Learner centred tutoring is an integral, yet often forgotten, part of English teaching, which meets the individual needs and goals of the participants. Yet what is understood by the term tutoring may very considerably in definition; label (from language exchange to individual consultation, student support or mentoring); size; time frame and purpose. Likewise ESP needs may range from preparing for an exam, to academic studies or conference presentations. So a broad definition of tutoring is taken which covers small group and one-to-one tutoring as well as groups with special needs and some insights may apply to shorter weekly student tutorials.
The goal of tutoring is not only to improve the communicative competence of learners but also to improve language learning strategies which promote learner autonomy. The addition of task based learning and cooperative group work promotes critical thinking, positive interdependence and cross cultural understanding. With regard to competencies, Canale and Swain's identification of grammatical; sociolinguistic; discourse and strategic competencies provides a very effective framework which tutors can reference to ensure competencies are being developed within tutorials (Scarcella and Oxford, 1992).
Initially the characteristics of tutorials and the classroom are compared. Secondly the benefits and pitfalls of learner-centred individual or small group tutoring are considered. Finally some strategies for more effective small group work are proposed. Specific comments from a questionnaire survey to a small sample of experienced teacher/tutors are also included.
Most teachers participating in the survey identified the typical classroom as less flexible and less able to meet the needs and interests of the learners especially in mixed ability classes. However most agreed that classrooms are livelier places as there are more opportunities for student interaction, more ideas and knowledge to draw on and a wider variety of activities can be offered. Others indicated that classes involve more preparation, organisation and marking; also discipline plays a larger role than in tutoring. However more facilities and equipment are available to assist teachers. Wilberg (1988) stresses "One-to-one teaching is different. Different, that is, from conventional class teaching. This fact cannot be overemphasised" (p.1).
The major benefit of small group and one-to-one tutoring was identified in the survey as its clearly directed focus on the specific needs and problems of the individual learners, but few offered practical suggestions on how to assess needs. The syllabus can be negotiated with the learner to closely fit the students needs and personal pace, and as a result sessions were often described as "intense" but also relevant and flexible. The teacher gets to know the "whole" learner, so can more easily assess and monitor progress and give immediate feedback. The atmosphere is usually more relaxed and informal.
The greater demands made on the learner are highlighted as the main drawback. For some learners, tutoring may be too intensive and even intimidating, especially for weaker ones. However it can be good for highly-motivated learners. It is intense because the learner has fewer opportunities to negotiate meaning with other learners, to experience cross-cultural exchange and to change partners or groups. In such a "close relationship," classroom strategies are often ineffective because of the small numbers and student personalities as more significant. Some learners may try to dominate or direct the session, or it may become too informal.
The first step is needs assessment which provides a unique opportunity to identify the learners' target needs, language strengths and weaknesses as well as learning needs such as preferred learning styles. Hutchinson and Waters (1987) recommend questionnaires, interviews, observations and informal consultations with sponsors and other relevant parties but a less formal means such as a conversation game may also be effective. Secondly as there is a very real danger in a tutorial that the student will become dependent on the tutor, learners should be encouraged to become more self-sufficient by developing learning strategies (Chamot and O'Malley, 1994).
Some of the intensity of the tutorial can be relieved by group or pair work, but students will need specific language for both task completion and group maintenance (Dornyei and Thurrell, 1994; Olsen and Spencer, 1992). A language sheet can assist with task functions such as explaining, agreeing, disagreeing or clarifying and group functions such as praising or asking others to contribute.
After suitable authentic materials have been found which match learners' needs and interests, and address weaknesses, carefully constructed real world tasks (Cohen, 1994) on the theme can promote sharing of information and experience or problem solving. These combine task based learning (Willis, 1998; Nunan, 1991) with recognized cooperative task strategies, such as those for EFL by Kagan & Kagan (1994) and Olsen & Spencer (1992). Such tasks promote collaboration and interdependence, individual accountability and sharing of responsibility (Johnson and Johnson, 1998). Students learn from each other and each student is accountable for both her own learning and for ensuring that all group members participate, and effectively complete the task. The teacher/tutor moves from centre stage to become a facilitator who prompts and provides feedback and correction.
Cooperative structures such as the "three-step-interview," "think-pair-share," and "round table," (Kagan & Kagan, 1994, p.14) are relevant. In addition, only one activity sheet and an open-ended or "ill-structured" task (Cohen, 1994) rather than one with a "right" answer will ensure greater collaboration.
After carefully planning the lesson, the tutor introduces and justifies the task, pairs the students (or joins a pair), and monitors language use, interaction and timing. Finally she provides group feedback and consolidation opportunities. Individual, peer and group assessment is ongoing, but the tutor must be alert for a student trying to get a "free ride" and ensure all contribute to the final assignment.
Tutoring is often considered to be a language exchange or "free talk", but the teachers surveyed here clearly take tutoring to be a challenging activity which differs considerably from classroom teaching. Individual and small group tutoring offers learners a chance to improve their communicative competence using a syllabus uniquely designed to meet their needs and problem areas. The benefits of this outweigh pitfalls such as the lack of variety and the greater demands made on the learner. In an academic setting it is, as one teacher highlighted, "particularly suitable for correcting, discussion and extending work that the learner has already prepared or completed such as essays or sections of a project."
Chamot, A.U. & O'Malley, J.M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the cognitive academic language learning approach. Mass.: Addison Wesley Publishing.
Cohen, G.E. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
Dornyei, Z & S. Thurrell. (1994). Teaching conversational skills intensively: course content and retionale. ELT Journal 48, 1, 40-49.
Hutchinson T & A. Waters. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning centred approach. Cambridge: CUP.
Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. (1998). Cooperative learning and social interdependence theory. http:/www.clcrc.com
Kagan, S. & Kagan, M. (1994). The structural approach: New tools for teachers. The Language Teacher, 18, 10, 12-17.
Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 2, 279-295.
Olsen, R.E. W-B & Spencer, K. (1992). In C. Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teacher's resource book (pp. 1-30). NJ, USA: Prentice Hall Regents.
Scarcella, R.C. & Oxford, R.L. (1992). The Tapestry of Language Learning: The individual in the communicative classroom. Boston, Mass.: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Wilberg, P. (1988). One to One. Sussex, UK: Language Teaching Publications.
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Longman.
Ann F. V. Smith
Centre for English Language Education
University of Nottingham
Email: Ann.Smith@nottingham.ac.uk