This study investigates how pre-service Teachers of English in Bilingual Streams’ (TEBs) perceptions of plurilingualism are elicited through carrying out small-scale research with learners. It builds on previous studies showing positive relations between teacher education and shifts in pre-service teachers’ predispositions towards plurilingual education, particularly when opportunities for critical reflection on the interplay between course- and field work is emphasised. TEBs (N=6) were introduced to visual and spoken data collection methods consisting of language mapping and focus group interviews during coursework and administered these during fieldwork. Spoken and written research reports were analysed deductively using language ideologies adapted from Ricklefs (2023). Results show all participants have a positive disposition to plurilingualism on completion of the course and fieldwork, particularly in relation to valuing plurilingualism as a potential resource in CLIL. Implementing multimodal research methods makes linguistic variation visible and draws out learner experiences. This helps TEBs make connections between their own beliefs and experiences, and those articulated by their learners and in their placement schools. This approach builds on the dynamic nature of the interaction between teacher beliefs and practices and confirms that critical reflection can play a key role in shaping TEBs’ dispositions towards plurilingualism and plurilingual pedagogies.
After the integration of research activities, universities of applied sciences (UASs) have formulated organisational strategies to foster connections between research and education (Daas et al., 2023). Scholars stated that the behaviour of employees within UASs influences ‘the direction and tempo in which the proposed aims are reached or resisted in the wider organisation’ (Griffioen & De Jong, 2017, p. 454). Thus, employees within UASs, such as academics and lower-level managers, play a key role in establishing research-education connections (Jenkins & Healey, 2005; Van der Rijst, 2009). A recent study has shown that academics and lower-level managers connect research and education through three types of behaviours: by involving aspects of research in education, by involving aspects of education in research, and by involving aspects of research and education equally, with the first type mentioned most often (Daas & Griffioen, in review). Similar patterns are observed in previous studies highlighting how education benefits from research rather than vice versa (Taylor, 2007). However, the beliefs underpinning this behavioural focus still remain unclear. Scholars have reported factors that could influence employees in connecting research and education, such as career stages, personal abilities and the availability of resources influencing how academics combine research and teaching tasks (Coate, Barnett & Williams, 2001; Shin, 2011), and research productivity and teaching beliefs influencing how academics integrate research in teaching (Hu et al., 2015; Magi & Beerkens, 2016). Despite the important value of these insights, these studies all focus on one (set of) behaviour(s) in connecting research and education instead of considering factors influencing behaviours in connecting research and education holistically. Moreover, most of these studies consider academics instead of managers. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate the beliefs underpinning the behaviour of academics and lower-level managers in UASs in connecting research and education.To study the underpinning beliefs we applied the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1991) as a theoretical lens. According to the TPB, a person’s behavioural intentions are shaped through three determinants (Ajzen, 1991). Behavioural beliefs (1) refer to a person’s conceptions about the expected positive/negative outcomes of practicing the behaviour. Normative beliefs (2) consist of a person’s conceptions about whether others approve/disapprove of practicing the behaviour. Control beliefs (3) are a person's conceptions about the presumed factors that could enable/hinder in practicing the behaviour. The research question is: Which behavioural, normative and control beliefs underpin the behaviour of academics and lower-level managers in connecting research and education?
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is a dual-focused educational approach whereby an additional language is used for the learning and teaching of both content and language. In the Netherlands, this takes place in bilingual secondary education (tweetalig onderwijs). Policy guidelines, teaching handbooks, research and teacher education primarily focused on how subject teachers implement CLIL. Little was known about the nature and range of the pedagogical and collaborative practices of language teachers in this context. Exploring formal and practical theories of teaching, this dissertation reports on four studies; a literature review, focus group study, survey, and multiple-case study. These generated building blocks for a knowledge base for Teachers of English in Bilingual streams (TEBs) including a theoretical framework for language teaching in CLIL contexts, a set of practices which emerged as a professional development tool for TEBs, eight case descriptions of prototypical practices, and a model of the dynamic interaction of TEBs’ beliefs and practices. Reviewing the findings in the light of developments in conceptualizing what CLIL means for teachers in practice, the discussion highlights four points. Firstly, language teaching in CLIL contexts is not the same as foreign language teaching. Secondly, CLIL achieves integration through subject-specific language. Thirdly, CLIL contexts can lead to transformative change in language teachers’ beliefs and practices. Fourthly, collaboration between language and subject teachers can be beneficial. It concludes that teacher education and policy guidelines can and should do more to support, encourage and enable language teachers to be both creators and agents of change.
LINK
