Building Innovation At School

by Wesley Benito

This article looks at school-level innovation in EFL and is based on the feedback supplied by Directors of Studies and Academic Managers at schools around the world both inside and outside the International House network. Christopher Walker, Glenn Standish, and Wesley Benito worked on the design and analysis of the survey “Innovation in EFL”, and would like to offer their sincere thanks to those who took the time to submit such detailed responses.

I have been working in ELT for just over three years now, but my career before then involved management roles – so since day one I have been interested in how schools are managed and how they support innovation. This article looks at some areas that have benefitted from innovation at the school level, and how those innovations could be taken further in the future.

Teacher Communication

How schools communicate with their teachers is critical to the smooth operation of the school. Here we can consider the means as well as the reasons for communication.

One DoS I spoke to compared the bad old days, where teachers needed to be available to answer the phone or SMS messages, with what was introduced in the last few years – first WhatsApp messages from school to teacher (and vice versa), and then membership in WhatsApp groups. When something important needs to be communicated, such as reminders to write student reports, a message can be sent out, usually concluding with a PAM or Please Acknowledge Message request. Sometimes, the DoS makes a specific PAM request – use a flag emoji for a country you’ve visited, for instance – to make sure that members of the group have actually read the message…

What can be done, though, if you work in a territory where WhatsApp is not available? Some VPNs (Virtual Private Networks) can bypass that issue, though the solution isn’t perfect: “Viber can cause syncing issues and limits access to files older than two weeks. While some teachers have expressed interest in switching to other platforms, we’ve decided to continue using Viber and email due to the high number of scams associated with other platforms in Myanmar.”

There are also privacy concerns – and these are probably the best reason to avoid apps like Messenger: “Teachers hated Messenger as they felt it invaded their privacy. Slack is much better as it is purely work based.”

Another shift has been in telling teachers of cancelled individual lessons. The amount of innovation here is impressive. Some schools have made it possible for students to cancel via a Google Form, and with the teachers being granted access to the resulting spreadsheet. Others have gone further, and I feel that the use of a custom Learner Management System (or LMS) will be a big source of innovation in the years to come.

Student Placement

It’s never easy to know where to put students who are new to your school. Skills are mixed – strong listeners are not always strong readers, and from what I’ve seen since taking on the responsibility for grading students’ writing in their placement test, the gulf between speaking and writing skills can be more than a whole level.

The tendency reported by most of the respondents is to move things online – “Now to attract more students, we have both walk-in and online placement test systems” says one. Many schools have moved to incorporate oral tests, with one DoS saying their school allows telephone interviews, and another talking about how they even set aside time in their weekly schedule to carry out student placement tests. One wonders, though, how long this personal touch will last before it is replaced by an AI assessment unit – though if we consider student placement to be the first step in bringing new clients into the school, a good oral interview can surely be a wonderful way to sell the atmosphere and spirit of the student’s future lessons. As one DoS says, having the opportunity to meet new students “helps create a connection where they are happy to approach me.”

Summative Assessment

Though my experience in ELT is fairly limited, one thing I have noticed is the disconnect between the way students are generally tested, and the way that they were taught in the semester leading up to the test. The best lessons are those that encourage open communication and teamwork, though these are two aspects that are completely forbidden when it’s time to sit a test. Then there is the way that so many lessons prioritise fluency; the test then serves as a test of accuracy.

The survey did not reveal as much innovation here as I might have hoped. One DoS, whose school operates study abroad programmes, talks about carrying out tests themselves, while several others talk of aligning with the various Cambridge tests – which often means that the test is representative of the level of the students but not of the material they have covered.

The same approach – of moving online – has carried over here too, though AI makes its presence felt: “Students using AI to do the writing test and identifying AI-generated responses remains a concern for many teachers.”

Being able to find an effective way for students to take tests online, while ensuring academic integrity, could be a great way to improve the student experience. It doubles as an opportunity for them to take the test from the comfort of their home, while maximising classroom time for learning.

Student Reports

This proved a juicy topic to discuss!

Writing student reports can be a challenge because so many have to be written, and the delivery of the reports generally coincides with a period of assessment. That means that a teacher who has already spent a lot of administrative time marking tests will have to spend another chunk of time writing reports.

From the survey responses, it feels as if there are two approaches to innovating report writing. One is to streamline the process of writing student reports, and the other is to move towards a kind of automation.

In terms of streamlining, some schools create shareable Google Docs for the student reports instead of writing comments directly onto preformatted report cards. Shareable documents allow edits to be made, and not just by the teacher or the DoS – other members of the administrative team can check the reports for details like spelling mistakes in students’ names or incorrect test scores.

The automation angle is fascinating. Generic reports still provide useful feedback to students, identifying common areas that require improvement while still signposting areas of growth. One DoS described their system thus: “Instead of personalised comments, students now receive a description of what they can generally do at the level they graduated from and according to the final grade they are awarded. Since our coursebooks are aligned with the CEFR levels, the standardised reports are adapted versions of what was covered in the coursebook and the can-do checklist of the CEFR level. Teachers add a couple of their own comments to that.”

It seems that a more automated process, while still allowing teachers to leave individual comments, is a great hybrid way of reducing the workload while also still providing the personalisation that paying parents have come to expect.

A Maturing Marketplace

I can put a few of the categories in the survey together here, as they cover the same ground. When asked about student management (keeping track of attendance and so forth) and the rather general idea of teaching itself (not something to be overlooked!), the theme was of schools maturing, moving from more casual businesses where much was done ad hoc or by word of mouth, to schools having their own LMS.

One DoS describes their soon-to-be introduced LMS and what it can offer that wasn’t possible before: “Learners will be able to access short video clips covering different language points for various levels. In addition to regular classroom lessons, we also organise monthly free webinars for students who want to learn more about grammar, vocabulary, functions, and pronunciation […] We also invite guest speakers from across the IH network to share their expertise in areas like using AI responsibly or preparing for IELTS. We’re also planning extracurricular activities to make the learning experience more engaging. One of these is our Conversation Club, where learners can meet other IH students. We’ve also trained and encouraged students to take part in inter-network events and competitions, such as the Postcard Exchange Program with IH Toruń and the IH Global Debate Challenge. To help students truly live the language, we’re working on adding more monthly activities, workshops and clubs.”

Clearly, some schools are moving beyond what they were traditionally able to offer, and the LMS sits at the heart of much innovation. Where these LMSs come from is another matter – some are off-the-shelf, and at least one that I’ve been told about was built from the ground up. This, I think, highlights the remarkable diversity of skills that you can find in language schools – a large number of EFL teachers entered the field from totally unrelated domains, bringing with them the kind of skills you wouldn’t normally expect from career teachers. Being able to build an LMS is apparently one of them!

Looking Back, Looking Forward

The survey gave respondents the chance to reflect on the innovations their school had worked so hard to introduce recently. One comment really stood out: “These innovations and changes have been positive and we are very proud to be able to connect our learners to the world through these activities and events giving a more authentic language learning experience.”

Not every area that we asked about in the survey revealed innovations – but it was clear that DoSes everywhere are still seeking ways to improve their schools. Sometimes, the future will be built on recent changes: “I’m still working on creating a more structured system for teacher development. Having access to free, certificate-bearing courses hosted on our own LMS that teachers can complete regularly as part of their CPD would be ideal.”

It’s interesting too to consider where school-level innovation comes from, and whether it is reactive – a response to a problem – or proactive – looking to build a better school from one that already handles a given situation well enough. One respondent offers a lot of food for thought: “Reactive – since I was promoted from a teaching role myself, I understand which areas often feel lacking and where improvement is needed. I talk to teachers formally during appraisals, and also occasionally be with them in the staff room to find out more about their needs. Through anonymous feedback and surveys, we also gain insight into teachers’ and learners’ needs, which often leads to meaningful solutions and innovation. Proactive – identifying problems early and analyzing student feedback, I am more able to see which areas teachers need to develop further and design schemes at the beginning of the year. The team also stays up to date with market trends and customer needs to keep driving innovation within the institute.”

It is also good to see how many sources DoSes are willing to draw from in order to find solutions that serve everyone. When asked who they consider before seeking out innovation, one says: “The learners – how can we deliver a better product overall? More efficient, more practical, more user-friendly, more relevant to their needs and wants. The teachers – how are my teachers? A well-being check – if they are not happy, the learners certainly are not.” Another modestly reports, “The innovations I’ve mentioned aren’t mine alone. They’ve come from directors, different people, various teams, and everyone involved.”

Conclusion

The survey on school-level innovation revealed some very interesting things, but the overall sense I had when reading through the responses to the survey and talking to DoSes and Academic Managers on social media was enormously optimistic. There is scope for innovation, and there is space for it, too – which suggests that there is more yet to come. I’m sure I’m not the only one excited to see what fresh innovations next year will bring!

Author Biography