Because of the innovation of second/third years having methodology for two terms, beginning in second grade and carrying onto grade three, instead of one term in grade three, I am concerned to ensure that not only is it an educational course for the students, but is also seen to be so by colleagues and political leaders in the college. (How can I ensure that the educational value of the methodology course is both helpful to the students and perceived as significant in the college’s future strategic planning?)

The situation surrounding my methodology teaching has been confused for me by the fact that the two students (out of 78) in my present Grade Three class (now on Teaching Practice) did not have to re-sit the written-examination for my subject although they failed. This seems to be a contradiction in a climate in which the course has been extended significantly. Students who fail Chinese Methodology have to re-sit. First, my methodology course has been doubled in length, apparently because of its success with third year students last term (although how that success is defined by the college, I don’t know — perhaps students’ opinions are the deciding factor here, as well as the Vice-Dean’s interest in and attendance at my classes). Then, however, the message seems to be that Moira’s class doesn’t matter enough to have the same rules as its Chinese equivalent. It is possible that my course is perceived as very beneficial by my departmental colleagues and Dean, but that the college statutes do not embrace the quality of what is happening in my curriculum.

One of the most significant aspects of good development work as I understand it, and have discussed with VSO officers, is negotiated, sustainable change, so if my methodology course, or rather the values underlying it, are not to die when I leave, then I need to leave behind me some structures which will help to support it. One of those could be an examination, which is flexible, encourages creativity and is compulsory. So what are the values underlying my methodology course, which I attempt to realise as actions in the world, with the underlying assumption that people will, given the right circumstances, gravitate towards actions which increase their productiveness, happiness, creativity and love of others?

• Empowerment of individuals as a means of helping them to reach their potential;
• Empowerment of individuals as a generative way to develop communities of learners;
• Joy in learning for its own sake;
• A sense of pride in the achievements of oneself and others;
• A sense of purpose and commitment to the future through developing the art of teaching;
• A respect for a systematic form of teaching and reflection;
• A respect for individuals and groups regardless of background, culture, ethnicity, religion, ability and experience;
• A development of a dialectical form of problem-solving/enquiry learning.

• By asking opinions of colleagues and leaders about the purposes of Western and Chinese Methodologies in the college;
• By a visit to the college of Dr. Jack Whitehead from Bath University;
• Through discussions with Dean and colleagues in the department about the appropriateness of a compulsory examination for Western Methodology;
• By encouraging a co-teacher to work with me in my Methodology classes; (This was formally agreed in my first VSO evaluation with the Dean.)
• By greater social contact with college-leaders;
• By discussions, formally and informally, with students;
• By setting up e-mail addresses for interested students to extend dialogues outside the classroom and for use on teaching practices if appropriate;
• Through analysis and discussion with the students about their action planning processes, which includes their collaborative work with learning partners;
• By ‘walking the talk’ (see values above);
• By helping to develop a climate of negotiation and discussion around key issues in development-roles in Guyuan;
• By discussing these issues with my Programme Officer (VSO) in Beijing and other VSO colleagues;
• By continuing with the Methodology Handbook in collaboration with Dean Tian Fengjun and other colleagues;
• By visiting other colleagues’ classrooms and encouraging them to come to mine;
• By supporting my colleague, Wang Shuqin, as she translates Jean McNiff’s booklet on Action Research into Chinese.

• See above.
• In addition, the Action Research Group at Bath University and perhaps the new ‘Accounting for Ourselves’ e-list, can give me ideas, can monitor progress, and help to validate and/or challenge results.

• The future of Western Methodology, or at least some of the underlying values, will be reflected in the organizing principles of the department when I am no longer there! If this is deemed appropriate at the time by staff and students.
• Students (and perhaps some colleagues) will reflect back to me either verbally, or in their actions, some of the values, which are implicit and explicit in my Methodology Course. For example, they might articulate or demonstrate their ability to respect others, to empathise with the situation of other individuals and groups; they will be more likely to ask questions, to challenge set-ideas, to take risks with creative responses in class and during practice sessions; they will reflect back some of the issues about their own sense of the future in a developing China; they will evince a pride in their own sense of achievement and be able to see how far they have come; they will be able to make links between their own achievements and developing the achievements of others.
• I will find an educational synthesis between the students’ action plans and their subsequent actions and ideation (if possible in the follow-through to teaching practice);
• There will be a development of more truly dialogical and negotiated forms of learning evolving between myself and my students, with particular emphasis on the action planning process and their use in the college-classrooms, on teaching practices, and elsewhere;