Perceptions of Linguistically Responsive Teaching in U.S. Teacher Candidates/Novice Teachers

• In Event: 72.040 - International Perspectives on Teacher Preparation for Second Language Learners

Abstract

Objectives: Generally speaking, the education of multilingual learners is not a successful enterprise in the United States (Goldenberg & Coleman, 2010). Increasingly, regular content teachers are teaching multilingual learners at various stages of English proficiency, but have not received adequate preparation for that work (Lucas, 2011). This study seeks to understand more about the perspectives of teacher candidates and novice teachers in relationship to working with multilingual students.

Conceptual Framework:
In 2008, Lucas, Villegas, Freedson-Gonzalez published a framework for linguistically responsive teacher education. This framework has been heavily cited, but not yet empirically examined in relationship to the development of teachers of multilingual learners (i.e., Bunch, 2013; Scanlan & López, 2012; Rueda & Stillman, 2012). In 2010 and 2011 Lucas and Villegas expanded their framework. The 2011 linguistically responsive teaching (LRT) framework (Lucas & Villegas, 2011) provides the most comprehensive perspective of what a linguistically responsive teacher is and was utilized in this study.

Methods and Data Sources:
Our research question is: What aspects of the LRT Framework do pre-service (and in-service) teachers discuss as they reflect on their teacher preparation experiences over time? What do their reflections illustrate regarding their understanding of LRT? Our qualitative study includes data from alumni interviews (n = 3), 10 focus groups (n=41), and four iterations of reflective essays over program duration (n = 13).


A deductive qualitative analysis was utilized to code the data around a priori themes outlined in the LRT Framework. All of the data across each interview, focus group, and reflective essay were coded and further analyzed through Consensual Qualitative Research approaches (Hill, Thompson, & Williams, 1997; Hill et al., 2005).

Results:
Teachers and Teacher Candidates demonstrated deep respect for students’ cultures, languages, and identities outside the classroom. The participants were aware that they needed to spend time and energy in getting to know their students and the importance of leveraging skills and strengths that they brought into the classrooms. However, the participants largely noted that they saw little to no modelling of linguistically responsive teaching during their internships and in their schools and some of them had learned to advocate for equitable content and materials for bilingual students on their own. The participants demonstrated limited knowledge of second language acquisition and ways to identify language demands of the classroom. Although they seemed to understand that scaffolding instruction was a necessary part of linguistically responsive teaching, they seemed overwhelmed by what they described as the large number of factors they needed to take into account for multilingual students and expressed their inability to cope with the demands of identifying needs, scaffolding, and meeting the assessment mandates of the school districts.

Scholarly Significance:
This study suggests both the value of the LRT framework as well as the additional work necessary to prepare linguistically responsive teachers.

Authors

• Madhavi Tandon, University of Colorado - Denver

• Colin Hueston, University of Colorado - Denver

• Tamara MIlbourn, University of Colorado - Boulder

• Kara Mitchell Viesca, University of Colorado - Denver