A K (Plus One) ARDS Modular Model to Improve Non-English Department English Teachers' Competences in a Higher Education

There are two types of English teachers in a higher education, English teachers who have English Language Teaching(ELT) background and those who do not have it. It brings about some problems in the teaching instruction and the achievement of the students, as well. This is a theoretical views used as a preliminary study to develop the model to improve English teachers' competences in a higher education. A modular model proposed by Kumaravadivelu, with his KARDS model seems appropriate to be applied for the English teachers who are assigned to teach higher education students. This model is at first intended for the prospective teachers of L2 (TESOL), but with some modifications, it can be used to improve the competences of in-service English teachers.


INTRODUCTION
In the workforce nowadays anyone can work from anywhere, which means changing the nature of traditional work, where traditional boundaries are replaced with more skilled and mobile talents. Thus the ability to adapt to change and continuously make changes in the career is badly needed. This will make a crucial difference in surviving in the workforce. When anyone does not accept learning, unlearning, and relearning, it is quite obvious that he/ she will get less opportunity in getting a job or in acquiring new knowledge, for instance. A procrastinator of a change will quickly be unable to find his place a world.
In addition in the globalization era, which makes the world become smaller and smaller, the need of good education and the mastery of an international language is a must. A country whose people are well educated will for sure become one of the leading countries in the world. Developed countries are counted here. As a not yet developed country, however, Indonesia needs more and well-educated people to develop it. Therefore higher education becomes a driving force for national development.
As one of the international languages, English continues to dominate as the lingua franca of business, media, technology, medicine, education, and research. Warschauer [16] therefore noted that "They (A large and increasing number of people) will need to be able to write persuasively, critically interpret and analyze information, and carry out complex negotiations and collaboration in English".
The above rationale turns out to be the reasons why the teaching and learning English in higher education needs to be developed to produce professional and qualified people. Since English is not their major, it is taught as an ESP (English for Specific Purposes). ESP or EAP is driven by learners' needs; therefore the first step to identify the needs is by conducting need analysis. It is a process for identifying and defining a valid curriculum in order to facilitate learning in a situation that is related to the students' real life [6]. This paper will therefore use the needs analysis to develop an instructional model for non-English department English teachers in a higher education to improve their competencies. The following questions are the formulation of the problem which will be answered throughout and by the end of conducting the needs analysis: 1) How is the model developed?, and 2) What does the model look like?.

ENGLISH FOR ACADEMIC PURPOSES
English for Academic Purposes (EAP) is a branch of English for Specific Purposes (ESP). ESP itself arose as a term in the 1960's as it became increasingly aware that general English courses frequently did not meet learner or employers needs. EAP emerged along with English for Occupational Purposes (EOP), as another branch of ESP. According to Hyland & Hamp-Lyons [10], EAP refers to "the language research and instruction that focuses on the specific communicative needs and practices of particular groups in academic contexts". As English has become the important language for disseminating academic knowledge, the need of mastering English, EAP especially, is becoming more and more important. The demand for ESP is growing rapidly, particularly in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) countries where English is mainly used for instrumental purposes. People in these countries learn English in order to fulfill the school curriculum requirement, to pass standardized English proficiency tests (TOEFL-Test of English as an International Language and IELTS-International English Language Testing Service), or to obtain promotion or professional development at work. In terms of the emergence of ESP, Nunan [18] argues that ESP has become an important subcomponent of language teaching, with its own approaches to curriculum development, materials design, pedagogy, testing and research.
The above explanation about ESP is also acknowledged by other scholars, such as Paltridge & Starfield [20] who argue that ESP refers to the teaching and learning of English either as a second or foreign language in which the goal of the learners is to use English in a particular domain. As also mentioned earlier, EAP and EOP, as well, are only two branches of ESP. Alongside the development of ESP Belcher, in [20] states that ESP has been expanded into areas such as EAP, EOP, English for Vocational Purposes (EVP), English for Medical Purposes (EMP), English for Business Purposes (EBP), English for Legal Purposes (ELP), and English for Sociocultural Purposes (ESCP).
In the higher education, however, the ESP terminology is used overlapping with English for Academic Purposes (EAP). EAP refers to the language and associated practices that people need in order to undertake study or work in English medium higher education. Therefore, the objective of an EAP course is to help these people learn some of the linguistic and cultural-mainly institutional and disciplinary-practices involved in studying or working through the medium of English [7]. Moreover Gillet argues that "EAP is often considered to be a branch of ELT, although not all EAP teachers have come through the ELT route". It is a type of ESP in that the teaching content is explicitly matched to the language, practices and study needs of the learners.
A key feature of an ESP course is, therefore, the orientation of the content and the aims of a course to the specific needs of the learners. Thus ESP courses focus on the language, genres, and skills that are appropriate to the specific activities that are needed by the learners to carry out in English. ESP students are usually adult learners with specific needs and often homogeneous groups in terms of learning foals, although it does not guarantee that their proficiency in the target language is the same. Since ESP is intended for special people who need special language skills and genres, the main issues in the developing ESP teaching are how to identify learner needs (need analysis), the nature of the genres that the learners need to be able to produce as well as participate in, and how teachers can know that the learners have been able to do this successfully, and if not, what the teachers can do to help them do this.
There are numerous studies that have been conducted on EAP. Blue, in [29], differentiates between English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP) and English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP). Jordan [11] explains the difference between these two. EGAP is concerned with the general academic language in English and skills in studying that are common across various disciplines, whereas ESAP deals with the English language features and activities of particular academic disciplines or subjects [29].
Another definition of EAP is presented by Hyland [9] who argues that "EAP is usually defined as teaching English with the aim of assisting learners' study or research in that language". All areas of academic practice are covered in this sense. The areas, according to Hyland [9] are, for instance, pre-tertiary, undergraduate and postgraduate teaching (from the design of materials to lectures and classroom tasks); classroom interactions (from teacher feedback to tutorials and seminar discussions); research genres (from 277 journal articles to conference papers and grant proposals); student writing (from essays to exam papers and graduate theses), administrative practice (from course documents to doctoral oral defenses) The increase of the communicative demand of EAP nowadays brings about the changing contexts of EAP. EAP now seeks to understand and engage learners in a critical understanding of the increasingly varied contexts and practices of academic communication [9]. Moreover students' populations have become so diverse, especially in terms of their ethnic and linguistic background and educational experiences. This condition brings about significant challenges to higher education academic staff. The situation is more challenging since the learning needs of the varied groups of students are somewhat very different.
Hyland [9] also highlights that the complexity of EAP is increased due to the concern of the English-language skills of non-native English speaking academics, especially those working in non-English-language countries where English is used as the medium of university instruction, such as Hong Kong and Singapore.
To overcome the challenges presented by the development of EAP, it attempts to offer systematic, locally managed, solution-oriented approaches that address the pervasive and endemic challenges posed by academic study to a diverse student body by focusing on student needs and discipline-specific communication skills [9]. Therefore, course designers should provide somewhat different English course for those who are learning English for other purposes, and program designed to prepare non-native users of English in the English-medium academic settings.
The important idea presented by Hyland [9] is the reality that nowadays, most teachers of EAP are not native-speakers of English, as he mentions that since English is going globa, therefore most teachers of EAP are non-native English speaker, which led to changes in EAP materials and teacher training courses.

LANGUAGE TEACHING CONCEPT
Language teaching experts and practitioners have defined the concept of teaching in many ways. One of them is proposed by Brown [3] who argues that "teaching is guiding and facilitating learning, enabling the learner to learn, setting the conditions for learning". Furthermore Brown mentions that the joy of teaching lies in the vivid pleasure of seeing the students' achievements of broader knowledge of their proficiency of language and students' experiences in the classroom. In line with the above definition of teaching Raka Joni, in [20], claims that teaching is awakening and assisting the students to be able to learn.
The above definitions obviously indicate that teachers are required to be able to be the agents to change the behavior of their students in learning. However, the main subject in teaching is the students, themselves. The task of the teachers is to design a learning situation that can facilitate the students to be able to deal with various obstacles that need their skills in identifying and manipulating critical changes in order to achieve their goals in learning. The role of the teachers is not merely delivering information, but motivating and guiding their students, as well as becoming the provider of teaching for their students.
Nurkamto [20], after reviewing some definitions of teaching, argues that there are two implications in teaching. First is the role of a teacher as a teacher, whose job is to help the students to learn. The assistance could be in the form of motivating and guiding the students. The teacher is also expected to be able to provide some learning tools and aids as the facilities of learning. Giving the students motivation could be through making them realize about their intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Guiding the student, which can be in the form of explaining the goals of the subject, the nature of the tasks, and the strategies used to do the tasks, means helping them to find the fine ways in learning. Providing the facilities to learn indicates that the teacher should be able to facilitate the learning, to make it easy to learn. This can be broadly interpreted as designing and creating good condition in order to learn and providing learning facilities.
The second implication concerns with who the most responsible persons in the learning activities is. Nurkamto [20], moreover, explains that the responsibility towards the process of learning should go to the students. Students become the subject of autonomous learners. Furthermore, Nurkamto presents the research result conducted by Cotteral and Crabbe in 1992 towards the language learners. It shows that an autonomous learner is a learner who 1) plans and organizes his/her own experiences in studying, 2) knows the field of studies, 30 monitors own progress in studying, 4) finding an opportunities to do the exercises, 5) is enthusiastic about a language and learning it, and 6) is confident in using the language and finds help if necessary.
Furthermore, in the 21st century, the demand of a teacher is more challenging. A teacher is required to apply a reflective approach in teaching. What is a reflective approach to teaching? Richard & Lockhart [27] defines a reflective approach to teaching as an approach in which teachers and teachers-in-training collect data about the process of teaching, examine their attitudes, beliefs, assumptions, and teaching practices, and use the information collected as a starting point for critical reflection about teaching. Moreover Richard and Lockhart present questions needed, which can help teachers and in-training-teachers to apply The questions proposed by Richard and Lockhart above indicate that there are five basic assumptions about reflective teaching. First is an informed teacher has an extensive knowledge about teaching. Teachers are demanded for mastering various approaches and techniques, as well as procedures, in teaching that can be employed as the basis of their reflection. The second assumption is there is much that can be learned about teaching through self-inquiry. This leads to the third assumption, in which teachers have no idea of what will happen in teaching. The continuous self-inquiry will help teachers figure out what should be done next. The three thoughts leads to another consideration that teaching experience alone is not sufficient to be used as a basis for continuous development. That is why critical reflections conducted again and again can trigger a deeper understanding in teaching.
The development in teaching, especially in the demand of teaching in the 21st century, eliminates the old/traditional view of teaching, which sees teaching as (only) the activity of transferring knowledge from the teacher to the students, as Nurkamto [20] mentions that the traditional thought of teaching sees students as an empty tube which can be filled with the teacher anytime. Students are required to sit down quietly on the chairs, which are set traditionally, listening to their teachers

CONCEPTS OF ADULT LEARNERS
The concepts of adult learners and the learning are important to be discussed since the research target is the English teachers/lectures who are categorized as adults. The most well known expert of andragogy concept is Malcolm Knowles. His theory of andragogy is an effort to develop a theory especially for adult learning. Knowles [12] emphasizes that adult learning should be differentiated with the children learning. He found out that in the past (seventh century), the emphasis of teaching was for children.
Using the idea from Lindeman and other theorists, Knowles makes five assumptions about the design of learning: 1) adults need to know why adult learners need to learn something, as Knowles mentions "Adults are motivated to learn as they experience needs and interests that learning will satisfy; therefore, these are the appropriate starting points for organizing adult learning activities.", 2) Adults need to learn based on life situations, as their orientation to learning is life-centered, 3) Adults should learn based on the analysis of their experience, 4) Adults have a deep need to be self-directing, thus the role of the teacher is to engage in a process of mutual inquiry with them rather than to transmit the teacher's knowledge, and 5) "Individual differences among people increase with age; therefore, adult education must make optimal provision for differences in style, time, place, and pace of learning." Following the five assumptions, Knowles [12] suggests 4 principles that are applicable to adult learning: 1) Adults need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction. 2)Experience (including mistakes) provides the basis for the learning activities. 3)Adults are most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance and impact to their job or personal life. 4)Adult learning is problemcentered rather than content-oriented.
Regarding the assumptions and the four principles above, teachers of adult learners are expected to know the concepts of adult learning theories and be able to integrate them into their teaching style. They need to become the facilitators of adult education, helping the adult learners to set and achieve their learning goals and guide them in choosing the subjects and courses needed. They should always consider that adult learners need to know why a course is important to their learning and life situation. The adult learners are expected to make use of their experiences that will affect the learning styles and integration of knowledge. Adult learners are, therefore, able to apply the knowledge into their life situations.
Practically, it can be concluded that andragogy means that any instruction for adults need to be more focused on the process and less on the material being taught, therefore andragogy needs strategies like case 279 studies, role playing, self-evaluation, project based, and simulations. Teacher's role is more as a facilitator or a resource person rather than lecturing.
In line with what Knowles has emphasized that adult learners are self-directed, Tennant [31] argues that "Psychology is frequently used as a foundation discipline in the training of adult educators. This is because it addresses those questions which naturally emerge from an engagement with adult teaching and learning." Moreover, Tennant proposes some questions which will help designers in developing a course for adult learners. Such questions are 1) What motivates students to attend classes?, 2) Through what processes do adults learn best?, 3) How can I adjust my teaching practices to take into account the learning styles of my students?, 4) How can I adjust my teaching practices to take into account the learning styles of my students?, 5) How can I encourage the formation of a cohesive and supportive group?, 6) Can I make sense of the expressed anxieties and concerns of my students?, and 7) What can I do to help those students who experience difficulties in learning?
Even though much of the psychological literature could not thoroughly answer these questions, it is not all clear how the practitioner should proceed to apply the output of this literature to the everyday activity of teaching adults. Therefore Tennant [30]proposes three options, which each of them correspond to a different motive within the practitioner. The options are to control events in the learning environment, to interpret and influence events, or to gain a critical understanding of events and one's actions in relation to them.
In an instruction process, it is quite natural and understandable that the instructor/educator wants to control the learners. Tennant [31] argues that a practitioner who holds such a view is likely to be disappointed. Moreover he says adult educators should not merely adopt, what he says as, a chameleon-like character, shifting colors as the environmental circumstances tell them. It indicates that the adult educators should be aware of their world view and understand its limitations and the context of the available options.

ENGLISH TEACHERS' COMPETENCES
Richards and Rodgers [26] argue that language teachers' roles are to facilitate the communicative process among students in the classroom, and between the students with various activities conducted during the lessons. A teacher acts as an independent participant, as well. Both require teachers to organize, lead, and monitor the learning process. Moreover Richards (1998) elaborate six factors which build the skills and competences of teachers, which include: 1) teaching theory; 2) teaching; 3) communication; 4) subject matter knowledge; 5) pedagogical reasoning and decision making; and 6) contextual knowledge.
Brown [3] suggests a checklist of good language-teaching characteristics, which can be used as a self-check to determine some areas for continued professional growth, to prioritize those areas, and to state specific goals that teachers will pursue. The characteristics are as follows: technical knowledge, pedagogical skills, interpersonal skills, and personal qualities.
Another expert, Richards [21], conceptualizes the nature of teacher's knowledge and skills as follows: practical knowledge, content knowledge, contextual knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, personal knowledge, and reflective knowledge. Whereas the skills, according to Richards, can be seen according to whether the teachers are untrained or trained and whether they are novice or experienced. What is meant by practical knowledge is the teacher's repertoire of classroom techniques and strategies. Content knowledge deals with the teacher's understanding of the subject of teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL). This includes, for example, pedagogical grammar, phonology, teaching theories, second language acquisition, as well as the specialized discourse and terminology of language teaching. The third knowledge, contextual, is familiarity with the school or institutional context, school norms, and knowledge of the learners, including cultural and other relevant information. Personal knowledge concerns with the ability to restructure content knowledge for teaching purposes, and to plan, adapt, and improvise. Personal knowledge and reflective knowledge are the teacher's personal beliefs and principles and his/her individual approach to teaching, and the teacher's capacity to reflect on and assess his or her own practice respectively.
Regarding the teacher's skills, which has two dimensions, training and experience, Richards [21] argues that the former refers to possession of a professional qualification in language teaching; whereas the later refers to class-room experience. Initial teacher training, according to Richards, typically sets out to give teachers what can be called basic technical competence, which includes an introductory understanding of the subject matter of TESOL, mastery of basic classroom teaching processes, as well as approaches to teaching the four skills. UCLES Certificate in Language Teaching to Adults, as what Richards says as a widely taught initial qualification for language teachers, focuses on six area of basic teaching skills: 1) language awareness, 2) the learner, the teacher, and the teaching/learning context, 3) planning for effective teaching of adults learners of English, 4) classroom management and teaching skills, 5) resources and materials for teaching, and 6) professional development.
In line with that, Rochsantiningsih [28] argues the teaching skills become the main competence for teachers. These skills consist of the followings: 1) selecting learning activities; 2) preparing students for new learning; 3) presenting learning activities; 4) asking questions; 5) checking students' understanding; 6) providing opportunities for practice of new items; 7) monitoring students' learning; 8) giving feedback on student learning; and 9) reviewing and re-teaching when necessary (Richards, 1998). In particular, there are more skills to obtain for language teachers, such as: 1) preparation of communicative activities; 2) organization and facilitation of communicative interaction; 3) judgment of proper balance between fluency and accuracy; 4) awareness of learners' errors; and 5) appropriate treatment errors.
The above discussion concerns with somehow the idealism of the world about teacher's competences. However, for the case of Indonesia, any theories about teacher's professionalism should work hand in hand with the law or rule in Indonesia. The qualification, competences, certification, and academic positions of a higher education teacher (lecturer) are stipulated in the Republic of Indonesian Law, No. 14, 2005, Chapter V, Paragraph 45, which says: "(A lecturer must have academic qualifications, competences, and education certifications, be healthy physically and psychologically, fulfill other qualifications required by their institution, and have the competences to fulfill the goals of the national education)" Any definitions concerning higher education teacher's competences are, therefore, in line with that law.

KARDS MODULAR MODEL
From the discussion on the theoretical review, a modular model proposed by Kumaravadivelu, with his KARDS model seems appropriate to be applied for the English teachers who are assigned to teach higher education students. This model is at first intended for the prospective teachers of L2 (TESOL), but with some modification, it can be used to improve the competences of English teachers at IT department. This model is challenging the previous L2 teacher education programs, which offer (only) a series of independent, standalone courses in areas such as linguistic theories, second language acquisition, pedagogic grammar, methods, curriculum, and testing, usually ending with a capstone course in practicum or practice teaching [13]. Kumaravadivelu offers a holistic picture of learning, teaching, and teacher development, which is generally left to student teachers to see "the pattern that connects".
KARDS-Knowing, Analyzing, Recognizing, Doing and Seeing-consists of five constituent modules. In developing this model, Kumaravadivelu [13] bases himself on the thought that in order to become selfdetermining and self-transforming individuals, teachers have to basically (a) develop their professional, procedural and personal knowledge base-Knowing, (b) analyze learner needs, motivation, and autonomy-Analyzing, (c) recognize their own identities, beliefs and values-Recognizing; (d) perform teaching, theorizing and dialogizing-Doing ; and (e) monitor their own teaching acts-Seeing. Relating to the modular model, Nations [18] argues that a modular approach to sequencing means that each lesson is separate from the others so that the lessons can be done in any order and need not all be done. In other words, this approach breaks a course into independent non-linear units. These units may be parts of lessons, lessons or groups of lessons. Each unit or module is complete in itself and does not usually assume knowledge of previous modules.
Moreover Nations argues that in language courses the language could be divided into modules in several ways. The modules could be skill-based with different modules for listening, speaking, reading and writing, and sub-skills of these larger skills. The modules could be based on language functions, or more broadly situations, dealing with the language needed for shopping, emergency services, travel, the post office and the bank.
The modular model proposed by Kumaravadivelu, however, presents a dynamic network of modules that interact in complex way. Moreover he says "The centrality of the model lies in the process of forging a synergic relationship where the whole is much more than the sum of the parts... From practical point of view, the dynamism of the model renders it flexible enough to help present and prospective teachers to meet the challenges of learning and teaching needs and wants and situations that are unpredictably numerous. Thus, the essentials of the model presented here show a pathway towards the design and delivery of a context-sensitive model that local practitioners should be able to build. [18]" Regardless the first intension of KARDS, a model used for language teacher education, this model could be modified to improve the competences of English teachers at higher education. The modification, however, should be based on the learner needs (the English teachers as teachers of ESP and/or EAP). Thus the proposed model should be able to fulfill the conditions necessary for teachers to know, to analyze, to recognize, to do, and to see what constitutes learning, teaching, and teacher development. This model should also be suited with the condition of the teachers (the pre-and in-service ones). Therefore, the context of andragogy, with its five assumptions, applies here. Those assumptions are: 1) adults need to know why adult learners need to learn something; 2) adults need to learn based on life situations, as their orientation to learning is life-centered; 3) adults should learn based on the analysis of their experience, 4) adults have a deep need to be self-directing, thus the role of the teacher is to engage in a process of mutual inquiry with them rather than to transmit the teacher's knowledge, and 5) adult education must make optimal provision for differences in style, time, place, and pace of learning.
The following discussion will scrutinize the KARDS modular model more with some modifications, which could be applicable to the model intended to improve the competences of the English teachers at higher education.

Knowing
Kumaravadivelu [13] proposes a set of manageable and meaningful types of knowledge with a simple frame of reference consisting of professional knowledge, procedural knowledge, and personal knowledge.

a. Professional Knowledge
In the real condition, there are two types of English teachers at higher education, the ones with English teacher training background and the other with no background of English teacher training. The professional knowledge of both types of teachers is of course different. Kumaravadivelu [13], in one hand, discusses three types of this professional knowledge, i.e. knowledge about language, knowledge about language learning, and knowledge about language teaching. In the case of English teachers here, it is needed to add one more category of knowledge; this is knowledge about the content of study major field.
Bearing in mind about the two types of teachers above, the first assumption is that the type one teacher is good enough at the three professional knowledge mentioned by Kumaravadivelu whereas the second type is only professional in the fourth category. This assumption brings about another assumption that their needs, to improve their competences, are different. Therefore a preliminary study to find out the teacher needs is a must to do list. The need analysis is also in line with what Kumaravadivelu [13] argues Knowledge as a product, though important, is less valued and valuable than knowing as a process. But, we know very little about teachers' ways of knowing because the cognitive dimension of knowing is so complex and so difficult to investigate. Until we know, with confidence, what Language Teacher Education for a Global Society teachers think and know, and how they know what they know, our knowledge of teacher knowledge will remain partial and puzzling.

b. Procedural Knowledge
Procedural knowledge, according to Kumaravadivelu is knowing how to manage classroom learning and teaching (ibid: 29). Moreover he says "it is about facilitating the flow of the lesson, channelizing it in the Everton and Weinstein, in [13], define it as The actions teachers take to create an environment that supports and facilitates both academic and social-emotional learning. In other word, classroom management has two distinct purposes. It not only seeks to establish and sustain an orderly environment so students can engage in meaningful academic learning, it also aims to enhance students' social and moral growth. The above definition needs teachers' skill in managing not only the academic environment, but also the behavior of the students. In case of a class consisting of English teachers, who are all adults, concepts of andragogy must be applied, especially dealing with managing the social and moral growth. Thus, behaviorism does not apply here. The most appropriate approach to classroom management is probably constructivism, which is not used solely, but combined with other approaches.

c. Personal Knowledge
This type of knowledge reveals the individual endeavor of the teacher. Teachers' personal knowledge involves the ability to critically recognize, reflect, review, and reinvent their own identities, beliefs, and values (ibid: 32). Kumaravadivelu, indeed, argues that the personal knowledge matures over time as the teachers learn to cope with competing pulls and pressures related to professional preparation, personal beliefs, institutional constraints, learner expectations, assessment instruments, and other factors.
For the second type of teachers taught at the certain department, such maturity is eventually built without knowing that they are dealing with pedagogical and/or andragogical activities. This lack of knowledge should be revealed by distributing questionnaire or interviewing the teachers in order that they realized they are not only being zero in the pedagogical and andragogical aspects. This awareness in needed to build teachers' confidence so that they are gaining self motivation in improving their competences to teach ESP/EAP in the certain department.
The following figure is the modified circle of K in KARDS, with the additional category, content knowledge

Analyzing
The next module in KARDS is Analyzing. Kumaravadivelu assumes that in order to carry out their duties responsibly and successfully, L2 teachers must develop the knowledge and skill necessary to analyze and understand learner needs, learner motivation, and learner autonomy. Moreover he argues that "what makes such analysis and understanding so complicated and challenging is that the learner needs, motivation, and autonomy are determined by a combination of individual, institutional, governmental, and social demands." [13] This module will be adopted verbatim because English teachers of IT students should be able to analyze the needs, motivation, and also autonomy of their students. This is important in order that they are able to design suitable course design as shown in Figure 2 above.

Recognizing
Kumaravadivelu introduces the the term teaching Self [13]. What is meant by teaching Self here is the inner Self that the teachers bring with them to the practice of everyday teaching. This is as important as their ability and willingness to recognize and renew their teaching Self. The third module of KARDS modular model plays a very important role since the effectiveness of the K and A in KARDS depends on the teaching Self. Moreover he writes "Recognizing the teaching Self is all about recognizing teacher identities, beliefs, and values. That is to say, a teacher's personal disposition toward various aspects of their professional life is so vital that it determines their teaching behavior and hence shapes learning outcome. It contributes to their understanding of and perceptions about what constitutes desired learning and what constitutes desired teaching. It steers them towards either being passive technicians who merely play the role of conduits transmitting a body of knowledge from one source to another or becoming transformative intellectuals who play the role of change agents raising educational, social, cultural, and political consciousness in their learners. It guides their decision making on a variety of strategies ranging from the simple use of pair or group work in classrooms to the complex task of maximizing learning potential. [13]" The third module is in line with the assumption in andragogy, which says adults have a deep need to be self-directing, thus the role of the teacher is to engage in a process of mutual inquiry with them rather than to transmit the teacher's knowledge.

Doing
The "D" in KARDS modular model deals more with the doing rather than the doer, like what was already discussed previously (the K, A, and R). This D comes after the first KAR because they will be useless if the doer is not doing. Three components are proposed here: teaching that promotes desired learning outcome, theorizing that involves deriving a personal theory of practice, and dialogizing that looking for critical conversations with informed interlocutors as well as with one's evolving teaching Self. [13]  There are two propositions about the doing of teaching, namely maximizing learning opportunities and mentoring personal transformation. The former is based on the principle that the central goal of teaching is to assist learners in their attempt to realize their fullest potential. Therefore, the teaching must be aimed to create the necessary conditions in as efficient and short (time) as possible. While the latter concerns with their role which brings them about to view teaching not merely as a mechanism for maximizing learning opportunities in the classroom but also as a means for personal transformation. In this case, Kumaravadivelu cites the brilliant ideas from a philosopher, Paulo Freire, who sees the goal of education for liberating. He rejects the traditional teacher-fronted pedagogy that merely transmits content information [13]. So far Kumaravadivelu argues that language teachers have to offer their students a new perspective and a new way of thinking about the social, political and cultural factors that shape their identity formation and personal transformation.
The doing of theorizing highlights two aspects, what the problems and prospects of teachers are seriously doing the type of teacher research that can potentially lead them to theorize what they practice and practice what they theorize, and the methodological considerations.
The last primary goal of any teacher education program, which is also applicable to a program to improve IT English teachers competences must be to prepare them who are successful in doing teacher dialogizing, having conversation with Self, with texts and with others on matters related to learning, teaching, and theorizing. The conversation must be constant, continual, and critical. Not only that, it must also be a learning conversation (ibid: 94).

Seeing
Kumaravadivelu argues that expectations, beliefs, identities, voices, fears, and anxieties vary enormously among participants, therefore how they see classroom actors and activities will also vary. Consequently, any meaningful attempt to see what happens in the classroom must take into consideration different perspectives learners, teachers, and observers bring to the classroom, and the perceptions they develop about their classroom experience. [13]  The first factor in Seeing is learner perspective. Referring to Rod Ellis's compilation, Kumaravadivelu presents some choice metaphors which can and do shape teachers' expectations about the role of the learners: learner as container, learner as machine, learner as negotiator, learner as problem-solver, learner as builder, learner as investor, and learner as struggler. Teacher perspective and observer perspective become the other factors in Seeing. Understanding the teacher perspective is essential for understanding the nature of classroom learning. Getting the observer perspective on classroom events and activities is also essential, as well, since it can produce valuable and valued insights for them to see their work in a new and critical light [13].
The KARDS modular model presented by Kumaravadivelu offers no more than a skeleton framework for the development of a context-sensitive language teacher education program. This framework, with some modifications will be used as the basis model to improve IT English teachers' competences, no matter what their backgrounds are, whether they are from an English education department or non-English education department.

THE DEVELOPMENT MODEL FRAMEWORK
The above discussion leads to a somewhat new model of KARDS, which is called K (plus one) ARDS, as can be seen in the following figure The postmethod bases, with its three principles (particularity, possibility, and practicality), are put in the central of the model. It has an interpretation that it can be used as the spirit to execute the 5 circles surrounding it.
One of the biggest obstacles in applying the above model is whether it is feasible to develop the teachers from the English teaching background to master the content of IT terminologies or field, as well as whether the IT teachers who are expected to teach English can have the same teaching competences as those from English teaching background when they have to teach English subject at IT department.
Both choices seem to be unrealistic in terms of timing. English teaching background teachers usually need four to five years to study in an undergraduate teaching program, not to mention that based on the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No 14, 2015, Chapter 46 that requires a higher education teacher to have a post-or graduate degree, which will make it longer for a higher education teacher to be able to teach at a higher education legally. The same problem will certainly happen for the second type of teachers. Thus conducting appropriate research is necessary in order to validate the model.

CONCLUSION
K(Plus One)ARDS model developed to improve English teacher's competences is a comprehensive model that still need to be validated to see whether it is appropriate and applicable for two types of English teachers in a higher education, i.e. teachers with English teaching background and teachers with no English teaching background. The problem is whether the first type should master the IT field content, as well as whether it is possible in terms of timing (research timing) to develop the second type of teachers in order that they master all the professional, procedural, and individual knowledge in English education in terms of timing. This problem raises a thought of collaboration teaching between the first and the second types of teachers. Thus there will be three possibilities which will be validated through conducting action research