Improving access to language training is not enough by itself. Course quality is equally important, both regarding retention and with respect to improving outcomes for adult migrants. In addition to mobilising the right tools, this requires well-qualified teachers. Student-teacher relationships can be essential to fostering motivation to continue in a language course. Teachers are also in the best position to differentiate according to the needs demonstrated by students in the classroom. They provide important feedback to learners and are capable of filling gaps, for example by explaining nuance in the meaning of words and expressions. Well-prepared teachers can make the difference for better language outcomes.
Language training in the adult migrant context is different from traditional foreign language education. Even within ability groups, teachers will encounter students with a wide range of backgrounds. Exposure outside the classroom to the host-country language will differ according to the socio‑economic situation of the migrant, leading learning needs to vary significantly. Some migrants will, depending on their language contacts, need to dedicate more practice to speaking, listening, or reading. Others may be exposed to specific dialects in their social context and need to understand how those differ from standard language. Second, adult migrants have specific linguistic needs tied their status as migrants in a potentially unfamiliar country with its particular systems. In some cases, legal concerns regarding the status of residence or psychological effects of past trauma may add pressure to the learning situation. Such migrants may require more psychosocial support during their attendance in language courses to be successful (Krumm and Plutzar, 2008). Language teachers may be confronted with questions and problems resulting from these conditions that educators are not usually prepared to handle. Third, unlike with much traditional foreign language teaching, teachers of migrants are often addressing a multilingual audience. While some migrants may have little to no language learning experience, others may have two or even three family languages. Responding to these heterogeneous experiences in planning a curriculum is an essential part of the role of the teacher (Cooke and Simpson, 2008).
The integration of CALL into a classroom setting raises additional teacher preparation issues. New technologies entail new ‘literacy’ requirements, not only for language learners. Numerous qualitative case studies have revealed a negative attitude among teachers toward the use of ICT, which largely reflects insufficient experience in this domain. Their own ICT literacy and educational philosophy can be significant barriers for teachers to fully engage in use of new technologies,1 which can mean a loss of investment for those countries who have invested in development of these tools.
The need to be qualified in these specific areas has, in some countries, led to a shortage of available educators. There is substantial competition for well-qualified teachers. Furthermore, private sector salaries may be more attractive. To ensure that eligible migrants have access to language courses needed to fulfil integration obligations or entitlements, countries should consider what incentives are necessary to recruit teachers in sufficient numbers.