At the TESOL 2014 International Convention & English Language Expo in Portland, I attended Professor Thomas Farrell’s talk, entitled Developing Teacher Expertise: Finding Balance. The title of the presentation caught my eye because I had often wondered about the point at which a professional can be called an “expert.” As I learned in the presentation, the literature has produced lists of expert teacher characteristics; however, few definitions of teacher expertise have been agreed upon. Additionally, there are currently no criteria for measuring teacher expertise, perhaps because conceptualizations of expertise may vary across cultures (Tsui, 2009) and because identifying the characteristics of expert teachers is difficult (Rodríguez & McKay, 2010). As Professor Farrell pointed out, the notion of expertise has received substantial attention in other fields (e.g., math and science); however, the topic has received far less attention in the field of Teaching of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL).

A deep understanding of teacher expertise is important for English as a Second Language/English as a Foreign Language (ESL/EFL) teachers, however, because if we know what expert teachers do, we can establish teaching standards and elevate the status of teaching (Tsui, 2005). In this article, I will first summarize the presentation and then share some reflections on what I have learned.

The Case Study

Professor Farrell (2013) reported on an exploratory case study which examined the perspectives of three ESL teachers at a Canadian university, all of whom had been teaching for more than 15 years. Data were collected over a period of 2 years and included focus groups conducted once per week, participants’ journal entries, and follow-up interviews with the participants. Findings reveal a taxonomy of five interrelated characteristics that compose a teacher’s expertise. These characteristics are ordered based on their frequency in the data, the first characteristic being the most frequently discussed.

The first characteristic is knowledge of learners and learning. Participants reported that expert teachers have a keen awareness of their instructional contexts and their students’ needs, motivations, learning styles, and dispositions. They also talked about the difficulty in achieving a balance between course rigor and student engagement and satisfaction—one solution being to involve students in deciding course topics. The second characteristic is critical reflection of teaching practices. All participants were cautious of not becoming complacent in their teaching and reported that they engaged in critical reflection, professional development opportunities, and collaboration with their colleagues whenever possible. Participants also reported that they regularly gathered students’ input about the course and activities to learn what students find effective or ineffective and to resolve any problems that may have arisen.

The third characteristic that emerged was access to prior experiences. Participants reported that they drew on their past experiences and teacher “tricks” to purposefully inform their teaching approaches and strategies. The fourth characteristic is informed lesson planning, which refers to spending less time planning detailed lessons and instead, focusing on striking a balance between planning for instruction and executing lessons. Participants discussed the importance of flexibility in the classroom and altering a lesson plan if necessary. Finally, the fifth characteristic is active student engagement. Teachers reported that they enjoy interacting with their students outside of class to strengthen their relationships with them and build a community of English language learners. This finding is not surprising as ESL teachers are often very involved in extracurricular activities, which offer opportunities for students to practice English and become acquainted with their new environments.

Some Reflections on Teacher Expertise

This case study paints a picture of three skilled and passionate teachers who are attuned to their students, their teaching experiences, and their particular contexts. It was clear from the data that these teachers strive for excellence and are devoted to their students and professional growth. I left Professor Farrell’s presentation with a lot to think about.

First, I thought about how my views of teacher expertise changed after learning more about the topic. For me, expertise had always implied an end-state or a level that is reached after one has spent many years training and accumulating experience. However, I have come to believe that another very important factor of expertise includes having the drive to want to improve teaching practices and taking action to improve those practices. What stood out to me in this study was that all three participants were critically reflective of their teaching, aware of their instructional choices, and active in making effective changes in the classroom. As Professor Farrell mentioned, teacher expertise cannot be measured by years spent in a classroom because a teacher who has been teaching poorly for 20 years is hardly an expert! Expert teachers, as shown in this study, are proactive in shaping their professional trajectories and do not simply accumulate years of experience. While objectively measuring a teacher’s inner drive and passion is difficult (if not impossible), I believe that a teacher's inner drive and passion play a large role in defining expertise.

Second, I thought about whether we could come up with a definition of teacher expertise that considers how teachers assert their expertise differently depending on the context. In the classroom, teachers want to position themselves as confident, informed, and prepared to answer students’ questions. This is what students expect from teachers, and students feel safe when they trust that their teacher knows the content and can attend to their needs. In fact, many teachers (myself included) enjoy when students ask challenging questions that cannot be answered on the spot. Still, many teachers may feel uncomfortable admitting to students that they do not know something or have made a mistake. We want to be confident in what we know yet also acknowledge that we do not know “everything.” For this reason, we might consider teacher expertise as a construct that exists on a continuum that allows for change and the influence of multiple factors.

Third, I wondered how the findings of this study may have been different if first-year ESL teachers (or less experienced teachers) had participated in the focus groups. It would be interesting to examine their growth over the 2-year period and see what they would learn from their more experienced colleagues. It would also be interesting to compare the responses of the two groups and analyze any similarities and differences between their views of teacher expertise. This is beyond the scope of this study, however, and left for future research.

Finally, the teachers in this study noted the value of taking part in weekly focus groups as participants in this research study because meeting in focus groups every week provided them the opportunity to regularly reflect on their teaching practices. I wonder how all teachers might engage in regularly scheduled discussions on a much smaller scale. Perhaps these discussions would first lead to conceptualizations of teacher expertise in local settings, and from there, additional data could inform other teaching contexts. For instance, teachers in an intensive English program at a university may define what expertise means in their specific academic setting, leading to the creation of a set of standards and benchmarks to be reached by teachers in that program and subsequently in other intensive English programs.

Moving Forward

Professor Farrell’s work has important implications for teacher education, and this body of work promises much for the future of English teacher education. I hope that this brief article has encouraged readers to reflect on their own notions of expertise and raised awareness of this valuable strand of research and practice.

REFERENCES

Farrell, T. S. C. (2013). Reflecting on teacher expertise: A case study. System, 41, 1070–1082.

Rodríguez, A., & McKay, S. (2010). Professional development for experienced teachers working with adult English language learners. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/caelanetwork/resources/experienced.html

Tsui, A. B. (2005). Expertise in teaching: Perspectives and issues. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Expertise in second language learning and teaching (pp. 167–189). New York, NY:Palgrave Macmillan.

Tsui, A. B. (2009). Teaching expertise: Approaches, perspectives, and characterizations. In A. Burns & J. Richards (Eds.), Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 190–197). Cambridge, United Kingdom:Cambridge University Press.

Ilka Kostka has been teaching ESL for the past 7 years as well as courses in second language acquisition, pedagogical English grammar, and literacy development for English language learners. Her research interests include second language (L2) academic writing and textual borrowing.