CHAPTER 4: PROGRAMME PRINCIPLES AND GOALS

4.1 Basic assumptions
Having analysed the research situation in Chapter 2 (stage 1 of the extended curriculum development model), and having reviewed the relevant literature in Chapter 3, it is necessary to "Establish principles and goals" (stage 2), asking: i) "What is the guiding philosophy?"; and ii) "What do we want to achieve through it?"  Holistic programme principles of process learning have already been derived through the literature reviews in Chapter 3 (cf. sections 3.4.4.3, 3.5), so this chapter will confine itself to programme goals.

A general[1] response to the second question (above) can be expected to focus on student "success", whether in increased scores on nationally-recognised tests (e.g. TOEFL[2], TOEIC[3], TEPS[4]), or in target-language proficiency (range of vocabulary, language usage/use [Widdowson 1978a], communicative competence, speaking skills, listening skills, etc.). However, while objective "results" represent "value for money" for sponsors, parents and students, as well as reassuring teachers and administrators that they are doing their job (the effectiveness of learning is related to the excellence of the teacher in "large power-distance" societies [Hofstede 1986]; cf. table 7), a formal "language-as-code" approach (as has been the case in Korea in recent history) can tend to focus on a linear view of learning and be driven by measurement of aspects of language that do not necessarily exist, convincing students who have successfully absorbed a great deal of vocabulary and structure in secondary schooling (occasionally more than their native-speaking English teachers), that they are "poor" language learners, since they have not acquired the whole language, and do not possess 100% grammatical accuracy. Such a situation, resulting in lack of confidence, reduced motivation (Lee 1991), dependence on the teacher for "correctness", and counter-productive learning beliefs (Victori & Lockhart 1995:225), cannot be seen as an acceptable "price to pay" for the goal of accuracy.

4.2 The main goal

Performance is an important aspect of language learning, and involves risk-taking, making errors, negotiating meaning, and constant practice – skills that secondary education has typically been unable to provide in Korea (Lee 1991:18). The primary goal of the programme in this study, as set by the President of Andong  National University (Dr. Lee Jin-seol), in line with Ministry of Education guidelines (section 2.3.1.2), was to address this situation and to emphasise productive skills, by requiring students to obtain 6 Credits of "Conversational English" over the first three of their four years of university study. This was approved by the university executive committee (the sponsors), but without consultation of parents, students, or teachers, and with some opposition from university deans, who were keen to allocate increased budgets to other departments, and who were "quietly resisting major language curricula reforms in order to maintan a scholastic, teacher-centered approach" (Hadley 1999:97). A "Language Centre" building was commissioned, and the writer was invited to design and implement the programme, having previously taught at the University for three years (1991-1994), and therefore being familiar with the learning needs of the students.

4.3 Programme Principles

While the main goal of the programme was communicative competence (section 1.1), three sub-goals of confidence, motivation, and independence (sections 1.1, 1.2, 2.2, 2.3.3.1, 3.5), were derived from the literature reviews (Chapter 3), as appropriate for the Korean situation (section 2.3.3.1; cf. Deci & Ryan's [1992] three main human needs of competence, relatedness, and autonomy). Motivation to learn is extremely important for language learning (Dickinson 1995; cf. section 3.3.2), and confidence that goals are attainable (cf. section 3.3.4 on anxiety) can help students to take risks while performing, without worrying about complete accuracy. Independence and self-direction (Dickinson 1978) is a valuable skill for all learners - "The only man who is educated is the man who has learned how to learn" (Rogers 1969:120) -   especially so for those who have little time to learn English, but who face a future in which the ability to "re-skill" promises to be an important factor.

4.3.1 Learner beliefs 
Implicit in the three sub-goals of the programme is a focus on attitude-change (in terms of perceptions and beliefs) on the part of students and teachers, since improvement in CMI[5] largely depends on subjective perceptions[6].  Learner beliefs and other affective factors are thus seen by Breen & Candlin (1980:91) as "both the driving force for learning, and also the motivation behind much everyday communication and the inspiration for the recreation of the conventions which govern such communication" (cf. Riley 1996b:155; cf. section 3.3.3). Self-reference is an important factor of such beliefs, and can be embodied in the logical proposition "Bp Þ p" (i.e. that believing ["B"] in a proposition ["p"] implies that the proposition is true). Thus believing that one is a poor learner (and even believing that one believes that one is a poor learner ["BBp"]), with low confidence and abilities, will lead to attitudes and study habits that confirm this belief. Attention to CMI therefore addresses the belief systems behind all language learning.

Internal and external assessment of the programme was based upon monitoring such beliefs (cf. Research instruments 2, 3 and 4, chapter 8) to see if they could be channelled (and altered) in a positive direction, so that students would adopt a proactive approach of "I believe that I am a competent learner" (cf. Cotterall 1999:494 on the correlation of positive beliefs and proficiency in speaking and reading). Examination of these determiners of learning (i.e. the participants' perceptions of their progress in communicative competence and in CMI; cf. research questions, section 1.2) offered a means of assessing language learning and evaluating the programme:

It is clear that we cannot rely on simple pre-test/post-test research designs to measure language gains. (Larsen-Freeman 1997:158)

4.3.2 Process
Consideration of affect (section 3.3), autonomy (section 3.2) and attitude change (section 3.3.3.4) in language-programme-design implies a student-centred approach, including authenticity (in learning experiences and learning materials) (cf. section 6.2.2), reflection (language-learning awareness [section 3.2.2.5], learner training [section 3.2.2.2], and self-assessment [section 3.2.3]). Promotion of the learning process over isolated (and ambiguous) "results" also suggests a view of learning in which the "means" is the "end", and points to a broader concept of language learning as education (cf. sections 3.2.1.3, 3.4.4.3). Such a humanistic perspective (cf. Rogers 1951; 1969; 1983; Maslow 1962; 1971;) concentrates on: i) high-level health and well-being; ii) the whole person; iii) the human motivation towards self-realization; iv) change and development; v) education as a life-long process; vi) respect for an individual's subjective experience; and vii) self-empowerment (Underhill: 1989:251). Underhill observes that attention to these themes in the classroom requires attention to what is often called process, a concept that was central to the programme evaluated in this study:

Process concerns the way in which the content of a lesson, syllabus, or curriculum is taught and learnt from the point of view of the learner, and how that content can become directly relevant to the lives of the learners. ... Whatever contributes to the ambient learning atmosphere, including the attitudes, values, and awareness of the teacher and of the learners, is part of the process. ... The dynamics of process revolve around issues such as authority and self-determination; co-operation and competition; expectation and motivation; the individual and the group; security and risk; failure and success; self-esteem and its absence; personal meaning; and how participants feel, think, and act in relation to themselves, to each other, and to what they are doing. (Underhill: 1989:251)

4.3.3 Evaluation
The formative nature of the evaluation meant that data was continually being fed back into the programme, and that change was an ongoing process (cf. section 1.3 for discussion of the rationale behind the adoption of this type of evaluation). However, the programme was also designed formatively, in that reflection was seen as an important aspect of holistic education, and reflective instruments were therefore intrinsic to learning how to set goals and assess achievement (in addition to their role in programme evaluation). Given the emphasis on affect and attitude change, therefore, it was decided to focus on such self-assessment instruments as measures of changes in learner/teacher beliefs (including CMI), the hypothesis being that students would perceive improved oral skills at the end of each semester (cf. table 53/4, below), that attitudes would become more positive, and that students would become motivated, confident, and able to continue the learning process by themselves.  

TABLE 53: RESEARCH INSTRUMENT 1, PART 1.

TABLE 54: RESEARCH INSTRUMENT 1, PART 2.

4.4  Conclusion
The primary programme goal of development of communicative competence, as interpreted by the writer in the Korean context, and based upon reference to relevant research and literature, necessitated attention to the affective factors of confidence and motivation and to learner autonomy (independence), mentioned in the Language Centre Mission Statement as sub-goals:

The Language Centre was set up to provide language learning opportunities for University students and local citizens. ... An English Conversation programme was initiated with the aims of developing communicative competence in ANU students ... and all activities and methodologies are seen in this light. Developing such competence involves:

                              i.       addressing lack of confidence in the students;
ii.       motivating students to become involved with their own learning;
iii.       helping students to become independent learners. (ANU Language Centre Mission Statement: http://lc.andong.ac.kr/eng/state.html)

The student-centred humanistic approach which grew from these goals introduced and confirmed a long-term view of the programme's purpose and role, so that addressing learner beliefs, and preparing students to be skilful problem-solvers (learner-training) and responsible members of society in their future lives (responsible learners), gained in importance as the programme progressed. In this way, the formative nature of the programme and of the evaluation influenced the very goals upon which it was based. Development of communicative competence remained the short-term benchmark, with promotion of CMI functioning as a means of attaining that goal. However, as the students and teachers began providing feedback (cf. research instrument 3, section 8.5), further sub-goals (consciousness, meaning, and interaction [section 6.2.4) appeared. The response to the second question at the beginning of this section ("What do we want to achieve through this language programme?") thus grew into "... a focus on the process of learning." This interaction of goals and principles is referred to in more detail in section 9.1, and is represented in figure 26.