32.2241, Review: Applied Linguistics; Language Acquisition: Cammarata, Ó Ceallaigh (2020)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-32-2241. Thu Jul 01 2021. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 32.2241, Review: Applied Linguistics; Language Acquisition: Cammarata, Ó Ceallaigh (2020)

Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Student Moderator: Jeremy Coburn, Lauren Perkins
Managing Editor: Becca Morris
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson, Nils Hjortnaes, Joshua Sims, Billy Dickson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Jeremy Coburn <jecoburn at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 17:49:23
From: Laura Dubcovsky [lauradubcovsky at gmail.com]
Subject: Teacher Development for Immersion and Content-Based Instruction

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36702637


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/31/31-3162.html

EDITOR: Laurent  Cammarata
EDITOR: T.J.  Ó Ceallaigh
TITLE: Teacher Development for Immersion and Content-Based Instruction
SERIES TITLE: Benjamins Current Topics 110
PUBLISHER: John Benjamins
YEAR: 2020

REVIEWER: Laura Dubcovsky, University of California, Davis

SUMMARY

“Teacher Development for Immersion and Content-Based Instruction” consists of
a compilation of seven articles focused on immersion programs in Hong Kong,
Alberta and Ontario in Canada, Dublin and Limerick in Ireland, and Minnesota
in the United States. In the introduction Cammarata and Ó Ceallaigh highlight
the success of immersion language programs that combine second language
learning and subject matter knowledge in integrated instruction.
Well-documented studies have largely shown how bilingual and immersion
programs, such as Dual Immersion (DI) and Content and Language Integrated
Learning (CLIL), bring about greater and more durable linguistic, cognitive,
and cultural benefits than do traditional second language curricula (Lazaruk,
2007). However, the book editors notice a dearth of studies that examine and
support prospective teachers and teacher educators during the immersion
preparation years. The articles in this volume advocate for stronger and
well-balanced immersion programs. They all share similar concerns about
teachers’ knowledge of the content areas in the language of instruction, the
need for a vast and robust linguistic repertoire to accompany the academic
requirement, as well as the development of teachers’ literacy skills to
identify relevant features across school texts, genres, and discourses.
Although the different authors address unique topics and situate their studies
in specific educational contexts, they all agree in finding more effective
ways for integrating content and language, while offering more frequent and
richer opportunities to improve the immersion learning experience.

In the first chapter, Peichang He and Angel Lin illustrate the possibility of
“Becoming a “language-aware” content teacher: Content and language integrated
learning (CLIL) teacher professional development as a collaborative, dynamic
and dialogic process.” Their chapter builds on the notion of teacher language
awareness (Andrews & Lin, 2017), arguing that disciplinary teachers need to
develop not only subject matter knowledge, but also language knowledge,
closely related to the specific discipline and general academic school demands
(Schleppegrell 2004). In addition, teachers are required to gain pedagogical
knowledge to make the highlighted integration of content and language more
accessible for all students (Shulman, 1987). He and Lin follow the trajectory
traced by a science teacher who teaches science in a secondary school in Hong
Kong. Her path shows a series of professional stages marked by the dynamic
involvement between the teacher and her colleagues, as well by dynamic
interactions with her students. The science teacher starts by being a simple
user of scientific language, privileging almost exclusively the knowledge of
the disciplinary content. Gradually, the educator moves onto a new stage, in
which she adopts linguistic tools to analyze words, phrases, and structures
closely related to scientific content. Finally, the teacher reaches an
insightful stage that allows her to reflect on ways to better motivate her
students toward the scientific subject matter, while considering specific
linguistic features that may further students’ understanding and production of
scientific knowledge. In closing, the authors underline that a supportive
preparation program should include courses that facilitate the systemic
integration of language and content and promote collaboration, productive
dialogues, and joint participation among prospective teachers and educators.

In the second chapter, titled “In search of immersion teacher educators’
knowledge base: Exploring their readiness to foster an integrated approach to
teaching,” Cammarata and Cavanagh pursue a better comprehension of current
French immersion preparation programs in Canada. The authors focus on the
instruction of language, literacy, and subject matter, recognizing educators’
influential role in preparing stronger and more knowledgeable immersion
teachers. Experienced educators should nurture pedagogical and disciplinary
languages, as well as encourage teachers’ awareness of intricate connections
between different types of knowledge. As shown in Figure 1 (p. 46), the
success of immersion instruction is based on the balanced combination of
content, language, literacy, and pedagogy. Cammarata and Cavanagh offer an
analytical tool, the Interconnected Knowledge for Integration (IKI), which
helps juxtapose and combine relevant features, to determine areas of
intervention that might optimize immersion teachers’ performance (Appendix A,
p.65). The authors compare the ideal IKI model with educators’ actual
unbalanced knowledge and distribution, through the visualization of uneven
circles (Figure 2, p. 53). Cammarata and Cavanagh stress the need for a strong
curriculum, dedicated to immersion teachers only, and which offers a detailed
understanding of the varied and intricate knowledge required. Above all, they
emphasize the importance of well-prepared educators, who can provide a strong
cosmovision of the content area, properly accompanied by adequate grammatical
and lexical structures, and included in coherent texts of clear thematic
orientation. 

In the third chapter, Leavy, Hourigan, and Ó Ceallaigh attempt “Unpacking
dimensions of immersion teacher educator identity.” This chapter explores the
identity development of two mathematics teacher educators who use Irish as the
language of instruction at the elementary school level. The authors follow the
“community of practice” (Wenger, 1998) framework and analyze “critical
incidents” (Skovholt & McCarthy, 1988) to underline significant episodes in
the search of immersion educators’ identities. The authors trace a
developmental continuum that shows how the mathematics educators start by
adopting an extreme defense of their discipline, prioritizing the subject
matter while exposing a clear tension between content and language components
(Phase 1). They gradually move to a more flexible position that includes timid
interactions and incipient negotiations between the subject matter content and
its corresponding language, signaling the possibility of an integration of the
two spaces (Phase 2). Finally, the immersion educators reach an
“immersion-responsive” status, by which they start to accept the strong
influence of the society to build individual identities (Phase 3). The authors
conclude that while developing personal identities is always a challenging
task, developing the professional identity of immersion teachers is even more
complex and requires active support of the bilingual community of practice.
Only through positive interactions, productive dialogues, and narrow
collaborations can immersion teachers develop assertive and more powerful
identities. 

Chapter 4, “Teacher adaptations to support students with special education
needs in French immersion: An observational study,” extends the range of the
student population that typically attends immersion programs to include
students with learning difficulties. Mady reviews literature about inclusion
in general education and the few studies that focus on particular students
within immersion programs (Arnett, 2010). The author draws from sociocultural
theories to gain a deeper understanding of French immersion programs in
Canada, concluding that the adoption of inclusive practices will benefit
students with special needs. Therefore, she encourages adapting the curriculum
and designing differentiated activities, and illustrates some options, from
modifying strategies (Table 1, p. 102) to establishing appropriate types of
interaction (Table 2, p.105), and from presenting content in different
modalities (Table 3, p. 106) to using adapted materials extensively (Table 4,
p. 106). Mady also includes teaching models that show how to modify lesson
plans and promote differentiated instruction, following a more comprehensive
perspective of language and cognition. Finally, she calls for a stronger
immersion professional preparation, which enables prospective teachers to
examine their own beliefs toward inclusion, based on well-founded scientific
knowledge. The author highlights not only the integration of language and
content, but also the existence of an inclusive immersion curriculum that
welcomes all students.

In Chapter 5, Tedick and Zimmer address “Teacher perceptions of immersion
professional development experiences emphasizing language-focused content
instruction” in an online course in Minnesota. They use three socio-cultural
categories of the “community of practice” (Wenger, 1998) to signal features
that have a high impact on teachers’ ability to attend to language during
immersion content-based instruction. The three categories of learning by doing
(“practice”), experience (“making meaning”), and becoming (“identity”)
converge in recurrent and influential themes for immersion practices. Among
them, Tedick and Zimmer pinpoint: (1) meaningfulness of the instruction, (2)
instrumental feedback for raising students’ language awareness, (3) enactments
to put into practice concepts and strategies that encompass language and
content, (4) observable positive changes in students’ learning and language
production, (5) teachers’ reflections on deeper language understanding, and
(6) collaborations with other immersion colleagues and across disciplinary
teams. In closing, the authors encourage the design of immersion professional
courses that incorporate these themes, on the one hand because they foster
content, linguistic, and pedagogical knowledge, and on the other hand because
they empower immersion teachers, encouraging them to take up leading roles,
participate in professional conferences, and maintain high expectations for
student learning and language production. 

Chapter 6, “It was two hours […] the same old thing and nothing came of it”:
Continuing professional development among teachers in Gaeltacht post-primary
schools,” starts with a general overview of immersion programs in Ireland. The
author, Ní Thuairisg, focuses on major challenges faced by teachers and
students, as well as on some precarious conditions found in immersion
classrooms. Regarding language proficiency, educators show uneven levels in
the use of Irish as the medium of instruction. While some feel stronger in
oral conversations, others can write Irish but are not confident to speak it
in public, and others understand the language quite well but cannot deliver
instruction, etc. Likewise, students from Irish descent attend immersion
programs mostly to comply with their parents’ desires. Many of them limit the
use of the heritage language to the classroom domain, as required by immersion
program mandates. Maintaining the Irish language is nowadays a challenge, as
younger generations are shifting rapidly into English, showing a clear
inclination toward the language perceived as more powerful and hegemonic, and
using English almost exclusively outside of the classroom. Additionally, most
Irish immersion programs lack adequate teaching and learning resources,
display poor curricula, and offer little or no support for students with
special needs. Not surprisingly, teachers feel increasingly disengaged and
overall dissatisfied with the educational environment. Given the current
situation, Ní Thuairisg suggests substantial changes in the CPD model to
support immersion teachers in specific content areas, classroom management,
and bilingual assessments. The author emphasizes that CPD should be conducted
by experienced trainers with a solid foundation and vast teaching experience,
capable of fostering immersion professional identity and incoming teachers’
leadership. 

In the next chapter, Arnott and Vignola present “The Common European Framework
of Reference (CEFR) in French immersion teacher education: A focus on the
language portfolio.” The authors explain how CEFR offers descriptors that can
better discriminate among basic, independent, and proficient users, as well as
among varied modes of communication (e.g., reception, production, interaction,
and mediation). CEFR also facilitates artifacts that encourage
self-evaluations, such as passports and biographies, as well as action plans
and integral dossiers. The detailed information contrasts with more general
preparation in Canadian teaching preparation programs, which do not typically
provide immersion teachers with a strong foundation or opportunities to
improve the second language. Therefore, Arnott and Vignola stress the value of
adapting portfolios for the Canadian context, recognizing this as an efficient
tool to identify language proficiency levels and cultural knowledge more
accurately. The authors carefully weigh strengths and limitations found during
the portfolios’ implementation (Table 2, p. 187). Among the former,
self-evaluations of French competency, reflections that raise language
awareness, and possible action-oriented activities are clear benefits for both
student-teachers and experienced instructors. Among the latter, high pressure,
short time for completion, and hard management constitute major challenges
faced by beginning teachers, while unnecessary repetitions or irrelevant items
may lead to boredom or disengagement. Despite these disadvantages, adapted
portfolios are preferred as positive assets to French immersion programs, as
they can strengthen teaching preparation through clearer objectives, lesson
plans that integrate language and content, efficient instruction, and accurate
measures of assessment.

EVALUATION

“Teacher Development for Immersion and Content-Based Instruction” is an
updated anthology of articles that emphasizes the need for continuing
preparation of immersion teachers in second language and culture. The book
addresses teachers, stakeholders, and researchers involved with
bilingual/immersion education around the world. It is a significant
contribution to the improvement of content-based immersion programs, focusing
on stronger connections between subject matter and linguistic knowledge, as
well as on complex issues of professional identity within the immersion
community. Moreover, the articles are situated in different educational
settings, from Hong Kong (Chapter 1) to Canada (Chapters 2, 4, and 7) and from
the Republic of Ireland (Chapters 3 and 6) to the United States (Chapter 5).
Some of the articles trace interesting parallelisms between immersion
teachers’ language proficiency levels in distant contexts, such as Ireland and
California (Chapter 6), while others highlight common immersion classrooms’
needs or similar immersion teachers’ struggles for agency and leadership
across countries (Chapters 3 and 5, respectively). 

This edited book also addresses issues of inclusion, which is a less discussed
topic in the field of immersion programs. For example, Chapter 4 offers
effective tools to facilitate the incorporation of students with special
needs, while questioning the “most suitable” type of population that may
attend these types of programs. The authors challenge the largely debated
elitist nature of immersion programs, forcing practitioners and scholars to
revisit traditional notions of language and cognition, which sometimes
function as confounding variables in bilingual education (Cummins, 2007).
Finally, professional and lay readers alike will enjoy the flexibility of the
table of contents, as it is possible to choose, skip, or change the order of
reading the chapters according to one’s personal interests and orientation.
Each chapter constitutes a self-contained corpus of knowledge that follows
either more general or more specific perspectives, supported by either
theoretical principles or practical implications for the classroom. Some
articles acknowledge the limited number of participants and/or the constraints
of results based on self-assessment surveys, while others are empirical
studies that contain quantitative data. Overall, “Teacher Development for
Immersion and Content-Based Instruction” brings positive insights to further
new studies and to replicate or enhance offered models in different immersion
settings.

REFERENCES

Andrews, S., & Lin, A. (2017). Language awareness and teacher development. In
P. Garrett & J. Cots (Eds.), “The Routledge Handbook of Language Awareness”
(pp. 57-74). London: Routledge.

Arnett, K. (2010). Scaffolding inclusion in a Grade 8 core French classroom:
An exploratory case study. “Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics”, 6(4). 

Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in
multilingual classrooms. “Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics”, 10(2),
221-240. 

Lazaruk, W. (2007). Avantages linguistiques, scolaires et cognitifs de
l'immersion française. “La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes”, 63(5),
629-654. 

Schleppegrell, M. (2004). “The language of schooling. A functional linguistics
perspective”. Mahwah,NJ: Erlbaum 

Skovholt, T., & McCarthy, P. (1988). Critical incidents: Catalysts for
counselor development. “Journal of Counseling and Development”, 67(2), 69-130.

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.
“Harvard Educational Review”, 57(1), 1-22. 

Wenger, E. (1988). “Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity”.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Laura Dubcovsky is a retired instructor and supervisor from the Teacher
Education Program in the School of Education at the University of California,
Davis. With a Master’s in Education and a Ph. D in Spanish linguistics/with
special emphasis on second language acquisition, her interests tap topics of
language and bilingual education. She has taught bilingual teachers to use and
practice communicative and academic Spanish needed in bilingual classrooms for
more than ten years. She is currently leading professional development courses
for bilingual teachers and interpret in parent/teachers’ conferences. She also
translates at the Davis Joint Unified School District, the Crocker Art Museum
in Sacramento, YoloArts in Woodland, Davis Art Center, STEAC, and in the
Zapotec Digital Project of Ticha. <br />Laura is a long-standing reviewer for
the Linguistic list Serve and the California Association of School -University
Partnerships (CASUP), and she also reviews articles for the Journal of Latinos
and Education, Hispania, Lenguas en Contexto , etc as requested. She published
“Functions of the verb decir (‘to say’) in the incipient academic Spanish
writing of bilingual children in Functions of Language, 15(2), 257-280 (2008)
and the chapter, “Desde California. Acerca de la narración en ámbitos
bilingües” in ¿Cómo aprendemos y cómo enseñamos la narración oral? (2015).
Rosario, Homo Sapiens: 127- 133





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

***************************    LINGUIST List Support    ***************************
 The 2020 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
  to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
     ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
                   https://crowdfunding.iu.edu/the-linguist-list

                        Let's make this a short fund drive!
                Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
                    https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-32-2241	
----------------------------------------------------------