Teachers’ perceptions on the relevancy of linguistic training for teaching

1. Teachers’ perceptions on the relevancy of linguistic training for teaching Kristina Jetter

2. Introduction: Research Area • Teacher Education • Theoretical Linguistic Training • syntax, phonology, morphology, semantics, and sociolinguistics • Knowledge About Language (KAL)

3. Aim / Justification • M.A. TESOL programs often include training in theoretical linguistics. • This study seeks to further develop a previous study by LaFond and Degancay-Aktuna (2009) by increasing the number of respondents and adding more information on the role of teacher context.

4. References Bartels, N. (2005). Applied linguistics and language teacher education: What we know. In N. Bartels (Ed.), Applied linguistics and language teacher education (pp. 405-424). New York: Springer. Freeman, D. & Johnson, K. (1998). Reconceptualizing the knowledge-base of language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 397-417. LaFond, L. & Dogancay-Aktuna, S. (2009). Teacher perspectives on linguistics in TESOL teacher education. Language Awareness, 18(3), 345-365. Popko, J. (2005). How MA-TESOL students use knowledge about language in teaching ESL classes. In N. Bartels (Ed.), Applied linguistics and language teacher education (pp. 387-404). New York: Springer. Tsui, A.B.M. (2005). Expertise in teaching: Perspectives and issues. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Expertise in second language learning and teaching (pp. 167-189). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillian.

5. Research Questions • What value do graduates of M.A. TESOL programs place on linguistic training? • How do these graduates perceive the influence of this linguistic training on teaching preparation and practice?

6. Methodology - Sources Graduates of M.A. TESOL programs who have had as part of these programs some formal training in linguistics. • TESL-L: http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/~tesl-l/ (as of 2006 had 32,293 members in 172 countries) • Snowball Sampling: Personal acquaintances working in the ESL/EFL field.

7. Methodology - Materials • On-line survey interface: www.surveygizmo.com • The questionnaire will be modeled after the questionnaire used by LaFond and Dogancay-Aktuna (2009).

8. Methodology - Procedure • Create an electronic version of the questionnaire on surveygizmo.com. 2. Electronically send the link to the survey in an email (following IRB guidelines) introducing my study to members of the electronic listserv, TEFL-L.

9. Methodology - Procedure 3. Electronically send the link to the survey in a similar email introducing my study to personal acquaintances working in the ESL/EFL field. Use snowball sampling. 4. The link will be available for one month.

10. Methodology - Procedure 5. If I do not receive the target number of responses, I will make personal phone calls to intensive English programs (a list with links to phone numbers is available at: http://www.aaiep.org/schools) to seek additional participants. 6. When the survey is finished, SurveyGizmo.com will create an Excel database of the responses.

11. Methodology – Data & Analysis The data will consist of information collected from the questionnaire. (see following slides for questionnaire) The analysis for the qualitative data will consist of identifying themes and categorizing responses. The analysis for the quantitative data will be done with descriptive statistics.

12. Questionnaire Part 1: Background Information – Linguistic Training • Are you a graduate from an M.A. program? ____ Yes _____No • M.A. degree received: ___________________________________ • Name of institution: _____________________________________ • Name of department: ____________________________________ • Which of the following courses in linguistics have you completed: (will have a checklist)

13. Questionnaire Part 2: Background Information – Teaching Experience 1. How many years of experience do you have teaching in an... ESL setting ______ EFL setting _______ 2. How many years of experience do you have teaching... Children (ages 0-12)____ Adolescents (ages 13-18)_____ Adults (ages 19+)____ Public school _____ Private language school _______

14. Questionnaire Part 3: Respondent Views 1. Indicate the relative relevance of the following areas of linguistics for your teaching process. Please add comments and examples to explain how each area applies to your teaching. a) Syntax Relevant 1 – 2 – 3 – 4 – 5 – 6 – 7 – 8 – 9 – 10 Irrelevant Comments/Examples: (section ‘a’ is repeated with: phonetics/phonology, morphology, semantics, sociolinguistics)

15. Questionnaire Part 3: Respondent Views, cont. 2. Which statement more closely summarizes your experience? ___ Linguistic theory can assist me in teaching more effectively ___ Linguistic theory is not at all that helpful for what I do in the classroom. 3. Has your understanding of linguistic theory helped you solve problems in teaching preparation and practice? ___ Yes (Please indicate how, referring to specific areas of linguistics, such as syntax, semantics, phonology and sociolinguistics in your response.) ___ No (Please indicate why you think it didn’t help.

16. Anticipated Problems / Limitations • Respondents may not complete the entire survey. • Respondents may not be honest or thorough in their answers • Respondents may not understand a question.

17. Anticipated Problems/ Limitations • Limitedto include members of TESL-L who have opted to receive emails from the listserv and personal contacts. • While it should not be difficult to reach the goal of n=80, the data may not have a good distribution of experience and teaching context (due to self-selection factor)

18. Expected Findings • Graduates will consider their linguistic training relevant to teaching. • More experienced teachers will perceive the influence of linguistic training as more important for teaching preparation and practice than those with less experience.