CELTA common mistakes
CELTA · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Spends most of the lesson explaining target language himself rather than setting up tasks in which learners work out meaning and use; teacher talk dominates and learners produce only short choral responses.
Nerves and a belief that a clear explanation is faster and safer than elicitation; the candidate has not planned the questions that would hand the work to the learners.
What to do instead
For each target item write two or three elicitation questions and a pair-check task in the plan; set a personal teacher-talk target, and review a recording or ask the trainer to time whole-class teacher talk against learner talk.
Gives activity instructions once at normal speed and then starts the activity while several learners are still opening books or asking what to do.
Assumes the instruction was clear because it was clear in the candidate's head; rushes because of time pressure and does not check understanding.
What to do instead
Write a short instruction script, demonstrate the first item with a learner, ask two instruction-checking questions with expected answers, and wait until all learners are on task before monitoring.
Presents new language and moves on after asking 'Do you understand?'; no checking of meaning, form or pronunciation.
The candidate does not know what effective checking looks like and relies on learners' polite nods.
What to do instead
Plan concept-checking questions with expected answers for meaning, write the form on the board and check it, mark stress and drill chorally then individually before moving to practice.
Monitors by standing at the front or only helping the strongest learners; does not note errors and ends the lesson without any correction slot.
Uncertainty about the purpose of monitoring and fear of interrupting fluency; no system for collecting errors.
What to do instead
Plan a monitoring route around the room, carry an error log with columns for the error and the learner, and timetable a short delayed-correction stage before feedback.
Sets activities that are not connected to the stated main aim: for example, the aim is controlled practice of past simple questions but the activity is a general speaking game.
Chooses activities because they look engaging rather than because they serve the aim; the aim was written after the activities were chosen.
What to do instead
Write the main aim first and, for every stage, write one sentence explaining how it serves that aim; ask the trainer to check the plan against the aim before teaching.
Runs out of time and cuts the free practice or the feedback stage, so the lesson ends with an activity unfinished and no rounding off.
Overestimates how long stages take and plans too much content for the lesson length.
What to do instead
Do a timed run-through of the plan, mark stages as must-do or can-cut, and prepare a shorter version of the final activity and feedback so the lesson still has a clear ending.
Uses complex teacher language and metalanguage with a low-level class, such as 'This is the present perfect continuous used for an action that started in the past and continues'.
Habit from own learning and a wish to be precise; the candidate is not thinking about the learners' level of English.
What to do instead
Grade language to the class level by using examples, simple questions and the board rather than terminology; write key instructions in simple language in the plan and rehearse them.
Writes the language-analysis assignment as a descriptive grammar summary copied from a reference grammar, with no analysis of learner difficulties or implications for teaching.
Misreads the purpose of the assignment as a grammar test and runs out of time to add analysis.
What to do instead
Use the assignment rubric as a checklist, include two or three likely learner problems with evidence, and state what the candidate would do in class; cite the reference grammar rather than copying it.
Quotes or closely paraphrases sources without citation, or copies sections from websites into the assignment.
Time pressure and weak referencing habits; the candidate does not realise that close paraphrase also needs a citation.
What to do instead
Take notes with the source recorded alongside each point, write from the notes rather than the source, include a reference list, and run the draft through the centre's plagiarism check before submission.
Leaves one or more bullet points of the assignment task unanswered, or answers a related but different question.
Skims the task and starts writing from memory of what the assignment is 'about' rather than what it asks.
What to do instead
Turn each bullet point into a heading, write against each heading, and tick off every bullet point before submitting; ask the trainer to confirm the task is fully covered.