In December of 2012, the late President of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, signed Decree 1875, a measure enacted to promote nationwide foreign language instruction. Beginning with the 2013–2014 academic year, special focus was given to English language instruction. To that end, beginning in 2014, all postsecondary full-time English language teachers with a minimum of 3 years of English language teaching experience were sent to Uzbek State World Languages University in the capital city, Tashkent, for a 2-month professional development course. Throughout these 2 months, they attended seminars on topics such as modern methodology, using technology in foreign language teaching, and how to plan curriculum and assess learners. From this point on, every 3 years, teachers will continue to travel to Tashkent from their home regions to attend these retraining courses with a view to improving their teaching.

In September of 2017, shortly after my arrival in Tashkent, I was asked to serve as a consultant for the 2-month retraining period from 3 October to 3 December. I would observe various training classes; give feedback on aspects such as methodology, books, and assessment; and even teach one or two methodological classes. One of the methodological lessons I presented to the teachers was a modified, tech-free model of blended learning.

In many countries, the education systems still cling to teacher-centered methodologies. After teaching in northwestern Uzbekistan during the 2015–2016 academic year, it was clear that many teachers in Uzbekistan followed this model. Fortunately, there is a strong desire for change. The retraining will be continually revised and improved, striving to show teachers how to use learner-centered methodologies to teach language. After 2 months, they will return to their home regions to resume teaching, incorporating what they have learned into their classes.

Though a learner analysis may include a formal, written questionnaire, I engaged the trainees in a conversation, making it clear that their assistance would be used to help me advise the director of the training center. Not only did I want to provide essential feedback for the improvement of the teacher training program, but I also needed guidance for the kind of master class I would teach. These were the questions:

1. Which classes have you taken so far?
2. Which ones were the most helpful and why?
3. Which ones were the least helpful and why?
   
   

Overwhelmingly, the responses were in favor of classes offering practical application and/or newer teaching methodology. Of the teachers I asked, none of them liked the classes that were strictly lecture based.

Smith and Ragan (as cited in Brown & Green, 2016) designed a five-step learning task analysis, which is what I used to design my Station Rotation Task. The steps are:

1. Write a learning goal.
2. Determine the types of learning of the goal.
3. Conduct an information-processing analysis of the goal.
4. Conduct a prerequisite analysis and determine the type of learning of the prerequisites.
5. Write learning objectives for the learning goal and each of the prerequisites.
   
   

In addition to the questions asked of the teachers, I also spoke to some of the teacher trainers to ascertain what kind of instruction the learners needed, employing these trainers as unofficial subject-matter experts. Most commonly, I was asked to show teachers methods that emphasized differentiation in the English language classroom, teaching multilevel classes, and new methodology that would enable teachers to teach learner-centered classes.

Blended learning is an educational model that combines online and offline instruction. (Blended Learning 101 Handbook, 2013). I designed my master class to show the Station Rotation Model, a blended learning model that I first learned when I was in my early years as an English language teacher. In this model, learners in a classroom are divided into small groups. There are three or four learning stations, each one focusing on a different activity. After the allotted time set by the teacher, students will move to another station. This continues until all students have visited each station. The instructional portion is explained in detail in another part of this article, but the general organization of my master class was as follows (Figure 1):

Figure 1. Master class organization.

One of the limitations in Uzbekistan currently is the lack of internet access in classrooms, even at top universities in the nation. Therefore, while the traditional Station Rotation Model would include online and offline learning (Figure 2(a)), it was necessary to modify the model to reflect the realities of a language classroom in Uzbekistan (Figure 2(b)).

Figure 2. Traditional Station Rotation Model (a) and modified version for Uzbekistan (b).

Teachers were interested in learning new methodology. Though most teachers had heard of the blended learning concept, only some could define it—but even they did not know how to use it in their own classrooms. Rather than simply talking about Station Rotation, it was important to show them how it worked in the classroom, providing them with a new way to teach their students once they returned to their home region.

After designing the learning model (see Figure 1), I designed the lesson with the following instructional objectives:

• After participating in a practical application of modified blended learning, teacher trainees will be able to accurately identify the components of the Station Rotation Model without error.
• Given examples of the Station Rotation Model of blended learning, teacher trainees will be able to construct their own model with 80% accuracy.

The training module took place during an 80-minute class. To demonstrate how the blended learning model works, I chose a simple lesson on the parts of speech. Borrowing from something one of my graduate school professors did, I begin with practical application. For the first 30 minutes, teachers acted as students and I was the only teacher in the room. Participants were divided into small groups, working at three different stations. After 10 minutes, they moved to another station (see Table 1).

Table 1. Station Rotation Model Example, Part 1 (Practical Application)

After 30 minutes, the practical application stopped and we began discussing what teachers noticed and the theoretical foundations for the model. Teachers responded to questions as to what they (students) were doing, what I (teacher) was doing, and where were the best stations for lower and upper level students to begin.

During the final part of the training module, teachers remained in their groups but were now required to create a new Station Rotation Model for a specific skill. They were given the choice of listening and speaking, reading, or writing. After each group chose their skill, they were given 10 minutes to design a workable model for their classroom. Then, each group presented its model to the entire class, with audience members critiquing what did or did not work.

Twelve learners engaged in the instruction. The practical group work served as an informal, formative assessment, allowing me to discern whether the participants understood how the model worked. As we concluded the lesson, I conducted an informal summative assessment, asking the teachers whether this was something they could realistically do in their own classrooms. One teacher commented on how useful it was to ask them to build the model based on what I had demonstrated. Other teachers gave me private feedback. One 30-year teaching veteran told me that the other teachers in her class view her as an expert. Yet, she said that after my lesson, she realized there was much for her to learn still, despite her many years of teaching. Unfortunately, there will be no way for me conduct a long-term summative assessment to discover whether teachers will use this method in their classrooms. At the writing of this project, they have all returned to their home regions, and I will shortly return to the United States.

References

Aspire Public Schools. (2013). Blended learning 101: Handbook (1st ed.). Retrieved from http://aspirepublicschools.org/media/filer_public/2013/07
/22/aspire-blended-learning-handbook-2013.pdf

Brown, A., & Green, T. (2016). The essentials of instructional design: Connecting fundamental principles with process and practice (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

President resolves to improve foreign language learning system. (2012, December 11). Uzbekistan National News Agency. Retrieved from http://uza.uz/en/society/president-resolves-to-develop-foreign-language
-learning-system-11.12.2012-3147

Rebecca Martin has been teaching English since 2010. She recently spent 2 years in Uzbekistan as an English Language Fellow, a program funded by the U.S. Department of State.