What language teachers want--considering the evaluation of 18th biennial conference.
Absalom, Matthew ; Morgan, Anne-Marie
Abstract
Professional learning (PL) is an essential ingredient in the
professional and personal lives of contemporary educators. PL can take
many forms but large-scale conferences remain a touchstone in many
fields, including languages education. In this paper, we review the
evaluation of the 18th biennial conference of the Australian Federation
of Modern Language Teachers Association (AFMLTA) in 2011. Through an
online questionnaire a very high percentage of delegates (83%) provided
feedback on the conference in a range of areas. We provide a preliminary
analysis of this feedback and discuss implications for future planning
of similar events, within the context of new demands and the changing
landscape of languages teaching and learning in Australia, and language
teachers' professional learning wants and needs.
Key Words
conference evaluation, professional learning, teacher standards,
language teaching
[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]
Introduction
The AFMLTA Professional standards for accomplished teaching of
languages and cultures identifies a set of teaching standards, the first
dimension of which, educational theory and practice, notes that
'[a]ccomplished languages and cultures teachers ... keep up to date
with developments in the field of education through professional
learning' (AFMLTA, 2005, p. 2). Similarly, the Australian Institute
for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) in its National Professional
Standards for Teachers, includes as one of three 'domains' of
teaching, 'Professional Engagement', with two standards
'Engage in professional learning' and 'Engage
professionally with colleagues, parents/carers and the community'
(AITSL, 2012a).
AITSL is also now responsible for the framework for teacher
registration nationally, which includes the requirement that each
teacher engage in and demonstrate relevant professional learning of a
minimum numbers of hours (60 hours over three years in South Australia,
for example; see AITSL 2012b). A commitment to and evidence of ongoing
professional learning is also integrated into policies and documents
around teacher certification and behaviour in Australian states and
territories. For instance, the Victorian Teaching Profession Code of
Conduct specifies in Section 3b that teachers are 'committed to
pursuing their own professional learning' (VIT). This trend can
also be seen internationally. The Teachers" Standards (DfE, 2012),
released in May 2012 by the British Department for Education, identify
the fulfilment of 'wider professional responsibilities' in
standard 8 stating specifically that teachers must 'take
responsibility for improving teaching through appropriate professional
development ...' (DfE, 2012, p. 9).
What can be seen by this documented (though not new) emphasis on
professional learning in key guiding documents for teachers is that
professional learning is considered paramount by all
'stakeholders', be they governments, accreditation and
registration bodies, professional organisations, principal and parent
bodies, or educators themselves. Furthermore, it is increasingly seen as
the responsibility of each teacher to ensure that they receive and
engage with appropriate learning for their own subject areas, contexts
of teaching, personal professional needs, and for their own wellbeing as
teachers. If teaching is to be a sustainable, rewarding and collegial
practice, and quality outcomes for learners are to be achieved, then
professional learning that embraces the needs and wants of teachers is
critical. This requires consideration through both analyses of existing
PL opportunities and in wider discussion about how teacher PL needs and
wants can be met, and which events or activities best cater for
different aspects of ongoing, developmental professional engagement.
Considering professional learning
Of the many possible professional learning activities--and we would
argue that a range of different PL activities and modes of participation
contribute to teachers' overall needs--conferences remain an
important ingredient. The outcomes and value of conferences as PL vary
and depend somewhat on the focus and intention of the event,
contributors, and the involvement of each participant. Conferences of an
academic nature 'provide an important channel for exchange of
information between researchers' (Wikipedia, 2012). They also
'offer attendees opportunities to share and receive information,
stimulate creative thinking, rekindle or establish contacts, and a
myriad other personal and professional objectives' (Weissner,
Hatcher, Chapman, & Storberg-Walker, 2008, p. 367). The nature of
conferences is crucial for the vitality of the field in question for
'presenting, evaluating and discussing disciplinary and
methodological developments as a reflective community of practice;
[which ensures] that, as a whole, research and/or professional practice
progresses both substantially and methodologically' (Jacobs &
McFarlane, 2005, p. 319). Furthermore, because of their size or reach
beyond everyday circles of practice, '[b]y attending conferences,
[participants] can learn about cutting-edge practices in [their]
specialty, professional issues and the latest research ... [and] also
have a chance to network with colleagues' (Brown & Schmidt,
2009).
In conjunction with other PL opportunities, therefore, conferences
respond to a range of intentions and purposes and fulfil PL needs of the
profession in different ways, and with emphases and outcomes that are
likely, in part, to differ from person to person, but also to provide
more universal outcomes or opportunities.
Our project
The AFMLTA biennial conference takes place in a different state or
territory in Australia every two years, on a rotation basis, in
recognition of the nature of our organisation as a federation of the
eight state and territory-based language teacher associations. The 2011
conference was held in Darwin from 6-9 July. With the theme
'Enrich, Consolidate, Inspire', the conference attracted just
fewer than 300 delegates, and was evaluated by the conference organising
committee.
The questionnaire
Instead of the common pen-and-paper feedback questionnaire we opted
for an online questionnaire as the evaluation tool for the conference.
An incentive to complete the evaluation was that the certificate of
attendance, used by delegates as evidence of participation, only became
available on completion. We used SurveyMonkey (www.surveymonkey.com) to
construct a survey that interrogated in detail delegates'
experiences of the conference. The survey was developed by the
conference organising committee with a view to really understanding how
the conference functioned at a range of levels. It was emailed directly
to delegates around ten days after the completion of the conference. The
questionnaire was articulated in seven sections:
1. AFMLTA 2011 conference attendance and membership (6 questions)
2. Conference organisation, cost and facilities (5 questions)
3. Conference program (6 questions)
4. Professional learning and networking (5 questions)
5. Online presence (4 questions)
6. In conclusion (5 questions)
7. A little bit about you ... (6 questions)
The total response rate to the questionnaire was 83%. Of these
responses, 91% were complete and the remaining 9% were partially
complete.
Results of the questionnaire are summarised below, followed by a
discussion of the implications of these results in planning future
conferences. This discussion should prove useful more broadly as a way
of targeting PL for language teachers in conferences of this kind, and
as part of language teachers' overall professional learning needs.
Included in this discussion is consideration of how national conferences
might be seen within the wider context of PL opportunities for languages
teachers, and what complementary and supplementary activities may be of
benefit, given the current demands on languages teachers and the
changing landscape of languages teaching in Australia.
Responses
Respondents and MLTA membership
The response rate to the questionnaire was 83%, with 245 responses
received from 297 conference attendees. The majority of respondents
(75%) were members of the federation's state and territory language
teacher associations, and were predominantly female (83%). 91% were over
30 years of age, and 42% were over 50. Only 9% of respondents were under
30.
Respondents came from all Australian states and territories--with
the largest numbers from the eastern and southern states of Victoria,
New South Wales, South Australia and Queensland. There was also a strong
showing from the host territory, the Northern Territory. In addition, 16
respondents were from overseas, from nations including New Zealand, the
US and Finland. See Table 1.
Employment and language focus
Around two thirds of respondents identified their occupation as
school language educators (44% secondary, 20% primary), with a further
10% tertiary language educators or researchers. Other attendees were
jurisdiction or government representatives, students and
'others', including publishers and commercial organisations
supporting languages education. See Table 2.
Most respondents were employed in permanent (tenured) positions
(85%) and the majority of these held full-time positions. Small
percentages of respondents worked on a contract or casual basis, or were
self-employed, students, unemployed or retired. See Table 3.
Languages taught by respondents are summarised in Table 4, with a
strong representation across the six major languages taught in
Australian schools.
Attendance history and knowledge of the conference
Two questions addressed AFMLTA conference attendance history and
how respondents knew about the conference. More than half of respondents
(55%) were attending their first AFMLTA conference, and of the remaining
45%, nearly three quarters had attended the last AFMLTA conference, held
in Sydney. Approximately half had attended the previous conference,
hosted in Perth, and at least one person had attended every other AFMLTA
conference since they began, except for the 1976 conference in Brisbane
and the 1980 conference in Sydney. Nearly all respondents (88%) knew of
the conference through direct communication from the AFMLTA or their
state or territory modern language teacher association (MLTA), and, in
addition, 31% identified that they knew about the conference from
colleagues (some respondents ticking more than one box for this
question).
Financial support
In terms of financial support for attending the conference, 80% of
respondents indicated that their conference registration was fully
covered by their employer or a supporting organisation. Further, 70% of
respondents indicated that their travel costs were also fully or
partially covered by employers or supporting organisations. 13% received
no support, funding their attendance themselves. The most common sources
of financial support to attend the conference were employers and MLTAs.
Overall satisfaction
High levels of satisfaction with the conference were reported
across the range of fields surveyed. Table 5 shows combined responses
for Very Satisfied and Satisfied in response to a range of items.
Similarly high levels of satisfaction were recorded in relation to
content and program orientation. These are summarised in Table 6, again
based on combined responses for Very Satisfied and Satisfied.
Conference inclusions
Table 7 outlines conference inclusions which are considered either
Very Important or Important to attendees.
Conference venues
Respondents were asked to rank preferences for suitable venues for
AFMLTA conferences. Feedback demonstrated that respondents felt that the
most desirable venue was a dedicated conference centre, followed by
hotel conference facilities, and then universities and schools.
Additional comments in this section, however, addressed ways that money
could be saved, with many respondents noting that using schools and
universities would keep costs down, especially for self-funded
participants.
Program inclusions
Respondents were asked about the importance of a range of program
inclusions. Table 8 shows percentages of respondents who indicated Very
Important and Important.
Favourite sessions and suggestions for future conferences
Respondents were invited to nominate their three favourite
sessions. A wide range of sessions was nominated, 63 (of a possible 86)
in all, with from 1 to 82 votes for each. The key plenary sessions were
popular, as were ICT-oriented sessions. The top sessions were:
* Plenaries by Joseph Lo Bianco and Alastair Pennycook
* Clayton Forno's sessions on feedback, videoconferencing and
focus on form
* Noburo Hagiwara's session on the future focus on mobile
learning
* Sessions on using interactive whiteboards by Lynne Rockcliff and
Melanie Consola.
The three most popular panel sessions were the Australian Languages
panel, the Australian Curriculum panel and the Chinese panel.
Suggestions for sessions in future conferences were also extensive
and covered a range of topics. Many respondents noted their satisfaction
with the current range, with comments such as 'good range covered:
keep it as it is', and 'repeat this style --good choices,
well-vetted'. Many additional topics or issues were also suggested.
The most prominent of these were for sessions on bi and multilingual
programs, language specific sessions, language acquisition, task design
and assessment (in relation to the Australian Curriculum), early
childhood programs, Q and A sessions and successful teaching strategies.
Professional learning, networking and value for professional
practice
There were high levels of satisfaction with the conference in terms
of its value as PL, to allow for networking and for impacting positively
on practice. Table 9 lists percentages of respondents who either
Strongly Agreed or Agreed with a range of statements relating to this
aspect.
Opportunities for networking were broken down further, to include
questions on when and where networking occurred. Most respondents
identified that networking occurred in breaks in the program (90%). Half
of the respondents (50%) identified that networking opportunities
occurred at the conference venue and 42% used the Welcome Reception for
networking.
Suggestions for additional networking opportunities focused on the
need for longer breaks and programmed language specific meeting times.
In Table 10, PL highlights are identified.
The conference online and social media use
Respondents were asked which online and social media they had used
in relation to the conference. The conference and AFMLTA websites
featured predominantly as indicated in Table 11.
Many suggestions were made in response to questions eliciting the
most useful aspects of the conference website. These included:
* Draft and final programs
* Pocket program
* Presenter information
* Uploaded presentations
* Babel articles list
* General conference information
* Information on Darwin and Darwin Convention Centre
* Accommodation and Twitter links
* Room indications for presentations.
Respondents indicated that they appreciated the website for:
* Making the conference look exciting
* ICT sharing opportunities
* Ease of operation
* Excellent search function.
Suggestions to improve the website included:
* Uploading the final program, biographies and abstracts earlier
* Links to all MLTA websites
* Easier registration process.
Best and worst
Respondents were invited to nominate the 'worst' and
'best' thing about the conference. The most common response to
the 'worst' was 'nothing' (41 responses).
'Worst' responses about the location and venue included
comments on the distance to Darwin, Darwin airport, and high travel and
accommodation costs. 'Worst' comments about the organisation
and program included high registration costs (especially for those
paying their own way), the tight schedule, some overcrowded sessions,
the need for more discussion time, not being able to attend sessions
running concurrently, the program being too academic with not enough
practical ideas, and the program being too practical with not enough
theory. In the personal domain in response to the 'worst'
question, were responses such as having to leave, alignment with school
holidays (some saying it had not fallen in their holidays and they
wished otherwise, some saying it had fallen in their holidays and they
wished otherwise), late arrival due to flight problems, and the lack of
a free day to enjoy the glorious location.
The highest response for 'best' thing about the
conference was networking opportunities (92 responses). Collaborative
aspects were also mentioned, such as contact with publishers,
international partnerships, being with people who value languages, the
large attendance and feeling part of a network. 'Best'
responses about program content included a large number of comments on
being inspired and listening to inspirational speakers (47 responses),
learning new ideas, practical things to use in the classroom, being able
to present one's own work, the balance between practical and
theoretical sessions, the plenary sessions, hearing about the Australian
Curriculum, new resources and pedagogies, expanding personal outlooks,
the variety of speakers and presentations, the dynamism of presenters,
hearing the latest academic research, and receiving positive feedback.
Many respondents commented positively on the location, venue and weather
(42 responses), and many also praised the conference organisation
overall, flow of activities and 'ease' of everything (47), as
well as the pocket program in the lanyard, the work of George from
Dreamedia (the professional conference organiser), and the social
program and dinner venue. One comment seemed to sum up the
'best' aspects: 'visiting Darwin, listening to
inspirational speakers, networking'.
Take home messages
There were 229 take home messages provided, addressing issues
including networking, the use of ICTs, being inspired, comments about
the Australian Curriculum, and being part of a highly collegial network.
Indicative responses included:
About the organisation and role of AFMLTA and MLTAs:
* The very high standard of AFMLTA operation; confidence in the
work of the AFMLTA and MLTAs; support for languages education from
AFMLTA
* To become more proactive as a member of state languages
association.
About languages education:
* Good things happening in Australian languages education
* Need collaborative effort to promote languages
* Australia needs a languages policy; teachers need to take an
active stance
* Need to address multilingualism in Australia
* International collaboration is important
* Language educators are passionate about languages
* Languages education has a positive future in Australia as we
continue to 'push the boundaries'
* Respect for teaching of Australian/ Indigenous languages
* ICT is here! Technology is the present and the future
* New academics are needed to reinvigorate the languages discourse
* Languages are dynamic and teachers need to move with changes
* Hope for a brighter future because of the calibre of languages
teachers
* Language learning is a life skill not confined to the classroom
* The importance of translanguaging
* The importance of research to inform practice
* That language teachers are important to our students' whole
life experience
* Languages continue to struggle
* Focus on the students
* Community languages need enthusiastic teachers
* Languages education is in decline
* We are doing better than other countries
* We are at the beginning of a new era
* Connections with English teaching
* Languages are not given the status they deserve, despite teacher
and researcher expertise
* Approaches come and go- there is no 'right' way to
learn a language.
About the Australian Curriculum:
* Appreciation of the key drivers and strengths of the Australian
curriculum
* Hoping for but uncertain about Languages through work on the
Australian curriculum
* Australian curriculum very uncertain; languages remain
contentious
* The importance of the intent of the 'reciprocating'
strand of Australian curriculum
* Concern about the Australian curriculum and
'reciprocity' in particular
* The Languages shape paper has yet to fully resonate with all
teachers
* The Australian curriculum will not revitalise languages
* Need for language teaching research to support languages in the
Australian Curriculum
* Language educators are unhappy with many elements of the
Australian Curriculum's shape paper for Languages and would like to
see changes and amendments made to it
* Good to see the rising status of languages in Australian
curriculum.
About the conference content:
* Useful ideas and information for the classroom
* Celebration of languages learning
* Teachers are always looking for new resources and classroom
practice skills
* A really impressive conference
* New ideas and great discussions
* Gaining new knowledge and strategies
* Focus on ICT and innovation.
Personal domain:
* There is always more to be learning and conferences allow this
* Wonderful camaraderie
* Keep aiming to do better
* Many language teacher are struggling with the same issues I am:
time allocation, student retention
* Languages teaching is exciting and worthwhile- don't give up
* Networking is invaluable
* The passion of languages teachers
* I am inspired
* I want to improve my ICT skills
* An individual teacher can make a difference
* There are fantastic opportunities; you need to be open to trying
new things and ways of doing them
* Great being in Darwin: not same old, same old
* The new generation of teachers gives me much hope
* Looking forward to Canberra.
Discussion
It is clear from the feedback received that the 18th biennial
conference of the AFMLTA successfully met its objectives as a PL
opportunity for languages educators, embracing the range of conference
benefits discussed at the outset of this paper (as a channel for
exchange of information, to hear the latest research and inspirational
speakers, to advance practical and methodological knowledge, and as a
networking opportunity involving a collaborative community of learners).
High levels of satisfaction for most aspects of the conference attest to
the positive experience the conference provided for most attendees and
to its value as PL for them. Good levels of representation across the
nation, with members attending from all states and territories, indicate
that the conference served a national, federating purpose, fulfilling
one of the primary objectives of the AFMLTA, in supporting language
educators across Australia and across its member associations.
What is also clear, however, is the presence of a range of
conflicting messages within the data. In relation to programming, some
felt the conference did not provide enough practical sessions and was
overly theoretical, while others expressed the exact opposite view, that
there were too many practical sessions and insufficient sessions
dedicated to theory or reflection. The top PL highlight was practice
examples to take back to the classroom, while comments on the
'best' aspects of the conference indicated that inspirational
speakers were of high importance (along with networking). Similarly, in
terms of timing, there were those who were unhappy that the conference
was not in their holidays and those who were unhappy because it indeed
fell in their holidays. There were many who sought increased ICT
sessions and session capacity, while others commented that there was too
much ICT focus. While most respondents chose dedicated conference
centres and hotels as preferred venues for AFMLTA conferences, there
were numerous respondents who noted that if registration fees were
lower, more teachers would be able to attend. As registration fees are a
direct consequence of conference venue type choice, with conference
centres and hotels being the most expensive options, there is a
disconnect between these responses. Conference inclusion selections
favoured meals above all else, which also contrasted with comments on
reducing conference costs. Full printed biographies and presentation
abstracts were indicated as necessary inclusions by the vast majority of
respondents, while in another question, the majority said they would be
happy with digital abstracts and biographies, and many praised the
simple 'pocket program', which did away with the need for a
printed, glossy program. The inclusion of international speakers--also
desired--is another factor that influences cost.
This mixed feedback illustrates well the old adage that you
can't please all of the people all of the time, but also highlights
both the different expectations and preferences of different attendees,
and the need to interrogate the data, including the demographic data, to
be able to interpret results in a way that can provide directions in
future planning for a national organisation such as the AFMLTA. There is
also a need to report back to the participants to provide information
about conflicting messages, so that they can better understand the
bigger picture of what matters most to others, as well as to themselves,
and that, in the interests of, for example, reaching more teachers, some
'comfort' sacrifices might be more acceptable. Experience from
international conferences attended by the authors and their colleagues
also suggests that conference inclusions in the context of increased
mobility of attendees from more diverse backgrounds, and in the
interests of providing for wider participation, mean that emphases have
shifted away from lavish conference inclusions, and that long sessions
times for individual presentations are largely a thing of the past.
Some other data warrant discussion before considering the
implications of the findings for the AFMLTA. The first of these is that
online media became important in this conference, possibly for the first
time in AFMLTA conference history. The first opportunity to engage in
Twitter and Facebook to respond instantly and to engage in reflections
on the conference has opened a new dimension for conference attendees
that has continued and expanded beyond the conference. Expected
engagement with the conference, AFMLTA and MLTA websites shows that
online communication is the main point of connection for the languages
education community spread across Australia, and is likely the key to
ongoing communication and representation for the field. An online
evaluation process for the conference allowed significant data to be
collected, collated and prepared for analysis in a vastly more efficient
manner than previous pen-and-paper evaluations. This was explicitly
recognised by attendees as illustrated by one delegate's comment
'1 like this idea with a survey and certificate several days after
the event; it makes us reflect calmly and probably more
objectively'. Crucially, this process has allowed for this analysis
to be disseminated to the languages education community.
The open-ended questions about best and worst aspects of the
conference, suggestions for future conference inclusions and take home
messages have provided a wealth of data for the AFMLTA and MLTAs
preparing future conferences and attempting to 'read' the
interests and orientations, wants and needs of the languages education
community. The desire for information on bi/multilingual programs,
language specific sessions, current research on language acquisition,
task design and assessment, primary programs, changes in
Australia's curriculum and its language policy, and more
opportunities to discuss issues in groups are informing preparation for
future PL events, including the next biennial conference. The emphases
of the take home messages on the community of languages educators,
contested thoughts on the developing Australian Curriculum, the
importance of ICT and the affirmation of the role of MLTAs and the
AFMLTA in supporting the languages education community, are also
informing future conference planning, and, more broadly, the work and
strategic directions of the AFMLTA.
Implications
The AFMLTA is carefully considering the results of the evaluation
of its 18th biennial conference. As indicated above, the evaluation
results are directly informing the preparation and planning for the 19th
conference, to be held in Canberra in 2013, and also influencing
strategic and operational planning.
Implications from a number of issues arising from the evaluation
are also being considered. The demographic and 'census'
data--about numbers of participants from different states and
territories, ages, gender, work contexts, languages taught and financial
support to attend the conference --suggest that work needs to be done to
increase participation opportunities for some sections of the languages
education community, notably for early career and young teachers, male
teachers, primary and tertiary educators, and members from smaller
states and territories. Opportunities for engagement from members from
the smaller states and territories will need to remain a central
consideration of AFMLTA conference planning, in terms of factoring in
distances from and access to conferences for all members, the capacity
of each state or territory MLTA to host and support a conference of this
size and scope, and cost implications. In addition, it needs to be borne
in mind that differential support within states and territories from
sponsoring bodies to support hosting of the conference can influence
participation outcomes. While for this conference the high number of
delegates from the local area would seem to indicate strong engagement
with the event, we must also note that a very large number of these
participants had (fully) subsidised places either through the MLTA or
the Northern Territory government, a situation that may not be
replicated for conferences hosted in other states and territories.
The balance of educators from different year levels heightens
awareness that both primary languages educators and tertiary educators
and researchers were underrepresented at the conference. In light of the
requirements of the Australian Curriculum: Languages and the need for
engaged and informed languages teachers across all Australian primary
schools, efforts need to be made to increase primary languages
teachers' participation, and to consider whether perceptions exist
that the national languages conference is not targeted at teachers of
this level. Similarly, the community of languages teachers would benefit
from greater participation of tertiary sector languages educators.
Continued collaboration with the Languages and Cultures Network of
Australian Universities (LCNAU--see www.lcnau.org) may provide an avenue
to address this concern.
Another participation issue concerns part time, casual and contract
educators. Though casual and part time teachers are known to proliferate
in languages education at all levels, these people are grossly
underrepresented in the attendee profile. Incentives and opportunities
for these educators also need to be addressed.
Many of these issues point to the 'elephant in the
room'--the costs associated with conferences. With 80% of
respondents to the questionnaire indicating that they were financially
supported in their attendance at the conference, there is a clear
indication that financial support is in most cases necessary to meet the
registration, travel and accommodation costs associated with attendance
(around $2000 or more per person for the Darwin conference). Whilst it
may be desirable to hold conferences in elaborate venues, fully catered,
with glossy programs and the like, these elements should all be up for
review in considering equitable access to the national conference. As
'networking' was the clear winner for what languages teachers
want, opportunities for doing so, for a wider cross-section of the
languages education community, should be a first priority of the AFMLTA
in organising its biennial conferences.
Similar 'harmonisation' of conference conceptual content
and programming also needs to occur. Whilst there is a strong desire for
practice examples, practical sessions and language-specific working
groups, the contrasting desires for inspirational speakers, cutting-edge
research and connections across the whole community of languages
educators also need consideration. When considering the range of PL
opportunities open to languages educators--from local school, hub
groups, jurisdiction-organised, language-specific associations, MLTAs
and the AFMLTA--it would seem essential that different emphases occur,
relevant to the suitability of contexts and participants. Arguably,
provision of practice examples, practical sessions and concentrated work
within one language is better done in-depth at the local, and state and
territory level, and within language-specific and hub group sessions.
National conferences could then concentrate on 'big picture'
ideas, leading national and international research, cutting edge
practice, national policy directions, inspirational speakers and forums
for collaboration and discussion with colleagues from across the nation.
Concluding reflections
Overwhelmingly, the evaluation of the AFMLTAs 2011 conference
paints a very positive picture. As one respondent eloquently summarises:
... It is so important that we keep up this important event,
perhaps the only one that really binds us as a professional community on
a national scale.
There were, however, some recurrent issues that prompt a reflective
pause. A major issue related to the typology of presentations. In
Darwin, we trialled short papers (20 minutes) and full papers or
workshops (30/40 minutes), as well as double-sessions for panels and
various workshops (80/90 minutes). The resulting program was very
'tight' and this was a cause for concern for a good number of
delegates. Others noted that short papers were not useful and should be
dropped. A similar criticism was levelled at the lack of opportunity for
discussion provided by the program. On reflection, it is indeed the case
that the program was heavily biased towards presentational sessions
rather than open discussion opportunities. These two issues will be
central to thinking relating to future AFMLTA conferences. Nevertheless,
respondents showed a generosity of spirit and a clear understanding of
the complexities of organising an event of this scale in comments such
as:
* Thank you! While I may have been critical in some areas, I did
get a lot out of the conference, which I am now sharing at my Faculty
level, with colleagues and Leadership Team level. It really was a great
conference and I loved Darwin.
* Congratulations to the organisers and helpers. A huge amount of
work is done on a voluntary capacity and particularly countless hours
into putting the program together. THANK YOU.
* The time flew because I was learning so much. There was a great
feeling of collegiality and I enjoyed meeting teachers of other
languages and from different parts of Australia. I can't wait to go
back.
These comments, and the majority of responses to the questionnaire,
convey the clear need for this conference, and the expectation that it
will provide significant PL and networking opportunities for the
national languages education community. Consideration of these comments,
and the ramifications that will be and are flowing into the planning of
the 2013 conference, suggest that the next conference should be well
supported by the community and will (hopefully) provide similarly
positive and beneficial experiences for those who attend.
Acknowledgements
The success of the 2011 conference was largely due to the hard work
of a small team of volunteers from the AFMLTA executive. We would also
like to heartily recognise the initial vision, the commitment and
ongoing hard work and dedication of Maisy Latif and the rest of the
conference committee of the Languages Teachers Association of the
Northern Territory (LTANT), for hosting the conference in Darwin.
References
AFMLTA [Australian Federation of Modern Language Teachers
Associations). 2005. Professional standards for accomplished teaching of
languages and cultures. Commonwealth of Australia
AITSL [Australian Institute of Teaching and School Leadership].
2012a. Professional Engagement Retrieved August 5 2012 from http://www.
teacherstandards.aitsl.edu.au/DomainOfTeaching/
ProfessionalEngagement/Standards
AITSL 2012b. A nationally consistent approach to teacher
registration, Retrieved 30 August from http://www.aitsl.
edu.au/teachers/registration/registration.html#1
Brown, J. & Schmidt, N . (2009). Getting the most out of
conferences Nursing, 39(4), 52-55.
DfE [Department for Education). 2012. Teachers' Standards May
2012 Crown.
Jacobs, N. and McFarlane, A. (2005) Conferences as learning
communities: Some early lessons in using 'back-charmer technologies
at an academic conference --distributed intelligence or divided
attention? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 317-329
VIT [Victorian Institute of Teaching]. The Victorian Teaching
Profession Code of Conduct. VIT.
Wiessner, C., Hatcher, T., Chapman, D., & Storberg-Walker, J.
(2008). Creating new learning at professional conferences: an innovative
approach to conference learning, knowledge construction and programme
evaluation. Human Resource Development International, 11 (4), 367-383.
Wikipedia. 2012. 'Academic conferences', Retrieved 1 July
2012 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic conference
Matthew Absalom is a university teacher and researcher,
professional linguist, Italian language coach, translator and author.
His current appointment is in the Italian Studies Program at The
University of Melbourne. He holds qualifications in music, education,
languages and linguistics, and his research interests cover Italian
linguistics, computer assisted language learning, and languages
education. Matthew is President of the AFMLTA.
Anne-Marie Morgan is a Research Fellow in the School of Education
at the University of South Australia, the Editor of Babel and a member
of the executive of AFMLTA. Her teaching, research and publication
interests include languages and literacy education, Indonesian language
and teaching and learning, intercultural language learning,
intercultural performance and studies of Asia.
Table 1. Attendance by location
State/Nation 16% Victoria
16% New South Wales
15% South Australia
14% Queensland
12% Western Australia
12% Northern Territory
6% Australian Capital Territory
0.5% Tasmania
11 (individuals) New Zealand
2 (individuals) United States
3 (individuals) other international locations
Table 2. Participants by occupation
Occupation 44% secondary language educators
20% primary language educators
11% jurisdiction/government employees
10% tertiary educators/researchers
3% students
12% other occupations
Table 3. Employment type
Employment 66% full time, permanent
19% part time, permanent
7% full time, contract/casual
4% part time, contract/casual
5% other (self employed, unemployed,
students, retired)
Table 4. Languages taught by delegates
Language teaching 18% French
18% Japanese
11% Italian
11% Indonesian
10% Chinese
8% German
15% other languages, including
Australian (Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander) languages
9% not currently language teachers
Table 5. Levels of satisfaction with conference
Organisation of the conference 94%
The conference as a whole 91
Darwin Convention Centre (as venue) 89%
Catering 88%
Organisation by Dreamedia 86%
(conference management company)
Online registration process 82%
Welcome reception 65% 21% indicated N/A
Cost of registration 55% 25% Neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied
Conference dinner 45% 42% indicated N/A
Conference organised accommodation 32% 55% indicated N/A
Table 6. Levels of satisfaction with content
and program
Range of themes 88%
Quality of plenaries 85%
Preparedness of speakers 84%
Range of speakers 82%
Practical/theoretical balance 72%
Lengths of sessions 72%
Table 7 Conference inclusions
Lunch 95%
Morning tea 91%
Printed program 91%
Printed abstracts 83% 68% in another question indicated
they would be happy with online only
versions of the abstracts and
biographies
Welcome event 79%
International speakers 77%
Lanyard 76%
Presenter biographies 76%
Afternoon tea 71%
Organised transport 67%
Social program 58%
Conference dinner 57%
Satchel 51%
Table 8. Program inclusions
Hearing inspirational speakers 98%
Hearing about the latest 95%
research/practice
Networking 95%
Gathering practice examples 88%
for own teaching
Catching up with colleagues 78%
or friends
Experiencing a new 65%
place/having a break
Visiting trade displays for 63%
resources
Presenting own work 40% 40% Neither important
nor unimportant 16%
Unimportant
Table 9. The conference as PL
Provision of valuable 85% 10% Neither agreed nor disagreed
professional learning
experiences
Provision of sufficient 80% 9% Disagreed
networking opportunities
Sufficient formal 62% 16% Neither agreed nor disagreed
discussion opportunities 17% Disagreed
Conference will have a 66% 24% Neither agreed nor disagreed
clear impact on my practice 9% Disagreed
Table 10. PL highlights
Practice examples to take back to the classroom 64%
ICT applications to languages learning 60%
Australian Curriculum discussion 57%
New perspectives on languages teaching and learning 55%
Theoretical perspectives on relevant issues 42%
Table 11. Online presence
Conference website 86% before the conference
22% during the conference
23% after the conference
AFMLTA website use 80% before the conference
13% during the conference
17% after the conference
AFMLTA Face book page 10%
AFMLTA Twitter account 15%
Own blogs/social media to 10%
discuss conference
