Stepping Out of the Silos: Training Teachers, Training Trainers

Introduction

In light of the internationalisation of education and the emergence of English-Medium Education (EME), rethinking pedagogy for the twenty-first century is as crucial as identifying the new competencies that today’s learners need to develop. While formal education must be transformed (Scott, 2015) to enable the new forms of learning that are needed to tackle complex global challenges (United Nations, 2015), research on EME offers compelling arguments for transforming pedagogy to better support acquisition of twenty-first century skills (Coyle, 2013; Dafouz & Smit, 2016; Valcke & Wilkinson, 2017)). However, the question of how best to teach these skills is largely overlooked. Experts recognize that the ‘transmission’ or lecture model is highly ineffective for teaching the necessary knowledge, skills, and values needed for the international classroom, yet widespread use of this model continues. In spite of widespread agreement that learners: “[…] need to be able to work with people who aren’t like [them]. [They] must communicate well, both in writing and in person. And [they] ought to be able to solve problems in new and creative ways” (Vaccariello & Haar Siegel, 2018, p.1). This means that graduates need to develop critical thinking, the ability to communicate effectively in any language, innovate, and solve problems through negotiation and collaboration. In short, they need to be able to function effectively in multilingual and multicultural environments.

A change in the medium of instruction brings the quality of content acquisition to the fore and specifically the quality of what is delivered and how. The curriculum therefore becomes pivotal in determining the quality of teaching and learning and implies that curricular development teams rethink and reshape how the curriculum is delivered. The curriculum is central to Leask’s definition of Internationalisation of the Curriculum (IoC): “[…] the incorporation of international, intercultural and global dimensions into the content of the curriculum as well as the learning outcomes, assessment tasks, teaching methods and support services of a study programme” (Leask, 2015, p.9). IoC becomes a useful tool since it connects research-based evidence with practice by applying innovative curricular design to internationalise teaching and learning.

The development of internationalisation and EME have arguably contributed to a shift in the perceived role of university teachers in developing the global and international skills in their students. Adopting twenty-first century pedagogy therefore requires teachers to rethink their reasoning about what they teach and why, and to rethink who they are as teachers. It requires them to “resituate themselves professionally, not as a traditional teacher, but as a highly skilled advanced learner” (Saavedra & Opfer, 2012, p.6). Meaningful professional development requires teachers to “shift their paradigm” – to break with and replace their past ways of thinking and knowing with a totally new understanding of their role and its purpose” (Bull & Gilbert, 2012, p.6). Indeed, the increase in EME in Higher Education Institutions and internationalisation has necessarily led to concerns about the type of professional development education developers may also require in terms of providing training for the international classroom. Despite the numerous opportunities offered by the global economy, there is still a critical need for universal access to quality education and visionary leadership (Cisco Systems, 2009, p. 3).

So, how can teaching staff best support learners to develop these essential skills for the twenty-first century? What kind of training should be provided to higher education teaching staff? And who should provide the training? This chapter will attempt to describe the thinking behind a teacher training course for higher education teaching staff in order to prepare them for teaching in the international classroom.