Why Did I Ask That Question? Bilingual/ESL Pre-Service Teachers’ Insights

Abstract

Questioning techniques have historically been considered the measurement by which teachers challenge and gauge student learning. Much has been said about questioning strategies used by teachers; yet little is known about the strategies used by pre-service teachers, especially those that are working with English language learners. This study presents findings from a qualitative study that explored what types of questions pre-service teachers use and their reflections on the use of such strategies. Eight bilingual/ESL pre-service teachers in South Texas were videotaped during a math and a language arts lesson, attended focus groups, and participated in an exit interview. The findings revealed the type of questions used by the participants, how they made sense of their teaching, and how accountability measures influenced their teaching. This research recommends education programs to prepare future teachers to comply with what is required by the current reform without compromising their students’ learning and thinking skills

Keywords

• Pre-service Teachers, Questioning Strategies, English Language Learners, Teacher Preparation, Bloom’s Taxonomy

Why Did I Ask That Question? Bilingual/ESL Pre-Service Teachers’ Insights

Abstract

-

Keywords

• -

References

1. Allsopp, D. H., DeMarie, D., Alvarez-McHatton, P., & Doone, E. (2006). Bridging the gap between theory and practice: Connecting courses with field experience. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(1), 19-35.
2. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
3. Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, Toronto: Longmans, Green.
4. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Boston: Ally and Bacon.
5. Booker, M. J. (2007). A roof without walls: Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy and the misdirection of American education. Academic Quest, 20, 347-355.
6. Brown, C. P. (2010). Children of reform: The impact of high-stakes education reform on preservice teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(5), 477-491.
7. Clift, R. T., & Brady, P. (2006) Research on methods courses and field experiences. In Marilyn
8. Cochran-Smith and Kenneth M. Zeicher (Ed.), Studying Teacher Education The Report of the AERA Panel of Research and Teacher Education (pp. 309-423). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Darling-Hammond. (2006). Consttructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education,57(3), 300-314.

9. Ferguson, J. & Brink, B. (2004). Caught in a bind: Student teaching in a climate of state reform.
10. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(4), 55-64. Fisher, R. (2005). Teaching children to think (2 nd ed). Cheltenham, UK: Nelson Thornes.
11. Gandara, P., & Contreras, F. (2009). The Latino education crisis: The consequences of failed social policies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
13. Haberman, M. (1991). Pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 290-294.
14. Haycock, K. (1998). Good teaching matters: how well-qualified teachers can close the gap. Thinking K-16, 3(2), 1-8.
15. Hill, J. D., & Flynn, K. (2008). Asking the right questions: Teachers’ questions can build students’ English language skills. Journal of Staff Development, 29(1), 46-52.
16. Klem, A.M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationship matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(4), 262-273.
17. Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: Understanding achievement in U.S. schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3-12.
18. Lloyd, G.M. (2007). Strategic compromise: A student teacher’s design of kindergarten mathematics instruction in a high-stakes testing climate. Journal of Teacher Education, 58 (4), 328-347.
19. Lopez, J. J. (2006). Dynamic Growth in the Rio Grande Valley. Southwest Economy, 2, 11-14.
20. Retrieved February 9, 2011 from http://www.dallasfed.org/research/swe/2006/swe0602c.html
21. Maril, R. L. (1989). Poorest of Americans: The Mexican Americans of the Lower Rio Grande
22. Valley of Texas. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. Martin, H. (2007). Mathematical Literacy. Principal Leadership 7(5), 28-31.
23. Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & Pollock, J.E., (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA:ASCD
24. Mather, M. & Foxen, P. (2010). America’s Future: Latino child well-being in numbers and Trends. National Washington D.C.: Council of La Raza (NCLRA).
25. Merriam, S. B. (2001). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San
26. Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Meyer, R. J. ( 2002). Phonics Exposed: Understanding and Resisting Systematic Direct Intense
27. Phonics Instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Orfield, G. & Lee, C. (2005). Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality.
28. Cambridge, MS: Harvard Civil Rights Project. Padrón, Y. N., Waxman, H. C., & Rivera, H. H. (2002). Issues in educating Hispanic students. In
29. S. Stringfield & D. Land (Eds.), Educating at risk students (pp. 66-88). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education. Palmer, D. & Wicktor-Lynch, A. (2008). A bilingual education for a monolingual test? The pressure to prepare for TAKS and its influence on choices for language of instruction in Texas elementary bilingual classrooms. Language Policy.7, 217-235.
30. Perry, C.M., & Power, B.M. (2004). Finding the Truths in Teacher Preparation Field
31. Experiences. Teacher Education Quarterly, 31(2), 125-136. Pryor, C.R. & Kuhn, J. (2004). Do you see what I see? Bringing field experience observations into methods courses. The Teacher Educator, 39(4), 249-266.
32. Thompson, T. (2008). Mathematics teachers’ interpretation of higher-order thinking in bloom’s taxonomy. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 3(2), 96-109.
33. U.S. Census Bureau: State and County QuickFacts. Data derived from Population Estimates, Census of Population and Housing, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, State and County Housing Unit Estimates, County Business Patterns, Nonemployer Statistics, Economic Census, Survey of Business Owners, Building Permits, Consolidated Federal Funds Report, (2010). Retrieved February 15, 2011 from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48/48215.html
34. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009 a). Characteristics of public, private, and Bureau of Indian Education: Elementary and secondary schools in the United States. Retrieved March, 9, 2011 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009321/tables/sass0708_2009321_s12n_02.asp
35. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), (2009 b). Reading 2009: National Assessment of Educational Progress at Grades 4 & 8. Retrieved March 27, 2010 from http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_2009/
36. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), (2009 c). Mathematic
37. Assessment: Grades 4 & 8. Retrieved March 27, 2010 from http://nationsreportcard.gov/math_2009/
38. Wineburg, S. & Schneider, J. (Dec. 2009/ Jan. 2010). Was Bloom’s Taxonomy pointed to the wrong direction? Phi Delta Kappan, 91(4), 56-61.