1. 1
Universidad Católica de la
Santísima Concepción
Reaction Paper
Name: Dannae Del Campo
Teacher: Roxanna Correa

2. 2
Summary
Ur (2002) in her text called “the English teacher as a professional”
explains the contrast between professionalism and other concepts, such as, lay,
amateur, technician and academic. The first contrast which is explored is
professional versus lay. According to the author the professional group possesses
certain skills, knowledge and conventions that the lay group does not have. The
second one is professional versus amateur, Ur (2002) argues that the distinction
between these two is based on consistent differences in performance in the field,
involving the quality of preparatory and ongoing learning, standards and
commitment. The third contrast is professional versus technician, the author
explains that a technician performs acts with skills and becomes more skillful
through practice while the professional not only has to acquire skills but also
knowledge and thought. The last contrast is professional versus academic, Ur
(2002) defines an academic as a researcher, lecturer, and writer usually based in a
university while the professional is a bringer-about of real world change which
means that the professional prioritizes real time action whereas the academic
prioritizes thought. Moreover, Ur (2002) names a list of characteristics that
English teachers as professionals should possess, some of the characteristics are,
teachers are autonomous, they publish and communicate their innovatory ideas,
they are committed to reach certain standards of performance, they are a
community and an identifiable group and they learn continually about their
subject. Finally, Ur (2002) states that English teaching has not yet reached the
level of professionalism which for the author seems desirable.
Pettis (2002) in her text called “developing our professional competence: some
reflections”, explains that the role of an educator is multifaceted. She also mentions that

3. 3
the teacher’s goal is to facilitate the development of the students’ communicative
competences. Pettis (2002) suggest the definition for communicative competences
provided by Teddy and Walker (1994) which is defined as the ability to communicate
and understand messages across linguistic boundaries. Moreover, she mentions that a
good language teacher must consider three things. The first one is to be principled and
knowledgeable in addition to skillful, which means that these three implications must be
balanced, otherwise the teacher’s performance would be limited. The second one is that
teachers must have present that their professional needs will change over the time. The
author mentions that novice teachers are worried about What-to-teach, while expert
teachers want to explore How-to and Why questions so their needs are different.
Moreover, Pettis (2002) expresses that it is necessary to continue developing those
interests and needs so teachers can learn to make better decisions about the activities
and techniques used in class. At last Pettis (2002) explains the importance of personal
commitment to professional development, meaning that teachers need to be constantly
upgraded so they can develop their personal commitment and grow professionally.
Crandall (1996) mentions some activities that help teachers to fulfill their personal
commitment. It is mentioned among these activities that teachers can take courses, read
journals, talk and observe their colleagues, review textbooks and classroom research to
conduct. Taylor (2002) refers in a deeper way to one of the activities named above
which is the classroom research. Taylor (2002) answers seven questions in his text
named “Research in your own classroom. These questions are the following, How
might I become interested in investigating my own classroom? The answer of this
question is that teachers want to know about their classrooms in practical and theoretical
levels. For example, the author explains that in a practical level would be when teachers
are interested in how the learners work better, maybe seating in small groups or as a

4. 4
whole class. And in a theoretical level, would be the patterns of interaction by learners
in small-groups settings. How might I make these links between practice and theory?,
Collaborate or go it alone?, What have other researchers found out about my area of
interest?, How do I go about investigating my own classroom? In this question the
author explains four steps. First, teachers must focus on the investigations, then collect
the information, analyze the information and finally make sense of it. How can research
in my own classroom help my teaching? The author explains that this would help
teachers in their planning and teaching their classes in the future through the
experimentation and observation of the subjects, in this case, the learners. Thus,
teachers are able to see learners’ reactions and orientations in specific situations.
Finally, the last question is, do I report my finding?.
In addition to one of the points explained by Pettis (2002) about professional
development is Hayes (2000) who wrote the paper called “Cascade training and
teachers’ professional development”. Hayes (2000) explains in his text a strategy for
introducing major innovations into educational systems. This strategy is called cascade
model in which training is lead by teachers drawn from a level above. According to
Gilpin (1997) this strategy has some benefits, some of them are that the model does not
require long periods out of service and it uses existing teaching staff as co-trainers.
Nevertheless, it also brings with it some disadvantages, the principal one is that the
message is less and less understood the further one goes down the cascade. However,
the author states that the model is not the problem but the way in which is often
implemented. Therefore, an innovation of the cascade model was implemented. For the
cascade training to be successful it should be taking into account that the expertise must
be diffused and not concentrated at the top, that the method of conducting the training
must be experiential and reflective, the decentralization of responsibilities within the

5. 5
cascade structure and that the training must be open to reinterpretation. He also relates
this strategy to his experience on the development programme called the Sri Lanka
primary English language project (PELP). This project has a number of basic principles
which are, participative development, context sensitivity, normative re-educative
models of training, reflexivity, classroom-centredness, collaboration, responsiveness,
continuing professional development.
Finally, is the text written by Brown (2001) called “continuing your teacher
education” where the author explains four rules to reap success. The first rule is to set
realistic goals, the second one is to set priorities, the third is to take risks and at last to
practice principles of stress management. Brown (2001) also provides a list of
characteristics that a good language teacher must have. First to all, a good teacher must
have technical knowledge, which means that the teacher understands the linguistic
system of English phonology, grammar and discourse. The second one is to have
pedagogical skills, which is to understand and use a wide variety of techniques, use
appropriate principles of classroom management, creatively adapt materials and aids,
etc… The third characteristic is to have interpersonal skills, which is to be aware of the
cross-cultural differences of students, to value their opinions and abilities, to cooperate
with colleagues, among others. And the final characteristic is to have personal qualities,
which means to be well organized and to set short-term and long-term goals. Brown
(2001) also refers to classroom research and he gives four points to start an effective
action research. The first one is to convert your ideas into specific questions, the second
one operationally define the elements of your questions, the third is to determine how
you will answer your question and at last to interpret your results appropriately.
Moreover, Brown (2001) explains the importance of teacher collaboration and learning

6. 6
from each other where teachers can do peer coaching, team teaching, action research,
teacher support groups, etc...
Evaluation
According to Brown (2001) a good language teacher must have technical
knowledge, pedagogical skills, interpersonal skills and personal qualities which is
similar to what Pettis (2002) wrote. Pettis (2002) explains that a good language teacher
must have knowledge which is the equivalent to technical knowledge in Brown’s ideas
(2001), a teacher also need to have principles which is the equivalent to interpersonal
skills and at last a teacher needs to have skills which is the equivalent to pedagogical
skills. One of the main topics in Brown’s (2001) text is the term “action research”. The
author points out that teachers are more suitable to make classroom research because
they know about what they will investigate. In my opinion, the experience that teachers
have inside the classroom is helpful to build the questions that will form the research.
Moreover, it is a good way to learn and develop as a professional. The same idea is
explained by Taylor (2002) although the name changes to “investigation in your own
classroom”. The conclusion was the same, the author believes that if teachers do their
own research it would be helpful for them in the future to improve their own
performance while planning and using new techniques. The problem is that in our
context is difficult that teachers carry out a research because they are not disposed to
add more weight to their work and the reward is little in terms of salary which is what is
motivating for many teachers. Brown (2001) also promotes the idea of teacher
collaboration which is helpful in terms of saving time because a teacher can be
beneficiary of a good feedback by being observed by a colleague and not only one

7. 7
person is beneficiary but both. The person who is observing can also learn from the
teacher exposing the class acquiring good ideas from it. Nevertheless, this can also
present some problems. Many teachers can feel threatened by being observed or a level
of stress can be added to them by knowing they are being evaluated which can affect
their performance. Finally, the last important point to mention about Brown (2001) is
the topic of critical thinking. It is necessary that teachers allow students to think by
themselves, otherwise, teachers would form people without opinion. It is important that
a teacher let their students express their thoughts and not force them to have an establish
opinion.
Pettis (2002) points out in her paper that a teacher with knowledge and
principles and without the appropriate skills is limited. It can be said, that is not enough
to have the knowledge of a specific subject if you do not know how to deliver it in an
effective manner. The same happens in the case that a teacher has the skills but not the
knowledge; it is limited because it is impossible to know the techniques to teach and not
having clear the information to deliver. That is why people who are an expertise in a
certain area but do not have studies of pedagogy need to do a course to learn how to
teach. The author also refers to the different needs novice teachers and experienced
teachers have. She says that novice teachers are concern with what-to teach and
experienced teacher are concerned with how-to and why questions. It is necessary to
state my disagreement in this point because what it is more worrying for novice teachers
is how-to teach in terms of motivating the students, especially the ones with social risk,
because experience is what gives teachers the knowledge to control students. It is
important to point out that teachers only have to follow the plans and programs the
government gives them to know what to teach and in what level. Nevertheless, what it
might be a problem, it is trying to get a group of students to the same English level. In

8. 8
that case, a teacher would have to modify the program and choose what-to teach to lead
the students to a similar level of knowledge. On the other hand, the experienced teachers
have the skills to know how-to make a class, which techniques are the best, how to
control a group, etc… Finally, the author states that the development of professional
competence is a lifelong process and that a teacher should be aware that is both a
teacher and a learner. It is easy to agree with this statement because education is moving
forward every day, new methodologies, new techniques, new investigations which can
help teachers to develop their own skills to become even a better professional and
deliver their knowledge of the best way possible. That is why the author encourages
teachers to attend conferences, take courses, do classroom research, etc…
In this reporting reading and according to Taylor (2002) only teachers can carry
out researches because they are the ones who know the context and have the experience
to investigate the issues that concern them. Nevertheless, it would be better if in a
classroom research not only participate a teacher but also a psychologist. Thus, the
analysis of what they investigated would be much more complete, both areas are
important at the moment of leading a class. It is worth to remember what Brown (2001)
states in his text called “continuing your teacher education”. He said that interpersonal
skills are equally important than technical knowledge, which proves that teachers must
have in mind the psychological aspects. However, even when Taylor (2002) expresses
that teacher must carry out researches it is unlikely to occur in our context. Teachers
work an average of 44 hours at schools and the majority of them do not want to add
more work than they already have. Some possible solutions for this issue would be the
creation of a research bonus where the teachers that have the motivation of developing
as professional can be benefited by it. Another solution would be to reduce the average
of hours to work by eliminating two hours of classes and leaving them as a teacher

9. 9
personal development work which can benefit not only the teacher but also the
institution by giving them better results. Finally, Taylor (2002) expresses her support to
team work. She explains that this way of collaboration it is easier for teachers to learn
from your colleagues and talking over methodology problems and issues presented in
class. Nevertheless, it is also important to investigate by your own because you might
find some journals or resources in a library which can help you with your same area of
investigation and in that way you can be prepared to discuss with your colleagues.
After reading Ur (2002) it is easy to understand why a teacher cannot be a lay,
an amateur, an academic or a technician. Teachers need to be professionals, that is why
it is necessary to agree when the author says that a professional teacher may only try out
new things if they are confident that they will benefit their students’ learning. That is
the distinction between a professional and an amateur, an amateur can commit mistakes
because they do things for fun, but we, as pre-service teachers, can not commit big
mistakes because we are forming people. Teachers do not only transmit knowledge but
also they form people in every aspect of their life to insert them inside a society which
is a big responsibility for teachers to commit a mistake. The same happens with
technician, they are skillful and they develop those skills through experience and time,
but a professional not only needs experience and time, they need pedagogical
knowledge, technical knowledge, and interpersonal skills. Another important state made
by Ur (2002) is when she says that English teaching has not yet reached the level of
professionalism which seems desirable. This happens in Chile, I have noticed in my
practice at schools that many English teachers do not reach the necessary standards to
teach a second language. That is why educators along the country are being evaluated
every year to demonstrate that they are competent and they can carry out their
profession in an effective manner. An example of this are teachers of different areas

10. 10
who get their degree with an “English mention” and they are actually working as
English teachers at high schools. A solution for this issue would be the existence of a
regulation in which only English teachers can work with the higher levels at school and
high schools which require a better technical knowledge from the teacher. Finally, this
lead us to the topic that Ur (2002) expresses as a characteristic teachers should have.
Teachers must be committed to reach certain standards of performance which is clearly
not being carried out.
Finally, after analyzing Hayes (2000), it can be said that putting in practice the
cascade model in our context would be a benefit for teachers that do not have time for
doing a post-graduate course because of their jobs. Moreover, this training would keep
teachers active in the process of evaluating if their performance is effective or what they
can improve to become a better professional. Therefore, this is a good manner to
motivate teachers to keep upgrade and collaborate with their colleagues if the cascade
model is implemented in the correct manner. The innovation of the cascade model
allowed improving many disadvantages initially found. However, another idea to keep
developing this model is to establish monitors in charge to prove that the delivery of the
information is the same produce by the primary source.
Nevertheless, it can be said that even when the cascade model is a good idea to
developing teaching, I still believe that it would be better and easier to receive a direct
feedback from the expertise trainer. That is why I find that the idea proposed by Brown
(2001) with his “peer coaching” would be more effective. It is worth to remember that
with the peer coaching process of collaboration the observer gives the teacher feedback
of a specific topic that it needs to be improved which makes it more personalized. On
the other hand, with the cascade model teachers are not directly observed but they
receive a message to learn from the expertise at the top most levels. Thus, the trainers

11. 11
who are at the top do not improve their teaching because they are the ones providing the
message to learn. The peer coaching proposed by Brown (2001) provides a mutual
learning, which means that both sides of the team are benefit, the observer for analyzing
another’s one teaching developing the person’s metacognitive ability to reflect on the
teaching process and the teacher exposing is benefit by become aware of the
weaknesses and strengths of his or her teaching. In addition to this, it might happen that
teachers cannot balance their work as an educator and their work as a teacher, which is
difficult when you work several hours a week in more than one establishment which
happens especially at state-funded schools. Finally, the cascade model proposed by
Hayes (2000) it is a good idea but for our own reality and context it would be better to
apply the process of collaboration proposed by Brown (2001) called peer coaching.

12. 12
References
Brown, H.D (2001). Continuing your teacher education. In Teaching by principles. An
interactive approach to language pedagogy. (pp.426-447)
Crandall,J. (1996,May). The challenge of professionalism and professionalization in
ESL. Keynote address presented at the national TESL Canada Conference in
Winnipeg.
Hayes, D. (2000). Cascade training and teachers’ professional development. ELT
Journal, 54/2, 135-145.
Pettis,J. (2002). Developing our professional competence: some reflections. In
Richards, J.C. & Renandya, W.A (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching.
(pp.393-396). New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, E. (2002). Research in your own classroom. In Richards, J.C. & Renandya,
W.A (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching. (pp.397-403). New York, USA:
Cambridge University Press.
Tedick, D.J., & Walker, C.L. (1994). Second language teacher education: The problems
that plague us. Modern Languages Journal, 78, 300-312.
Ur,P. (2002).The English teacher as professional. In Richards, J.C. & Renandya, W.A
(Eds.), Methodology in language teaching. (pp.388-392). New York, USA:
Cambridge University Press.