多語教師在多重語言任教經驗中之身分形塑與對話

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學文學院英語學系博士論文 Department of English, College of Liberal Arts. National Taiwan Normal University Doctoral Dissertation. 多語教師在多重語言任教經驗中之身分形塑與對話 Teachers of Multiple Languages: The Negotiation of Language Teacher Identities Across Multiple Languages and Contexts 顧國瀚 Eric Kuo-Han Ku 指導教授劉宇挺博士 Advisor: Yeu-Ting Liu, Ed.D. 中華民國 109 年 3 月 March 2020.

(2)

(3) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. i. Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Yeu-Ting Liu, not only for offering his invaluable guidance and inspiration in research, but also for exemplifying great wisdom, empathy, and compassion towards the bigger picture of what it means to be a scholar and teacher. Much of what can be achieved in academic scholarship rests upon some form of mentorship from those who have come before us. Thank you, Dr. Liu, for providing that mentorship as the foundation for my graduate studies at National Taiwan Normal University. I also want to thank the dissertation committee members for their commitment towards helping me improve my dissertation. A special thanks to my colleagues Dr. Chieh-Fang Hu, Dr. Wen-ying Lin, Dr. Mei-Ching Ho, Dr. Hung-Shu Chen, Josephine Chen, and Cheyenne Maechtle for their encouragement, support, and concern over my professional development as well as my personal well-being during my doctoral journey. Thanks to Cynthia Lee and Cho Yi, dedicated elementary school English teachers and dear friends, as well as my students for sharing their teaching experiences and providing me with an insider understanding of what it means to be an elementary school teacher in Taiwan. I would like to express my gratitude to my friends at National Taiwan Normal University, Jojo Tang, Jasmine Kam, and Winnie Chiu, who were always there to offer perspective and community. Lastly, I want to thank my friends in Taiwan and Steven for making Taiwan feel like home..

(4) ii. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. Chinese Abstract 本質性研究聚焦三多語言教師的生活經歷。這三名教師在本研究中以 Ann、Haruko 和 Megan 代稱出現；他們分別來自台灣、日本和美國。這幾名經驗豐富的語言老師擁有多元語言和文化背景，在研究中描述自己在語言教學生涯以及身為教師的角色中，教授多重語言之經驗。本研究目的為深化並增加對多語教師的了解，探觸下面議題：(1)多重語言教學經驗如何形塑多語教師身分認同、並影響其身分認同；(2)多重語言教學經驗如何影響這些多語教師的語言教學方法；(3)多重語言教學經驗如何影響這些教師長期專業發展軌跡；以及 (4) 多語教師如何在其教授多語的職涯中，形塑出多重身份、工作場域環境和意識形態。為探索上述議題，本研究以 Douglas Fir Group 的〈多語言世界中的第二語言習得跨學科框架（Transdisciplinary Framework for SLA in a Multilingual World）〉作為理論概念框架，因為該框架提供學者探觸微觀及宏觀面向的各項因素如何影響語言教學與學習。為了解上述四項議題，本研究針對多語教師之敘事資料（含半結構性訪談、書面教學理念，以及透過參與者拍攝的照片和照片引談法得出的照片敘事）進行主題分析。藉由上述資料交叉比對，本研究針對多語教師專業知識成長、身分認同、習慣，以及語言教育環境進行深度探討。本研究發現對於多語教師師培教育課程發展提供了十分有價值之參考，並點出此性質課程可能遭遇之議/問題及可能解決之道。此外，研究結果揭示了多語教師唯一獨特之族群，及其身份認同，這對多語教師師培發展具重要意義。. 關鍵字：多語教師身分認同、多語教師、多語主義、敘事研究、師培教育、教師發展.

(5) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. iii. English Abstract The qualitative study focused on the lived experiences of three teachers of multiple languages (TMLs), Ann, Haruko and Megan from Taiwan, Japan, and the United States, respectively. As experienced language teachers coming from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds, the participants described their experiences teaching multiple languages over the greater trajectory of their language teaching career as well as in their everyday moments as teachers. The purposes of the study were to deepen and enrich our understanding of TMLs in (1) what language teacher identities are involved in teaching multiple languages and how they are impacted by the teaching multiple languages, (2) how teaching multiple languages impacts approaches to language teaching, (3) how teaching multiple languages impacts the long-term trajectory and development of a language teacher’s career, and (4) how TMLs navigate the multiple identities, workplace contexts, and ideologies that come from teaching multiple languages over the course of their career. The study applied the Douglas Fir Group’s “Transdisciplinary Framework for SLA in a Multilingual World” as the conceptual framework because it is structured to explore how a full range of factors, from micro to macro, influences language teaching and learning. This was conducted through thematic analysis of TML narratives as told through semi-structured interviews, a written teaching philosophy, and photo-narratives elicited through participant-taken photographs and photo-elicitation interviews. The analysis of their narratives revealed four aspects of language teaching that TMLs learned to navigate from teaching multiple languages: their teacher knowledge, LTIs, habitus, and language education contexts. The findings provide implications for the issues that future language teacher education programs designed for TMLs should address. Furthermore, the findings provide an entry-point from which researchers can understand TMLs as unique teachers in their own right and explore other aspects of TMLs in.

(6) iv. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. future research. This has important implications for informing research and language teacher education toward the development of current and future TMLs. Keywords: language teacher identity, teachers of multiple languages, multilingualism, narrative inquiry, language teacher education, teacher development.

(7) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. v. Table of Contents Acknowledgements ..……………………………………………………………………………... i Chinese Abstract ...………………………………………………………………………………. ii English Abstract ……………………………………………………………………………….. iii Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………………………... v List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………………..... ix List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………………. x Chapter 1: Introduction ………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………… 1 Background: Who are TMLs? …………………………………………………….……... 3 Purpose of the Present Study ……………………………………………………….……. 5 Research Questions ……………………………………………………….………6 Organization of the Study ………………………………………………………….…….. 7 List of Acronyms and Abbreviations …………………………………………………….. 7 Chapter 2: Conceptual Framework and Literature Review ……………………………….……... 9 Conceptual Framework …………………………………………………………….….. 9 Douglas Fir Group’s Framework ………………………………………….……... 9 Ten Foundational Themes from the DFG Framework ……………………….… 12 Applying the DFG Framework to this Study ……………………………….….. 16 Language Teacher Identity Literature Review …………………………………………. 18 Defining LTI ……………………………………………………………………. 19 Key Developments in LTI Research ……………………………………………. 21 Significance of LTI for Classroom Teaching and Teacher Education ………….. 24 LTI and the NS/NNS Dichotomy ………………………………………………………. 25 Current Understandings of NESTs and NNESTs ………………………………. 26 Efforts to Challenge and Reconceptualize the NS/NSS Dichotomy …………… 27 TML Literature Review ………………………………………………………………… 29 TMLs and LTIs …………………………………………………………………. 29 TMLs and Teacher Education within Multilingual Teaching Contexts ………… 33 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………… 36 Summary of this Chapter: What is Known and What is Not Known ……...…… 36 Chapter 3: Methodology ………………………………………………………………………... 39 Narrative Inquiry ……………………………………………...………………………... 39 Why Use Narrative Inquiry for LTI Research? ………………………………… 39 Defining Narrative Inquiry and Stories ………………………………………… 41 Participants ……………………………………………………………………………... 42 Data Collection …………………………………………………………………………. 43 Collecting Data in Multiple Modes …………………………………………….. 43 Semi-structured Interviews ……………………………………………………... 47 Written Teacher Philosophy Statement …………………………………………. 48 Photo-elicitation ………………………………………………………………... 49 Data Analysis …………………………………………………………………………… 54 Validation, Trustworthiness, and Verisimilitude ……………………………………….. 57 Validation and Trustworthiness ………………………………………………… 57 Verisimilitude …………………………………………………………………... 57 Establishing Trustworthiness and Verisimilitude ………………………………. 58.

(8) vi. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. Triangulation of Multiple Data Sources ………………………………… 59 Member Checking ……………………………………………………… 60 Generating Rich, Thick Descriptions …………………………………… 60 Clarifying Researcher Positionality through Reflexivity ………………. 61 Putting It All Together ………………………………………………………………….. 63 Introduction to Narrative Chapters …………………………………………………… 65 Chapter 4: Ann – The Ambassador ……………………….…………………………………….. 67 Ann’s Language Teaching Career Trajectory …………………………………………... 67 Stage 1: “The Budding Stage” (Fall 2011-Spring 2013) ….……………………. 68 Stage 2: “A Small Tree” (Spring 2013-Fall 2014) ……………………………... 69 Stage 3: “Two Stems Tangled Together” (Fall 2014-Summer 2015) …………... 71 Stage 4: “Branching Out to India” (Summer 2015) ……………………………. 75 Stage 5: “Two Trees: English Teaching Tree Grows Slowly, Chinese Teaching Tree Grows Rapidly” (Summer 2015-Winter 2016) ………………….........77 Stage 6: “Growing Both Trees, the English Teaching Tree Growing Faster” (Winter 2016-Summer 2018) ……………………….……………………………….. 79 Stage 7: “Branching Out to America” (Summer 2018-Summer 2019) …………. 80 Epilogue: Possible Future Stages ……………………………………………….. 82 Ann’s Photo-narratives …………………………………………………………………. 84 Image 1: An Email from Ann’s Student ………………………………………… 84 Image 2: Ann’s Students Doing Chinese Calligraphy ………………………….. 85 Image 3: Ann’s Students Practicing for a Skit ………………………………….. 86 Image 4: Textbook for Ann’s Chinese Class …………………………………… 88 Image 5: A Gift from Ann’s Student …………………………………………… 90 Image 6: A Chinese New Year Event …………………….…………………….. 92 Ann as a TML …………………………………………………………………………... 94 Language Teacher Emotions ……………………………………………………. 94 Approaches to Teaching Multiple Languages ………………………………….. 95 Language Teacher Identities ……………………………………………………. 97 Discussion …………………………………………………………...…………………. 98 The Micro Level of the DFG Framework ……………….……………………… 98 Teacher Knowledge …………………………………………………….. 99 Semiotic Resources ………………………………………...………… 100 Emotions ……………...……………………………………………… 102 The Meso Level of the DFG Framework ……………………………………… 103 Navigating LTE Programs of Multiple Languages …………………… 103 Immersion in Teaching Contexts Abroad ……………………….…….. 104 The Macro Level of the DFG Framework …………………………………….. 106 The NS/NNS Dichotomy ……………………………………………… 106 Tapping into the Global Language Market ……………………………. 107 Ann the Ambassador ………………………………………………………………….. 110 Chapter 5: Megan – The Fighter ……………………………………………………………….. 112 Megan’s Language Teaching Career Trajectory ……………………………………… 112 Stage 1: “Teaching Before I Knew What I Was Doing” (2006-2009) ………... 112 Stage 2: “Novice Teaching During my Masters” (2009-2012) ……………….. 114 Stage 3: “New Professional” (2012-2015) …………………………………….. 116.

(9) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. vii. Stage 4: “I Sort of Know What I’m Doing Now” (2015-2019) ………….…… 120 Epilogue: Possible Future Stages ……………………………………………… 125 Megan’s Photo-narratives ………………………………………………………………127 Image 1: A Gift from Megan’s Student ……………………………………….. 127 Image 2: Using an Alternative Type of Assessment ………………………….. 130 Image 3: Megan’s Students Doing Groupwork ……………………………….. 131 Image 4: Celebration with Megan’s Colleagues ………………………………. 133 Image 5: A Hybrid Car ………………………………………………………… 135 Image 6: Collaborating with Colleagues ………………………………………. 136 Image 7: Chairs from Megan’s Classroom ……………………………………. 137 Image 8: Students from Megan’s German Class ………………………………. 138 Image 9: A Birthday Celebration for Megan ………………………………….. 140 Image 10: A Strong Sense of Community …………………………………….. 142 Image 11: Students from Megan’s FYC Class ………………………………… 143 Megan as a TML ……………………………………………………………………..... 144 Language Teacher Emotions ………………………………………………….. 145 Approaches to Teaching Multiple Languages ………………………………… 146 Language Teacher Identities …………………………………………………... 147 Discussion …………………………………………………………………………….. 150 The Micro Level of the DFG Framework …….………………………………. 150 Teacher Knowledge …………………………………………………… 150 Semiotic Resources ……………………………………………………. 151 Emotions ………………………………………………………………. 152 The Meso Level of the DFG Framework ……………………………………… 154 Teaching within Higher Education ……………………………………. 154 Teaching in the Corporate Sector ……………………………………… 155 The Macro Level of the DFG Framework …………………………………….. 156 The NS/NNS Dichotomy ……………………………………………… 156 Awareness of Social and Economic Inequalities ……………………… 157 Megan the Fighter ……………………………………………………………………... 159 Chapter 6: Haruko – The Performer ..………………………………………………………... 162 Haruko’s Language Teaching Career Trajectory ……………………………………… 162 Stage 1: “Chick Stage” (2010-2011) ………………………………………….. 162 Stage 2: “Juvenile Bird Stage” (2011-2016) ………………………………….. 163 Stage 3: “Adult Bird Stage” (2016-2019) ……………………………………… 164 Epilogue: Possible Future Stages ……………………………………………… 164 Haruko’s Photo-narratives …………………………………………………………….. 168 Image 1: Textbook Used in Haruko’s Class …………………………………… 168 Image 2: Reviewing Textbook Content ……………………………………….. 170 Image 3: Haruko’s Self-Introduction ………………………………………….. 171 Image 4: An Ice-breaker Activity ……………………………………………... 173 Image 5: Social Isolation When Speaking English ……………………………. 174 Image 6: Drawings on the Chalkboard ………………………………………... 176 Image 7: Megan’s Example of a College Application Video …………………. 177 Image 8: Digitally Highlighting the Textbook ………………………………… 178 Image 9: An Extensive Reading Program ………………..…………………… 179.

(10) viii. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. Image 10: Using Japanese to Teach EFL ……………………………………… 180 Image 11: An Empty Classroom ………………………………….…………….182 Haruko as a TML ……………………………………………………………...………. 183 Language Teacher Emotions …………………..………………………………. 183 Approaches to Teaching Multiple Languages ………………………………… 184 Language Teacher Identities …………………………………...……………… 186 Discussion …………………………………………………………………………….. 190 The Micro Level of the DFG Framework …………………………………….. 190 Teacher Knowledge …………………………………………………… 190 Semiotic Resources ……………………………………………………. 191 Emotions ………………………………………………………………. 193 The Meso Level of the DFG Framework ……………………………………… 194 The Desire for Additional LTE ……………………………………..…. 194 Living, Studying, and Teaching Abroad ……………………………… 195 The Macro Level of the DFG Framework …………………………………….. 196 The Native Speaker Fallacy …………………………………………… 197 Awareness of the Global Language Market …………………………… 198 Haruko the Performer ………………………………………………………………… 200 Chapter 7: Discussion & Implications ………………………………………………………… 202 Revisiting the Purposes of the Study and the Research Questions …………………… 202 Revisiting the DFG Framework from the TML Perspective ………………………….. 202 Findings: Thematic Insights from TML Narratives …………………………………… 206 Theme 1: Learning to Navigate Teacher Knowledge ………………………… 208 Managing the Relationship Between Languages ……………………… 209 Adjusting Pedagogical Practices ………………………………………. 210 Theme 2: Learning to Navigate LTIs …………………………………………. 212 Being both NST and NNST …………………………………………… 213 Being an Adjunct Instructor or “Going Corporate” …………………… 215 Theme 3: Learning to Navigate Habitus ……………………………………… 216 Bolstering Personality, Persuasiveness, and Charisma ……………….. 217 Developing Transnational Competency ………………………………. 218 Theme 4: Learning to Navigate Language Education Contexts ……………….. 219 Contextual Expectations of TMLs …………………………………….. 219 Global Language Markets for Language Teaching …………………… 223 Summary: Reconceptualizing the DFG Framework from a TML Perspective ... 225 Implications for LTE ………………………………………………………………….. 227 The Necessity of LTE Programs for TMLs …………………………………… 227 Issues TML LTE Programs Should Address ………………………………….. 228 Contributions to LTI and Language Teaching Literature ……………………………… 230 Future Directions for Research ………………………………………………………... 232 References …………………………………………………………………………………….. 233 Appendices …………………………………………………………………………...……….. 254 Appendix A: Informed Consent Form ………………………………………………… 254 Appendix B: Semi-structured Interview Guide ……………………………………….. 257 Appendix C: Guidelines for Written Teaching Philosophy Statement ….…………….. 259 Appendix D: Guidelines for Participant Photographs ………………………………… 261.

(11) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. ix. List of Tables Table 1. Fundamental Themes Based on the DFG’s Framework. Table 2. Definitions of Language Teacher Identity. Table 3. Types of Multilingual Education. Table 4. Demographic Profile of Participants. Table 5. The Role of Each Data Source. Table 6. A Summary of the Data Collection Process. Table 7. Connecting the DFG Framework with the Research Questions. Table 8. Addressing the Purposes of the Study and Research Questions. Table 9. Characteristics of Participants’ Teaching Multiple Languages.

(12) x. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. List of Figures Figure 1. The Douglas Fir Group’s Framework. Figure 2. Connecting the DFG Framework, Methodology, and the Research Questions. Figure 3. Stages of Ann’s Career Trajectory. Figure 4. Image 1: An Email from Ann’s Student. Figure 5. Image 2: Ann’s Students Doing Chinese Calligraphy. Figure 6. Image 3: Ann’s Students Practicing for a Skit. Figure 7. Image 4: Textbook Used in Ann’s Chinese Class. Figure 8. Image 5: A Gift from Ann’s Student. Figure 9. Image 6: A Chinese New Year Event. Figure 10. Stages of Megan’s Career Trajectory. Figure 11. Image 1: A Gift from Megan’s Student. Figure 12. Image 2: Using an Alternative Type of Assessment. Figure 13. Image 3: Megan’s Students Doing Groupwork. Figure 14. Image 4: Celebration with Megan’s Colleagues. Figure 15. Image 5: A Hybrid Car. Figure 16. Image 6: Collaborating with Colleagues. Figure 17. Image 7: Chairs from Megan’s Classroom. Figure 18. Image 8: Students from Megan’s German Class. Figure 19. Image 9: A Birthday Celebration for Megan. Figure 20. Image 10: A Strong Sense of Community. Figure 21. Image 11: Students from Megan’s FYC Class. Figure 22. Stages of Haruko’s Career Trajectory.

(13) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. Figure 23. Image 1: Textbook Used in Haruko’s Class. Figure 24. Image 2: Reviewing Textbook Content. Figure 25. Image 3: Haruko’s Self-Introduction. Figure 26. Image 4: An Ice-breaker Activity. Figure 27. Image 5: Social Isolation When Speaking English. Figure 28. Image 6: Drawings on the Chalkboard. Figure 29. Image 7: Megan’s Example of a College Application Video. Figure 30. Image 8: Digitally Highlighting the Textbook. Figure 31. Image 9: An Extensive Reading Program. Figure 32. Image 10: Using Japanese to Teach EFL. Figure 33. Image 11: An Empty Classroom. Figure 34. Reconceptualizing the DFG Framework from a TML Perspective. xi.

(14)

(15) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 1. Chapter 1: Introduction If you want to know me, then you must know my story, for my story defines who I am. And if I want to know myself, to gain insight into the meaning of my life, then I, too, must come to know my own story. (McAdams, 1993, p. 11). Consciously, we teach what we know; unconsciously, we teach who we are. (Hamacheck, 1999, p. 209) Introduction When we meet a language teacher, our imagination and understanding of who the language teacher is becomes limited by what is presented in front of us – by the particular time, settings, and discourses that mediate our understanding of who a teacher is. When we see an English teacher, we assume that he or she is what he or she is presented to us as – an English teacher. But the significance and role of researching language teacher identities (LTIs) is to delve deeper than what appears at the surface in order to understand the multiple, intersecting layers and contextual factors that are in negotiation with a language teacher’s professional identity (Barkhuizen, 2017; Douglas Fir Group, 2016). Gaining a deeper understanding of teacher identity has significant implications towards major aspects of language teaching, such as curriculum design, classroom practice, and teacher education (Barkhuizen, 2016). In essence, a greater understanding of how language teachers perceive their roles in the classroom is connected to understanding how language teachers approach their teaching and relationships with colleagues and students. Furthermore, the connection between teacher identity and language teaching is not only rooted in the researcher’s.

(16) 2. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. understanding of LTIs but more importantly, for language teachers themselves to reflect on their own identities. As Barkhuizen (2016) puts it: What teachers know about themselves – their personal histories, their ideologies, their language use, the kind of person they are, how others perceive them – affects their professional practice and their understanding of the power relationships that exist among themselves, their learners and members of the wider community. (p. 4) At the core of this line of thinking is that our identities influence what we do (Watson, 2006). In this study, I explore the LTIs of a specific demographic of teachers that applied linguistics research has paid little attention to: language teachers who have taught or are currently teaching multiple languages, either simultaneously or during different periods of their career. To describe these teachers, I use the term teachers of multiple languages or TMLs. In a time of increasing globalization and multilingualism, it is important for research to consider that language teachers may be seeking to or put in the position of teaching more than one language during their career. By researching the LTIs of TMLs, we can begin to understand who they are and how they perceive themselves as TMLs, and how that influences their language teaching. Research in applied linguistics has explored a wide range of LTIs that grant access to understanding the rich lives and insights of non-TML language teachers, including but not limited to: •. language-based identities: second language teachers (Kanno & Stuart, 2011); native speaker (NS) and non-native speaker teachers (NNS) (Aneja, 2016; Faez, 2011); multicompetent teachers (Cook, 1999; Pavlenko, 2003); bilingual and multilingual teachers (Kramsch, 2018; Pavlenko, 2003); translingual teachers (Jain, 2014; MenardWarwick, Masters, & Orque, 2019; Motha, Jain, & Tecle, 2012).

(17) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. •. 3. experience-based identities: pre-service teachers (Barkhuizen, 2010; Chang, 2018); novice teachers of English (Ruohotie-Lyhty, 2011). •. socio-cultural identities: racialized identities of ESOL teachers (Motha, 2006); East Asian teachers of English (Park, 2015); transnational English teachers (Menard-Warwick, 2008); EFL teachers in Japan (Nagamoto, 2015),. •. gendered & sexual identities: female EFL teachers in Japan (Simon-Maeda, 2004); queer English teachers (Nelson, 2009). •. professional-based identities: EFL writing teachers (Lee, 2013; Racelis & Matsuda, 2015), teachers of English to young learners (Nguyen, 2016); language teachers as researchers (Edwards & Burns, 2016); teacher educators (Trent, 2013). The diversity of ways we describe language teachers is no accident – the terminology researchers and practitioners develop to conceptualize who teachers are and who they perceive themselves to be is an attempt to account for the realities language teachers experience and confront in their everyday lives (Darvin & Norton, 2015; Douglas Fir Group, 2016). What is missing from the breadth of literature on various LTIs is the recognition and understanding of TMLs as a unique kind of language teacher and the need for research to focus on issues pertinent to them. Background: Who are TMLs? TMLs have complex language teaching experiences, often with a wide range of students and classroom settings, that are not apparent at first sight. TML’s backgrounds and experiences even vary widely when compared with one another. For example, TMLs can be teachers who are simultaneously teaching more than one language (e.g., teaching in dual language programs, teaching an English language course and a Spanish language course during same semester). Or, TMLs can also be teachers who used to teach one language and have switched to teaching.

(18) 4. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. another language (e.g., an international student in the United States who had taught English in China and now teaches Chinese in the United States). Also, there may be teachers who are both simultaneous and sequential TMLs (e.g., a teacher currently teaching English and Spanish simultaneously and had taught Chinese in a previous teaching position). Certainly, further categorizations of TMLs are possible and will emerge with the contributions of future research on TMLs. But for now, the main point of emphasis here is the multiplicity and non-linearity that characterize the trajectories of TMLs and influence who they are and how they teach. At first, one might ask, who exactly are TMLs? Do they really exist? One might even suggest that perhaps TMLs are just unique cases of individual language teachers who have simply made a personal choice to teach another language, rather than being an observable, emerging phenomenon. For some TMLs, becoming a TML might indeed be a matter of personal choice and they may indeed be a unique case among their peers. However, those choices might have been made under the influence of greater systematic trends at play, such as changing market demands for certain languages or new language education policy reforms creating teaching jobs for certain languages. In addition to individual cases of language teachers choosing to switch careers and teach a different language, becoming a TML has actually become an increasingly common career choice that has been systematically implemented in language teacher education (LTE) programs around the world. In the United States, Teachers College of Columbia University offers dual certificate programs in teaching Chinese and English (TCSOL/TESOL) in cooperation with Beijing Language and Culture University in China (Teachers College, 2018) and Osaka Gakuin University in Japan (Teachers College, 2018). In the Netherlands, HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht offers undergraduate students the opportunity to complete a double Teacher.

(19) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 5. Education Bachelor’s degree in teaching English and German (Hogeschool Utrecht, 2018). In Taiwan, the Ministry of Education’s Local-Language-in-Education policy has provided the opportunity for certified, in-service elementary school teachers who are already teaching Chinese or English to also teach one of Taiwan’s local languages (Taiwanese Hokkien, Hakka, and aboriginal languages) (Chen, 2006). These examples of organized TML teacher education programs and policies attest to the fact that there are organized initiatives actively recruiting and training pre-service and in-service teachers to become TMLs. Nowadays, it is not just that people are learning and speaking more than one language (multilingual education and multilingual societies), or that our language teachers are able to use more than one language (multilingual instructors) (Kramsch & Zhang, 2018); also, as this study shows, language teachers are expanding their professional expertise beyond teaching a single language for their entire teacher career and becoming teachers of multiple languages. Purposes of the Present Study The first purpose of this study is to understand who TMLs are. As of now, TMLs are often overlooked or assumed to have the same experiences as teachers of a single language but simply doubled. No study has ever sought to investigate whether the experience of teaching multiple languages influences who a language teacher becomes in areas such as teacher knowledge, LTIs, and teaching practices. Thus, this study aims to understand the individual characteristics of TMLs, their LTIs, and the journey they took to become TMLs. The second purpose of this study is to gain a big-picture understanding of the contextual factors that influence the teaching of multiple languages. In an increasingly multilingual world characterized by global mobility, fluidity, and diversity (Darvin & Norton, 2015), the sociocultural institutions and communities language teachers participate in play an important role.

(20) 6. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. in guiding their professional development. Thus, this study also aims to understand how the different contexts TMLs teach in as a result of teaching multiple languages influence the way they navigate transitions between teaching different languages as well as the factors impacting their overall career trajectories. With these two purposes in mind, I approach this study through narrative inquiry, which focuses on the stories told by the participants of their lived experiences as TMLs. In applied linguistics, narrative inquiry has been recognized as a significant methodology in exploring LTIs (Barkhuizen, 2016; Barkhuizen et al., 2014; Block, 2015; De Costa & Norton, 2016). Johnson and Golombek (2002) describe the significance of narrative inquiry as a resource for teachers to articulate their knowledge, beliefs, and identities. Research questions Through narrative inquiry, this study seeks to address the following research questions: 1. What LTIs are involved in the teaching multiple languages and how are they impacted by the teaching of multiple languages? 2. How does teaching multiple languages impact approaches to language teaching? 3. How does teaching multiple languages impact the long-term trajectory and development of a language teacher’s career? 4. How do TMLs navigate the multiple LTIs, workplace contexts, and ideologies that come from teaching multiple languages over the course of their career? The first and second research questions are guided by the first purpose of this study, which is to understand who TMLs are and how the teaching of multiple languages influences their LTIs and approaches to language teaching. The third and fourth research questions are guided by the.

(21) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 7. second purpose of this study, which is to examine the greater contextual factors that are involved in the teaching of multiple languages and TML’s career trajectories. The issues at the core of these questions have to do with exploring individual’s identities as understood from their own perspectives and understanding the relationship between their identities and the context in which they are constructed and performed. Addressing these issues requires a complex, in-depth investigation that allow researchers to learn directly about individual’s experiences from their own stories and narrative inquiry as a qualitative approach to research provides the framework and tools to do so (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Organization of the Study In Chapter Two, I present the conceptual framework that informs this study, the DFG framework (Douglas Fir Group, 2016), and a literature review on language teacher identity and studies relating to TMLs. In Chapter Three, I describe my methodological approach. From Chapter Four to Six, I present the narratives of my three TML participants, Ann, Haruko, and Megan. In Chapter Seven, I provide a discussion that revisits the conceptual framework from the perspective of the TMLs narratives. I also detail the thematic findings from analyzing the participants’ narratives. Finally, I explain the implications the findings from this study has for LTE, contributions to literature relating to language learning and teaching as well as LTIs, and future directions for research. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Below are a list of common acronyms and abbreviations that will be used throughout the study: CSL – Chinese as a second language EFL – English as a foreign language.

(22) 8. ESL – English as a second language FYC – first year English composition L2 – second language LTE – language teacher education LTI – language teacher identity NNS – non-native speaker NNST – non-native speaker teacher NS – native speaker NST – native speaker teacher TCSL – teaching Chinese as a second language TESOL – teaching English to speakers of other languages TML – teacher of multiple languages. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES.

(23) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 9. Chapter 2: Conceptual Framework and Literature Review A conceptual framework is defined as “a system of concepts, assumptions, expectations, beliefs, and theories that supports and informs your research” (Maxwell, 2013, p. 49). In this chapter, I outline the main conceptual framework used in the study, Douglas Fir Group’s framework, and how it will be applied to this study. This framework was chosen because it breaks down how different levels of social interaction (i.e., the individual, institutions and communities, ideologies) affect one another when it comes to language teaching and learning. Using this framework to interpret TMLs’ experiences allows for a detailed understanding of how these different elements connect with one another. This means that this framework provides a conceptual explanation for how the elements raised from the research questions (i.e., the experience of teaching of multiple languages, teaching practices, LTIs, various teaching contexts, large-scale ideologies, and long-term career trajectories) affect each other. Conceptual Framework Douglas Fir Group’s Framework This study will adapt the Douglas Fir Group’s (DFG) (2016) “Transdisciplinary Framework for SLA in a Multilingual World” (see Figure 1) as the conceptual framework for interpreting the narrated experiences and identities of TMLs. The DFG’s framework was proposed by a group of 15 distinguished scholars across ten different disciplinary perspectives within SLA as a way of understanding how multilingualism in “a new world order in the 21st century” characterized by increasing globalization, technological advances, and mobility are changing SLA (Douglas Fir Group, 2016, p. 19). Several phenomena emerge as a result of these new global forces. Communication has become deterritorialized and no longer limited to one’s immediate locality; language use and learning has become more dynamic and open-ended. An.

(24) 10. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. Figure 1 The Douglas Fir Group’s Framework. Note. From “A Transdisciplinary Framework for SLA in a Multilingual World,” by The Douglas Fir Group, 2016, The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), p. 25 (https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12301). Copyright 2016 by The Modern Language Journal. increasing number of individuals from a wider range of backgrounds are deciding to learn additional language and become multilingual and transcultural. Thus, the DFG’s new framework for SLA aims to address the needs of multilingual individuals by examining language learning.

(25) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 11. and teaching from various contextual perspectives (e.g., private vs. public, material vs. digital) in a multilingual world (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). The DFG framework treats SLA as complex, ever-changing, and multi-dimensional, involving the layering of diverse cognitive capabilities and social interactions in a multilingual context (Hall, 2019a). Structurally, the DFG framework provides a new way of conceptualizing SLA by integrating the various levels at which SLA occurs (i.e., micro, meso, macro) with the various disciplinary understandings of SLA (e.g., neural, cognitive, social, ideological) with greater context of the globalized, multilingual world that we live in (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). More specifically, the DFG’s framework integrates three mutually dependent levels inspired by an ecological framework (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The three levels can be summarized as: ⚫. micro level: internal mechanisms (e.g., cognition, emotions) are used during interaction with others (linguistic, nonverbal, graphic, auditory, semiotic, etc.). ⚫. meso level: sociocultural communities & institutions (family, school, neighborhood, work, etc.). ⚫. macro level: large-scale, society-wide ideological structures (beliefs about language use or language learning, cultural values, political values, etc.). According to the DFG (2016), L2 learning begins at the micro level of social activity, in which individual learners manage cognitive and emotional systems during social interactions using any available semiotic resources, such as linguistic, nonverbal, graphic, and auditory resources. These micro-level interactions occur within the meso-level, shaped by sociocultural communities and institutions, such as family, school, local neighborhoods, and the workplace. Not all learners are able to experience the same kinds of social interactions at the meso-level; the degree to which learners have the power and/or agency to invest their identities and material.

(26) 12. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. resources into accessing meso-level communities and institutions are impacted by certain society-wide conditions (e.g., economic class, politics, culture) at the macro-level. Thus, the everyday communities and institutions learners may take part in for language learning are influenced by (and also influence) large-scale, societal ideologies at the macro-level of the DFG’s framework. Ideologies can be defined as individuals and group beliefs and values around the role of forces such as culture, politics, and economics in society (Hall, 2019a). The DFG emphasizes that while each of the three levels represents different aspects of language learning, all three levels and mutual interactions amongst the three levels are essential to fully understanding SLA. Ten Foundational Themes from the DFG Framework From their multi-level framework, the DFG introduced ten fundamental themes relating to SLA. While these themes originally focused on language learning, De Costa and Norton (2017) showed the same themes based on the DFG’s framework can be applied to language teaching as well. Table 1 reproduces a table used by De Costa and Norton (2017, p. 8) to compare the themes from the two perspective. Below, I briefly summarize each of the ten themes by reinterpreting the DFG’s original ten fundamental themes based on language learning to language teaching: Language competencies are complex, dynamic, and holistic: In contrast to conceptualizing language competencies as fixed, abstract systems, the DFG’s framework views language competency as a dynamic system of resources for meaningmaking. (Hall, 2019a). That means language learning and teaching involves the use of the entirety of one’s semiotic resources across various languages, varieties, and registers, applying them fluidly based on different contexts over a lifetime..

(27) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 13. Table 1 Fundamental Themes Based on the DFG’s Framework Relating to language learning Relating to language teaching 1. Language competencies are complex, 1. Language competencies are complex, dynamic, dynamic, and holistic. and holistic. 2. Language learning is semiotic teaching. 2. Language teaching is semiotic teaching. 3. Language learning is situated and 3. Language teaching is situated and attentionally attentionally and socially gated. and socially gated. 4. Language learning is multimodal, 4. Language teaching is multimodal, embodied, and embodied, and mediated. mediated. 5. Variability and change are at the heart of 5. Variability and change are at the heart of language learning. language teaching. 6. Literacy and instruction mediate language 6. Literacy and instruction mediate language learning. teaching. 7. Language learning is identity work. 7. Language teaching is identity work 8. Agency and transformative power are 8. Agency and transformative power are means and means and goals for language learning. goals for language teaching. 9. Ideologies permeate all levels of 9. Ideologies permeate all levels of language language learning. teaching. 10. Emotion and affect matter at all levels of 10. Emotion and affect matter at all levels of language learning. language teaching. Note. From “Introduction: Identity, Transdisciplinarity, and the Good Language Teacher,” by P. I. De Costa, and B. Norton, 2017, The Modern Language Journal, 101(S1), p. 8 (https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12368). Copyright 2017 by the Modern Language Journal. 2. Language teaching is semiotic teaching: Language teaching involves the application and teaching of a wide range of semiotic resources, including the use of linguistic, visual, graphic, and auditory means of expression. In addition, semiotic resources can be verbal (e.g., turn-taking, intonation, pausing), nonverbal (e.g., gestures, facial expressions, body positioning), or written (e.g., typography). The importance of taking into consideration the difference forms of semiotic resource involved in language teaching has also been highlighted in studies looking at the role of multimodality in language teaching (Early, Kendrick, & Potts, 2015). The meaning conveyed by semiotic resources are shaped by meso- and macro-level social institutions, such as family and school, and therefore, are not neutral nor equally accessed (Douglas Fir Group, 2016)..

(28) 14. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 3. Language teaching is situated and attentionally and socially gated: Language teaching starts at the micro-level, requiring recurring social interaction guided by a range of cognitive activity and emotions (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). During the process of language teaching, these cognitive capabilities help guide patterns of meaning-making, which become more entrenched with more frequent input (Hall, 2019a). 4. Language teaching is multimodal, embodied, and mediated: Language teaching involves the application and teaching of multimodal semiotic resources, activating the entire human body as an embodied whole to assist teaching and learning, such as the use of repetitions, recasts, tone, eye gaze, gesture, and so on (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). Language teaching also occurs through the use of cultural tools and resources that make sense of the world (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). Mediational tools used in language teaching range from the use of language itself, to cultural artifacts such as charts, books, and technology. Thus, for example, the type of materials used by language teachers can influence the type of interactions and activities a language teacher decides to use. 5. Variability and change are at the heart of language teaching: Language teaching is an ever-changing endeavor (Douglas Fir Group, 2016, p. 29). This means that no two teachers will experience teaching in the same way due to differences in the micro, meso, and macro levels of social interaction. 6. Literacy and instruction mediate language teaching: Literacy and instruction are important sources of influence on L2 teaching. This not only includes the form of instruction and literacy language teachers’ have experienced in the languages they know and/or teach, but also in the instructional approaches and language pedagogy they have received about language teaching through LTE programs and other forms of.

(29) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 15. professional development. The mediational relationship between literacy/instruction and language teaching should not be misunderstood as a direct relationship, that is, more instruction equals better language teaching. In fact, literacy and instruction may not influence language teaching in the ways we expect. For example, language teachers may not find the theoretical nature of what is taught in language teacher programs to be applicable in everyday teaching contexts (Johnson, 2019). 7. Language teaching is identity work: When language teachers teach, they do so with historically-situated and contextually-influenced social identities (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). These social identities, both as social categories (e.g., ethnicity, nationality, religion) and roles in relation to their interactions with others (e.g., students, native speaker, teachers) influence teachers’ motivation and investment in teaching opportunities in various contexts and communities. Language teachers’ identities, both real and imagined, fluctuate over time and space, as they are influenced and performed through interaction. (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). 8. Agency and transformative power are means and goals for language teaching: While language teachers and their practices are shaped by larger societal and institutional forces, they also act as individual agents who have a significant role in influencing those forces themselves. Language teachers may draw upon certain identities over others depending on the context in order to participate in ways that grant them greater agency over teaching opportunities or practices in their career (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). 9. Ideologies permeate all levels of language teaching: Ideologies impact the level of access, investment, and agency language teachers may feel the desire, ability, or need to exercise in their teaching practices or their overall teaching career. Some of the more.

(30) 16. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. common language-based ideologies that impact language teaching are language education policies that influence what languages should or should not be taught, the ideology of monolingualism as the assumed norm (Ortega, 2014), and the fallacy of the native speaker as the ideal model for language teaching and learning (Phillipson, 1992). 10. Emotion and affect matter at all levels of language teaching: Language teaching is an emotionally driven process that affects the micro, meso, and macro levels of social interaction. At the micro level, emotions impact language perception and cognition. At the meso level, emotions are experienced socially, or deeply tied to the social interactions and relationships involved in teaching. Emotions are also influence and influenced by society-wide ideologies at the macro level. Applying the DFG Framework to this Study Since the DFG introduced its transdisciplinary framework, applied linguistics scholars from various disciplinary perspectives have sought new ways of applying and extending DFG’s framework in areas such as LTE (Gao, 2019; Johnson, 2019), multilingual socialization (Duff, 2019), multilingualism and social justice (Ortega, 2019), language learner agency from a complex dynamic systems perspective (Larsen-Freeman, 2019), conversation analysis and interactional linguistics (Hall, 2019b), the psycholinguistic development of complexity, accuracy, and fluency (LaScotte & Tarone, 2019), multilingualism and translanguaging (Cenoz & Gorter, 2019), raciolinguistics (Flores and Rosa, 2019), generative approaches to SLA (Slabakova, 2019) A year after DFG’s framework was first introduced and published in The Modern Language Journal (Douglas Fir Group, 2016), De Costa and Norton (2017) edited a special issue of The Modern Language Journal focusing on introducing and expanding the application of.

(31) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 17. DFG’s framework for LTI research, or what they call “A Transdisciplinary Approach to Language Teacher Identity.” They argued that applying DFG’s framework for LTI research helps researchers address the ways in which increasing multilingualism and globalization impact the real-life issues relevant to language teachers. For this study, DFG’s framework is particularly suitable for investigating the LTIs of TMLs for two reasons. First, because the framework places an emphasis on the increasing multilingualism around the world, which TMLs are part of. From the perspective of the DFG framework, TMLs are treated as “people who learn to live—and in fact do live—with more than one language at various points in their lives” and “the learning and teaching of additional languages across private and public, material and digital social contexts in a multilingual world” (Douglas Fir Group, 2016, p. 20). Second, because DFG’s framework is structured into multiple layers that compose a holistic ecology, the framework acknowledges the different sources (e.g., micro: cognitive, emotional, interactional; meso: communities, institutions; macro: beliefs, values) that may influence as well as be influenced by LTI. By taking into consideration multiple sources of influence that may affect LTI, the framework allows for a more comprehensive understanding of the role of LTI in language teaching. This is important when exploring the LTI of TMLs because TMLs are characterized by an added layer of complexity; namely, to understand the LTI of TMLs, one must take into account all of the language teaching experiences a TML has in the multiple language they have taught, not just the current language they are teaching. Lastly, as a concluding note, it is important to understand that when the DFG proposed their framework and encouraged researchers to apply it their respective disciplines, the DFG highlighted that they do not expect nor suggest that a researcher attempt to investigate all.

(32) 18. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. dimensions of the framework all at once or within the same study (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). Instead, what the DFG envisioned is that their framework would encourage a transdisciplinary mindset in SLA research, in which researchers integrate different disciplinary perspectives without compromising their own (Douglas Fir Group, 2016). Thus, my approach in applying the DFG framework to this study started with initially using the structure (i.e., micro, meso, macro) and the broad concepts (i.e., the individual, the sociocultural/institutional, the ideological) of the framework to guide my research questions, data collection and data analysis. The specific aspects of the DFG framework that I applied in my study were determined after going through the initial phase of reading through the data and coding (explained in more detail in the “Data Analysis section). This is consistent with emergent methods of qualitative inquiry that emphasize that the analytical process is data-driven, or emerging from the data (Patton, 2015). Specifically, the aspects of the DFG framework that are examined in this study are: •. micro-level: teacher knowledge, semiotic resources, teacher emotions, habitus. •. meso-level: LTIs (i.e., NS/NNS, professional identities, cultural identities), LTE, teaching contexts (i.e., higher education, corporate sector, teaching abroad). •. macro-level: native-speakerism, global language markets, socio-economic inequalities. How these aspects of the DFG framework piece together and address the research questions is narrated throughout the participants’ narratives as TMLs and discussed in Chapter 7. Language Teacher Identity Literature Review In an effort to move beyond cognitive approaches to second language acquisition and explore the social aspects of language learning (Firth & Wagner, 1997), language teacher.

(33) TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. 19. identity (LTI) has been pushed to the forefront of applied linguistics research (De Costa & Norton, 2016), transitioning from simply an emerging research interest to a central topic featured in special issues of top-tier journals (De Costa & Norton, 2017, Varghese et al., 2005; Varghese et al., 2016;) and a number of edited books, handbooks, and monographs (Barkhuizen, 2017; Cheung et al., 2015; Clarke, 2008; Preece, 2016). A useful way of framing the plethora of new perspectives and findings regarding LTI is under two broad categorical topics: (1) defining LTI, and (2) exploring how LTIs impact teachers and various aspects of language teaching. Defining LTI There is no simple definition for the concept of identity. The expansion of LTI research has resulted in more complex understandings of what one means when talking about LTI and what the relationship between a language teacher and their LTI is. It is useful to first begin by understanding the two main theoretical roots of LTI. Varghese et al. (2005) describes these two theoretical perspectives as identities-in-discourse and identities-in-practice, with the former informed by poststructuralist theories of identity and the latter by Lave and Wenger’s (1991) theory of situated learning and communities of practice. Poststructuralist theories of identity argue that identity is always relational and discursively constructed through language, or identities-in-discourse, in contrast to notions of the individual as having a core, essential self. An individual’s identity changes over time and space, often in diverse and contradictory ways, and is constructed by and through language. Thus, language use is not only an act of communication, but also an act of creating a sense of who you are and how you relate to others. This relational aspect of language and identity can be seen in Norton’s (2013) definition of identity as “how a person understands his or her relationship to the.

(34) 20. TEACHERS OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES. world, how that relationship is constructed across time and space, and how the person understands possibilities for the future” (p. 45). On the other hand, Lave and Wenger’s theory of situated learning argues for identities-inpractice (Lave, 1996; Wenger, 1998), or the notion that identity is developed through engaging the practices of a certain community and learning the ways of being and doing in the community. As identities change and develop through participating in the practices of the community, the individual’s practices also change and develop. From this theoretical perspective, identity and practice are linked and inevitably mutually impact each other (Kanno & Stuart, 2011). This means that language teachers do not start their teaching careers or step into the classroom with well-formed, pre-packaged teacher identities, nor do they develop LTIs from gaining certain skill sets or certain kinds of knowledge; rather, LTIs are developed over time through the full body experience of being immersed in working with communities of teachers and students and taking part in the practice of being a language teacher”. Both notions of identities-in-discourse and identities-in-practice seem to have made their way into the current understandings of what LTI entails. Table 2 compares some current definitions of LTI from prominent LTI researchers. These definitions show the following themes in regards to current understandings of language teacher identity: 1. LTIs are dynamic, changing over space and time. 2. LTIs are relationally and contextually understood, in terms of one’s relationship to oneself, other individuals, and the greater social context. 3. LITs are constructed, negotiated, and enacted through social interactions..