It?s taken me a few days, but I have finally decided to sit down and write my impressions of the HOTS debate that took place at the end of the ETAI conference last week. Firstly from a purely biased point of view, I must state that the anti-HOTS faction won on points at least. (That is boxing terminology for anyone who doesn?t know.) Their arguments were well-thought out and backed by sound theories. I was a bit disappointed that the speakers backing the new programme only spoke from their personal experience. I realise that personal testimonies describing how successful it has been should be convincing enough, but all the same, I was hoping to hear the anti-HOTS faction?s arguments being debated one by one. The fact that a few teachers might have liked the programme doesn?t mean that all teachers will succeed in getting it to work. Indeed, those of us who follow the posts on ETNI will know that a very dedicated and experienced teacher in a development town has written in several times describing her dissatisfaction with the programme. The teacher would have come to the conference and spoken up had it not been for medical issues. However, amongst the anti-HOTS speakers was a colleague of mine who has trained to be an instructor of the programme and was less than enamoured with it. In addition, who is to say that the positive experiences that many have had with the programme do not stem from an initial enthusiasm that comes with any innovation? How will these teachers feel a few years down the line when they realise that they have been teaching the same thing again and again, or when they see that work being given in by their pupils is identical to pieces that they read a few years beforehand? The log, in my opinion, could encourage plagiarism. Our time and effort will be spent on preventing this rather than teaching. Why should English teachers be put in a situation in which they are constantly being forced to change materials in order to keep one step ahead of the pupils? We are overworked enough as it is. As for the supposed improvement in grades, I feel that the data that has been thrown up to prove this is very misleading. (This is a point that was brought up at the conference.) How is it possible to compare a grade given by a class teacher on pieces of work done over a 2 year period to a grade on an objective test given by an anonymous examiner? Of course the grades will be higher, but is that the point? Teachers who decide to do the log (which I suspect will be the majority as it allows them greater freedom of choice and because those that will not want to do it will probably cave in under pressure from all sides to do so when it is realised that the log will yield a higher mark than the exam,) will end up giving 62.5% of the final grade. What will the English Bagrut exam be worth in the eyes of universities, when this happens? I have to admit that I am taking the online HOTS course at the moment, defying the directives of my union. I decided to do this for several reasons amongst which was the will to see what all the fuss is about. I have to admit that I have yet to be impressed by anything I have seen. This, I must stress, is not the fault of the course?s instructor, but is the fault of the material that we have to study. I can fully understand why many senior teachers, at the moment, feel insulted and outraged that the programme looks like being implemented in spite of their well-thought through protestations. I cannot understand why the fact that the chances are that a great many teachers will be implementing the programme against their will and better judgement is not reason enough to put a complete moratorium on it for the time being. David Graniewitz Jerusalem ----------------------------------------------- ** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org ** for help - ask@xxxxxxxx ** ** to post to this list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx ** -----------------------------------------------