Dear Friends at GLV,

Thanks to Ping 's kind invitation, I accomplished a most pleasant visit to GLV that left me a profound and lasting impression. In response to the great friendship and open-mindedness of GLV friends, I would present you a report on my impression and some further considerations, based on my 3 weeks' observation of:

1. 30 day-time classes (i.e. 20 morning classes, 9 electives and 1 workshop);

2. 7 evening programs and warm-ups (3 evening lectures, 1 English conversation corner, and 3

warm-ups);

3. 2 Opening Days' (2 Mondays) all-day-through procedures.

All the above classes and programs I observed were respectively conducted by 34 teachers;

and

4. 2 Friday presentations, given respectively by Levels 1-- 4, and Levels 5 -- 8 students.

In addition to the above observation, I also had the opportunity to talk and exchange ideas with ten more teachers as well as a couple of staff members. With all these valuable inputs and experiences, an overall picture of GLV by and by developed in me as depicted as follows

Miracles Created in the Flourishing Coastal City on South China Sea

When I heard of the Gateway Language Village, an international total immersion English program in Zhuhai, I started wondering whether, or how much it was true; and whether it was really similar to the one labeled the same in Japan which I worked for 11 years ago, or if so, how much similar it was, etc. So I decided on a flying visit to the beautiful southern coastal city for personal experience to satisfy my curiosities.

To my delightful discovery, GLV was indeed a well-developed total immersion English program! I found myself in an international English-speaking environment immediately when I stepped through the entrance of the school. Although I had 40 more years of teaching experience both home and abroad, I had never seen so many international people with Western, African, Indian, South Asian features, as well as Chinese, teaching English together, and working under the same roof of the single school system. It was amazing! And I found my tongue stiff and my English rusty, due to a number of years' absence from teaching and communicating in English. But the amiable working atmosphere at GLV didn't allow my hesitations and uneasiness stay long. I soon put myself at ease when I mingled with the teachers and students in their classrooms; and I soon found myself filled with a ll the admiration for GLV's success in gathering so many international teachers, old and young, male and female, from all parts of the world. The GLV teaching force was, therefore, made up of most foreign teachers and a few Chinese. The teachers, veterans or novices, used their native-tongue or native-like English to teach English at GLV; they were competent and confident, dedicated and friendly teachers to all learners there. What an ideal and admirable English teaching and learning environment for anyone who desires to contribute themselves to English teaching, or to become competent and fluent English users! It seems to me that, the most precious and greatest achievement made so far at GLV was the people it managed to bring together, who worked under the school system and devoted to the profession.

Unique Evening Programs! Invaluable Experiences For Students!

I was glad that I didn't give up the evening activities at GLV in spite of the fatigue from the day observation of classes. My spirit was aroused, so were the learners' when the evening warm-up began. An even greater surprise to me was that I found another lot of international assets involved in conducting GLV evening programs. They were glaringly versatile, bringing in a diversity of cultural characteristics that made up a most colorful and lively English cultural world for the students. I immersed myself in the enjoyment with the students, of the music and the singing that I seemed to have heard from American country music concerts, or overheard from some British local pubs. Hardly before the excitement of the warm-up calmed down, the students were guided to different evening programs of their own accord. There were lectures given by senior teachers on topics like “Philosophy in Life”, “Relationship – Problem Solving” and “My Career Experience”; and Conversation Corners around a range of topics hosted by different teachers; there were also singing and dancing clubs , playing games etc. to satisfy special interests of students' and help to get rid of their study tension of the day; and self-study halls , too, specially for threshold-level students with tutors around to help. Oh, what an inexhaustible evening to experience! An idea suddenly struck me that, “This is the real sense of immersion into the English language and cultural world for the students.” But there were frequent complaints, I was told, that the evening programs were overwhelming, or too difficult for students to follow, or that they'd rather have evening classes than those programs, etc. It seems to me that the solution to these complaints is not to change or alter the evening programs, but to help the students see the absolute value of their evening experiences so that they will willingly adapt themselves to the environment. They must realize that they have to face the same kind of difficulties in real life; and that they have to learn to enjoy what they can from evening activities, and to learn to survive the difficulties they are most likely to encounter in real life. It is beneficial for students to understand that the real-life English-speaking world is indeed difficult for them, but IT will never ever change for them ; it is they themselves that must be prepared for IT . Furthermore, the students should be helped to recognize the GLV curriculum goals and learn to appreciate the most cost-effective evening programs for them, the experiences from which they can hardly get only from language classrooms. I congratulate GLV on its successful running of the evening programs and its advantage of being able to constantly bring in new blood from its associated TEFL Program. I deeply admire the GLV evening program faculty for the exceptional versatility they posses.

First Class Service at GLV

It seemed to me that another factor that helped to make GLV a success was its strong, well trained

service staff contingent. Having worked and resided in educational institutions for over 40 years home and abroad, I have learned not to expect too much from service support either for work or life. But GLV's service staff gave me a completely different impression. Over my 3 weeks there, I found ready help and supportive service the moment you needed; I met with smiles whoever I contacted with on GLV service staff. My observation proved that, such service provided was not a “presentation” to a visitor, but a manifestation of their deep-rooted Service Philosophy . That was, they firmly believed in that their management served staff; their staff served students; and the students served humanity. They truthfully carried out what they were trained for and believed in. That was how such a friendly, cooperative, and amiable working environment was created that was full of mutual-respect and mutual-trust among the staff. The SERVICE they valued and provided was expressed in their READINESS, SKILLS and EFFICIENCY.

Some Further Considerations

What GLV badly needs at this stage when the program is so very well established and its reputation goes far and wide? The most important of all seems to me that it is the professional development that GLV encounters at present that urgently calls for reviewing and re-establishing program goals and objectives for teaching guidance.

The following is what I saw at GLV and thought about:

•  From my observation, I found not a few teachers who were learned, had a world of knowledge

and thoroughly prepared for class teaching. From the handouts they prepared for students and

for different classes, I realized how much they had devoted to teaching, and how profoundly

learned they were that they could never exhaust their storage of knowledge for teaching. I felt that the students were really lucky to have those teachers, and at the same time I was wondering about students' capacity of learning in the limited 2 or 4 weeks' time . Of course, every teacher chose the material they thought to be most useful to or needed for students while preparing their lessons, but I did find a considerable diversity of teachers' interest and criteria in choosing materials. In fact, I heard of students' complaints about learning a poem, and their desire to practice more of speaking in class, right after some morning classes. So, this made me think, would it be time that GLV teaching faculty had a review of its program goals and objectives? It seems to me that a well-developed language program like GLV with a considerably large enrollment of adult students should carry on some on-going research work on students needs analysis and updating its curriculum and syllabus design. Its re-defined and established program goals and teaching objectives will provide the teachers with necessary guidance for teaching preparation and materials development as well as students evaluation. Such undertaking will best of all benefit students, and promote professional development of the program as well.

•  From several elective classes I observed, I was unable to make a distinction between the morning classes and the electives. I even misunderstood that the afternoon classes were the continuation of the morning ones. I talked with some teachers but only to find that the afternoon classes were mixed, some stayed as it was. As for what to teach in the elective classes, one of the teachers told me that he was only concerned and made sure that no repetition of other taught materials should happen and he possessed the only resource-book for materials to be taught in his electives. At this point, I felt that at GLV a concise course description should be made known to all the teachers and students , so that different courses will be distinct from each other. Each course has its own focus, with different contents to teach and different materials to use, and even different ways and methods to conduct the course. In doing so, teachers could put their concentration on a certain part of teaching so as to spare some time and energy for research work and materials development; then students could enjoy different experiences from different teachers and benefit better from different courses .

•  A 2-week or 4-week program?

I was told that GLV had once been a 4-week program and later

changed to the present 2-week program. It seems to me that the longer one probably benefits teaching and students better, and the administrative work as well. First of all, a 4-week program will reduce half of the workload on enrollment and accommodation arrangement, etc. for the administration part. Secondly, there will be less work on teacher allocation, class scheduling and teaching coordination, leaving the Teaching Coordinator more time for supervising and professional management. Thirdly, teachers save their time on beginning placement interviews and students evaluations at terminations. They could concentrate better on teaching and working with the same group of students for a longer period , witnessing students' progress and enjoying their achievement of teaching, while in a 2-week program, you can hardly expect to gain anything like that. Lastly, but the most important, a 4-week program serves students needs better. They can obtain a stable period of at least two consecutive weeks for learning besides their first week adaptation and the last week miscellaneous procedures for termination. In one word, a 4-week program can save everyone's time and energy on hustle-and-bustle administrative procedures, so that they can concentrate better on their major undertakings. Besides the scheduled hours to teach, it seems to me, teachers should be left adequate time for teaching preparation, related and necessary coordination, materials development and self-improvement in the profession. In running a regular 4-week program, these can be easier obtained.

4.Co-teaching or team-teaching of classes

It's good and absolutely necessary for GLV to have Chinese teachers' input on its program the majority of which are international teachers. This teacher formation makes a perfect international English teaching and learning environment for Chinese adult learners . In order to bring forth better effect of the teachers' resources on learning, and teaching as well, I suggest that team-teaching is arranged in levels (basically, Beginners Level, Intermediate and Advanced). That is to say, let 2 or 3 teachers teach the same 2 or 3 day-time classes in a 2- or 4-week session, so that each class will have the opportunity for at least two, or three teachers (Chinese and foreigners) to teach them in their main course. As for the teachers, they can divide their responsibilities in terms of teaching contents, language skills or pick up a different focus to take care among themselves; at the same time they can still be a core teacher respectively to one class of the team. When coming to student evaluation, easier and more accurate decisions can be made, as the team teachers know the students from the team classes almost equally well. It also seems that if the teacher can focus their attention of teaching on certain area, say speaking, listening or culture and language behavior, etc. for a certain period, probably they will achieve better learning results on students' part, and teaching skills and experience fast accumulated on their own.

5. Student presentations should be language-focused

Students presentations were exciting and I enjoyed both the low-levels' and the high's on two Friday afternoons. Here I suggest that more guidance should be given to students since they spend time preparing and practicing. Language use in their performance should be stressed whatever they present; otherwise there would be no sense in just acting or making fun without much use of the language . To my understanding, the purpose of student presentation is not just to liven up students study life, but also to demonstrate their progress in language learning, to encourage further improvement and set examples for themselves.

6.More workshops dealing with students' pronunciation and comprehensibility.

Students from programs like GLV are not expected to have perfect pronunciation and/or rhythm in speaking, but it is desired at least that they should be comprehensible, and their way and manner of speaking should be acceptable when communicating with speakers of English. I found that I could hardly understand, or I felt uncomfortable in listening to, totally about 1/5 of the students. Some of them had extreme difficulties in pronunciation; some of them spoke too fast, or shouted out their “English”, like shooting from a machine-gun. Probably they mistook speed as fluency. Specific guidance and remedial work on their difficulties could be done in different workshops that are helpful and absolutely necessary to maintain GLV's training quality.

The foregoing are my personal points of view that might be too subjective from an outsider to be appropriate to GLV's situation. But as a trusted friend, I would like to present them all without reservation. I understand that any substantial measure taken and put into effect needs a lot of consultations and agreements made among the teachers and administrators, but that's exactly how work should be done and can bring about good results. Wish to get your feedback on the foregoing. Thanks.

As Ping has repeatedly requested, I agree that you can use any part of the above for GLV's pamphlet, but please give the following as necessary information about myself if needed in publication.

Thanks again.

Yours sincerely;

Wang Changqi

P.S. At Ping 's later request and instruction, I added my educational background as below: