Commercial vs. in-house language training and testing in the Czech Republic
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 29

Introduction Czech training and testing system In-the-field inspections Findings Steps taken PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 59 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Commercial vs. in-house language training and testing in the Czech Republic Vilnius, Lithuania 10 May, 2011 LTC Jan Šmíd. Outline. Introduction Czech training and testing system In-the-field inspections Findings Steps taken Research Conclusion. Czech training and testing system.

Download Presentation

Introduction Czech training and testing system In-the-field inspections Findings Steps taken

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Commercial vs. in-house language training and testing in the Czech RepublicVilnius, Lithuania10 May, 2011LTC Jan Šmíd


Outline

Introduction

Czech training and testing system

In-the-field inspections

Findings

Steps taken

Research

Conclusion


Czech training and testing system

+ Contracted Instructors+ Contracted Examiners


Czech training and testing system

Sites

Outsourcing


Outsourcing + DLI

Czech DLI


Success rate


In-the-field inspections

  • Low awareness of STANAG 6001 descriptors

  • Low awareness of exam format

  • Frequent poor instructor preparation

  • Textbooks not sufficiently/effectively supplemented

  • 90 minute lessons

  • Lack of homework

  • Lack of homework feedback


Research

  • General information:

  • Years 2008 – 2010

  • 790 questionnaires distributed

  • 651 returned

  • Research questions in Czech: closed –ended qs, open-ended qs

  • 43 questions + 9 sub questions in 3 sections

    • General characteristics of a respondent

    • Feedback on language training

    • Feedback on language testing


Part I – General characteristics

Motivation for studying English?

Position requirement66.0%

Work-related reasons0.5%

Personal reasons7.1%

Part of curriculum4.6%

NATO position requirement7.8%

Studies abroad requirement3.6%

Deployment9.5%

EU battle group 0.9%


Part I – General characteristics

What is the language requirement?

No SLP/other3.0%

SLP 11001.5%

SLP 111131.0%

SLP 22117.0%

SLP 222246.8%

SLP 33221.8%

SLP 33338.9%

10


Part I – General characteristics

How do you perceive the requirement?

SLP 0

Low43.8%

Adequate37.5%

High0.0%

Irrelevant18.7%


Part I – General characteristics

How do you perceive the requirement?

SLP 1100

Low0.0%

Adequate25.0%

High25.0%

Irrelevant50.0%


Part I – General characteristics

How do you perceive the requirement?

SLP 1111

Low11.8%

Adequate71.7%

High6.4%

Irrelevant10.1%


Part I – General characteristics

How do you perceive the requirement?

SLP 2211

Low5.4%

Adequate27.1%

High37.8%

Irrelevant 29.7%


Part I – General characteristics

How do you perceive the requirement?

SLP 2222

Low3.2%

Adequate71.8%

High18.7%

Irrelevant6.3%


Part I – General characteristics

How do you perceive the requirement?

SLP 3322

Low0.0%

Adequate63.6%

High36.4%

Irrelevant 0.0%


Part I – General characteristics

How do you perceive the requirement?

SLP 3333

Low0.0%

Adequate78.0%

High22.0%

Irrelevant0.0%


Part II – Language Training

The course was taught by

DLI18.5%

Komorní Hrádek3.3%

Defence University1.1%

Outsourcing74.6%


Part II – Language Training

Satisfaction with instructors

Absolutely no4.6%

No23.3%

Yes53.1%

Absolutely yes19.0%


Part II – Language Training

Absolutely no – reasons:

No info on the exam25.0%

Poor instructor preparation40.0%

Unsuitable demeanour5.0%

Not relevant education5.0%

Too many instructors5.0%

Not specified20.0%


Part II – Language Training

No – reasons:

No info on the exam12.8%

Poor instructor preparation22.1%

Unsuitable demeanour9.3%

Not relevant education3.5%

Too many instructors7.0%

Too few instructors1.1%

No native speaker3.5%

Not specified40.7%


Part II – Language Training

Yes – reasons:

Appropriate methodology9.3%

Suitable demeanour8.8%

Not specified81.9%


Part II – Language Training

Absolutely yes – reasons:

Appropriate methodology20.0%

Suitable demeanour36.3%

Not specified43.8%


Part II – Language Training

Satisfaction with course books used

Absolutely no22.9%

(Face to face, Headway)

No34.9%

(Headway, Face to face)

Yes36.8%

(Headway, ALC, Face to face)

Absolutely yes5.4%

(ALC, Headway)


Part III – Language Testing

Source of information on the STANAG 6001 exam

Czech DLI website53.0%

Colleague, friend10.0%

Instructor28.1%

Examiner1.0%

No information7.9%


Part III – Language Testing

Was the information sufficient?

Yes56.6%

No43.4%


Part III – Language Testing

Have you read the STANAG 6001 descriptors?

Yes28.7%

No25.9%

What are they?45.4%


Conclusion

  • MoD level – suggestions:

  • Selecting procedures

  • On-site inspections

  • DLI level – stepstaken:

  • Frequent inspections

  • More user-friendly DLI website

  • STANAG 6001 exam familiarization guide

  • Seminars for language instructors – both MoD and outsourcing


Questions?Thank you.


  • Login