My presentation

1. Academic and Occupational Language Development of Bilingual Immigrant Students in a Teacher Education Program • Case Studies • JOSÉ BEIJER • Faculty of Education • Research Centre for Multicultural Education • Jose.Beijer@hu.nl

2. My presentation • Method • Case studies: charateristic situations • Findings • Recommendations

3. Motives • Language problems : ‘First aid Post’ • Cure instead of prevention • No language development in the curriculum • No language development on the workplace • Is language the main problem? • Growth of bilingual immigrant students in the faculty (18%) • Language problems: loss of students

4. Aim • To gain insight into the way students go on in courses and • on the workplace: • To fulfill assignments • Interaction with teachers, coaches • Interaction with fellow students, colleagues

5. Theoretical frame • (Applied) linguistics • Explicit versus implicit language learning, content-based approach • Intercultural communicative competence • Learning theory • Social constructivism

6. Research Questions • How do bilingual immigrant students go about in their study and on the workplace? • How do they solve their problems, particularly language problems? • How do teacher educators and school coaches address the needs of bilingual immigrant students? • Which expertise of teacher educators and school coaches is needed for effectively support in academic and occupational language development?

7. Data collection • Kind of research: exploratory; qualitative • Period Six months • Data Participant observation Interviews Video recordings • Setting Faculty • competence-based training curriculum • seminar of work experience reflection Workplace (school)

8. Participants • 4 Students • 1st year of their study • Identified themselves as bilingual immigrant students • 2 newcomers • 2 born and grown up in the Netherlands • Teachers • 3 teacher trainers • 3 schoolcoaches

9. Participants

10. Initial situation(1) • NADYA • . Motivated : • to learn the Dutch language • to become a teacher • . Autonomous language learner • . Aware of using the Dutch language in her study • . Dutch boy-friend • . Home language: Dutch “I come from Russia, then a lot of questions. So then you always have to say something or to tell something”

11. Initial situation (2) • GHITA • Near native speaker of English • Inadequate information and unrealistic expectations • Dutch husband • Home language: English “I never anticipated that the teaching material would not be in English”

12. Initial situation (3) • MOHAMED • - little academic language proficiency • - not motivated to improve his language proficiency • only contact with Turkish fellow students, teacher, friends, family • - home language Turkish • OMER • little academic language proficiency • - not motivated to improve his language proficiency • contact with Turkish and Dutch fellow students, teachers, friends • a Dutch girl-friend • - home language: Turkish “you understand each other immediately”

13. Visions on language proficiency • Grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation • Students • Mohamed: “sentence use is what I actually must work on” • Omer: “I don’t get on in stories, I don’t finish”. • “I speak too fast”. • “I have to look up more words than Dutch students”. • Teachers • “he hardly articulates at all in my opinion” (Omer) • “he doesn’t get on in stories, lots of hesitations, starts sentences again, doesn’t finish sentences” (Omer) “he repeats his self very much, and I switch off”

14. Feedback Comments on language proficiency by students, teachers and coaches : ad hoc and arbitrary No language criteria or frames for (new) assignments like: writing a reflective report, a portfolio, essays, collegial coaching,……………… Teacher “ it’s the content of Omer’s contributions that’s most important and comments about his use of language might be seen as disqualifying the content of what he says”

15. Omer “I don’t get on in stories, I don’t finish” Teacher “he doesn’t get on in stories, lots of hesitations, starts sentences again, doesn’t finish sentences” “ it’s the content of Omer’s contributions that’s most important and comments about his use of language might be seen as disqualifying the content of what he says” Informed about each others notions? (1)

16. Informed about each others notions? (2) • Nadya • “I have the idea that if I would say or tell something, then if it works, no one would be interested … or I would say something wrong. I find that it is a bit difficult. Because I have the idea that they can do it better, or they know more … I'm a bit behind or something like that.“ • Teacher • “Nadya participates very well and has a very good contribution to the discussion”.

17. Language training on the job • Coach • (Omer, Mohamed) • “I don’t pay attention to professional language, the students will learn it on their own while doing practice”

18. Language training on the job (2) • Coach • (Nadya) • The coach works on the development of her professional competencies but does not pay any explicit attention to her language competencies, although he does do this implicitly.

19. Nadya (beginning of a lesson) • "What you have now done, and it's the first time that I have seen it, is that you actually used their names – and that you see that it helps immediately. Don't say "quiet please" but "Farida …"

20. Nadya (the difficult group) • [English equivalent of original Dutch:] "In fact they were starting to sabotage things, I thought. And then you can get mad at them or want to win the battle against them, but it's better to say 'OK then, you just don't take part any more'. They think that's in fact much worse."

21. Is language the problem? • GHITA • Work placement • Start of the lesson: "jackets off, mobiles off, • I have a lot to tell you and I'm waiting patiently." • In her lessons : one-on-one contact • pupils are constantly talking to each other , • or trying noisily to attract her attention.

22. Findings • Too little attention for academic and occupational • language proficiency • No attention to initial language situation of individual students • Limited vision on language proficiency • No attention to language training on the job • Lack of systematic feedback • Lack of criteria for language proficiency for study and profession • Teachers, coaches and students are not informed about each others notions about language proficiency of the student • No relations between language proficiency (problems) in different situations • Language problems not always the main problems

23. Recommendations(1) Language development integrated part of the curriculum • Faculty • Linguistic starting situation part of an assessment • Information about programs: • Attention to language proficiency • Language use

24. Recommendations (2) Language development integrated part of the curriculum Teachers/ coaches • Distinguish language problems from didactic, pedagogical and other problems • Should be professionalized in: - Concept of language proficiency as intercultural communicative competence - Teaching by content based language instruction - Creating a safe and comfortable learning environment

25. Recommendations (3) Language development integrated part of the curriculum Programs • Framework for language competencies (part of professional competencies) • Attention to language development should be part of the course – and career counseling component

26. Thank you for your attention!