Universidad Ju rez del Estado de Durango

1. Universidad Juárezdel Estado de Durango “How do our beliefs shape our teacher talk?” Rosa María Funderburk Razo

2. Teaching: a complex process The way teachers orchestrate classroom talk in the second/foreign language classroom is one of the many actions and behaviours they carry out in their daily practice. It is simply part of what teachers ‘do’, among a myriad other things encapsulated within the complex process of teaching.

3. The underlying elements of teachers’ behaviour ‘…what teachers do is a reflection of what they know and believe…’ Richards and Lockhart (1996:29) One may then speculate that the reason for teachers to orchestrate communication in the classroom the way they do is highly influenced by what they believe to be the right way to do it.

4. Teachers’ beliefs ?

5. On beliefs… philosophical principles that guide teachers’ expectations and decisions Harste and Burke (1977) filters which are used by teachers to make instructional judgements and decisions (Nisbett and Ross, 1980; Shavelson 1983) result from cultural transmission and shape the ways in which our understanding of the world is constructed thus strongly influencing how individuals shape both their perceptions and behaviours (Pajares, 1992) ‘psychologically held understandings, premises or propositions about the world that are felt to be true’ (Richardson 1996 quoted in Peacock 2001:178)

6. The bidimensional nature of beliefs ‘Teachers’ belief systems are built up gradually over time and consist of both subjective and objective dimensions. Some may be fairly simple-for example, the opinion that grammar errors should be corrected immediately. Others may be more complex-for example, the belief that learning is more effective when it involves collaboration rather than competition.’ Richards and Lockhart (1996:30)

7. Language and its relevance for language learning Interest in the language of the classroom has grown steadily in the last thirty years. In the particular case of the language classroom , one of the main reasons behind this interest found its origins in the rejection of the teaching method as the main determinant of successful learning.

8. Language and its relevance for language learning 2 It was possible that irrespective of the method, learners were being successful or not so successful at learning a second/foreign language independently of the teaching methodology. Perhaps the clue lay in the type of interactions taking place given that the various methods observed similar patterns of classroom communication.

9. A major variable: classroom language ‘it was hypothesized that classroom interaction was the major variable affecting SLA in formal settings.’(Ellis, 1985: 141) … for it is the teacher who will orchestrate the talk in the classroom thus controlling the communication patterns therein, independently of the methodological approach sh/he may adopt.

10. The question then is, why do language teachers talk the way they do and what makes them decide on particular patterns of interaction?

13. The research question What is the relation—if any— between teachers’ beliefs about classroom interaction and the way they actually orchestrate it? Subsidiary research questions: What are the prevailing features of the classroom interaction set by these teachers? What do teachers believe effective classroom interaction is about?

14. Beliefs: a complex entity for the researcher …beliefs cannot merely be observed or measured, but instead must be inferred by what individuals say, intend and do. Thus investigations into teachers’ beliefs entail inferring beliefs not only form the statements that teachers make about their beliefs, but also by examining teachers’ intentionality to behave in a particular way and ,then of course, what they actually do. (Johnson, 1994:440)

15. The context The teachers hold a teaching qualification for teaching English and have the FCE or TOEFL 550 as a minimum have been teaching English for over three years neither of them holds an undergraduate diploma in language teaching or in teaching. All undertook undergraduate studies in other disciplines and in some cases moved gradually from their original field to English teaching or got started in English teaching as they finished their undergraduate studies. They all teach at the centre where the data was collected and have other part time jobs in teaching English in other institutions. Neither of them is a native speaker and continue studying English to this day They attend teacher training courses and workshops regularly, some of which are offered at the same centre where this research took place.

16. The context 2 The Learners around 40% are university students;the rest are made up of younger students ( no younger than 15), professionals in different areas, house-wives, university personnel ( administrative and from other schools within the university), etc. They have the choice of attending either weekly or weekend intensive courses, which tend to last approx. 3 months (totalling 75 hours per term). The number of learners per level varies greatly given that many (especially university students) are only required to cover between 200 and 250 hours, which results in smaller numbers as learners move on to higher levels. In the particular case of this research, the groups involved have studied English between 75 and 200 hrs

17. The context 3 As to the status of English where the research took place this is taught as a foreign language as in the majority of the institutions in the state and country, and the only opportunity learners have at practicing speaking English is limited to the time they are in class. English is used in the centre among personnel— said of teachers—, this being a policy established since the centre was created in 1995 and teachers are encouraged to use only English if possible when teaching, starting from beginners.

18. The methodology The present study adopted a Qualitative Research Approach— Case Study. Three lessons were recorded ,transcribed and analised(the IRF was used as the tool to analyse interaction between the T and the L’s). Teachers were interviewed and their interviews were recorded and transcribed Excerpts from lessons and interviews were looked at in order to find a relation between what teachers believe about teaching/learning English and what they actually do while interacting with learners.

19. The findings What teachers believe about classroom interaction…

20. “…the teacher is the guide of the interaction… he is the person who times it and leads students through a proper path of practice and helps them express themselves …” ( interview extract –L-) “…the environment that the teacher allows in the classroom is key to promoting interaction… it should be positive because if they do not feel comfortable… like if you are eliciting...when you are eliciting they can go further… if … they can practice… and if they are not comfortable… they don’t express themselves further…” ( interview extract –D-) Who orchestrates classroom interaction?: teachers’ beliefs

21. Who orchestrates classroom interaction?: teachers’ beliefs (2) “In this group the interaction between Ss and T is good, the Ss are always participating, sometimes T let Ss make a funny comment to relax the environment and provoke more participation… …about the turn taking, I try to vary the turn taking when I start a topic or a presentation trying to give a different order among Ss, and when Ss get the idea and I could see they can handle it I just let them speak as the ideas are appearing allowing them generate their own turn taking. When T speaks, Ss usually pay attention to what I am saying; sometimes it prompts more speaking among them, or sometimes T just breaks and interrupts… ” ( interview extracts –D-)

22. “…interaction is possible, due to the good will of the students in learning, they pay attention to the instructions given and they always wait for the teacher to explain, then they make questions and me as teacher do my best to answer them …” ( interview extract –A-) Who orchestrates classroom interaction?: teachers’ beliefs (3)

23. What classroom interaction should be like… The data analysis up to this point shows that teachers in this study share views on what classroom interaction should be like the teacher is a guide it is the teacher who is in control of the exchanges taking place even in the case where teachers pass on this control to their learners, they always regain it at different points during classroom interaction the status of the teacher as a central figure in the classroom is well embedded in their beliefs of what two of them called ‘good classroom interaction’ A positive environment should be set by the teacher

24. Classroom interaction patterns What were the predominant T-L interaction patterns found?

25. The IRF: the researcher’s choice The three-phase cycle, namely the IRF, has served as a cornerstone for the analysis of teacher-learner interaction. It has not only served numerous studies into classroom interaction, but has also seen an ever going debate regarding its prevalence in subject and second/foreign language teaching scenarios.

26. “Is the clock on the wall?” T Is the clock on the wall? Initiation L Yes, the clock is on the wall. Response T Good. The clock is on the wall. Feedback Sinclair and Brazil (1982)

27. The findings On the classroom interaction patterns found in the present study…

28. Analysing T-L interaction From the analysis it emerges that there is evidence of the pervasiveness of the IRF interaction pattern in the transcripts here analysed—that is to say that initiation is mostly done by the teacher and that the learners’ responses are frequently followed by evaluative moves. In this extract ( extract 1D)initiation is done mostly by the teacher (eg. 1, 3, 5, 9,13—What is the perfect job for you?— , 21 and 61); learners’ initiation seldom takes place ( 12 and 70), and evaluation or feedback is consistently given by the teacher either for each response (as seen in 6 and 20) or collectively ( as seen in 11), where the teacher addresses students’ responses in turns 8 and 10 in a collective way ‘Ok, ok.. you are students. Good.’

29. Findings on the IRF The analysis of a number of extracts from the transcripts of the three teachers’ lessons observed the features seen in the section above. However, a second analysis of the extracts with a focus on what the teachers were doing beyond initiation or follow-up, allowed the appreciation of a number of things happening along the sequences which the IRF analysis alone does not permit.

30. Beyond the IRF : analysing # 1D 7 the teacher repeats the learner’s response—very probably to make sure other learners have access to the information— 11 again extends what the learners have contributed with at the same time he provides evaluation of such contribution ( ‘Ok…ok.. you are students’) 13 reformulates the learners’ contributions/answers, but also validates these in ‘They swear...they swear they are students’ and signals his approval of the learner’s contribution in ‘Good’. 15 /23 reformulates with the intent of tiding up incorrect formulations learners as seen i where the teacher retakes the learners’ ‘ many money..’ and reformulates as ‘ a lot of money ’; the same for the learner’s contribution of ‘you…buying more things’ into ‘ you buy more things’. 20 responds to indicate she does not know the answer to the teacher’s question (in 19). The ‘ok’ that follows (in 21) would seem to indicate that either the teacher decides to move on to another learner or that he in fact validates (aknowledges) the learner’s response as such.

31. Extract #1D offers a good example of how this teacher’s beliefs about classroom interaction permeate the way he interacts with his learners. In this extract the teacher guides the topic and allocates turns up to 11; from there the learners seem to self-select themselves. The teacher allows this and does not in fact regain control until later in the lesson when the teacher ‘breaks and interrupts’. There is also an obvious openness from the teacher to accept humorous contributions by learners, an aspect which this teacher gives importance to when interacting with them.

32. A specific case: Teachers’ beliefs about noticing and T-L interaction “…I try to model the structure to the students..you know…repeating it can help the learners discover that part of the language…also if the students hear the same structure from their classmates..they can..they can get it…and they learn from interacting with others…in the classroom…like sometimes they hear a student using that and then they can understand…” (interview extract –D-)

33. D’s beliefs and how they permeate interaction with learners: the case of #8D In this case the teacher seems to allocate turns based on the performance of his learners. The interaction seems to carry a two-fold purpose here: allows the learners to practice a particular structure and also the assessment of this by the teacher. Note: the teacher moves to a different learner even if the previous one has not succeeded in producing the expected structure, as seen in 312 and 316. The teacher returns to this learner(Gustavo) after other learners have succeeded at producing the pattern and on the learner’s apparent failure at producing the structure a third time decides to prompt him until the learner seems to grasp what it is that he is expected to do in 342 with a significant ‘Ah!..If I..’.

34. A brief analysis of the findings: Looking at D In the case of D, his strong beliefs about noticing and its relevance for language learning influence the interaction patterns set in the classroom. -he makes strategic use of reformulation in order to promote noticing of incorrect vs. correct versions of information elicited from the learners. -structures interaction around his belief that exposure from others’ use of language and not only the teacher’s, facilitates noticing of a pattern (he moves from one learner to another and then goes back to a learner who has been facing problems in producing the pattern, thus multiplying the opportunities for that learner to be exposed to the same form)

35. A’s beliefs: and noticing “…I try to model the new grammar using fun example some of them unreal that makes a good rapport with students and they give fun examples too...I try to model the grammar many times to the students before I explain it to them, trying to make them notice it just before I explain it. Some of then get it themselves, and the explanation of the grammar is not so complicated for them…” (interview extract –A-)

36. “…the pink one”: A’s beliefs about noticing the teacher is repeating and emphasising in order for the learners to discover the pattern and the apparent failure on their part to do so as evaluated by the teacher ( as was found in an exchange with this teacher regarding how the lesson had evolved ): the belief held by this teacher about how learners demonstrate whether they have been able to grasp the grammar or not sets particular interactions patterns—that the teacher continues to repeat the structure each time she elicits which colours her learners prefer. “…my students didn’t repeat the grammar I was modeling (the black ONE?)…” ( interview extract –A-)

37. Teachers’ beliefs and their practice: the case of noticing Teachers allocated turns according to their perception of their learners’ need for support and practice of a given structure – perception which is based on their appreciation of learners’ output. The language used by teachers, especially said of their prompting as well as reformulation moves, is also linked to their beliefs regarding the conditions which favour language learning.

38. Conclusions:Teachers’ beliefs and their practice Teachers’ beliefs about effective teaching-learning do permeate the way they orchestrate interaction during direct-teaching events; that is to say, that there are consistencies between what teachers believe to be effective classroom interaction and the way they orchestrate it—as it is found in the samples of their teaching practice which were made available to the researcher.

39. Implications: ? For our daily practice For teacher training/development/education Can we help other teachers and ourselves become aware of what we believe about teaching and how our beliefs permeate our practice?

40. More questions Given the time and work that practices such as these imply, we can only ask ourselves whether it is plausible to integrate them to our daily practice. How can we help other teachers and ourselves become more analytical of their/our teaching practice for the sake of developing a better understanding of the process?

41. On the impact of researching classroom talk Of particular relevance were some findings which did not relate directly with the principal research question. Among these, the most striking one was that of the impact this experience made on one of the participants, namely having been able to ‘see’ their teaching from a different perspective:

42. “…a little bit scary at the beginning… they say that no one likes to listen to yourself...you know… but it is good you know… others could say this about your class but if you see yourself… you can see not just one thing or comment on just one thing but many…you can really learn from your class…” “ …I had no idea I was so repetitive…I repeated a lot…yeah…” ( interview extracts)

43. The value of research This is an invaluable aspect of research studies which at some point include an element of reflection thus allowing for the participants to experience both personal and professional growth, and points to the importance of including this kind of experiences as a key element of teacher development programmes—this especially said of contexts where there is an absolute absence of this practice.

44. This study has attempted to look at the possible links between the beliefs teachers hold about classroom interaction and their practice. It is in no way free of flaws but offers an interesting insight into the complexity behind teachers’ understandings of language teaching and learning and how it is possible to look for areas of consistency between these and what they do in the classroom. Final Comments

45. ?

46. Barcelos, A.M.F. 2003. Researching beliefs about SLA: A critical review. In P. Kalaja and A.M.F. Barcelos (eds.) Beliefs about SLA: New Research Approaches. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers pp7-33 Borg, S. 2003. ‘Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe and do’. Language Teaching 36:81-109 Clandinin D. J. and Connely, F.M. 1986. ‘Rhythms in teaching: The narrative study of teachers’ personal practical knowledge in the classroom’. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2: 377-378 Clandinin D. J. and Connely, F.M. 1987. ‘Teachers’ personal knowledge: What counts as “personal” in studies of the personal’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 17:487-500 Dewey, J. 1933. How we think. Lexington MA: D.C. Heath Edelsky, C., Smith, K. nd Wolfe, P. 2002. ‘A discourse on academic discourse’ Linguistics and Education 13/1: 1-38 Ellis R. 1985. Understanding second language acquisition , Oxford: Oxford University Press Garton S. 2004. Person-oriented and Process-oriented Teachers: An investigation of the links between ESOL teachers’ personal belief systems and approaches to teaching. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Aston University. Harsgte J. C. and Burke, C.L. 1977.A new hypothesis for reading teacher research: Both the teaching and learning of reading is theoretically based. In P.D. Pearson (ed.) Reading: Theory, research and practice. pp 32-40 New York: Mason Johnson, K.E. 1994. ‘The emerging beliefs and instructional practices of pre-service English as a Second Language teachers’, Teaching and Teacher Education 10/4: 439-452 Johnson, K.E.1995. Understanding Communication in Second Language Classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Long, M. 1983a. Native speaker/non native speaker conversation in the second language classroom in M Clarke and J Handscombe (eds) On TESOL 82 Pacific perspectives on Language learning and teaching Washington DC TESOL Lortie D. 1975. Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Nisbett, R. and Ross, L. 1980. Human inferences: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Pajares, M.F. 1992. ‘Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct’, Review of Educational Research 62/3:307-332 Peacock, M. 2001. ‘Pre-service ESL teachers’ beliefs about second language learning: a longitudinal study’, System 29/2:177-195 Richards, K. 2003. Qualitative Enquiry in TESOL, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Richardson, V. 1996. ‘The role of attitudes and beliefs in learninig to teach’ in J Sikula TJ Buttery and E Guyton (eds) Handbook of Research on Teacher Education 2nd Edition New York: Macmillan pp. 102-119 Sakui, K. and Gaies, S.J. 2003. A case study: beliefs and metaphors of a Japanese teacher of English. In P. Kalaja and A.M.F. Barcelos (eds.) Beliefs about SLA: New Research Approaches. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers pp153-170 Seedhouse, P. 1996. ‘Classroom interaction: possibilities and impossibilities’. ELT Journal 50/1: 17-24 Seedhouse, P. 2004. The interactional architecture of the language classroom: A conversation analysis perspective. Oxford: Blackwell Thompson, G. 1997. ‘Training teachers to ask questions’. ELT Journal 51/12: 99-105 van Lier, L. 1988. The classroom and the language learner. London: Longman Woods, D. 2003. The social construction of beliefs in the language classroom. In P. Kalaja and A.M.F. Barcelos (eds.) Beliefs about SLA: New Research Approaches. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers pp 201-229

47. Thank you funderburk_razo@yahoo.com.mx