1. ITAF’s Experience in Teaching English to Forward Air Controllers
A lesson in motivation
Ltc Emanuele Di Castri
Mr Benjamin C Pim
BLED 2012

2. Overview What is MOE for FAC What is L2 motivation?
Motivation in the L2 classroom
Motivational strategies
- students
- teachers
Working example: ITAF ESP course for FAC personnel
Here you can read the agenda of our briefing. (some seconds).
You can see the first topic of the presentation is dedicated to explain what we mean for MOE for FAC.
This course was projected together between the Italian Air Force Language School and the Italian Army Language School and our colleagues from the Italian Army Language School presented during the last meeting in Prague a wide and complete overview about the project and their experience with their first course.
Because of that, we are not going to repeat the same analysis, the topic of this presentation is how in the ITAF language school we managed the student’s motivation and teacher’s motivation. But in respect for whose ladies and gentlemen who weren’t in Praga we spend just three slides to give them a brief framework about this course.

3. What is a Forward Air Controller ?
( FAC)
An FAC is a qualified individual who,
from a forward position on the ground or in the air, directs the action of combat aircraft engaged in Close Air Support of friendly Land Forces.
Who is a Forward Air Controller.
He has to speak on the battle field, by radio, with a pilot or with another FAC
Often in extreme circumstances under fire 3

4. What is Military Operational English ?
(MOE)
STANAG 3797
“ English is the language to be used when controlling NATO aircraft. Therefore FACs need adequate knowledge of and proficiency in the English language to the EQUIVALENT OF NATO STANAG 6001 Level 3.
To be clearer about language skills a FAC needs let me quote the Stanag 3797 that states :
“English is the language to be used when controlling NATO aircraft. Therefore FACs need adequate knowledge of and proficiency in the English language to the EQUIVALENT OF NATO STANAG 6001 Level 3. The competency examination should be biased towards military, particularly FAC, terminology ”
Now, it’s clear that the key word is “Equivalent” and let me explain again, in other words, what we mean for “Equivalent”.
The STANAG 6001, for level 3 language proficiency skills, asks:
“Can convey abstract concepts in discussions of such topics as economics, culture, science, technology, philosophy as well as his/her professional field…”
We can see, in this definition, on one hand the linguistic skills, grammar, fluency, pronunciation and so on, on the other hand a very wide cultural personal background about economics, science and so on. These elements, at level 3, are mixed togheter in a strong relationship.
But FACs don’t need science, economics, philosophy, so we only care that they “Can discuss particular interests and special fields of competence with considerable ease” that is, you know, another descriptors from STANAG 6001 level 3.
Because of that we have decided to focus our syllabus on these “special fields” that are linked to their specific field geography, topography descriptions of landscapes, weather and so forth. In addiction I must clear that the MOE course is 5 weeks long, less then 150 hours of lessons and ,at the end we expect the student achieves the level “3 EQUIVALENT”. Because of that the prerequisites to have access to the course is 2+ about speaking and listening skills. 4

5. What is Military Operational English?
(MOE)
IMMEDIATE
CLEAR
EFFECTIVE
CONFIDENT
COMMUNICATION
In conclusion, FACs perform complex operations in which they have to :
Identify and describe targets
Plan, brief, study and describe ingress and egress routes
Orient, direct and guide aircraft as it delivers its ordnance onto the enemy
Describe weather, terrain, vegetation, altitude, enemy and friendly position, buildings and other structures, aircraft, obstacles
Confirm and clarify information
Adjust plans and the execution of tasks to suit emerging circumstances
Advise when scenarios change as actions unfold
We also know that an FAC must use language that is clearly designed to negate any ambiguity regarding
What the target is
Where it is
How it will be reached
What obstacles have to be overcome
What changes may have to be put in place as the operation unfolds and …
MOST IMPORTANTLY …
Where friendly Forces are located and how they are marked.
The slide is funny but you cannot underestimate how important is to avoid misunderstandings 5

6. What is L2 motivation?
“Motivation explains why people decide to do something, how hard they are going to pursue it and how long they are willing to sustain the activity” (Dörnyei, 2001, p.7).
As the delegate from Jordan stated on Monday: L2 motivation is one of the most important factors that determine the rate and success of L2 attainment. Without sufficient motivation even the most able students risk failing
BLED 2012

7. Motivation in the L2 environment
1. Integrative motivation: becoming part of the community 2. Instrumental motivation: a way of achieving another aim. But in the L2 classroom: 1. Learners do not usually have sufficient first-hand experience about the target language community to be able to form attitudes for or against it, and 2. Language learning typically takes place in a classroom setting.
Early studies in motivation were conducted in the Canadian Anglo/French bilingual enviroment. According to Gardener and Lambert (1959) success in language learning depends on the learner’s attitudes towards the linguistic cultural community of the target language (Gardner & Lambert, 1959), these are fuelled by:
1. Integrative motivation: becoming part of the community
2. Instrumental motivation: a way of achieving another aim
However although integrative and instrumental factors are relvevant to the L2 classroom, this model can only be applied to L2 acquisition within the L2 classroom…..and other factors come into play: .
BLED 2012

8. General Framework For L2 Motivation (Dörnyei, 1994)
Language level:
- Integrative;
- Instrumental.
Learner level:
- Need for achievement;
- Self-confidence;
Language use anxiety
Perceived L2 competence
Attributions about past successes & failures
Learning situation level:
- Course-specific: Interest, relevance, expectancy, satisfaction
- Teacher specific: affiliative, authority type, modeling, task presentation, feedback
- Group specific: goal-orientedness, norm and reward system, group cohesiveness, classroom goal structure
And to examine these other factors we turned to Dornyeis’s general framework of L2 motivation that is based on classroom research and which places the many components that influence motivation into 3 main dimensions
The language level: encompasses the traditional concepts of integrative (When students want to learn a language to become part of a speech community (integrate). People who immigrate to new countries are some examples of people who may want to identify with the community around them. An important aspect of this form of language learning is using language for social interaction. This form of motivation is thought to produce success in language learners. This is often compared to instrumental motivation which is Wanting to learn a language for the purpose of obtaining some concrete goals such as a job, graduation, or the ability to read academic materials. This form of motivation is thought to be less likely to lead to success than integrative motivation
The learner level: concerns traits that the learner has developed in the past: need for achievement and self-confidence
The learning situational level: 3 main types of motivational sources can be identified:
BLED 2012

9. Social context Figure 3 Milieu Learner Instructional setting
Self-perceptions
Cognitive factors,dyslexia
Attitudes
Goals
Motivated behavior
So we asked ourselves, in this social context of L2 learning motivation, where, and how, could we intervene?
BLED 2012

10. Motivating Students
Components Of Motivational Teaching Practice (Dörnyei, 2001):
Creating the basic motivational conditions
Generating initial motivation
Maintaining and protecting motivation
4. Encouraging positive restrospective evaluation
And one of the obvious starting points was Dornyei’s components of motivational teaching practice …1,2,3,4….. and I will now consider the importance of each one individually
1. Creating the basic motivational conditions
Teachers should be enthusiastic, committed to their work, have good relationship with students.
Teachers should create a supportive atmosphere in the classroom.
A cohesive learner group and appropriate group norms are necessary to create sufficient level motivation.
2. Generating initial motivation
Teachers should promote a positive attitude to L2 learning (calling students' attention to the value of learning L2).
Teachers should increase learners' expectancy of success and should create realistic beliefs about L2 learning.
Learning materials should be relevant to learners' needs.
3. Maintaining and protecting motivation Learning should be stimulating and enjoyable and motivating tasks should be used.
Teachers should set sub-goals for the students that they can achieve.
Learners' self-esteem should be protected and their self-confidence should be enhanced.
Teachers should promote learner autonomy.
Teachers should promote co-operation among learners.
4. Encouraging positive retrospective self-evaluation Teachers should provide regular feedback about students' progress.
Teachers should grade in a motivating manner.
BLED 2012

11. Motivating Teachers
Teacher motivation is reflected in the following: 1. Lesson preparation 2. Teacher/student relationship 3. Classroom atmosphere 4. Self-confidence 5. Interest
All of the previous factors, in explaining how to motivate the student, emphasize the role of the teacher. role models in general have been found to be very influential on student motivation but the importance of teacher motivation in motivating learners has been largely ignored. Yet one question that begs to be answered is: How to motivate the teachers?
BLED 2012

12. Working Example M.O.E Military Operational English course Teachers
Students
Classroom activities
Final exam
Future implications
So, that is the theory…and hopefully if some of you are still awake I’ll explain how we applied this theory.
The MOE course was a four week inter-force course designed for potential JTAC/FAC operators. The courses were conducted both at the SLE (Army) and SLEAM (Air Force). The syllabus, entry and exit test were conceived in a inter-force work group.
In the following slides I’ll talk about the following:
The students
The teachers
Classroom activities
final exam
And future implications on in-house courses.
BLED 2012

13. Coordinators
Military
Coordinators
Teaching staff
This flow chart gives the general idea of how the SLEAM is structured.
The military propose us problems and we find solutions when and where possible. These, so called, solutions are then passed to the teaching staff.
The coordinators see the so-called ‘bigger picture’ and not only assist the teachers but also help train and guide them.
The coordinators have a contract with administration whereas, the teaching staff work for a private language that has contract to supply teachers. This factor can have certain implications on when we try to exert influence over them.
BLED 2012

14. The teachers Native speakers CELTA (or equivalent) qualified
Experience teaching ESP
Open minded
So we had the syllabus, now we had to identify which teachers would interpret the syllabus along with two coordinators and make it a real working course.
We looked hard and long at the teacher staff of 25 teachers. The first criteria, which had been established by the inter-force work group was that the teachers had to be native speakers. Seeing the staff that we had available to us we decided to one British teacher and one American. We decided against using Irish, South African or Australian teachers as the Italians have more contact with British or American pilots.
The second point we looked for was that the teachers were CELTA or equivalent qualified.
The third was that the teachers have to have had experience in teaching ESP and multilevel courses.
The fourth and most intangible point was the teacher had to have an open mind. By this I mean that we needed teachers that had repeatedly demonstrated to be creative, imaginative and able to work in the spirit of collaboration with other teachers and the coordinators.
After all these factors had been taken into consideration we came up with two teachers.
BLED 2012

15. Motivating Teachers Strategies
Spark initial interest
Personal research
Team research
The step was to engage and motivate the chosen teachers.
The first step was to spark interest in the subject. This was done by watching a short video clip of a CAS mission. After this teachers we posed a series of questions linked to type of language they thought would be used by a JTAC/FAC. They were then asked to find out more information about the subject through their own research. They were given defined boundaries of their research in order define their field of study. This process of meetings and research continued for a number of weeks, after which the syllabus was introduced to the teachers. This process of independent study and knowledge building was of vital importance for the success of the project as it not only instilled confidence in the teachers, but also allowed them to bridge the knowledge gap that can exist between an ESP class and their teacher.
The final part of this process which here is called team research, was the research for suitable material to be used in the classroom by the teachers. Seeing as the teachers already studied the subject, this was more of a process of collating and ordering material. This process was led by the coordinators.
These steps helped to motivate and prepare the teachers as they felt part of the ‘system’ and not external bystanders.
BLED 2012

16. The students
Here we have a group photo of the two classes with the old CO and head courses.
Now when this fine band of gentlemen washed up on our shores we realized that motivation could be an issue.
To begin with we not only had folks from different departments of the Italian navy but also from different departments of the air-force – which in itself could have caused a few issues.
The students were all of different ranks and came from different operational backgrounds.
It was of the utmost importance to render the course legitimate in the eyes of the students, as all teachers or educators know in the audience if the student is believes in the course this facilitates not only learning process but also the teaching part. This was done by explaining the rationale behind the course, who (in the way of subject matter experts) had been involved the development of the syllabus. What the logic behind the course was and why it was important.
BLED 2012

17. Classroom activities Teaching styles Use of realia
Boundaries of the classroom
So, more than ever the teachers had to be conscious of their teaching styles. The day was divided up and teaching styles were suggested for each part of the day. We asked the teachers to sometimes adopt a less collaborative methodology in favor of a more frontal/instructor stance. This was to tailor the lesson to the students’ learning needs.
Use of teacher aids. We tried to recreate the target language work situation by incorporating the use of tools such as Google earth and walkie-talkies. We asked the students to carry out ‘talk ons’ (a talk on is the part when the FAC guides the pilot to the target) on ‘enhanced target descriptions’ (is when the FAC describes in detail the target) of pre-designated targets throughout the world. This activity was done as a either an intra or inter class activity.
These activities were carried out in the early afternoon of the first weeks and served as an opportunity for peer-learning and collaborative study.
This type of task also made up a substantial part of final exam.
We also encouraged the students to a personal diary/blog/journal in L1 of their learning progress. The students at first were somewhat skeptical , as they felt we wanted to check up on them. After we explained this was for them and not for us and to help them internalize what they had been taught and make them ‘masters’ of their own learning path and that they should upon their teacher as a sort of ‘guide’.
The final point was how or what we perceived as the classroom. In order to render the lesson more realistic and effective we decided to let the chaps play outside – as you will see in the following slides
BLED 2012

18. Out....
We are very lucky at Loreto where the SLEAM is based as there is a five story building onto of the highest hill in the area. So, what we decided to do was to really put the language in use. Seeing as we had two classes we decided that one class would go out on the roof top, whilst the other group stayed in the classroom. The ones on the rooftop would call in CAS on a target designated by the teacher that had been discussed in the classroom. Whilst the group in the classroom would act as pilots using Google earth to follow the coordinates of the pretend FACs on the rooftop.
BLED 2012

19. and about...
BLED 2012

20. working together
What we noticed was that course for the students took on a new dimension. The language that they had been studying during the morning was really put into use. The students were used to during these types of activities but had never been taught English in this way. The standard image they had of an English course was grammar, grammar and wee bit more grammar. The potential friction that could have been caused by inter-force/departmental relationships did not appear. Friendly competition was encouraged by the teachers - which led to greater peer-collaboration and peer-tutoring.
You can also see one the teachers Jackie – taking the whole matter seriously.
BLED 2012

21. Here is the other teacher ‘Paul’
Here is the other teacher ‘Paul’. After I spoke to the teachers about the course and I asked them impression of the course, they felt proud to have part of project, as if their work really meant something. They liked the use of different realia and found the whole project not only challenging but also stimulating. And as we can see from faces of the students they felt there time was not being wasted.
BLED 2012

22. Final exam
These two video clips show part of the final exam for two candidates.
The first gentleman started off at lower level then the second gentleman.
The second gentleman had had extensive experience working abroad and seeing as this our first ‘experimental’ course he was not only a student but also as a SME. He also made sure that we didn't go beyond our remit and try to teach the FACs their jobs.
BLED 2012

23. BLED 2012

24. Future Implications Adapt courses for students
Use whatever realia you have available to you
Harness human resources to the maximum
Non- standardized way of teaching
Well, what did we learn from this experience that can be applied to our bread and butter courses?
The first point is to adapt you course where and when possible to the ‘real’ needs of your students – not ones that you might think.
Use whatever high-tech or low-tech devices/tools available to you.
Harness human resources to the maximum – what I mean by that is you have to involve firstly the teaching staff. We have seen that if they do not feel part of the ‘bigger picture’ than their classroom ‘effort’ can be affected. We also understood that our best laid plans tended to go waste when our teaching staff did not believe in the product as much as we did. We also came to understand that classical idea of hierarchical system of management maybe was not the most optimum system and that a network approach tended to be more fruitful –with more people working on a part of the project sharing their work via moodle (which we use as our LMS for elearning) or via Google drive.
The point is to think outside the box. Challenge what is considered to be an English course.
BLED 2012

25. References
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in a foreign language. Modern Language Journal, 78, Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. London: Longman. Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. In N. C. Ellis & D. Larsen-Freeman (Eds.), Language as a complex adaptive system. Oxford: Wiley- Blackwell. Dörnyei, Z., & Ottó, I. (1998). Motivation in action: A process model of L2 motivation. Working Papers in Applied Linguistics (Thames Valley University, London), 47, Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (Eds.). (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Gardner, R. (1985). Social psychology and. second language learning: The role of attitudes. and motivation. London: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R. (2006). The socio-educational model of second language acquisition: A research paradigm. EUROSLA Yearbook, 6, Gardner, R., & Lambert, W. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13, 266–272. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory of relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, Noels, K. (2001a). New orientations in language learning motivation: Towards a model of intrinsic extrinsic, and integrative orientations and motivations. In Z. Dörnyei, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report #23, pp ). Honolulu, HI: The University of Hawai’i, Second Language & Curriculum Center. Ushioda, E. (2001). Language learning at university: Exploring the role of motivational thinking. In Z. Dörnyei, & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language acquisition (Technical Report # 23, pp ). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center.
BLED 2012