listening to a lecture, reading,
viewing a movie), presenting information (i.e,
facts), characterizing information (i.e., putting
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - DECEMBER 1990
520
information into categories, pointing out
similarities or differences, selecting one item
from a list), Elating information (i.e., making inferences), reproducing information (i.e.,
repeating after the teacher, copying from the
board). 3) What areas of content are communicated? To answer this question,the observer contemplates whether or not the area of content is
life (i.e., about personal matters, about public
matters), procedure (i.e., administrativematters,
disciplinematters), or study (i.e., of language, of
other subjects.)
The short audio-tapedtranscriptionof lessons
from a beginning level university Japanese class
presented in Thble I1 and I11 illustrate how the
major FOCUS categories are used to code
transcriptions and how teachers can obtain a
data base for studying teaching behavior and
their consequences.The teacher of this class, a
native of Japan, was a graduate assistant new to
teaching. During the short segment of the lesson
presented in a b l e 11,the class is practicing telling time. The teacher is holding up a large paper
clock with moveable hands.
TABLE 11
, .
Source/ Move
Target
1.1 l?
Nan ji desu ka?
(What time is it?)
Medium
Use
Content
t-ss
sol
1
P
S
1.2 s1:
Roku ji han.
(Six-thirty.)
s-t
res
1
P
S
1.3 T
Hai. So desu.
(Yes. That’s right.)
t-s
rea
1
P
S
1.4
Buraun-san, ima nan
ji desu ka? (Mr. Brown,
now what time is it?)
t-s
sol
1
P
S
s-t
res
1
P
S
t-s
rea
1
P
S
s-t
rea
1
d
S
t-s
rea
1
P
S
1.5 S2: Hachi ji ju go.
(Eight fiteen.)
1.6 l?
Hai.Hachi ji ju go
ga irrimasu.
(Yes. Eight fifteen.
But, you need minutes.)
hun. Hun
1.7 S2: Hachi ji ju go hun.
(Eight fifteen.)
1.8 l?
Ee, tadashi desu.
(Yes, that’s correct.)
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - DECEMBER 1990
A Second Step: %aching Teachers
Analytical Skills
Following Fanselow’s advice, a second step to
provide teachers with opportunities to make
their own informed teaching decisions is to give
them practice in analyzing classroom interaction
for patterns of teaching behavior. Such analysis
is possible by studying a transcript for patterns
in the coding. For example, after studying several
short transcripts, the Japanese teacher discovered that she did most of the questioning
(soliciting)and that she asked questionsto which
she already knew the answers. She also discovered that although there was some student
reaction, she, herself, reacted to students’
responses with frequency. Students simply
responded to her solicitations after which she
reacted.
Some teachers say they find this step in the
process rewarding because it enables them to
recognize patterns of which they were previously unaware. As the Japanese teacher put it, “I
was surprised by the fact that I ask so many questions over and over again! I drill the students a
lot and don’t ask them very many real questions.” Some experiencedteachers also say they
appreciate seeing patterns in their teaching unfold. As one experienced teacher said, “I was
sort of aware that I follow certain patterns in my
teaching but I never fully understood what these
patterns were or that I use them so frequently.
Seeing these patterns laid out in front of me like
this makes me want to alter the way I teach, to
add more variety.”
A Third Step: %aching Teachers to Interpret
A description of patterns, however, is not
enough. lkachers also need to be able to interpret
what these patterns mean to them, and this can
be done in a number of ways. One way teachers
can interpret the description of patterns of interaction in their classes is to consider the relationship between what is going on in their classes
and what teaching methodologists are saying
they should do. For example, methodologists
such as Nunan (30) and Rivers (33) emphasize
interactive/communicativelanguage teaching in
which the kind of practice done in the classroom
closely resembles communication in settings
outside classrooms. Thus, teachers can interpret
521
their teaching by asking how closely the patterns
of classroom interaction match communication patterns which take place outside classrooms.
ltachers can also consider research on teacher
behavior and student achievement. Brophy and
Good (7), for example, discuss research indicating that certain teacher behaviors are more
likely to have an impact on learning than other
behaviors: engaging students in activities that are
appropriate in difficulty level, making sure
students stay on task, structuring lessons (with
overviews, review of objectives, and signals to
show transitions between lessons), providing
chances for students to review through repetition, and asking questions which students can
answer.
More relevant to language teachers, Bailey (4),
Chaudron (8), and Gaies (18) offer comprehensive reviews of second language classroomcentered research (CCR). Although Chaudron
(8) concludes that there is evidence that certain
teacher behaviors promote learning outcomes
(adjusting rate of speech to proficiency levels; use
of repetition of target language forms), he also
points out that we have much to learn: “If any
one conclusion can be drawn from a review of
learning outcomes, it is that much more research
remains to be conducted to determine what aids
learners’ target language development in
classrooms(p. 179);’ Such statements, although
at times disappointingto teachers, do help them
understand that the relationship between teaching and learning, is complex, and gives rise to
many unanswered questions.
A Fourth Step: Teaching Teachers
to Explore
After teachers have considered patterns of interaction, it then becomes possible to make decisions about what to do next. One possibility is
for teachers to do nothing. They can simple continue to do what they have been doing. However,
even if teachers like the consequences of their
teaching, as Fanselow (13,14) explains, it is worth
trying something different simply to explore, to
see teaching differently. As explorers, teachers’
next step is to decide how to break their patterns
to produce different consequences. The supervisor’s key question to the teacher becomes:
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - DECEMBER 1990
522
“What canyou change in your teaching to break
this teaching pattern?”
For the Japanese teacher in Table 11, it is possible to see how such a decision can be made. Based on an understanding of the “lockstep” pattern of interaction going on in her classes, the
teacher decided that the pattern might change if
she gave the students a taskin Japanese: Instead
of drilling, she brought in a map of the Pittsburgh area and, knowing some students had
visited the city over spring break, she asked them
to show her where they had been. Tmble I11 shows
what happened in the interaction where students
used the map to talk about where they had been.
(Note that some sub-categories are coded and
are explained at the base of the table.)
TABLE III
source/ Move
Target
Medium
USe
Content
l? Jyaa, daun taun Pittsubaagu wa doko desu ka?
(Where is downtown
Pittsburgh?)
t-ss
sol
la + lv
Pe
so
2.2 s1: Monogarhera to Aregeni
no aida. (Between the
Monogahela and
Aligheny rivers.)
s-t
res
la +Iv
P
so
l? Hee, Koko desu ne.
(Wow, here.)
t-ss
rea
la + lv
P
so
2.4 S2: Steeshion sukueaa doko
desu ka? (Where’s
Station Square?)
s-ss
sol
la + lv
Pe
so
2.5 S3: Koko. (Here.)
s-s
reS
la + lv
P
so
2.6 S2: Ikimashita yo. (I went
there.)
s-s
rea
la
P
f
2.7 SS: Hee? (Really?)
ss-s
rea
la
P
f
s-ss
rea
la
P
f
s-s
sol
la
Pq
f
s-s
res
la
P
f
2.1
2.3
2.8
s2
Omoshirokatta desu yo.
(It was interesting.)
2.9 S1: Totemo takai desu yo?
(Things are expensive
there?)
2.10
s2
Maa maa desu yo. (Not
so expensive.)
Note: See Tmble I. In addition, the followingsubcategoriesare used here: la=finguistic aural/speeck
lv =linguistic visual/print; pe =present elicit (used with a question in which the asker already knows
the answer); pq=present query (used with a question in which the asker does not already know the
answer); and so= study of something other than language.
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - DECEMBER 1990
Through the transcription shown in n b l e 111,
the teacher was able to recognize a change in the
pattern of interacton. Students began this lesson
by studying a map and changed to personal and
life-generalmatters. As a possible consequence,
the teacher did not end up asking the students all
the questions. Instead, the students asked each
other questions, such as “Steeshion sukueaa
doko desu ka? (Where is Station Square?)” and
“Totem0 takai desu yo? (Things are expensive
there?)” and unlike in the previous classes,
students reacted to each others’ comments with
such statements as “Omoshirokatta desu yo. (It
was interesting.)”
As teachers become more and more comfortable with taping, transcribing short segments of
classroom interaction, coding, analyzing the interaction for patterns, and interpretingthese patterns, some teachers become much more flexible
in the kinds of activitiesthey are willing to try out
in class. For example, as Fanselow (13,14) recornmends, some teachers will do the opposite of
what they usally do just to see what happens. If
teachers usually ask questions slowly, they can
ask them quickly. If they always teach from the
front of the room, they can teach from the back.
If they always ask questions about language,
they can ask personal questions, and so on.
A Fifth Step: Enhancing Exploration
Some teachers who have gone through the
process of explorationwith a supervisor will stop
exploringif they are not encouraged to do so on
their own. The supervisor needs to continue to
support the teachers in their exploration of
teaching, and there are ways this can be done.
One way is to get teachers together to talk
about their explorations. During inservice
workshops or preservice student teaching
seminars, teachers can be given chances to talk
about their explorations. Teachers can likewise
collaborate on and discuss investigative projects.
Fattorini and Oprandy (15), Gebhard (22), and
Nunan (31) have reported on ways to carry out
such projects. In question form, topics for investigation include: What are all the ways I can
give directions and what are the consequences of
each for this particular group of students; What
is the relationship between the way the furniture
is arranged and classroom interaction?; What
523
tasks stimulate the most interaction?; What
behaviors seem to keep students on task?; How
can I get students to use behaviors appropriate
to the cultural uses of the language?; What happens when I increase the amount of time I wait
after asking a question?
The supervisor can also pay attention to what
teachers do on their own to see if teachers are
making use of their knowledge about exploration. The Japanese teacher discussed here decided on her own to explore patterns of interaction
between native Japanese speakers outside the
classroom. She recorded her friends talking in
various settings, transcribed some of the interactions, coded with Fanselow’s FOCUS, and
studied the coding for patterns. After recognizing some of these patterns, she made decisions
about how she could get students engaged in
classroomactivitieswhich would result in similar
patterns.
In addition, supervisorscan guide teachers to
consider their teaching through other means.
Bailey (9,Bartlett (6),and Porter, et al. (32) note
that teachers benefit from self observation
through reflective writing in diaries or learning
logs. Such reflection offers teachers a chance to
see who they are as teachers and to work through
a process to reach a more ideal teaching self.
This last step of enhancing exploration is an
important part of the whole process. Through
consistent provision of opportunities for exploration, teachers can make the transition from
doing what everyone else is doing or what is easy
to do as a language teacher, to beingfree to make
informed decisions based on observing, interpreting, and generating alternatives.
Conclusion
This paper has described a process through
which the supervisor can free teachers to make
their own informed decisions about how to
teach. Adapted from Fanselow’s (13, 14) approach to teacher supervision, this process includes teaching teachers basic observation skills
of distinguishing judgment from description,
making short transcriptions of classroom interaction from audio or video tapes, and coding
the interaction through the use of an observation
system. This process also includes analyzing the
coding for patterns of teaching, interpreting
524
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - DECEMBER 1990
these patterns based on knowledgeabout teaching and learning, making decisionsabout what
to do in the classroomwhich might bring about
a new pattern, implementing new teaching
behaviors, taping and coding again, and analyzing the interaction to see if the change in teaching
behavior resulted in a new pattern of classroom
interaction. In this process, supervisors can
possibly enhance exploration by bringing
teachers together to present, write about, collaborateon, and talk about their explorations,as
well as to have them work on investigativeprojects which promote reflection.
Through mastery of this process of exploration teachers can learn how to make more informed decisionsbased on descriptivesystematic
observation, thus gaining control over how to
teach. In short, the role of the supervisor does
not have to be simply that of a director who tells
teachers how to teach. Supervisors can guide
teachers through a process of exploration, thus
freeingthem to be autonomous decision makers.
REFERENCES
Abbott, Suzanne and Ralph M. Carter. “Clinical
Supervisionand the Foreign Language Teacher.”
Foreign Language Annals 18 (1985): 25-29.
2. Allen, Patrick, Maria Frohlich, and Nina Spada.
“The CommunicativeOrientation of Language
Teaching: An Observation Scheme,” 231-52 in J.
Handscomb, R.A. Orem and B.P. Thylor, eds.,
On TESOL ’83. Washington, DC: TESOL, 1983.
3. Allwright, Dick. Observation in the Language
Classroom. New York: Longman, 1988.
4. Bailey, Kathleen M. “Classroom-centered
Research on Language Teaching and Learning,”
96-121 in M. Celce-Murcia, ed., BeyondBasics.
Issues and Research in TESOL. Rowley, MA:
Newbury House, 1985.
5.
. “The Use of Diary Studies in
Teacher Education Programs,” 215-26 in J.C.
Richards and D. Nunan, eds., SecondLanguage
Teacher Education. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1990.
6. Bartlett, Leo. “Teacher Development Through
Reflective Taching,” 202-14 in J.C. Richards and
D. Nunan, eds., Second Language Teacher
Education, 1990.
7. Brophy, Jere E. and Good, Thomas L. “Teacher
Behavior and Student Achievement,” 328-75 in
M.C. Wittrock, ed., Handbook of Research on
Teaching. New York Macmillan, 1986.
1.
8. Chaudron, Craig. Second Language Classroom
Research on Teaching and Learning. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1988.
9. Cogan, Morris L. Clinical Supervision. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1973.
10. Day, Richard R. ‘“kacher Observationin Second
Language Teacher Education,” 43-61 in J.C.
Richards and D. Nunan, eds., SecondLanguage
Teacher Education. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1990.
11. Fanselow, John F. “Beyond RashomanConceptualizing and Observing the Teaching
Act.” TESOL Quarterly I1 (1977): 17-37.
12
.“What Kind of Flower is That?A ContrastingModel for Critiquing Lessons,” in
H. Eichheim and A. Maley, eds., Rzpers from
Goethe Institute-British Council Seminar on
Classroom Observation.Paris: Goethe Institute,
1982.
. Breaking Rules. Generating and
Exploring Alternatives in Language Teaching.
New York: Longman, 1987.
. “Let’s see: Contrasting Conversa14.
tions about Teaching!’ TESOL Quarterly 22
(1988):113-30. (Reprinted in J.C. Richards and D.
Nunan, eds., Second Language TeacherEducation. New York: Cambridge University Press,
13
1990.)
15. Fattorini, Sonia and Robert Oprandy. “Pro-
moting Professional Development Through Investigation and Other Activities! ’ Presentation
at the 23rd TESOL Convention, San Antonio,
Rxas, 1989.
16. Freeman, Donald. “Observing ‘Eachers: Three
Approaches to In-Service ’Ifsliningand Development!’ TESOL Quarterly 16 (1982): 21-28.
17
.“Interveningin PracticeTxching,”
103-17 in J. Richards and D. Nunan, eds.,Second
Language TeacherEducation. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
18. Gaies, Stephen J. “The Investigation of
Classroom Processes.” TESOL Quarterly 17
(1983):205-17.
. and Roger Bowers. “Clinical
Supervision of Language Teaching: The Supervisor as Tfainer and Educator,” 167-81 in J.
Richards and D. Nunan, ed., SecondLanguage
Teacher Education. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1990.
20. Gebhard, Jerry G. “The Teacher as Investigator
of Classroom Processes: Procedures and
Benefits.” Paper presented at the 23rd TESOL
Convention,Antonio, ’kxas, 1989. (ED 304 877).
21
.“Models of Supervision: Choices.”
19
FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - DECEMBER 1990
TESOL QuarterZy 18 (1984): 501-14. (Reprinted
in J.C. Richards and D. Nunan, eds., Second
Language Teacher Education. New York Cambridge University Press, 1990).
22
. “Interaction in a Langauage
Teacher Practicum,” 118-31 in J. Richards and D.
Nunan, eds., Second Language TeacherEducation. New York: Cambridge University Press,
27. Long, Michael H. “Inside the Black Box:
MethodoligicalIssues in Classroom Research on
Language Learning,” Language Learning 30
(1980): 1-42.
28. Malamah-Thomas, Ann. CIarssoomIntemction
Oxford Oxford University Press, 1987.
29. Moskowitz, Gertrude. “Interaction Analysis: A
1990.
23
.Sergio Gaitain, and Robert Oprandy. “Beyond Prescription: The Student Teacher
as Investigator.” Foreign Language Annals 20
(1987): 227-32. (Reprinted in J. Richards and D.
Nunan, eds., Foreign Language TeacherEducation. New York Cambridge University Press,
30.
1990).
32.
24. Goldhammer, R., R.H. Anderson, and J. Krajewski. Clinical Supervkion. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1980.
25. Jarvis, Gilbert A. “A Behavioral Observation
System for Classroom Foreign Language Skill
Acquistion Activities,” Modern Language Journal 52 (1978): 335-41.
26
“Teacher Education: They’re Tkaring Up the Street Where I Was Born,” Foreign
Language Annals 6 (1972): 198-205.
.
525
31.
33.
34.
New Modern Language for Supervisors,”
Foreign Language Annals 5 (1971): 211-21.
Nunan, David. The harner-Centered Curriculum New York Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Nunan, David “Action Research in the Language
Classroom,” 62-81 in J. Richards and D. Nunan,
eds., Second Language Teacher Edu_cation New
York Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Porter,Patricia A., Lynn M. Goldstein, Judith
Leatherman, and Susan Conrad. “An Ongoing
Dialogue: Learning Logs for lkacher heparation,” 2 2 7 4 in J. Richards and D. Nunan, eds.,
Second Language lbcher EpFucation New York
Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Rivers, Wilga. Intemctive Language Teaching.
New York Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Simon, A. and A. Bayer. M i m r of Behavioc
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Research for Better
Schools, 1970.
CAIL TOLL FREE
CALL TOLL FREE
1-800-72
6-5087
1-800-726-5087
VOCABULARY TUTORS* PRONUNCIATION TUTORS* VERB TUTORS TENSE TUTORS* SURVIVAL
MANUALS KANJI DRILLS HIRAGANA & KATAKANA DRILLS
MMOST
PRODUCIS
PLUS OUR
PROWCIS
HAW
EXTENSIVE
EXTENSIVE
DIGITIZED
DIGITIZED
9
SOUND!
SOUND!
THESE UNIQUE CD-BASED OR DISKETTE AND AUDIO TAPE BASED COURSES EMPHASIZE SPEAKING AND AURAL COMPREHENSIONSKILLS! EACH LESSON IS CENTERED
AROUND A SITUATIONAL SETTING AND A DIALOGUE, AND CONTAINS GRAMMAR,
VOCABULARY, CULTURALNOTES, AND INTERACTIVE EXERCISES, BOTH FOR
GRAMMAR AND LISTENING COMPREHENSION.
HAW
---
I
LEARN TO SPEAK SPANISH \ LEARN TO SPEAK FRENCH
* Indicates Mac & IBM Products. Others Mac only. The HyperGlot Software Company 505 Forest Hills Blvd.
Knoville, TN 37919
_.
Please mention Foreign Language Annals when writing toadvertisers