Introduction

English is widely used as second or foreign language or as a language of international communication in almost all the countries of the world. Its study is compulsory for students from Classes I to XII (Grades 1 to 12) in Bangladesh (Islam, 2010). The main objective is to equip the learners with communicative competence to face the challenges of the 21^stcentury. Teacher training plays a very crucial role for effective and state-of-the-art teaching in the classroom in order to achieve this objective. (H. R. Khan, 2005; Quader, 2005). To make English language teaching (ELT) successful and meaningful in practice, since 2000 the government and non-government organizations (NGOs), which are often supported by external donors (Hamid & Erling, 2016), have been investing a huge amount of money in training English language teachers on how to teach English language following the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach in Bangladesh (Roshid, 2008). It is important to mention that English was taught following the Grammar Translation Method (GTM) before CLT was introduced in the 1990s (Haque, 1999). When the communicative approach was introduced, textbooks were written communicatively, integrating the four skills of language, and highlighting real-life situations and activities (H. R. Khan, 2005; Yasmin, 2008). Teachers were trained to teach communicatively as well. In 2012, the communicative curriculum, along with the textbooks and the assessment system, was revised (National Curriculum and Textbook Board, 2012). Following the curricular changes, the training courses mentioned above were initiated.

Despite all these changes and teacher training initiatives, significant changes in ELT were not noticed, and the ELT training was not found to be transferred to the classroom by the trained teachers (Huda, 2015). In the micro-teaching or simulation sessions of ELT training courses, many trainee teachers performed well, but they faced obvious challenges in implementing their skills learnt from the training sessions into real classrooms (Huda, 2015). This study gives an overview of intensive In-service Teacher (INSET) training programs provided to secondary English teachers in Bangladesh. The aims of the study are to investigate the degree of implementation of the teaching skills, techniques, and knowledge of the trained teachers in the actual classrooms; to identify the challenges they face in implementing training-based skills, techniques, and knowledge in their real classrooms; and to identify recommendations of the teachers and master trainers (MTs) to overcome these challenges.

The findings of the study should identify the degree of implementation of training by the trained teachers, and the problems they face while implementing it, and thus help policy makers formulate their policies for implementing the training, removing the identified challenges in achieving the desired goal.

Literature Review

English language teaching in Bangladesh has been teacher-centered both in the past before the CLT era and now during it. In both cases students have been able to rarely engage in classroom activities. In Bangladesh, ELT means reading aloud from the English textbook provided by the government, defining any unfamiliar words to the learners, and translating each sentence from English into Bengali (Hamid & Baldauf, 2008; Haque, 1999; Yasmin, 2008).

GTM and its variants have been used extensively in different parts of the world since the first half of the 19th century (Dutta, 2006). However, this approach failed to prepare learners to communicate in the target language in real-life situations, and, hence, the necessity to make the students communicatively competent was felt. Although CLT originated in the late 1960s and expanded in the 1970s (Dutta, 2006), it was introduced in Bangladesh in 1996 (R. A. Khan, 2005), and, it has been used since then. Its principles are still followed in the writing of course books and other teaching resources globally. According to Richards (2006), “…it has influenced many other language teaching approaches that subscribe to a similar philosophy of language teaching” (p. 45). CLT is unique for paying systematic attention to both functional and structural aspects of language, and for combining them more communicatively(Littlewood, 1981).

According to Richards and Rogers (2014), “Communicative Language Teaching…marks the beginning of a major paradigm shift within language teaching in the twentieth century whose ramifications continue to be felt today” (p. 81). They further state that CLT, as an approach, includes a varied set of principles based on interactionism that leads to a wide range of classroom procedures (Richards & Rogers, 2014).

Background of ELT teacher training in Bangladesh

Teaching is a dynamic process characterized by constant change, and teachers’ behavior needs to adapt according to the changes in teaching and learning context (Sultana, 2005). To cope with these changes, teachers need to develop themselves professionally. With the introduction of CLT in 1996 in Bangladesh many training programmes were launched by different training institutes, projects, and NGOs to train and equip teachers with the techniques of CLT. Among them, the training courses offered by the English Language Teaching Improvement Project (ELTIP), the Post-primary Basic and Continuing Education (PACE) programme of BRAC, Teaching Quality Improvement (TQI) in Secondary Education Project (TQI-SEP), the National Academy for Educational Management (NAEM), and very recently, English in Action (EIA) projects (Anwaruddin, 2016; Hamid & Jahan, 2020) are prominent. These courses are basically based on pedagogy, aiming to help English teachers cope with the changes in the curriculum and teaching methods and techniques. Most of the abovementioned courses are based on the reflective model that gained wide acceptance in teacher education (R. A. Khan, 2005).

There have been several studies on ensuring quality English education at the secondary level in Bangladesh by both government and non-government organizations (Chowdhury & Farooqui, 2012; Farooqui, 2014; Haider & Chowdhury, 2012; Karim et al., 2017; Rahman et al., 2018). However, in most studies, the issue of training has been investigated from the perspectives of implementing the curriculum, teaching, communicative language teaching, or language policy. Most direct studies on training are found in large-scale training programmes, such as ELTIP, EIA, and PACE. Nonetheless, various short-term in-service training programmes are offered by government and non-government organizations. Research-based studies on their effectiveness and outcomes are hard to find. Hence, this study, in particular, researches the post-training experiences of teachers who have received short-term training from a government organization.

The state of CLT training

Training for teachers was intended to bring about a constructive reformation in the quality of teaching; however, inactual fact, this did not seem to have occurred because the training was not carried out as planned (Ahmed, 2005; Ara, 2005; Huda, 2015). Training, be it long term or short term, does not ensure its effective implementation and desired outcome (Hassan, 2013). Due to an absence of supervision, trained teachers are often found to be disinclined to implement their training-based knowledge. Often, INSET and real practices have contextual differences (Sim, 2011). Though attempts have been made to explore teachers’ changed behavior after INSET (Ashrafuzzaman, 2018, English in Action, 2009; Shah et al., 2011), several studies (Ahmed, 2005; Ara, 2005) have identified constraints in implementing training in the classroom. They are detailed below.

First, the success of training largely depends on the competence of the English language teachers. However, throughout the country, there seems to be a great scarcity of qualified teachers who are able to teach communicatively (Ahmed, 2005; Ara, 2005; Huda, 2015).

Second, according to Barman et al. (2006) culture plays an important role when it comes to innovation in language pedagogy. They noted that teachers and students are unwilling to accept the transition from teacher-centered classes to learner-centered classes, roughly comparable to the conditions in Japan (Matsumoto, 2015), because local cultural codes perceive it improper for students to be casual or argue with teachers; such action is usually considered to be disrespectful according to local conventions.

Third, teaching and testing are interrelated, and teaching may be ineffective if it is not reflected in testing. Language testing in Bangladesh is characterized primarily by rote learning; such a system is geared toward testing memory-based knowledge rather than language proficiency or communicative competence (Shahidullah, 1999). Though it is clearly stated in the syllabus objectives that students’ communicative ability will be tested, practically, testing items are taken from the textbook contents and students’ mastery of these contents ensures them getting better grades on the examination (Shahidullah, 1999). Though attempts have been made to integrate listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills equally in the textbook, only reading and writing skills are included in the examinations; other skills are completely ignored (Huda, 2015), resulting in a negative backwash effect.

Fourth, class size has always been considered a vital factor in the context of foreign language teaching. Class management and application of training or teaching methodology becomes complicated when the class is a large one, but, in Bangladesh, large classes are an unavoidable reality in almost all secondary educational institutions (Islam et al., 2005; Kabir, 2012). Even if some of the teachers are well versed in the teaching and fundamentals of CLT, they have little to do in classrooms where there are more than 30 students (Ara, 2005). Making the class interactive and communicative is one of the central features of CLT, which is hindered by the learning environment of the large class (Islam et al, 2005).

Fifth, delivering training in the classroom requires efficient and motivated teachers, but, as viewed by researchers and educators, most teachers seem to be unmotivated for a variety of reasons,. As teaching is an underpaid profession in Bangladesh, it is not the first priority of many teachers. Jobseekers initially compete for more lucrative career options. When they fail there, they unwillingly opt for the teaching profession as their last resort. On the one hand, teachers have excessive workloads and insufficient time to prepare for classes, organize lessons, or write corrections. On the other hand, because they are underpaid, they lack motivation to make their lessons engaging and successful (R. A. Khan, 2005).

Finally, knowledge from training is not implemented in the classroom as the classroom activities of the trained teachers are not monitored. Systematic post-training follow-up and constructive monitoring networks can ensure a more effective outcome of any training in a sustainable manner (H. R. Khan, 2005). Teachers receive training, but they rarely apply it in their classroom. Such discoveries indicate that the absence of systematic monitoring of their classroom teaching leads them to stay in their comfort zone and indulge in following their preferred grammar translation method (Haque, 1999; Huda, 2015).

Most of the factors presented here refer to the lack of efficient teachers, cultural issues, large class size, testing culture, and lack of monitoring. However, studies on the challenges faced by the trained teachers in applying their training-based knowledge and skills in their classrooms after receiving short training are hardly found in the literature. The present study addresses the less explored area.

Research Methodology

The study adheres to the features of an explanatory sequential design, one of the mixed-method designs for collecting and analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data to understand a research problem (Creswell, 2011, 2012). The research was based on the primary data collected from classroom observation, a questionnaire survey with the students, and trained teachers. At this phase, the nature of the data was mostly quantitative. However, there were two open-ended, yet relevant questions added in the questionnaire for teachers (see Appendix 3, questions 14 and 15). At the next stage, focus group discussion (FGD) with master trainers and teachers was conducted, and qualitative data was collected. The entire research design of the study is presented in the following Figure:

Figure 1. Flow chart of the explanatory mixed-method design adopted in the study

All the participants and institutes were informed about the research. They were invited to participate voluntarily. Anonymity of their identity was confirmed in writing. Thirteen upazillas (sub-districts) from six districts in four administrative divisions of the country were purposefully chosen for the study. Two schools from each upazillas were selected. A purposive selection method was applied because the study was based on two INSET courses offered by NAEM, namely Communicative English Course (CEC) and the English Language Teaching (ELT) course. In the next section, brief descriptions of the courses, their objectives, and their contents are presented. Although English teachers from institutions from a number of upazillas participated in either course, the institutions from the list provided by NAEM were selected as they were easily accessible to the researchers. Districts and divisions were judiciously chosen with a view to generalizing the findings. Twenty-six schools were included for data collection. The sample of the research consisted of 650 students (twenty-five students each from these 26 schools) to complete their questionnaire, 26 English teachers (one from each of the 26 schools) to complete their questionnaire, and the observations of 26 English classes (one from each of the 26 schools) by 26 teachers from 13 upazillas from six districts, namely Dhaka, Narayangonj, Chattogram, Sylhet, Khulna and Satkhira, and ten master trainers (MT) and teachers from four divisions to participate in focus group discussion (FGD) in this study. The number of MTs varied across divisions because of their availability in the respected divisions. Master Trainers are experienced and skilled practicing teachers who also work as trainers at other projects like TQI-SEP, and PACE. In this study, data was collected from 26 teachers and ten MTs.

Table 1. Tabular representation of sampling

Four types of instruments, including an Observation Checklist, Questionnaire for Students and another for Teachers, and a Questionnaire for FGD with MTs, were used for collecting data for the study. The classes were observed using an observation checklist by a trained and expert observer (here the authors of the article), and after observation, the students were asked to fill out the questionnaire. Teachers were asked to fill out the questionnaires in their offices. For FGD, ten English teachers working as master trainers from four divisions were invited to a special venue, and all arrangements were made prior to the researchers going to that district for data collection.

Once the process of data collection was completed, the data was analyzed and interpreted. First, the data was compiled and tabulated. Next, the information was summarized and interpreted. After that, these three types of responses were combined and compared, and the data was finally summarized to address the three central research objectives.

Brief descriptions of the training courses

Communicative English Course (CEC)

The Communicative English Course (CEC) of NAEM is a 21-day-long training course, providing in-service training to English teachers at the secondary level. The course aims at helping the teachers develop knowledge, skills, and attitudes for teaching English as a language. The course covers a wide range of basic classroom teaching skills and practical techniques for developing the four skills of language and communicative grammar using teaching aids and materials in class and other areas of competence in the light of English for Today (EFT), the coursebook produced by the government of Bangladesh. The course is comprised of integrated theory and practice sessions. Theories on classroom techniques for developing learners’ language skills, lesson planning, and learner evaluation are followed by demonstration classes by the trainers. Group work, pair work, individual work, demonstration, micro-teaching, and peer observation are used as training methodologies and techniques. The course actually has 13 working days, excluding weekly holidays and study tour, in which the following content is dealt with: introduction to communicative language teaching (CLT); classroom management; preparing lesson plan; teaching listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills; teaching vocabulary, grammar in a communicative approach, pronunciation; assessment and designing tests; using teaching aids; and preparing digital contents.

English Language Teaching (ELT) training Course

The ELT is a newly introduced 12-day long training course by NAEM, providing in-service training to teachers of English at secondary-level institutions. This course is held as a satellite mode in different parts of the country taking NAEM training to the doorsteps of the teachers. The course covers a wide range of basic classroom teaching skills and practical techniques for developing the four skills of language and communicative grammar using teaching aids, and other materials in the class and other areas of competence in the light of EFT. It includes the following contents and topics: how learners learn, introduction to Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), classroom management, preparing lesson plans. teaching listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills, teaching vocabulary, communicative grammar, and pronunciation, assessment and test design, using teaching aids, and observing colleagues.

Findings and Discussion

The purpose of this study was to find out to what extent the contents of the ELT training were being used in the classroom. Data was collected from the teachers who received prior training by NAEM. Therefore, data collection tools were designed based on the contents of Communicative English Course (CEC) and English Language Teaching (ELT) training courses. Ten teaching concepts, methods, and techniques were selected as variables from the contents of these two training courses to find out the present status of applying these methods and techniques in the classroom. The same variables were used in students’ and teachers’ questionnaires and classroom observation checklists for getting authentic information about the implementation of training and for triangulation of data. The data is interpreted below based on comparison and contrast among the three types of data. However, two open-ended questions were asked of teachers only, and the qualitative data from their responses is presented at the end of this section.

Findings from questionnaires for teachers and students and classroom observation

Taking classes in English to maximise students’ exposure to English

Figure 2. Taking classes in English to maximise students’ exposure to English

Ambience plays an important role in the acquisition and learning of the English language, and the trainee teachers are familiarized with this concept in the training session. In response to the question “how frequently do teachers use English” in the classroom, findings from 21% of the students reveal that teachers use English always; 41% mentioned that they do it often; 33% said sometimes; 3% said rarely; and 2% said that they never use English in the class. According to teachers, 58% of the teachers use English always; 23% often; and 19% sometimes. On the other hand, from the class observation, it is found that 31% of the teachers use English always; 42% often; 19% sometimes; and 8% of them never use it. Hence, the data from students and observation suggests that around two-thirds of the teachers always or often use English in their classrooms, though 81% of the teachers claim that they always or often use English in their English classes. However, it is noticed in the observation that teachers used very limited English in giving very short and incomplete instructions like “open your book,” “sit down,” and “read the passage,” checking answers, asking questions from the textbook, and did not initiate speaking for clarification, and giving feedback. Thus, an appropriate ambience for learning English and giving students exposure to spoken English could not be created.

Teaching listening activities from English for Today (EFT)

Figure 3. Doing listening activities from English for Today (EFT)

In case of teaching listening activities, 45% of students responded by saying their teachers teach listening activities always; 21% said they do it often; 25% said sometimes; 5% said rarely; and 11% said that they never teach listening skills. On the other hand, according to teachers, 31% of teachers always teach listening activities; 27% often; 19% sometimes; 4% rarely; and 19% of teachers never teach listening activities in the class. It needs to be mentioned that 26 lessons were observed, and none of the lessons was a listening lesson. Hence, it was not possible to observe how effectively listening lessons are taught following the techniques learnt in the training.

Teaching reading activities from EFT

Figure 4. Teaching reading activities from EFT

In the case of teaching reading activities, according to students, 45% of students responded by saying their teachers always give them silent reading practice; 22% said they do it often; 25% said sometimes; 4% rarely; and 4% never gave them silent reading practice. According to the teachers, 58% of teachers teach reading skills following pre, while, and post reading stages and engage students in silent reading; 38% do it often; and 4% do it sometimes. From classroom observation, it was found that only 4% of teachers always followed the right techniques of teaching reading; 38% did it often; 41% sometimes; and 17% of rarely followed the techniques they learnt from training. According to students, around two-thirds of teachers followed the techniques always or often, but, in the observation, it was found that even less than 50% of teachers always or often taught reading activities.

Teaching writing activities following process approach

Figure 5. Teaching writing activities following process approach

In the training, teachers are taught to teach writing activities using a process approach, which means students will write following some steps, such as brainstorming ideas, discussing in groups, and jotting down the points about the topic, organizing the ideas, and then writing the first draft, expanding those ideas, peer checking and finalizing the writing using feedback. In the case of teaching writing, 43% of students think teachers always teach writing skills following a process approach; 17% think they often do it; 29% sometimes; 6% rarely; and 5% of students think they never teach writing skills following a process approach. According to the teachers, 38% of teacher always use a process approach to teach writing skills; 35% do it often; and 27% of teachers do it sometimes. But, in the observation, 17% of teachers were found to follow the process approach sometimes; 43% of teachers did it rarely; and 40% never did it. In most cases, teachers asked students to write answers to questions or isolated sentences using the grammatical structures that they were taught. The observed lessons hardly included any writing tasks; a few writing tasks were given as homework.

Teaching speaking activities

Figure 6. Teaching speaking activities

In the case of teaching speaking activities, 25% of students think that teachers always do pair or group work; 24% think they often do it; 28% think they sometimes do it; 12% think they rarely do it; and 11% of students think teachers never do them. According to the teachers, 54% of teachers always do these activities; 19% do them often; and 27% sometimes give students speaking practice. In the observation, it was found that 8% of teachers always do these activities; 31%, do them often; 19% do them sometimes; and 42% of teachers rarely do them. Teachers were found not to involve all students in practicing speaking in pairs or groups using pictures of the lesson. In most cases, they just asked 2 or 3 students questions about the picture from the book. They did not use other speaking activities like asking and answering questions, comparing answers, or discussing topic-related speaking activities given in the lesson.

Teaching vocabulary using different techniques

Figure 7. Teaching vocabulary using different techniques

Different techniques of teaching vocabulary, such as using pictures or real objects, doing mime, or acting, giving definitions, explanations, and examples, were taught to the teachers in the training sessions. In this regard, 42% of students think that teachers always use these techniques; 24% think they often do; 25%, sometimes; 5%, rarely; and 4% of students think that teachers never use these techniques. According to the teachers, 69% of teachers always teach new words using different techniques; 27%, often; and 4% of teachers sometimes use them. However, in the observation, it was noticed that only 19% of teachers often tried to use other techniques than using Bangla translation for teaching vocabulary; 38%, sometimes; 23%, rarely; and 20% of teachers did not teach vocabulary at all. Though teachers tried to avoid Bangla, they only gave English synonyms and very few of them used pictures to teach new words.

Teaching pronunciation 

Figure 8. Teaching pronunciation

Forty-seven percent of the students think that teachers always teach pronunciation while 25% of students believe that teachers often teach pronunciation; 19% believe that teachers sometimes teach pronunciation; 5% believe that teachers rarely teach pronunciation; and 4% believe that teachers never teach pronunciation.  According to teachers, 69% always teach pronunciation; 8% often; and 23% sometimes do it. However, in the observation, it was found that only 4% of teachers always do it; 12% often; 30% sometimes; 20% rarely; and 34% of teachers never address pronunciation in their teaching of English. Pronunciation teaching was limited to the teaching of new words and was not related to the entire lesson. Often, their own pronunciation was not acceptable. They were never seen correcting students’ incorrect pronunciation.

Using visual aids for making class interesting and effective

Figure 9. Using visual aids for making class interesting and effective

Regarding using visual aids to make teaching more interesting and effective, 31% of students think that teachers always use visual aids; 26% of students think they often do; 30%, sometimes; 6%, rarely; and 7% of students think teachers never use visual aids in classrooms. According to the teachers; 27% of teachers always use visual aids; 30% often use them; 31% sometimes use them; and 12% of teachers never use any visual aids. However, it was found in the observation that 35% of teachers often; 42% sometimes; and 23% teachers never used any visual aids. Most of the teachers’ use of visual aids was limited to introducing the lesson, and many of them did not even use the pictures given in the textbook.

Correcting students’ errors

Figure 10. Correcting students’ errors

In response to the question of whether teachers correct students’ errors when they practice learning the language, 56% of students think that teachers always correct students’ errors; 18% of students think that they often do; 13%, sometimes; 4%, rarely; and 9% of students think teachers never correct the errors. According to the teachers, 50% of teachers always correct students’ errors; 30% often; 8% sometimes; and 12% of teachers never correct the errors. In the observation, it was seen that 8% of teachers always correct students’ errors; 23, always; 38%, sometimes; 20%, rarely; and 11% of teachers never correct their errors. This technique is more applicable in the participatory classrooms where students are engaged in practicing different language skills. In the observation sessions, teachers were hardly found to encourage a participatory class.

Encouraging students to learn English

Figure 11. Encouraging students to learn English

Regarding encouraging students, 43% of students think that teachers always encourage them for learning; 27% of students think they often do; 21%, sometimes; 6%, rarely; and 3% of students think that teachers never encourage them to learn English. According to the teachers, 84% of teachers always encourage students to learn; 12% often; and 4% of them sometimes encourage them to learn English. In the observation, it was found that around 15% of teachers encouraged their students; 21%, often; 35%, sometimes; and 19% of teachers rarely encouraged them to learn English.

Challenges (from the open-ended question)

In the first open-ended question, the teachers were asked to present a list of challenges they face while applying the techniques and methods of teaching English in their classes. The following patterns and issues emerged from the analysis of their responses and are quantified as presented below.

Table 2. Challenges (from the open-ended questions)

The challenges mentioned above include issues ranging from the education system (syllabi, textbooks, teaching, assessment, and infrastructural support) to cultural issues, background of teachers, learners, parents, and training, and monitoring system.

Solutions (from the open-ended questions)

In the second open-ended questions, the teachers were asked to present suggestions to overcome the challenges mentioned by them. The following patterns and issues emerged from the analysis of their responses and are quantified while presenting.

Table 3. Possible solutions (from the open-ended question)

Suggestions reveal the importance of assessment in the education system and how important it is to ensure valid and reliable assessment procedure for effective education in this context. Suggestions also touch upon diverse but relevant issues ranging from the assessment system, teaching materials, teacher-student ratio, class duration, and institutional support to the nature of training sessions, monitoring, recruitment policy, and malpractices.

Findings from Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with Master Trainers (MTs)

To find out the challenges of implementing the knowledge and skills from the training sessions into the classrooms and the recommendations to overcome them, FGD was conducted with MTs who are practicing teachers in secondary level institutions, and also work as trainers of English teachers. Both as teachers and trainers, they have a more enriched understanding. Ten MTs (3 from Dhaka, 2 from Chattogram, 2 from Khulna, and 3 from Sylhet) participated in the four sessions of FGDs, which were conducted in Dhaka, Chattogram, Khulna and Sylhet divisions. The following patterns and issues emerged from the analysis of FGDs on the challenges and are quantified while presenting.

Table 4. Challenges (from FGD with MTs)

Many of the challenges mentioned by the MTs match those mentioned by the classroom teachers. In addition, MTs also mentioned some more challenges, including a smaller number of training sessions, preference over Bangla as the medium of instruction in English classes, prioritizing memorization, reflection of teachers’ own learning experiences into their teaching, poorly designed materials, exclusion of teaching and learning in the summative examinations, low socio-economic background of teachers, and their attitude to the profession. Their opinions are more relatable and provide a more bleak and severe representation.

The following patterns and issues emerged from the analysis of FGDs on the suggestions and are quantified while presenting.

Table 5: Possible solutions (from FGD with MTs)

Here as well, it is noticed that many of the recommendations of the MTs match with those of the teachers. MTs emphasized further training on assessment, developing teachers’ English proficiency and communicative teaching skills, and mentioned other contextually pertinent issues like reducing teaching load of English teachers, enhancing the social and financial status of teachers.

Discussion based on research objectives

This study has been carried out with three research objectives mentioned in the introduction. An objectives-wise discussion is as follows:

Objective 1: To investigate the degree of implementation of the teaching skills, techniques, and knowledge of the trained teachers in the actual classrooms.

It should be noticed that most often there are mismatches among the findings from the classroom observation, students’ questionnaire, and teachers’ questionnaire. Teachers seemed to have self-exalted views about their practices when the classroom observer seemed to be more rigid in their observation; students, however, were found to have a moderate interpretation of the situation. It was found that all the teachers had not taken the class in English. However, the quality of English was not often satisfactory. They spoke a very limited amount of English. Mostly, they used English for some routine direct commands, such as, "open your book," "stand up," "sit down," "read the passage," and avoided giving complete and clear instructions, explaining lessons, and giving feedback in English. Their English was mostly characterized by a lot of errors and faulty pronunciation. Not a single teacher was found to teach listening skills explicitly. It was found that reading was not taught appropriately in many cases. In the case of a writing class, the process approach to teaching writing was never found in any of the observed classes. Speaking skills in the class were taught by a lower number of teachers in an unsystematic way (neither guided nor scaffolded). Students were hardly involved in interactive activities. Mostly, some selected students were asked to answer the questions about pictures. Students were found not to be accustomed to pair or group work when they were asked to participate in them by around 31% of teachers. Often, they were given preparation time, more than required, but they mostly remained silent.

Vocabulary was taught in a traditional way (e.g., providing synonyms only by most of the teachers). Pronunciation was taught by very few teachers in a very unplanned and disorganized way. Visual aids were not used in the expected manner by most of the teachers. Many teachers did not correct students’ errors in the expected way, but they hardly gave any feedback on their errors and used peer correction and other learner-centered error correction techniques. Almost half of the teachers encouraged students to learn English in the class by using friendly voices, smiling faces, inspirational statements, and a language that encouraged and motivated them to speak in English.

Objective 2: To identify the challenges they face in implementing training-based skills, techniques, knowledge in their real classrooms

A flawed assessment system characterized by traditional and highly predictable examinations, the omission of listening and speaking skills in these examinations, invalid and unreliable memorization-based assessment of reading and writing skills, and a repetition of selected topics, lessons, and grammatical items from the textbook is a challenge in applying new techniques and methods in the class. A new reduced examination-centred syllabus emerges, causing the rather easy and superfluous teaching of a few selected lessons from EFTs, and the teaching of a guidebook with model questions in the class.

Most of the techniques taught in the training sessions are suitable for a class of no more than 30 students, whereas there are at least 60–70 students in the actual classes, making them very large, and, in these large classrooms, it is not possible to implement the techniques taught in the training. In addition, local educational culture works as a barrier, as it is culturally believed that teachers are supposed to talk a lot and students should talk less, and teachers are supposed to be reserved and not become very friendly with students. Many teachers also nurture this conservative attitude, and training hardly succeeds in changing their behavior in the classroom. The situation is further worsened by the extra workload of teachers, including teaching and non-teaching activities, the short duration of English classes (40–45 minutes), the lack of linguistic competence of English teachers, non-cooperative students with different kinds of learning experiences at the primary level, and the lack of teaching materials and resources.

There is no provision for monitoring follow-up activities in the classroom by the teachers after the end of the training by the experts. Teachers’ efforts are not often recognized or acknowledged by the head teachers, senior teachers, or the SMC members. Explicit and direct teaching of grammar is emphasized in the syllabus; communicative teaching of grammar is highly neglected in the 12-Day ELT and 21-Day CEC training courses offered by NAEM. There is only a two-hour session on teaching grammar communicatively, focusing mostly on theoretical aspects and excluding textbook-related demonstrations.

Objective 3: To identify recommendations from the teachers and MTs to overcome these challenges.

The assessment system should be reformed to include speaking and listening skills, stopping the repetition of selected topics, reading texts, question content, and items. The ideal ratio of teachers and students should be strictly followed in the English class. Teachers should be given time for preparation and review of the lesson plan. Teaching loads and other kinds of workload should be reduced. Teachers with a degree in English or ELT should be recruited into secondary schools, and English classes should be taken by the designated English teachers. Necessary resources, teaching aids, and materials for implementing training should be provided to the teachers. Issues related to teachers’ traditional mindsets and teaching behaviors should be included in the training course. Massive awareness activities regarding innovation should be done to reach out to the stakeholders, including teachers, head teachers, and parents. An orientation workshop can be organized with head teachers and SMC members to raise their awareness about the innovation and minimize resistance.

The duration of an English class should be increased to one hour, allowing scope for an interactive class. Considering the differences and special nature of a language class, including an information gap, group discussion, pair work, drilling, and simulation, a short module of training for learner awareness can be included in a training session, so that learners can also be trained in a systematic manner and cultural differences can be negotiated. More practice teaching sessions on ways of teaching English in Bangladeshi context, including demonstration of teaching grammar communicatively and reflective analysis, should be incorporated into the training. The number and frequency of INSET courses should be increased, and more follow-up or refresher training courses should be offered to practicing English teachers. Finally, monitoring and evaluation of English classes should be conducted by ELT specialists, and constructive feedback should be provided to the teachers. Every training institute, and training program, or project should have a separate wing, logistic support, and provision for monitoring and evaluation of the trained manpower.

Summary of the findings in brief and research-based suggestions

It is found that the transfer rate of techniques and methods such as teaching listening and writing skills, vocabulary, and pronunciation is very poor as most of the trained teachers do not implement the techniques taught in the training. The participants of this study held the defective testing system responsible for this deplorable condition of the implementation of training. In addition to the flawed assessment method, they also noted some additional difficulties, such as the lack of patronage from the head teachers and SMC members, job pressure, and inadequate class length, and a lack of a competent English teacher with a background in English, giving less importance to teaching grammar communicatively and teaching writing skills following the process approach in the training courses, and a lack of necessary resources and appropriate teaching aids, which obstructed the execution of the training in the classrooms.

The absence of monitoring and evaluation is also a major drawback in ensuring the implementation of the training-based knowledge. Most importantly, the training syllabus is not on par with the actual communicative teaching syllabus and materials.

Based on the findings, the researchers would like to present the following set of recommendations, conceptualized from broader perspectives:

1. Local educational cultures need to be prioritized in teaching and training before implementing innovative ideas from abroad.
2. Consistency needs to be maintained across all relevant stages of education, such as curriculum, syllabus, materials, teaching, testing, and teacher training.
3. Monitoring and evaluation after training needs to be ensured.
4. Other than teachers, other important stakeholders like head teachers, members of SMC, parents, and even students also need to be trained. Massive awareness raising campaigns enlightening stakeholders about innovations in education need to be launched.
5. Contextual realities, including teacher qualification, class size, technological support, and infrastructure, need to be taken into consideration.
6. Assessment culture needs to be monitored and attempts need to be made to achieve a beneficial backwash effect, which, in a way, can have an influence on teaching-learning and the implementation of knowledge by teachers from training.

Conclusion

In Bangladesh, English teachers have been trained with the expectation that they will transfer the training to their classroom properly. If they teach English using the techniques and methods learnt in the training, students will be communicatively competent. This research reveals that the scenario of the implementation of training at the secondary level is poor. Some trained teachers try to transfer the training to their classrooms, but, in most cases, they cannot use the techniques completely and properly. The research reveals the barriers to implementing training in their teaching and the recommendations to overcome those challenges. It is anticipated that the concerned authorities will consider the matter and take required measures to remove all obstacles with a view to executing training, thereby bringing about aconstructive reformation in the way English is taught and learned in Bangladesh.

References

Ahmed, S. S. (2005). Communicative English in Bangladesh: A feedback. Stamford Journal of English, 2, 17-23.

Anwaruddin, S. M. (2016) ICT and language teacher development in the Global South: a new materialist discourse analysis. Educational Studies, 52(3), 260-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131946.2016.1169183

Ara, A. (2005). Teaching of English in Bangladesh: Problems and solutions. Stamford Journal of English, 1, 59-62.

Ashrafuzzaman, M. (2018). Impact of in-service training on English teachers’ classroom practice at primary level. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(3), 77-103. https://www.jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/view/890/393

Barman, B., Sultana, Z., & Basu, B. L. (2006). ELT theory and practice. Friends’ Book Corner.

Chowdhury, R., & Farooqui, S. (2011). Teacher training and teaching practice: The changing landscape of ELT in secondary education in Bangladesh. In L. Farrell, N. Udaya, & R. A. Giri (Eds.), English language education in South Asia: From policy to pedagogy (pp.147-159). Cambridge University Press.

Creswell, J.W. (2011). Educational research. PHI Learning.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research, (4^th ed.).Pearson.

Dutta, S. K. (2006). Grammar translation method vs. communicative language teaching: objectives and strategies. Stamford Journal of English, 2, 66-80.

English in Action. (2009). Large scale quantitative study 2a: The motivation and experiences of school students, teachers and adults in the community. [Research Report]. EIA.

Farooqui, S. (2014). The struggle to teach in English: A case study in Bangladesh. Journal of Education and Human Development, 3(2), 441-457. http://jehdnet.com/journals/jehd/Vol_3_No_2_June_2014/25.pdf

Haider, M. Z., & Chowdhury, T. A. (2012). Repositioning of CLT from curriculum to classroom: A review of the English language instructions at Bangladeshi secondary schools. International Journal of English Linguistics, 2(4), 12-22. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v2n4p12

Hamid, M. O., & Baldauf, Jr, R. B. (2008). Will CLT bail out the bogged down ELT in Bangladesh? English Today, 24(3), 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078408000254

Hamid, M. O., & Erling, E. J. (2016). English-in-education policy and planning in Bangladesh: A critical examination. In R. Kirkpatrick (Ed.), English language education policy in Asia (pp. 25–48). Springer.

Hamid, M.O., & Jahan, I. (2020). Beneficiary voices in ELT development aid: Ethics, epistemology, and politics. Language Policy, 20, 551-576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-020-09559-9

Haque, S. (1999). ELT issues in Bangladesh: An overview. [Conference proceedings]. National and regional issues in English language teaching: International perspectives British Council.

Hassan, M. K. (2013). Teachers’ and students’ perceived difficulties in implementing communicative language teaching in Bangladesh: A critical study [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The Open University. https://doi.org/10.21954/ou.ro.0000eefb

Huda, M. S. (2015). Impact of English language teacher training in Bangladesh. NAEM Journal, 20, 56-63.

Islam, M. S., Hossain, Z., & Akter, R. (2005). Choosing an appropriate methodology. Stamford Journal of English, 1, 145-150.

Islam, S. (2010, July 4). NGOs' role in secondary level English teaching. The New Nation.

Kabir, M. M. N. (2012). An evaluation of the secondary school English curriculum in Bangladesh: suggestions for reforms [Unpublished doctoral dissertation], The English and Foreign Languages University. http://hdl.handle.net/10603/195265

Karim, A., Mohamed, A. R., & Rahman, M. M. (2017). EIA- A teacher education project in Bangladesh: An analysis from diversified perspectives. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 254-264. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.1044a

Khan, H. R. (2005). Perception of trainee teachers: Implications for effective teaching of English. Stamford Journal of English, 1, 119-129.

Khan, R. A. (2005). The weak link in English language teaching practices. Stamford Journal of English, 1, 156-162.

Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge University.

Matsumoto M. (2015) Formal English education in Japan: What causes ‘unsuccessful’ English language learning? In L. T. Wong & A. Dubey-Jhaveri (Eds.) English language education in a global world: Practices, issues, and challenges (pp. 307-317). Nova Science.

National Curriculum and Textbook Board. (2012). National curriculum: English. (Classes VI-X)]. National Curriculum and Textbook Board (NCTB). Retrieved 18 June, 2019 from http://www.nctb.gov.bd/sites/default/files/files/nctb.portal.gov.bd/files/6d9b9671_f815_460c_b8ef_c58a1b829f55/English.pdf 

Quader, D. A. (2005). Teacher training for teachers of English: A project of National University. Journal of the Institute of Modern Languages, 18, 1-28.

Rahman, M. M., Pandian, A., & Kaur, M. (2018). Factors affecting teachers’ implementation of communicative language teaching curriculum in secondary schools in Bangladesh. The Qualitative Report, 23(5), 1104-1126. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2018.3220

Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge University Press,

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching (3^rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Roshid, M. M. (2008). Performance of teachers in implementing communicative approach in English classes at the secondary level: an evaluation study. The Teacher’s World, 33, 177-186.

Shah, S. M. A., Kiani, K. M., Mahmud, Z., Hussain, I. (2011). In-service training of secondary level teachers: A follow up of teachers’ performance in comparative perspective. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(11&12).https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/882/80

Shahidullah, M. (1999). Towards an appropriate methodology for ELT in Bangladesh. [Conference Proceedings]. National and Regional Issues in English Language Teaching: International Perspectives. British Council.

Sultana, S. F. (2005). Towards organizing a teacher development movement: Bangladesh perspectives. Stamford Journal of English, 1,69-76.

Yasmin, F. (2008). Attitude of Bangladeshi students towards communicative language teaching (CLT) and their English textbook. The Teacher’s World, 33, 49-59.