Poetry Inside Out as Professional Development Toward Pedagogical Language Knowledge Growth Among Urban Teachers

• In Event: 52.039 - Critical Language Awareness in Action: Examining Poetry Inside Out From the Perspective of Youth Researchers, Teacher Researchers, and University-Based Researchers

Abstract

Limited research claims can be made about student and teacher outcomes regarding teacher preparation for language development (Bunch, 2013; Goldenberg & Coleman, 2010; Lucas & Grinberg, 2008). Yet, increasingly linguistically diverse students and newly adopted Common Core State Standards (CCSS) offer opportunities to re-define teaching practice for language development (Valdés, Kibler, & Walqui, 2014). This study explores the development of critical language awareness (CLA) (Alim, 2005; Van Lier, 2014) among teachers as a component of pedagogical language knowledge (PLK) (Bunch, 2013; Galguera, 2011). We examine teachers’ use of tools, including “talk moves” (Michaels & O’Connor, 2012) and Poetry Inside Out (PIO) procedures, guided by the question: How does the development of PLK relate to teachers’ inquiry about their use of PIO materials and students’ translations?
This study responds to Bunch’s (2013) challenge to identify essential teacher knowledge required to meet challenges associated with standards and student diversity. We document how PIO prompts teachers to view English learners as competent meaning-makers, “disrupting the ‘natural’ sociolinguistic order of things” (Alim, 2005, p. 27). As dialogic teaching (Reznitskaya, 2012), PIO assumes language is “action” (Van Lier & Walqui, 2012) and fosters empowering and transformative relationships, building on teachers’ talk moves (Michaels & O’Connor, 2012).
Comparative case studies (Yin, 2009) describe teachers participating in professional development, adopting PIO materials and procedures, while conducting classroom research (Ballenger, 2009; Goswami, Lewis, Rutherford, & Waff, 2009). Teachers practiced translating a poem, familiarizing themselves with PIO content and procedures; they also read selected articles, collaboratively analyzing students’ recordings and work (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999). Meeting notes, student recordings and work samples, and communications with teachers were the qualitative data sources for this study. Analyses were predominantly inductive, although key constructs were also used for coding.
Jela, who came to the US from Bosnia in her 40s, learned English and became a teacher, was motivated by experience to study bilingualism and language development. She taught 3rd grade to students representing six languages and learned to engage otherwise marginalized students by examining their sense of investment in translating poems. Rodney, a monolingual, high school English language development teacher interested in poetry and translation, discovered that the poem choice and his own participation influenced his students’ engagement. Finally, Irene taught English in a newcomers’ high school. She learned to create scaffolds informed by her knowledge of students as translators, evidence of PLK growth that blends knowledge about students and linguistic functions. Overall, teachers gained appreciation of students’ interpretive skills informing translation. Teachers reported evidence of student engagement and growth as well as of self-efficacy development, with children genuinely interested in each other’s translations, viewing disagreements as worthwhile.
Findings suggest essential PLK (Bunch, 2013) components to meet the expectations of the CCSS, building upon students’ linguistic diversity, and fostering language as meaning-making actions (Van Lier & Walqui, 2012). Beyond communicative tasks (Ellis, 2005), PIO motivates students to interact with each other because of interest in each other. Finally, PIO-related CLA among students and teachers disrupts simplistic and stereotypical views of linguistic diversity.

Authors

• Tomas Galguera, Mills College

• Katherine Schultz, Mills College