Pedagogical Language Knowledge Development Among Preservice Single- and Multiple-Service Teachers: Sources of Knowledge

• In Event: 73.025 - Access for All? Preservice Teachers' Sources of Knowledge and Instructional Decisions for English Language Learners

Abstract

This study examines variables influencing the development of pedagogical language knowledge (PLK) (Galguera, 2011) among preservice teachers. Linguistic diversity in US public schools (Lucas & Grinberg, 2008), including English varieties (Gupta, 2010), and the inclusion of language development with the Common Core State Standards pose pressing demands on teacher educators (Santos, Darling-Hammond, & Cheuk, 2012). However, we lack models or even definite empirical evidence to guide decisions programmatic and instructional decisions (Bunch, 2014).
Drawing on Schneider and Plasman’s (2011) research on science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK), this study adapts their model to examine preservice teachers’ PLK along five components: orientations to teaching language, student thinking about language, instructional strategies for language, language curriculum, and assessment of students’ language learning. A particular concern informing the development of this study’s theoretical framework is the view of language as “action” (van Lier & Walqui, 2012), in contrast with problematic “curricularization” tendencies (Valdés, 2010).
A mixed-methods design was utilized to examine contextual variables’ relation with PLK development among preservice teachers. The initial comprehensive phase included 63 candidates from a preservice program at a Northern California liberal arts college, who completed all five components of the Performance Assessment for California Teachers’ Teaching Event (PACT-TE) required for teaching credentials: context description, planning, instruction, assessment, and reflection. The second phase consisted of semi-structured interviews with six representative teachers from the larger sample. Deductive and inductive analyses (Fortune, Reid, & Miller, 2013), and Pearsonian correlations and linear regressions were used for qualitative and quantitative data analyses, respectively.
Subject, grade level, and presence of ELs were analyzed with planning, instruction, and reflection components from 61 PACT-TE components. An additional source of predominantly quantitative data was 49 (78% response rate) anonymous completed surveys. Finally, six randomly selected teachers participated in semi-structured interviews via email.
PACT-TE’s language development mean score of 1.8 was the lowest of 12 strands. Also, teachers largely described language development mostly as vocabulary development; few considered discourse-level or socio-cultural concerns. Correlational analysis of PACT-TE scores point to ELs presence as being most strongly associated with PLK in planning, assessment, and reflection (R=0.46, p<0.01). Furthermore, teachers with few or no ELs were more likely to describe students as generally, with minimal attention to language. They often planned and discussed pedagogy utilizing constructs such as learning styles, care, and classroom community rather than linguistically-related constructs.
Correlational analysis of contextual variables and PLK index demonstrated that ELs are positively correlated with PLK development (R=0.39, p<0.01). Furthermore, a stepwise, unforced forward regression with PLK as the dependent variable yielded a model that, though not statistically significant, includes percentage of ELs, hours of language instruction, and linguistic content courses R2=0.23, F(1, 49)=18.25, p>0.5. Interviews confirmed the importance of field experiences in PLK development among beginning teachers.
At a time when the preparation of teachers for academic language development has moved from the fringes to the mainstream (Bunch, 2013), teacher educators must continue to build an empirical basis and models to guide their work. This study is a step in that direction.

Author

• Tomas Galguera, Mills College