Influencing Student Teacher Grammar Cognitions: The Case of the Incongruous Curriculum

Abstract

This study explored the role teacher education plays in influencing student teachers’ pedagogical grammar cognitions—defined as what student teachers know, think, and believe regarding grammar instruction—on the premise that investigating the impact of teacher education (or lack thereof) is more fruitful when considering it the result of complex interactions between various teacher education influences (and prior cognitions) rather than the outcome of individual courses. An instrumental case study was conducted to examine how a TEFL (teaching English as a foreign language) bachelor degree program in the Netherlands attempted to impact student teacher cognitions on grammar instruction. For this purpose, various groups of stakeholders (16 student teachers, 10 teacher educators, and 6 school placement mentors) were interviewed, 30 hours of teaching were observed, and multiple data sources were triangulated. The outcomes demonstrate how several manifestations of incongruence, in secondary education as well as in teaching practice, fostered instead of challenged student teachers’ traditional pedagogical grammar cognitions, which were further consolidated and reinforced—albeit unintentionally—in teacher education as a result of inconsistencies in the curriculum, incongruent teaching models, and confusion arising from the dichotomy between disciplinary knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge.

Parlez-vous francais? Effects of structure-based versus dynamic-usage-based approaches on oral proficiency

“…However, we believe that our findings also strongly support Lightbown and Spada (2013): the most effective approaches in language teaching are communicative approaches with language used meaningfully-preferably as authentic as possible-taught with a large amount of input. Unfortunately, in the Netherlands, there is still a very strong belief that rules drive the language system and grammatical accuracy -often explained in the L1 -needs to be achieved to avoid fossilization in the L2 (Graus & Coppen, 2018). Such beliefs are probably widespread as for example in L2 English in Vietnam (see Verspoor & Hong, 2013) and even L2 Spanish textbooks in the US seem to have a strong focus on grammar (Fernández, 2011).…”

“…If the past 50 years of research in L2 instruction has taught us anything, it is that the modern language classroom should be a place where learners are surrounded by meaningful L2 input and engage in motivating communicative activities in order to enhance their general proficiency level (Dörnyei, 2002;Krashen, 1981;Lantolf et al, 2015;Verspoor, 2017). However, in the Netherlands, as in Austria and France, most teachers still use methods that are based on structure-based (SB) views, where a focus on grammatical practice to achieve grammatical accuracy is viewed important (Graus & Coppen, 2018;Schurz & Coumel, 2020;West & Verspoor, 2016; see also Lightbown & Spada, 2013). This is not so surprising as much L2 instructional research also points to the effectiveness of some explicit focus on form (Goo et al, 2015;Norris & Ortega, 2000;Spada & Tomita, 2010).…”

Meaning-Focused Instruction (Mfi) vs. Form-Focused Instruction (Ffi): Metareflection on Bipa Grammar Learning

“…On the other hand, previous studies show that the role of grammar teaching in foreign language learning is quite controversial (Graus & Coppen, 2018). This is because teachers and students have their own perspectives on grammar teaching.…”

“…Teachers and learners are required to develop their ideas and beliefs about grammar teaching which become the basis of teaching and learning practices. For teachers, beliefs are an important factor in determining the design and implementing learning (Graus & Coppen, 2018).…”

“…Discrete learning focuses on language forms (Form-Focused Instruction/FFI), while integrative learning focuses on meaning in practical contexts (Meaning-Focused Instruction/MFI). Previous research found that learners prefer form-focused, explicit, and inductive (FFI) instruction (Graus & Coppen, 2018). For teachers, there is greater enthusiasm for grammar instruction with an inductive approach (Farrell & Bennis, 2013).…”