An example for teacher training – method of “ changing sides ”

1. Language teaching in subject-matter An example for teacher training – method of “changing sides” An example: mathematical word problem (grade 9): On an insect collecting project Lizzy caught mudwasps, Izzy caught waterbugs and Dizzy caught flies. It was observed that three times the number of mudwasps that Lizzy caught less 14 was equal to the difference between the number of flies Dizzy caught and the number of waterbugs Izzy caught. In addition, it was observed that the sum of the mudwasps caught by Izzy and the waterbugs caught by Lizzy was 10 less than three times the flies caught by Dizzy. On further examination of the collection it was seen that three times the number of waterbugs caught by Izzy plus the difference between the number of mudwasps caught by Lizzy and the number of flies caught by Dizzy was 16. How many mudwasps did Lizzy collect? Translate this task into your best foreign language (5 minutes)

2. Academic language L2 Didactical methods to include multilingualism Forms of cooperation Everyday language L1 Method for continuous and systematic language support (Gogolin et al. 2011) Upper secondary Lower secondary Language support across the curriculum Link between language & subject-matter Additional language support / outside school Additive & inclusive language support Involvement of parents & families Inclusion of informal language learning situations & contexts Primary school Kindergarten

3. Multilingualism and language instruction in subject-matter SCAFFOLDING language for learning Two theoretical bases

4. Language and content learning through systematic support in the „zone of proximal development“ (Gibbons 2009) Scaffolding represents the “temporary assistance that teachers provide for their students in order to assist them to complete a task so that they will later be able to complete similar tasks alone” (Hammond, 2001: 15) Systematic construction and deconstruction of support by teachers with the aim of overcoming the „zone“ Macro- and micro-scaffolding (Hammond 2001) Vygotsky’s “zone of proximal development” as a theory for learning Vygotsky, 1934/2002

5. Halliday’s systemic functional grammaras a theory of language Language: • Meaning making, context dependent • Mediating construction of knowledge • Variation in relation to: the area of inquiry or topic (field), the roles and relationships between participants (tenor), and the channel of communication (mode). Education: • Central role of interaction in the construction of knowledge • Effective teaching is about and through language • View of language away from deficit perspectives

6. Joining theories for scaffolding - a theory for learning content and language

7. Scaffolding – the curriculum cycle (Gibbons, 2002)

8. Knowledge of contents Everyday language (mostly oral) Scaffolding – the curriculum cycle (Gibbons, 2002)

9. Scaffolding – an example (Gibbons 2002) this...no, it doesn’t go... it doesn’t move... try that... yes, it does... a bit... that won’t...won’t work, it’s not metal... these are the best... going really fast.

10. First elements of academic language (oral) Introduction to the register Knowledge of contents Everyday language (mostly oral) Scaffolding – the curriculum cycle (Gibbons, 2002)

11. Teacher: we’re trying to talk like scientists; your language has got to be really precise; the language you choose is very important ...

12. First elements of academic language (oral) Introduction to the register Knowledge of contents Connection between linguistic aspects and contents Academic language (oral) Everyday language (mostly oral) Scaffolding – the curriculum cycle (Gibbons, 2002)

13. Scaffolding – an example (Gibbons 2002) this...no, it doesn’t go... it doesn’t move... try that... yes, it does... a bit... that won’t...won’t work, it’s not metal... these are the best... going really fast.

14. First elements of academic language (oral) Introduction to the register Indepedent writing on the theme Knowledge of contents Connection between linguistic aspects and contents Written academic language Academic language (oral) Everyday language (mostly oral) Scaffolding – the curriculum cycle (Gibbons, 2002)

15. Scaffolding – an example (Gibbons 2002) this...no, it doesn’t go... it doesn’t move... try that... yes, it does... a bit... that won’t...won’t work, it’s not metal... these are the best... going really fast.

16. 2 types of scaffolding • Designed-in scaffolding: macro-scaffolding that is consciously planned at a systemic level • Point-of-need scaffolding: spontaneous use of scaffolding techniques (also called micro-scaffolding or interactional scaffolding) Hammond 2001, Hammond & Gibbons 2005

17. Designed-in scaffolding - principles Hammond & Gibbons 2005: 13

18. Point-of-need or interactional scaffolding Hammond & Gibbons 2005: 21

19. Form groups of 3 to 4 persons Discuss the examples in the handouts (10 minutes) Remember to make notes and choose a raporteur 4. Practical activity – engaging with the role of language in scaffolding for learning

20. Develop technical vocabulary • Paraphrasing students’ talk resulting in a recontextualised version of their own ideas • Evidence of designed-in and point-of-need scaffolding: • in planning the lesson, teacher thought of key concepts; • in interaction teacher carefully supports development of appropriate technical vocabulary • Creating a conceptual hook on which students can “hang” their understanding of the study of history • Extend or reformulate responses from students • Develop a line of reasoning • Section summary or meta-statement • Focus on language issues – “migrate” • Use everyday language to convey knowledge • Redefining and elaborating on an activity to support understanding • Final exchange – recapping or making a final summative statement that points to out the focus of the task • Away from IRF (“the nurse, what about her?”) - prolonging talk, by involving pupils in the construction of knowledge • Responsibility for continuing the conversation is handed to the pupils (increasing the prospectiveness) Handout 1 Handout 2 Handout 3 Handout 4 Thank you! Scaffolding – snapshots from the classroom Pestalozzi Workshop Slovenia Seite 20 14.11.2012

22. Academic language L2 Didactical methods to include multilingualism Forms of cooperation Everyday language L1 Method for continuous and systematic language support (Gogolin et al. 2011) Upper secondary Lower secondary Language support across the curriculum Link between language & subject-matter Additional language support / outside school Additive & inclusive language support Involvement of parents & families Inclusion of informal language learning situations & contexts Primary school Kindergarten

23. Systematic language assessment • Systematic language assessment ⇨ basis for professional language support • Types of instruments: • Observation • Profile analysis • Tests(Screenings) • Needs coordination between members of a team – principle of rotation • Multilingualism ⇨ L1 + L2

24. Systematic language assessment

25. Systematic language assessment Phases of language aquisition (U-Curve) Knowledge Features of multilingual speech (code-switching, transfer) L1 proficiency of pupils (in particular literacy related)

26. Academic language L2 Didactical methods to include multilingualism Forms of cooperation Everyday language L1 Method for continuous and systematic language support (Gogolin et al. 2011) Upper secondary Lower secondary Language support across the curriculum Link between language & subject-matter Additional language support / outside school Additive & inclusive language support Involvement of parents & families Inclusion of informal language learning situations & contexts Primary school Kindergarten

27. Forms of cooperation • Condition – each teacher is a language teacher and must assume responsability in actively promoting academic language proficiency to all pupils • Vertical e horizontal cooperation: • Between several educational institutions • Between the several teachers of a grade (ex: English and biology) • Between the deffierent teachers of a subject. • Methods: • Analysing curricula in groups (planning for designed-in scaffolding) • Develop a plan based on cooperation (ex: train the genre of report in chemistry and english).

28. Summary • Social cohesion and reducing the achievement gap are possible through school change (at a systemic, a classroom and individual level) • Method at a school level – continuous and systematic language support of all learners (4 pillars) • Method at a classroom level – scaffolding for language learning in all subjects • Pre-requisites for change: • Political priority • Teacher empowerement (pre- and in-service training) • Whole-school involvement (need for systematic change) • Equal participation • Higher social cohesion

29. joana.duarte@uni-hamburg.de

30. References • Baker, Colin (2006): Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Multilingual Matters, Clevedon. • Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters. • Duarte, J. (2011): Bilingual langauge proficiency. A comparative study. Münster: Waxmann. • Gibbons, Pauline (2002): Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding. Learning. Teaching Second Language Learners in the. Mainstream Classroom. Portsmouth NH: Heinemann. • Gogolin, I. (2006): Bilingualität und die Bildungssprache der Schule. In: Mecheril, Paul/ Quehl, Thomas Hrsg.): Die Macht der Sprachen. Englische Perspektiven auf die mehrsprachige Schule. Münster: Waxmann, S. 79 - 85. • Gogolin, I. und Lange, I. (2010): Bildungssprache und Durchgängige Sprachbildung. In: Fürstenau, S. und Gomolla, M. (Hrsg.): Migration und schulischer Wandel: Mehrsprachigkeit. Wiesbaden:  VS-Verlag, S. 69 - 87. • Grosjean, F. (2001). The bilingual's language modes. In Nicol, J. (Ed.). One Mind, Two Languages: Bilingual Language Processing (pp. 1-22). Oxford: Blackwell. Also in Li Wei (Ed.). The Bilingual Reader (2nd edition). London: Routledge, 2007. • Klieme et al. (2010): PISA 2009. Eine Bilanz. Waxmann: Münster. • Knapp, W. (2007): Wie Kinder Begriffe erwerben und welche Annahmen Erwachsene darüber haben. In: Roland Jost, Werner Knapp & Kerstin Metz (Hg): Arbeit an Begriffen. Fachwissenschaftliche und fachdidaktische Aspekte. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider 2007, S. 173-188. • Reusser, K. (1997): Erwerb mathematischer Kompetenzen: Literaturüberblick, in: Weinert, Franz / Helmke, Andreas (Hrsg.): Entwicklung im Grundschulalter Beltz / Psychologie Verlags Union, Weinheim, 141–155. • Siebert-Ott, Gesa. 2006c. Deutsch (lernen) auf dem Schulhof? Konzeptionelle Mündlichkeit als Basis der Entwicklung schriftsprachlicher Kompetenz in der Zweitsprache. In: Ehlers, Swantje (Hrsg.). Sprachförderung und Literalität. (Flensburger Papiere zur Mehrsprachigkeit und Kulturenvielfalt im Unterricht, Sonderheft 3.) Flensburg: Universität Flensburg, S. 15-35. • Tajmel, T. (2010): DaZ-Förderung im naturwissenschaftlichen Fachunterricht. In: Ahrenholz, B. (Hg.): Fachunterricht und Deutsch als Zweitsprache. Narr Verlag: Tübingen, S. 167-184. • Tajmel, T. (2011): Sprache als Quelle aller (Miss-)Verständnisse?. Vortrag in der Fachtagung für Schulen mit ganztägigen Angebot, 30. März, Humboldt Universität Berlin.

31. Last but not least… Why multilingualism?