Pre-Service Teachers: An Analysis of Reading Instruction in High Needs Districts Dual Language Classrooms

Abstract

Pre-service teachers need opportunities to apply theory and connect to best practices as they teach in classroom settings be it, whole or small group. For many pre-service teachers often times their experience is limited to simply watching instruction or working with small groups of students (Pryor & Kuhn, 2004). The student teaching experience is a critical component of the teacher preparation program. Through the use of the English Language Learner Classroom Observation Instrument (ELLCOI), and researcher observation the hope is that these will aid in bringing to light the instructional activities used by pre-service teachers during reading instruction with ELLs. This study explores how pre- service bilingual teachers connect theory into practice by examining their instruction in the following categories: Instructional Practices, Interactive Teaching, English-Language Development, and Content Specific to Reading as listed in The English Language Learner Classroom Observation Instrument (ELLCOI) developed by Haager, Gersten, Baker, and Graves (2003). To capture these instructional events video tape recordings of eight South Texas pre-service teachers were taken during a reading language arts lesson in order to observe instruction in high need districts’ dual language/bilingual classrooms. Data were compiled to capture the nature and quality of instruction on key essential elements, as well as reading instructional practices specific to the teaching/learning process in the dual language classroom. The findings portray the results of the ELLCOI with bilingual/ESL pre- service teachers and how they make sense of their instructional practices as a means to instruction in one-way dual language public school classrooms

Keywords

• -

Pre-Service Teachers: An Analysis of Reading Instruction in High Needs Districts Dual Language Classrooms

Öz

-

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

Kaynakça

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
2. Education Quarterly. 33(1), 19-35. August, D., & Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children.
3. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Best, J. W., and Kahn, J. V. (2006).
4. Research in Education (10th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Bravo-Valdivieso, L. (1995). A four-year follow-up study of low socioeconomic status, Latin American children with reading difficulties. International Journal of
5. Disability Development and Education, 42, 189–202. 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.
6. Clarke, M. A. (1994). The dysfunctions of the theory-practice discourse. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 9-26.
7. Clift, R. T., & Brady, P. (2006) Research on methods courses and field experiences. In
8. Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Kenneth M. Zeicher (Ed.), Studying Teacher Education The Report of the AERA Panel of Research and Teacher Education (309-423). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cummins, J. (1991). Interdependence of first- and second language proficiency in bilingual children. In E. Bialystok (Ed.), Language processing in bilingual children

9. (pp. 70-89). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Darling-Hammond. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of
10. Teacher Education,57(3), 300-314. Genesee, F., Lindholm-Leary, K., Saunders, W.M., & Christian, D. (2006). Educating
11. English language learners: A synthesis of research evidence. New York: Cambridge University Press. Gersten, R., & Baker, S. (2000). What we know about effective instructional practices for English language learners. Exceptional Children, 66, 454-470.
12. Gersten, R., Baker, S., Haager, D., & Graves, A. (2005). Exploring the role of teacher quality in predicting reading outcomes for first-grade English learners. An observational study. Remedial and Special Education, 26 (4), 197-206.
13. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
14. Haager, D., Gersten, R., Baker, S., & Graves, A. (2003). The English-Language
15. Haycock, K. (1998). Good teaching matters: how well-qualified teachers can close the gap. Thinking K-16, 3(2), 1-8.
16. Lopez, J. J. (2006). Dynamic Growth in the Rio Grande Valley. Southwest Economy, 2, 11-14. Retrieved February 9, 2011 from http://www.dallasfed.org/research/swe/2006/swe0602c.html.
17. 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.
18. Maril, R. L. (1989). Poorest of Americans: The Mexican Americans of the Lower Rio
19. Grande Valley of Texas. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press. 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).
20. Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Education Technology Research and Development. 50(3), 43-59.
21. Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
22. Murillo, L. (2010). Local Literacies as Counter-Hegemonic Practices Deconstructing
23. Anti-Spanish Ideologies in the Rio Grande Valley. In R. T. Jimenez, V. J. Risko, M. K. Hundley, & D. W. Rowe (Eds.), 59th Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (276-287). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference, Inc. Myburgh, 0., Poggenpoel, M., & Van Rensburg,W. (2004). Learners' experience of teaching and learning in a second and third language. Education, 124(3), 573-84.
24. Nieto, S. (2000). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
25. Osorio-O'Dea, P. (2001). Bilingual education: An overview. CRS Report for
26. Congress. Retrieved February 24, 2012 from http://www.policyalmanac.org/education/archive/bilingual.pdf.
27. Orfield, G. & Lee, C. (2005). Why segregation matters: Poverty and educational inequality. Cambridge, MS: Harvard Civil Rights Project.
28. Palmer, D. & Wicktor-Lynch, A. (2008). A bilingual education for a monolingual test?
29. 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. 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.
30. Teale, W.H. (2009). Students learning English and their literacy instruction in urban schools. The Reading Teacher, 62(8), 699-703. doi:10.1598/RT.62.8.9.
31. Thomas,W. P., & Collier, V. (1997). School effectiveness for language minority students.Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
32. U.S. Census Bureau, (2000). Census 2000 Summary File 3. Washington, DC: Bureau.
33. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009 a). Characteristics of public, private, and Bureau of Indian
34. 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, National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). The condition of education 2006, NCES 2006-071, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
36. Yin, R.K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Footnotes i NAEP Achievement Levels: (1) Basic: denotes partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade assessed; (2)