外籍英語教師的課堂活動特色分析研究
134
0
0
全文
(2) 摘要 許多學者經過實驗證明，教室內的學習活動在語言學習過程扮演重要的角色 並協助老師達成教學的目標。過去研究亦指出，英語協同的教室內，教室活動的 本質明顯呈現出口說教學導向，以促進學生達到溝通能力的培養。然而，在其時 間和空間有限的研究條件下，加上研究者單一的觀點，其探討的範疇往往帶有侷 限性，而容易忽略教學活動本身潛藏的複雜性和多樣性特色。 有鑑於此，由於協同教學是一實施多年的計畫，本研究採用質性研究方法， 並透過文件分析(Document analysis)匯總，從外籍教師、中籍教師以及教學顧問 的觀點出發，分析過去七年來，臺灣五個地區的協同教學記錄檔案，包含外籍英 語教師的回饋報告、中籍英語教師的回饋報告、外籍英語教師雙周教學反思報告、 協同教學教案設計、教學顧問的課堂觀察報告以及教學回饋報告，將所得的資料 內容以三角驗證 (Triangulation)交叉進行分析，探究外籍英語教師課堂教學活動 的特色以及其教學活動伴隨而來的益處。 研究結果發現，外籍教師的課堂教學活動呈顯出多元的特點。第一，外籍教 師將學習活動情境化(Contextualized learning)，幫助學生將英語學習和日常生活 做有意義的連結。第二，外籍教師藉由遊戲的成分融入活動進行教學，如此一來， 增加了學生練習語言的機會、讓英語學習更有趣、同時減少學生心理上的學習壓 力。第三，外籍教師將文化學習結合語言學習，建構學生對不同文化有基本的認 識，同時培養學生以正確的態度來接觸不同文化。第四，外籍教師的教學活動能 滿足不同學習風格學生的需求，包含視覺型、聽覺型、和動覺型的學生。第五， 外籍教師的教學活動呈現出對正確發音的重視，因此外籍教師除了糾正學生的發 音之外，也將發音教學融入課堂活動之中，使學生獲得更純正的發音。本研究期 待能提供課程規劃以及課堂設計活動者更深入了解外籍教師課堂活動的特色及 其課堂活動帶來的益處。 關鍵字：課堂活動、外籍英語教師、英語協同教學、小學生、三角驗證 i.
(3) ABSTRACT Many scholars have recognized the value of employing classroom activities in the language learning process because they help teachers fulfill the teaching objectives. Past research indicated that in ETA-led co-teaching classrooms, to cultivate the oral fluency of students, the employment of classroom activities also showed an obvious speaking-oriented tendency. However, the highly speaking-oriented nature of most NESTs’ classroom activities can risk yielding a partial and limited understanding of the sophisticated characteristics common to NESTs’ classroom activities if conclusions are drawn from a single perspective, within a fairly short timeframe, and in a single area. To address this gap, as the ETA program is a multi-year co-teaching practice between NESTs and NNESTs, the present study set out to conduct a longitudinal analysis of various annual reports within the seven-year time frame across five regions throughout Taiwan. Annual reports such as ETA feedback reports, LET feedback reports, ETAs’ biweekly refection feedback reports, co-teaching lesson plans, teaching advisors’ lesson observation feedback reports, and their reflection on observation were qualitative data sources that facilitated the triangulation and identification of various stakeholders’ perspectives on the characteristics of classroom activities conducted by ETAs and the accompanying potential benefits these classroom activities might bring for elementary school students. The results of this study showed that the classroom activities conducted by ETAs were multi-dimensionally oriented in nature. First, ETAs contextualized language learning materials to help students relate their learning to daily life experience. Therefore, English learning seemed to be more meaningful to students. Second, ETAs practiced game-based teaching to employ game-like activities to. ii.
(4) provide students with more language practice, make English learning more interesting, and reduce students’ psychological stress in learning. Third, cultural learning materials were incorporated into English learning by ETAs to enhance students’ understanding of foreign cultures and help students develop appropriate attitudes when exposed to cultures from different countries. Fourth, the classroom activities ETAs practiced carried the characteristic of acknowledging students with visual-oriented, auditory-oriented, and kinesthetic-oriented learning styles. As such, the needs of different types of students were satisfied. Finally, ETAs emphasized the importance of pronouncing English sounds and words accurately. In addition to correcting students’ mispronounced words, ETAs also incorporated pronunciation instruction into classroom activities to help students acquire more accurate pronunciation. The results may inform curriculum developers and in-class activity designers of the characteristics and the potential benefits of classroom activities employed by ETAs.. Keywords: Classroom Activities, Native English Teacher, English co-teaching, Elementary School Student, Triangulation. iii.
(5) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am very heartily grateful to all the people who have supported me and helped me throughout the process of this thesis writing. First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude and respect to my advisor, Professor Mei-Chen Wu, whose expertise, knowledge, and insightful suggestions has always guided me through the most difficult times of writing graduate thesis. I would never forget the many times Professor Wu patiently discussed with me how I should formulate my research gaps. I am thankful for her consistent encouragement and constructive feedback. Without her kindness and patience, I would not be able to complete this challenging mission. I also appreciate the great help from my committee members, Professor Mei-Lan Lo and Professor Yi-Chien Lee from NTNU, and Professor Wen-Jiun Huang from NTUST, for their professional comments and insightful suggestions that made this thesis more solid and improve the quality of this thesis. A special thanks is given to all the English teachers (ETAs and LETs), and teaching advisors who participated in the ETA program and shared valuable information, which made this research possible. Were it not for their sharing recorded in annual reports, there would be no rich data for analysis, and the sophisticated results and discussions would not be able to be presented in this thesis. I also thank my awesome NTNU TESOL friends, Ivy, Ann, Rita, and Linda, for their genuine friendship, emotional support, professional assistance, and practical suggestions through good and bad times. Even after my dear friends had already graduated, they still answered my many questions patiently and accompanied me through the stormy sea of academic research. Last but not least, I would like to dedicate this thesis to my beloved family,. iv.
(6) especially my Mom and my aunt, and thank them for their unconditional love and support whenever I need them. I also appreciated their great tolerance of my bad temper when I was stressed out during the process of writing this thesis. Their support enabled me to accomplish my graduate study without worries. I thank my family for always being there for me; they have been the greatest blessing in my life.. v.
(7) TABLE OF CONTENTS CHINESE ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... i ENGLISH ABSTRACT .................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................. vi LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ x LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background of the Study ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................... 4 1.3 Significance of the Study ........................................................................................ 5 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................ 9 2.1 Role of Classroom Activities in Language Learning .............................................. 9 2.1.1 Role of Classroom Activities in SL Classrooms ............................................ 11 2.1.2 Role of Classroom Activities in Co-Teaching Classrooms ............................ 12 2.2 Overview of NEST ................................................................................................. 14 2.2.1 Evolution of Research on NESTs................................................................... 14 2.2.2 Empirical Studies on NESTs in Co-Teaching Practice .................................. 17 2.3 Research Questions ................................................................................................. 20 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................... 21 3.1 Research Design...................................................................................................... 21 3.2 Annual Reports........................................................................................................ 23 3.3 Data Collection Procedures..................................................................................... 26 3.4 Qualitative Analysis ................................................................................................ 27 3.4.1 Foreshadowing Problems ................................................................................. 27. vi.
(8) 3.4.2 Immersion in Data............................................................................................ 28 3.4.3 Organization of Data ........................................................................................ 28 3.4.4 Generating Categories and Themes ................................................................. 29 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS (RQ1, RQ2) .......................................... 31 4.1 Contextualizing Language Learning Materials ....................................................... 31 4.1.1 Different Manifestations of Contextualizing Language Learning Materials ................................................................................................................... 31 4.1.1.1 A Pen-Pal Writing Project ......................................................................... 32 4.1.1.2 Employment of a Taiwan Map .................................................................. 34 4.1.1.3 A Simulated Earthquake Scenario ............................................................. 35 4.1.1.4 Sharing of Past Family Trip ...................................................................... 37 4.1.1.5 A Food Tasting Activity ............................................................................ 38 4.1.1.6 Employment of Pictures of Students’ Faces ............................................. 39 4.1.2 Potential Benefits of Contextualizing Language Learning Materials .............. 40 4.2 Creating a Stimulating Learning Environment with Games ................................... 42 4.2.1 Implementation of Game-Based Teaching ....................................................... 42 4.2.1.1 Language Practices are Provided through Diverse Games ......................... 44 4.2.1.2 Creation of a Relaxed Atmosphere to Enhance Language Attempts .......... 47 4.2.1.3 Games Make English Learning More Interesting ....................................... 50 4.2.1.4 Creative Use of Games ............................................................................... 53 4.2.2 Potential Benefits of Practicing Game-Like Activities .................................... 56 4.3 Integration of Culture and Language ...................................................................... 59 4.3.1 Different Manifestations of Cultural Teaching ................................................ 59 4.3.1.1 Injection of Distinct Cultural Background .................................................. 60 4.3.1.2 Comparison between Native Culture and Foreign Culture ......................... 62 4.3.1.3 American Local Culture .............................................................................. 63 vii.
(9) 4.3.1.4 Representations of Cultural Images ............................................................ 65 4.3.1.5 Immersive Cultural Learning Experience ................................................... 67 4.3.1.6 Conflicting Values from Cultural Learning ................................................ 71 4.3.2 Potential Benefits of Integrating Culture with Language Learning ................. 73 4.4 Acknowledgement of Difference in Learning Styles .............................................. 75 4.4.1 Ways of Promoting Learning in Different Learner Styles ............................... 75 4.4.1.1 Incorporation of Songs ................................................................................ 76 4.4.1.2 Incorporation of Visual Stimuli................................................................... 79 4.4.1.3 Drawing Activities ...................................................................................... 83 4.4.1.4 Promoting Learning of Kinesthetic-Oriented Learners .............................. 85 4.4.1.5 Incorporation of Diverse Activities ............................................................. 88 4.4.2 Potential Benefits of Acknowledging Different Learner Styles....................... 90 4.5 Pronunciation Feedback .......................................................................................... 91 4.5.1 Emphasis on Teaching Accurate Pronunciation ............................................... 91 4.5.1.1 Demonstration of Standard English and Correction of Inaccurate Pronunciation .......................................................................................................... 93 4.5.1.2 Provision of Interactional Feedback ........................................................... 95 4.5.1.3 Constant Practice of Correct Pronunciation ................................................ 98 4.5.1.4 Strategy Use ................................................................................................ 99 4.5.1.5 Incorporation of Pronunciation Instruction ................................................. 101 4.5.2 Potential Benefits of Providing Pronunciation Feedback ................................ 102 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 104 5.1 Summary of the Findings ........................................................................................ 104 5.2 Limitations of the Study.......................................................................................... 107 5.3 Suggestions for Future Research ............................................................................ 108 REFERENCE .................................................................................................................... 110 viii.
(10) Chinese Reference......................................................................................................... 110 English Reference ......................................................................................................... 111. ix.
(11) LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Co-Teaching Lesson Plan for Survival Lessons .................................................. 36 Table 2. The Advisor’s Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Survival Lessons ....... 36 Table 3. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Food Tasting Lessons ....................... 39 Table 4. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Asking and Answering “Where” Questions ........................................................................................................... 42 Table 5. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Asking and Answering “What Are You Doing” Questions .................................................................................... 44 Table 6. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Asking and Answering “Where Are You from” Questions..................................................................................... 46 Table 7. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Practicing Sentence Patterns “What Do You Want?” ........................................................................................ 49 Table 8. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Practicing Sentence Patterns “What Do You Want?” ........................................................................................ 57 Table 9. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Comparing Holidays ...... 63 Table 10. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Halloween Lessons ......................... 68 Table 11. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Halloween Stations ....... 69 Table 12. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Singing “What Is This, Andy?” Song ..................................................................................................................... 77 Table 13. Co-Teaching Lesson Plan for Lessons of Asking and Answering “What Is Your Name?”Questions ..................................................................................................... 78 Table 14. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Asking and Answering “Do You Like ______?” Questions ................................................................................... 79 Table 15. The Advisor’s Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Singing “I Am Thirsty” Song ..................................................................................................... 79. x.
(12) Table 16. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for San Francisco Lessons.................... 80 Table 17. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Reviewing Halloween Lessons ...... 81 Table 18. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Introducing Halloween Lessons ..... 81 Table 19. Lesson Observation Feedback Report of Drawing Activities for Halloween Lessons .............................................................................................................................. 83 Table 20. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Introducing Basic Clothing Items ................................................................................................................... 96 Table 21. The Advisor’s Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Reviewing Vocabulary and Sounds ................................................................................... 96 Table 22. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Introducing Halloween-Related Vocabulary Words ............................................................................. 97 Table 23. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Learning Sounds........... 98 Table 24. The Advisor’s Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Practicing Pronunciation ................................................................................................... 100 Table 25. Lesson Observation Feedback Report for Lessons of Learning Pronouncing “A, E, F, and G” Sounds ................................................................................................... 101. xi.
(13) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Research Design ................................................................................................ 23. xii.
(14) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study English has become a global lingua franca due to its role as an international communication tool in politics, business, trading, and diplomacy (Crystal, 2012). This unstoppable trend has contributed to a growing demand for English and has influenced language education policies and teaching practices in Asian countries, including Singapore, Japan, China, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, and Taiwan (Cao, 1997; Jung & Norton, 2002; Lu, 1995; Macalister, 2017; Prapaisit de Segovia & Hardison, 2009). In these countries, English has been integrated into the national elementary school curriculum and has been introduced as a compulsory subject at elementary grade levels (Jenkins, 2003; Nunan, 2003; Shin & Crandall, 2014). This trend has also resulted in government efforts to improve the English proficiency of citizens as a way to promote international competitiveness (Chen, 2013; Jung &Norton, 2002; Nunan, 2003). Following the trend of developing citizens’ English competence, Taiwan has also emphasized the importance of English and thus adopted consecutive educational policies to promote English teaching and learning. In 2001, the Ministry of Education (MOE) launched the Nine-Year Integrated Curriculum (NYIC) guidelines, a major educational reform of which was to move English instruction from the secondary school level to the primary level. In 2005, English was regulated to be taught even from the third grade. After these NYIC guidelines, directions governing the Twelve-Year Basic Education Curricula were released in February 2016, scheduled for implementation in August 2019. In terms of English teaching, both educational reforms are meant to cultivate students’ basic communication abilities in real contexts 1.
(15) and foster student interest in learning English, especially at the elementary school level (MOE, 2006, 2018). In addition to incorporating English into the national curriculum as a compulsory subject in elementary schools, following the steps of the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) Program in Japan since 1987, the English Program in Korea (EPIK) in 1996, and the Primary Native-English Teacher (PNET) Scheme in Hong Kong since 2000 of practicing English collaborative teaching programs, a similar ETA co-teaching program as a measure to improve the English competence of students has also been enforced by the Taiwanese government since 2003, when an educational bureau of a city government in the northern part of Taiwan cooperated with a non-profit organization to provide native English-speaking teachers (NESTs) to collaboratively teach with local English teachers (LETs) in public schools (Luo, 2007). The common belief among these implemented co-teaching programs is that NESTs are believed to immerse students in the environment with authentic language use and provide students with more opportunities to use the target language (Barratt & Kontra, 2000; Carless & Walker, 2006; Rao, 2010), presumably enhancing students’ communication abilities (MOE, 2006, 2018). Since speaking proficiency has continued to gain importance in English learning, the focus has been placed on a communicative approach; no longer do we witness scenes of students learning English by memorizing grammar rules and translating in English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom. In other words, the widely-used traditional Grammar Translation Method (GTM) is to be replaced, since it is no longer regarded as contributing to students’ communicative competence (Chern, 2003). Willis (1996) has indicated that the cultivation and enhancement of communicative competence could be realized through the application of classroom 2.
(16) activities or tasks (Ellis, 2003). It has been repeatedly noted that in L2 classrooms, language tasks such as information gap (Doughty & Pica, 1986; Nunan 1989; Oxford, 1990), problem-solving (Nunan, 1989; Pica, Kanagy, & Falodun, 1993; Willis, 1996), decision-making (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Nunan, 1989; Pica et al., 1993), and puzzles and games (Nunan, 1989) have been identified to carry the purpose of negotiation of meaning when interacting with peers. It is these classroom activities with communicative-oriented characteristics that help L2 learners improve their speaking abilities. Therefore, it is difficult to ignore classroom activities when their centrality in language learning classrooms and the importance they attach to learning experience has been so explicitly documented in the literature. Furthermore, well-known models regarding lesson planning, such as Tyler’s (1949) linear framework, Harmer’s (2001) lesson plan proposal, and Brown’s (2007) lesson plan format, all advocate for the critical value of classroom activities in the language learning process, since the fulfillment of teaching objectives is heavily dependent on the application of learning activities (Nunan, 1988; Tyler, 1949). An examination of the literature and empirical studies related to collaborative practice between NESTs and NNESTs in co-teaching contexts also reflect the highly speaking-oriented nature of classroom activities. Relevant issues were often discussed such as encouraging students to use spoken language to grasp opportunities to interact with native teachers (Law, 1999), providing more chances for students to share opinions in English due to NESTs’ shown interest in knowing more about their ideas, NESTs’ success in convincing students to speak up (Benke & Medgyes, 2005), and NESTs’ successful employment of activity-based teaching requiring students to communicate in English so as to accomplish tasks (Storey et al., 2001). The research conducted by Li (2017) investigates the oral fluency of two co-teaching classrooms of junior high school students to assess whether NESTs’ one-semester teaching actually 3.
(17) benefits students by using passage reading and story retelling based on a comic strip as empirical tests. The qualitative results from classroom observation reveal that NESTs encouraged students to speak up and participate in class discussion, and incorporated various speaking projects or activities as classroom practices, including introducing Taiwan to foreigners, body language in different countries, and sharing favorite dishes. Namely, NEST application of most classroom activities manifests an obvious speaking-oriented tendency as well. Though these speaking practices indeed contribute to improved oral fluency of students, ignoring the complexity of the common characteristics inherent in the NEST employment of classroom activities could underestimate or skew results if interpretations are made only through a single perspective, in a single area, and within a fairly short time frame. To address this issue, the current study was conducted longitudinally to identify the features common to classroom activities employed by NESTs and the accompanying potential benefits these NESTs’ classroom activities might have for students by analyzing annual reports with different stakeholders’ perspectives over the past few years across five different regions throughout Taiwan.. 1.2 Purpose of the Study Since 2003, the English Teaching Assistant (ETA) Program is one of national policies under which American college graduates have been recruited annually and granted scholarships as English teaching assistants (ETAs) for co-teaching practice with LETs at elementary and junior high schools in different areas of Taiwan to foster student interest in English learning, improve their English ability, and enhance their cultural knowledge. In the ETA program, the ETAs are usually the leading teachers in English co-teaching classrooms, and are responsible for lesson design, discussing their lesson plans with LETs before class, and conducting classroom activities during the class (Chou, 2005; Lin, 2002); in turn, LETs serve as assistants who help ETAs 4.
(18) with classroom management or Chinese translation. Since classroom activities play an essential part in helping students achieve the learning objectives in language classrooms, past studies also recognized the value of classroom activities in co-teaching situations and even mentioned that students liked a wide array of classroom activities utilized by NESTs and then exhibited a subsequent positive attitude towards English learning (Huang, 2017; Lin, 2002; Yen, 2016). Nevertheless, there is still little research that examines and analyzes the overall characteristics common to NESTs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits of NESTs’ classroom activities. The researcher of this study, due to the participation in a research project, had access to annual reports, including ETA feedback reports, LET feedback reports, ETA biweekly reflection feedback reports, co-teaching lesson plans, teaching advisor lesson observation feedback reports, and advisor reflections on observation; these reports documented the practice, experience, and classroom activities of collaborative teaching between ETAs and LETs in the participating elementary schools across five different regions in Taiwan. As Merriam (1988) has proposed, “Documents of all types can help the researcher uncover meaning, develop understanding, and discover insights relevant to research problems” (p.118). In this sense, these various types of annual reports constitute valuable information that triangulates themes from different stakeholders’ perspectives. Furthermore, this study was conducted longitudinally to analyze annual reports over the past few years across five different regions around Taiwan to gain a general picture of the common characteristics specific to ETAs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits of these classroom activities from the perspectives of ETAs, LETs, and teaching advisors.. 1.3 Significance of the Study This study might carry the significance of analyzing the different types of 5.
(19) annual reports obtained from the ETA program over the past seven years to triangulate the common characteristics specific to classroom activities implemented by NESTs and reveal the accompanying potential benefits these classroom activities might bring for elementary school students. To begin with, this study was conducted with the hope of providing qualitative evidence that holistically pinpoints a general picture of the common characteristics inherent in the classroom activities employed by NESTs. Although endeavors have been made to extend the research on co-teaching practice, the highly speaking-oriented nature of NEST classroom activities displayed in Li’s (2017) one-semester study clearly cannot account for the complexity of the overall characteristics common to NEST classroom activities in ETA-led co-teaching classrooms. To be more specific, this present qualitative study was conducted longitudinally to examine past annual reports within the seven-year time frame across five regions throughout Taiwan. Therefore, the emerging common characteristics of NEST classroom activities represent not only one area, but an aggregate pattern for the entire program. In other words, the present research data has the advantages of person, time, and space triangulation (Denzin, 1989), which might be a methodological advancement in co-teaching research. Secondly, in the past decades, the benefits of incorporating NESTs have been extensively discussed. Many studies have also adopted a quantitative approach to specifically measure students’ motivational change towards English, listening anxiety, listening performance, pronunciation and so forth. The data analyzed were mainly collected through questionnaires or tests; seldom does any researcher investigate the potential benefits NESTs’ classroom activities might have for students mainly through qualitative instruments. In addition, teachers employ classroom activities to help learners successfully 6.
(20) achieve the teaching objectives; studies documented NESTs’ preferences for utilizing various classroom activities in co-teaching contexts, which indicated that NESTs adopted more activity-based teaching. Most learners expressed positive attitudes towards English learning when classroom activities were constantly applied. That is, the value of employing classroom activities in co-teaching situations has been recognized. However, very few studies specifically tap into the question of the common characteristics inherent in classroom activities employed by NESTs and the accompanying potential benefits of NESTs’ classroom activities through qualitative methodology. Given the current situation, it is thus essential to conduct investigations on the characteristics common to NESTs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits these classroom activities might bring for students. Last but not least, it is hoped that the findings of the study will inform policy makers, program administrators, curriculum designers, material writers, and language educators in terms of current co-teaching practice and pedagogy to facilitate the formulation of foreign-language-learning guidelines for planning and designing future curriculum in educational reforms. Furthermore, the study might yield important pedagogical implications and insight into the common characteristics and potential benefits of ETAs’ classroom activities for native English-speaking teachers (including ETAs), EFL teachers (including LETs), and educators in Taiwan in future curriculum design, in-class activity design, or new project implementation in a Taiwanese EFL context. For English teachers in Taiwan in particular, this analysis could, for example, facilitate the creation of feasible and effective classroom activities related to the use of multimedia materials, games, and cultural stimulation to maximize elementary school students’ classroom participation and engagement, leading to more effective learning, because the current research analyzed multi-year classroom activities conducted by ETAs in 7.
(21) different types of reports, revealing a general tendency of why students might enjoy learning English in ETA-led co-teaching practice.. 8.
(22) CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter reviews literature related to the proposed research questions of the present study. The first section addresses the importance of classroom activities and their role in foreign language learning. The second section covers the historical evolvement of NEST research with a focus on reviewing related empirical co-teaching studies in language learning.. 2.1 Role of Classroom Activities in Language Learning Past research has considered various perspectives from linguistic, psychological, or social-cultural contexts and has identified factors which determine whether or not an individual can successfully learn a second language (Saville-Troike, 2006). More specifically, learner motivation, attitude, learning achievements, anxiety level, intelligence, age, learning styles and strategies, as well as the role of the teacher influence a learner’s mastery in a second or foreign language (Brown; 2007; Gardner, 1983; Saville-Troike, 2006; Schmidt, Borai & Kassabgy, 1996). Among these, the role of teacher is acknowledged to be an influential factor in L2 learner achievement (Chaudron, 1988; Richards, 1990). Since teachers play an important role in structuring an efficient learning environment in language classrooms (Richards, 1990), some researchers have begun to investigate how teacher-related variables, such as teaching style, teacher talk, teacher quality, teacher-learner interaction, instructional practices, teaching materials, and teaching methods, affect language learning outcomes and classroom involvement (Akbari & Allvar, 2010; Chaudron, 1988; Freeman & Johnson 1998; Prabhu 1990; Richards, 1990; Sinclair & Coulthard, 1975). These studies suggest that teachers are the primary determiners of L2 learners’ learning effectiveness. 9.
(23) Another variable with a similar impact on students’ foreign language learning is the lesson plans. Lesson planning is deemed a key aspect in determining whether a lesson can be successfully implemented or not; therefore, its significance in FL learning has never been denied (Richard, 1998; Richards & Renandya, 2002). Then the question of what essential components should be included in terms of lesson planning is worth further exploration. To understand what components are included in lesson plans, many scholars have proposed models in which essential elements are part of each lesson. For lesson planning, a dominant, widely used model is Tyler’s (1949) linear framework, in which four steps (i.e., specifying objectives, selecting learning activities, organizing learning activities, and evaluating learning outcomes) are to be sequentially addressed during the process of writing a lesson plan. Similar elements are also outlined in a lesson plan articulated by Harmer (2001): a description of the class, objectives, activities, procedures, aids, timing, possible problems, and additional possibilities. Correspondingly, Brown (2007) proposes the format of a lesson plan which consists of goal, objectives, materials, equipment, procedures such as warm-up activities, a set of activities, assessment, and extra-class work. Concerning the place of learning activities in language learning, a key tenet of these models has underlined the importance of learning activities when teachers design a lesson plan in addition to teaching objectives. Tyler (1949) and Nunan (1988) maintained that teaching objectives clearly and precisely state the performance expected of students at the end of the course, whereas the learning activities that teachers arrange in the lesson plans are what help students achieve the teaching objectives successfully. Student learning cannot be successfully facilitated without the teacher’s selecting or designing appropriate classroom activities (Farrell, 2002), which is considered the basis for the development of a teaching lesson plan. 10.
(24) 2.1.1 Role of Classroom Activities in SL Classrooms Since the communicative approach prevails in today’s language pedagogy, language tasks have become a focus in second language classrooms (Long, 1985). Although experts have proposed various definitions and versions of what a task is (Ellis, 2003; Samuda & Bygate, 2008; Van den Branden, 2006), Skehan’s (1998) definition of tasks still captured the essence, defining task as an activity in which “(1) meaning is primary; (2) there is some communication problem to solve; (3) there is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities; (4) task completion has some priority; (5) the assessment of the task is in terms of outcome” (p.95). More simply explained, “a task is an activity which requires learners to use language, with emphasis on meaning, to attain an objective” (Bygate, Skehan, & Swain, 2001, p.11). Similarly, there is also general agreement that tasks are regarded as language learning activities which focus on meaning (Ellis, 2003), involve a clear goal or outcome (Ellis, 2003; Prabhu, 1987; Willis, 1996), and reflect how language is used in authentic contexts (Ellis, 2003; Long, 1985). Concerning the role that language tasks or activities play in classroom practice, the significance of tasks or activities in language learning seems to be emphasized more in terms of designing a language program or individual lessons (Ellis, 2003; Long, 1985), because it is believed that language learning competence would be most successfully developed and enhanced when language teaching contexts are created to implement language tasks or activities in classrooms (Ellis, 2003; Long, 1985; Prabhu, 1987). Studies carried out in L2 classrooms also reflect this realization, and thus express concerns about the teaching effectiveness when performing language tasks or activities in language classrooms. 11.
(25) As a consequence, explorations of task-based language teaching (TBLT) have burgeoned in recent years. Oxford (2006), in her comprehensive overview, brings together recent research on the language task types practiced in L2 classrooms. A great number of tasks have been examined in the literature, including information gap (Doughty & Pica, 1986; Nunan 1989; Oxford, 1990); opinion-gap or opinion exchange (Nunan, 1989; Pica et al., 1993); reasoning-gap (Nunan, 1989); question and answer (Nunan, 1989); problem-solving (Nunan, 1989; Pica et al., 1993; Willis, 1996); decision-making (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Nunan, 1989); structured and semi-structured dialogues (Nunan, 1989); role-plays and simulations (Crookall & Oxford, 1990; Richards & Rodgers, 2001); sharing of personal experiences and personal information exchange (Foster & Skehan, 1996; Oxford, 1990; Willis, 1996); puzzles and games (Nunan, 1989); interviews, discussions, and debates (Nunan, 1989; Oxford, 1990; Richards & Rodgers, 2001); and ordering and sorting (Willis, 1996). While this review outlines a wide range and variety of language task types, it is not surprising to find in them a highly communicative orientation. This indicates that the mainstream feature of most L2 tasks is recognized as having communicative intent, focusing on negotiation of meaning by using the target language in the interactional processes. In other words, it is these communicative-oriented classroom activities implemented in classrooms that seem to enhance students’ speaking competence in L2. 2.1.2 Role of Classroom Activities in Co-Teaching Classrooms Performing language tasks or activities is a way to help facilitate students’ communicative competence in SL/FL classrooms; another way that has been promoted is the government policy of prevalently recruiting native English-speaking teachers to collaboratively co-teach with local English teachers. In Barratt & Kontra’s (2000) study, students were encouraged to use more spoken English because the 12.
(26) NESTs did not understand the students’ mother tongue; therefore, the NESTs leverage the students’ desire to interact with their native teachers to motivate students to speak up (Law, 1999). Benke and Medgyes’s (2005) study also suggested that students were given more opportunities to practice speaking English during the class because NESTs showed interest in the students’ shared opinions; compared to NNESTs, NESTs were also more able to get students to speak up. Similar findings were revealed in the research conducted by Storey et al. (2001). NESTs’ activity-based teaching provided students with more chances to use English and forced them to communicate in English in order to complete the required tasks during activities. In brief, NESTs seem to utilize a variety of speaking practices due to their primary emphasis on improving students’ speaking skills. Likewise, research in a Taiwanese context also demonstrated a similar result in Li’s (2017) study, which was conducted in two co-teaching classrooms in Taipei city to investigate whether junior high school students enhanced their English speaking fluency after one semester of NESTs’ teaching. Li reported that in a speaking test which included passage reading and story retelling based on a comic strip, Taiwanese students’ oral fluency measured by rate and amount of speech was benefited by the NESTs’ training on speaking, such as encouraging Taiwanese students to participate in class discussion. At the same time, given the qualitative data from classroom observation, NESTs cultivated and strengthened the students’ speaking abilities and skills with a strong focus on communicative purposes, incorporating a great number of speaking projects as practice, such as introducing Taiwan to foreigners, body language in different countries, and the sharing of favorite dishes. The endeavors attempted in Li’s (2017) study have constituted valuable contributions to the understanding of the NESTs’ practice as well as the characteristics of their teaching activities in a co-teaching context. Nevertheless, in her study, the dominance of 13.
(27) speaking activities manifested in co-teaching classrooms and the emphasis on NESTs’ classroom activities of a highly speaking-oriented nature can risk ending up in partial and limited understanding of the overall characteristics inherent in NESTs’ classroom activities. Namely, conclusions drawn from a single perspective, a fairly short timeframe, and a single area fail to yield penetrating insights that are obtained through different viewpoints. Still unknown and unexplored are other aspects that exist regarding the characteristics of NESTs’ classroom activities. To offer a comprehensive and adequate account of these characteristics in terms of students’ English learning experience in co-teaching classrooms, the present study is thus motivated as a longitudinal analysis of various annual reports, such as the ETAs’ perspectives, the LETs’ perspectives, and the teaching advisors’ perspectives over an extended period of time frame (within seven years) across five different regions throughout Taiwan to further our understanding of the characteristics common to classroom activities employed by the NESTs, since the classification of classroom activities benefits learning in terms of providing a basis for ensuring variety. In addition, the identification of activity types also matches specific preferences or needs of particular groups of learners (Ellis, 2003).. 2.2 Overview of NEST 2.2.1 Evolution of Research on NESTs Studies on NESTs and NNESTs were attempted in the 1990s; Medgyes’s (1994) research offered a quick glance at the sharp contrast of attributes, strengths and weaknesses between NESTs and NNESTs. NNESTs were favored in terms of their sensitivity to student learning needs and language learning difficulties, their showing of a strong work ethic, their sharing of the same English learning experience as the learners, and their support for student English learning by resorting to their mother languages (Á rva & Medgyes, 2000). However, the NNESTs’ limited command of 14.
(28) English was exactly perceived to be the NESTs’ strengths. In other words, NESTs were valued for their superior linguistic competence, such as their breadth of vocabulary words, their intuitive and spontaneous employment of idiomatic expressions, their creation of a speaking environment facilitating authentic English usage, their authentic pronunciation, and their manifestation of the target cultural representation (Barratt & Kontra, 2000). Due to their native backgrounds, this kind of authenticity is achievable only by NESTs. The research conducted by Medgyes (1994) critically suggested that the divergence in linguistic proficiency between the two cohorts can lead to different teaching styles. Examinations of teacher perceptions towards their own teaching and student perceptions towards NESTs and NNESTs indeed highlighted the differences in teaching styles between the two groups (Á rva & Medgyes, 2000; Law, 1999; Rao, 2010; Storey et al., 2001). Á rva & Medgyes (2000), based on comparisons drawn between the stated teaching behavior in interviews with NESTs and NNESTs and their actual teaching behavior in a series of video-recorded lessons, concluded that NESTs were a walking encyclopedia of cultural transmission, communicated instructions in a clear and economical manner, moved between the blackboard and the students and even crouched in front of the students to listen to or talk to them, and designed their own teaching materials instead of utilizing the designated textbooks. In contrast, the NNESTs’ reliance on the use of textbooks, their resorting to error correction techniques, and their assigning of homework were all characteristic of NNESTs’ teaching styles. Similar findings were found also in studies conducted by Law (1999) in Hong Kong and Rao (2010) in China, where students reported that NESTs’ familiarity with cultural background knowledge made English language learning quite understandable. In addition, NESTs were an English oral model for students to imitate authentic pronunciation and intonation (Rao, 2010), and the NESTs’ employment of 15.
(29) visual aids, pictures, songs, and TV programs as teaching tools enhanced students’ integrative motivation to learn English, making lectures a more appealing English lesson (Law, 1999). Storey et al. (2001) also asserted that NNESTs tended to adopt textbook-based teaching. In contrast, NESTs’ teaching naturally tended to be activity-oriented. These studies imply that divergent teaching styles between two groups of teachers may lead to different learning impacts on students. Beginning in the 1990s, a number of countries in East Asia began to recruit native English-speaking teachers to co-teach with local English teachers (LETs) as a commonly implemented national policy, because it was believed that this national propaganda would enhance the communicative competence and English abilities of students. For example, a large-scale co-teaching scheme active since 1987 in Japan has been known as the Japan Exchange and Teaching (JET) Program. It has been demonstrated that the promotion of communicative activities and conversational English within the co-teaching context in the JET program has brought about changes in English education in Japan (McConnell, 2000). The English Program in Korea (EPIK), a parallel scheme initiated in 1996 in South Korea, aims to improve South Korean teachers’ and students’ oral English and promote cultural exchange (Carless, 2006). Likewise, in 2000, the Hong Kong government carried out the Primary Native-English Teacher (PNET) Scheme to immerse elementary students in an authentic environment where students can learn English and cultivate their communicative competence (Carless, 2006). In Taiwan, a similar ETA co-teaching program, where ETAs are deployed to conduct collaborative teaching with LETs in public schools, has begun in 2003. The program aims to facilitate student interests in learning English, improve students’ communicative competence, and foster cultural understanding. ETAs are usually mainly responsible for providing instructions in co-teaching English classrooms, and they are expected to design the lessons and 16.
(30) discuss with the LETs before the class (Chou, 2005; Lin, 2002). Since the recruitment of NESTs into public school systems became a common phenomenon, the identification of the benefits of co-teaching practice has become a main focus of investigation. The continuing efforts made in the past decades in uncovering the mystery of co-teaching programs have significantly contributed to the field of co-teaching practice. 2.2.2 Empirical Studies on NESTs in Co-Teaching Practice Examination of English co-teaching programs has suggested that collaborative practice between NESTs and NNESTs seemed to be beneficial to students (Chuang, 2011; Herbert, 2010) and co-teachers (Chen, 2008; Herbert. 2010). In addition, research has also been conducted to investigate the specific changes that NESTs brought about in students in English co-teaching classrooms. Both teachers’ and students’ questionnaires analyzed in Yen’s (2016) one-year study showed that students in elementary school and junior high school level improved their English-learning motivation at the end of the semester after receiving ETAs’ instruction. That is, the teachers (both ETAs and LETs) perceived their students to embrace increased motivation to learn English and understand foreign cultures after examining students’ classroom behavior. Yen’s (2016) results based on classroom observation and participant interviews as a secondary source of data showed that ETAs employed classroom activities to engage students in English learning. For example, the ETAs taught students about painting and eating an Easter egg. Throughout the activity, the students increasingly had their questions answered, realized the importance of using hard-boiled eggs while decorating Easter eggs, and understood more about the Easter holiday. Likewise, comparisons of ways to celebrate Valentine’s Day in different countries were also a fun activity employed by the ETAs in order to teach students. In a study with 105 junior high school students in Taiwan, Huang (2017) found 17.
(31) that students had displayed reduced listening anxiety in questionnaires and improved listening performance in the listening test at the end of the school year; these positive benefits were attributed to greater exposure to the ETAs’ spoken English and authentic input in the target language. Again, similar findings were also found in interviews and classroom observation, students showed their involvement by participating in classroom activities such as group activities, information gap activities, Telephone Pictionary, board games, and jeopardy employed by ETAs. For instance, one ETA introduced the history of Thanksgiving, taught how to write a thank you card, and taught how to cook a mashed potato to celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday. The students were happy during such cultural learning. The findings of both Lin’s (2002) and Liu’s (2004) research in terms of what the NESTs actually did in the co-teaching classrooms in Taiwan coincided with Huang’s (2017) study, shedding light on the NESTs’ preference for maintaining student interest in learning English by employing dynamic activities such as playing games, telling stories, group practices, and activities for festivals. According to data from 2210 surveyed questionnaires, Lin (2002) further pointed out that most elementary school students from the second to sixth grade felt more interested in NESTs’ English classes and demonstrated a positive attitude towards English learning when the NESTs kept changing and utilizing multiple activities in co-teaching contexts. All in all, the above discussion showed that most studies in co-teaching were designed mainly to quantify the outcomes of conducting co-teaching practice by collating questionnaires and tests that explained how NESTs’ collaborative efforts benefited students’ English learning, such as enhancing English-learning motivation (Yen, 2016), reducing listening anxiety, and improving listening performance (Huang, 2017), all of which suggested that students were making progress in learning English. 18.
(32) Nevertheless, this ignored how the benefits of incorporating NESTs into classrooms can be interpreted through data sources that mainly adopt qualitative perspectives. Therefore, while the mainstream NEST research is quantitative in nature, insight drawn from qualitative inquiry could help further our understanding of the potential benefits that classroom activities employed by NESTs might bring for students in terms of language learning in the co-teaching context. At the same time, what has been discussed so far again showed that lessons conducted by native English-speaking teachers were more activity-based (Storey et al., 2001). In addition, the above empirical studies seemed to support the critical value of employing classroom activities in the English learning process, and students appeared to benefit from NESTs’ teaching. However, these findings only partially revealed that students derived benefits from classroom activities conducted by NESTs in terms of English learning, such as enhancing students’ cultural knowledge and demonstrating a positive attitude towards English learning. This prevented a more holistic understanding of the intricacies of the overall positive benefits NESTs’ classroom activities might have for students. Despite the paucity of research on classroom activities within co-teaching contexts, their role in language classes cannot be oversimplified, as students are more engaged and motivated to learn when classroom activities are well-designed and chosen by teachers (Harmer, 2001). Additionally, it is also believed that a diverse choice of classroom activities helps keep the class lively and interesting (Farrell, 2002; Richards, 1998). Therefore, it is expected that a comprehensive understanding of common characteristics specific to NESTs’ classroom activities along with the qualitative results of this longitudinal study will more thoroughly reflect the potential benefits these classroom activities bring to students’ English learning in a way that quantitative studies rarely provide.. 19.
(33) 2.3 Research Questions The following research questions about classroom activities conducted in ETA-led English co-teaching classrooms were addressed: 1. What are the common characteristics of classroom activities conducted by English Teaching Assistants (ETAs)? 2. From the perspectives of LETs, ETAs, and teaching advisors, what are the potential benefits of classroom activities conducted by ETAs?. 20.
(34) CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY This chapter begins with the study design. In the second section, annual reports as the data sources analyzed in this study are described, and in the third section, the procedure of data collection is illustrated. In the final section, the spaces are devoted to introduce the process of qualitative data analysis.. 3.1 Research Design As the aim of this study was to achieve a more sophisticated and comprehensive understanding of the common features of ETAs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits of these classroom activities conducted by ETAs, the activities or practices included in the annual reports of the past few years were the focus of data gathering and analysis. This study adopted a qualitative approach via document analysis to answer the proposed research questions. Qualitative research can be classified into interactive or non-interactive modes of inquiry (McMillan & Schumacher, 2001). In the present study, a non-interactive inquiry was conducted. Namely, the researcher in the study used an approach called historical analysis (McMillan & Schumacher, 2001), identifying data and analyzing documents to provide a more complete picture by which to understand past events. Qualitative research can be defined as “an inquiry process of understanding based on distinct methodologies within traditions of inquiry that explores a social or human problem. The researcher builds a complex, holistic picture, analyzes words, reports detailed views of informants” (Cresswell, 1998, p.15). Inductively analyzing the data and interpreting participants’ perspectives and their meanings are two other characteristics of qualitative research (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Richards, 2003). Focusing on participants' perspectives and the inductive analysis of data allowed the researcher to examine annual reports with perspectives deriving from 21.
(35) the various stakeholders involved in the ETA program in order to achieve a deeper and holistic understanding of the common characteristics specific to ETAs’ classroom activities in the co-teaching classrooms. According to McMillan and Schumacher (2001), authenticated documents are the major source of data in document analysis, and document analysis is a procedure involving the systematic review and evaluation of both printed and electronic documents that describe past events. Similar to other analytical methods in qualitative research, in this study, data were investigated and interpreted so as to elicit meaning and gain understanding (Corbin & Strauss, 1998; McMillan & Schumacher, 2001). Documents can take many forms as diverse as advertisements, agendas, books, brochures, diaries, journals, letters, organizational and institutional reports, and various public reports (Bowen, 2009). Whereas document analysis has been employed to complement other research methods in most studies, it has also served as a stand-alone method (Bowen, 2009). Thus, document analysis was appropriate for the present research in its analysis of annual reports such as ETA feedback reports, LET feedback reports, ETA biweekly reflection feedback reports, co-teaching lesson plans, teaching advisors’ lesson observation feedback reports, and their reflection on observation, which served as the triangulation of qualitative data sources to identify the various stakeholders’ common perspectives. These perspectives could yield more in-depth information on the common characteristics inherent in the ETAs’ classroom activities practiced in the co-teaching context over the past seven years across five different regions and the potential benefits ETAs’ classroom activities bring. In addition to triangulated themes emerging from various reports from the perspectives of various stakeholders, the annual documents included in this study encompassed a long and wide span of time and space, which also helped improve the credibility of the study. That is, the present research data had the advantages of time and space 22.
(36) triangulation. Time triangulation refers to data collected at different times, which allowed the researcher to identify persistent phenomenon (Denzin, 1989). With space triangulation, attempts are made to determine whether data collected from multiple sites yields consistent findings (Denzin, 1989), thus increasing the credibility of the research (Fielding & Fielding, 1986). (See Figure 1.). Common characteristics of various ETAs classroom activities and the potential benefits ETAs’ classroom activities bring. Qualitative approach via document analysis. Co-teaching lesson plans. ETA feedback reports. LET feedback reports. ETAs’ biweekly reflection feedback reports. Teaching advisors’ lesson observation feedback reports and their reflection on observation. Figure 1. Research Design. 3.2 Annual Reports From 2011 to 2017, up to 156 elementary schools (students’ ages ranged from 7 to12) evenly located in the Northern, Southern, Western, Eastern, and Central Taiwan and participated in the English co-teaching program. That is, up to 268 ETAs, 232 23.
(37) LETs, and 22 teaching advisors participated in the ETA program over the past seven years across five regions in Taiwan, and carefully recorded what happened during the co-teaching process and also reflected on the co-teaching practice in their annual reports. More specifically, qualitative data were obtained by analyzing different types of reports, which were the main sources of data in the present study, including co-teaching lesson plans, ETA feedback reports, LET feedback reports, ETA biweekly reflection feedback reports, teaching advisors’ lesson observation feedback reports, and their reflection on observation. As Merriam (1988) has indicates, “Documents of all types can help the researcher uncover meaning, develop understanding, and discover insights relevant to research problems” (p.118). Diverse reports with viewpoints from different stakeholders also allowed the researcher to triangulate and observe whether similar themes emerged from various forms of qualitative data through thematic analysis. Identifying a convergence of themes from different data sources enhances the credibility of the qualitative research; this is termed person triangulation (Bowen, 2009; Denzin, 1989). As such, this yielded a detailed understanding of the common characteristics specific to ETAs’ classroom activities at the elementary school level within the co-teaching context, and facilitated more specific investigation of how students might benefit from the classroom activities conducted by ETAs given the various perspectives demonstrated by different stakeholders on this issue. Diverse annual reports actually perform different functions during the co-teaching practice. In co-teaching lesson plans, lesson objectives, teaching activities, teaching procedures, and teaching materials are included so that the researcher can understand how a lesson is carried out. The ETAs discuss with LETs what students need, and design class lesson plans before collaborative teaching; then the lesson plans may or may not be realized in the classrooms. ETAs hold bachelor degrees of 24.
(38) different majors. Although they were not English teachers in America, they all received teacher training before serving in schools. In terms of ETA and LET feedback reports, their feedback on the co-teaching project is collected at the end of each semester to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the project implementation. ETAs and LETs may make suggestions on how to improve the program based on their experiences and opinions. Furthermore, ETAs share their teaching practice and how they employ classroom activities to involve students in their feedback reports, allowing the researcher to categorize characteristics common to ETAs’ classroom activities; LETs record anything related to teaching based on their observation of what ETAs actually do in the co-teaching classrooms. Therefore, the perspectives of insiders who performed the classroom activities are included. In the feedback reports, there remains flexibility for both types of teachers to write anything regarding collaborative teaching. In the ETA biweekly reflection feedback reports, ETAs are to write biweekly reports reflecting on their teaching practices and how they conduct their classes in the English co-teaching classrooms. ETAs are to write anything related to their teaching or what happened in classrooms, including how they interact with students, what classroom activities they utilize for incorporation into the classrooms, students’ reactions to these activities, and how they collaborate with LETs to facilitate students’ English learning. These detailed records and rich description are all good evidence allowing for in-depth analysis of the common characteristics inherent in ETAs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits these ETAs’ classroom activities might have for students. The teaching advisors’ lesson observation feedback reports and their reflections on observation are also important documents informing the researcher in terms of what the common characteristics of ETAs’ classroom activities might be and what 25.
(39) potential benefits the ETAs’ classroom activities might bring, as once a semester the teaching advisors visit schools that participate in the ETA program to observe in the classroom how co-teaching classes are practiced. These observations facilitate the enumeration and recording of how ETAs employ classroom activities to engage students’ learning in co-teaching classrooms, and the students’ reactions towards these activities. As such, the perspectives of teaching advisors who observed the classrooms are incorporated. The teaching advisors consist of mostly college professors and elementary school teachers with expertise in TESOL or applied linguistics and more than 10 years of practical experience in teaching English. They are responsible for arranging and preparing a four-week orientation every August to familiarize ETAs with the teaching methods, the operation of the co-teaching program, the education system, and the teaching environment in Taiwan before their service. Workshops are also provided as training for ETAs and LETs to enhance their teaching competence by teaching advisors.. 3.3 Data Collection Procedures Due to the involvement in a research project, the researcher of the study had access to the annual reports which recorded the details of the co-teaching lessons implemented in the participating elementary schools across five regions in Taiwan. In the current research, annual reports, including ETA feedback reports, LET feedback reports, ETAs’ biweekly reflection feedback reports, co-teaching lesson plans, teaching advisors’ lesson observation feedback reports, and their reflections on observation, are all included in order to triangulate themes and gain a general picture of the characteristics common to ETAs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits of classroom activities employed by ETAs from different stakeholders’ perspectives. In addition, the annual reports examined in this study also facilitated triangulation of themes across different times and regions around Taiwan. All in all, this study 26.
(40) incorporated annual data collected and obtained from reports of ETAs, LETs, and teaching advisors from 2011 to 2017 across Northern, Southern, Eastern, Western, and Central Taiwan. The ETA program was first implemented in Northern Taiwan in 2003; in 2008, the program began in Southern Taiwan and was then expanded to other areas. In this study, the researcher did not analyze earlier annual reports from 2003 or 2008, but instead limited the analysis to annual data from 2011 to 2017. This did not seem to hinder the investigation of common themes. As Flick (2007) has maintained, the focus of qualitative studies should be on core cases that are highly relevant to the purpose of the study. He has further expounded his view on the concept of sampling in qualitative research by explaining that “our sample should be representative－not in a statistical way or in representing the reality in a basic population. Rather, our cases should be able to represent the relevance of the phenomenon we want to study” (p.29). Liamputtong and Ezzy (2005) likewise have contended that sampling in qualitative research aims to “identify the cases that will provide a full and sophisticated understanding of all aspects of the phenomenon” (p.45). In this light, the annual reports from 2011 to 2017 are sufficient documents providing rich and comprehensive information that facilitated the triangulation of common characteristics specific to ETAs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits that these classroom activities might have for elementary school students.. 3.4 Qualitative Analysis This study employed a qualitative approach based on document analysis. While analyzing qualitative sources, the researcher proceeded in a cyclical circle rather than in a fixed linear order (Creswell, 1998), which involved all the following steps given that analyzing qualitative data was an iterative process. 3.4.1 Foreshadowing Problems While collecting materials, the step of foreshadowing problems (McMillan & 27.
(41) Schumacher, 2001) regarding the present research was initiated by the researcher. The tentative research problem was associated with the key stakeholders involved in the ETA program or students learning in the co-teaching context. The research problem, for instance, what is the impact of the ETA program on English curriculum at the elementary school level, guided the researcher to analyze the subsequent data. Nevertheless, with research questions, there was still room for modification while analyzing the annual reports. 3.4.2 Immersion in Data After collecting all the annual reports as the data sources which described the details on co-teaching practices in the ETA program, the researcher began to skim the set of documents, read, and re-read the data thoroughly to become familiar with it. Also, the researcher meticulously located relevant data and excluded irrelevant data to ensure the trustworthiness of the study (Corbin & Strauss, 1998). For example, the researcher excluded a section in the annual reports on ETA’s highlights of living and cultural experiences throughout the week, as this was not related to the research focus. 3.4.3 Organization of Data When reading the annual reports, the researcher first organized the collected data. For a better understanding of the collected data, the researcher reviewed the selected information from annual reports several times; searched for represented ideas from each data set of text descriptions in the ETA feedback reports, LET feedback reports, co-teaching lesson plans, ETAs’ biweekly reflection feedback reports, teaching advisors’ lesson observation feedback reports, and their reflections on observation; recorded key ideas in the margins next to data segments (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992) of various types of annual reports; arranged the data geographically to triangulate whether consistencies could be found systematically in emerging patterns in multiple sites (Denzin, 1989); and organized key ideas into no more than 25 to 30 28.
(42) categories (Cresswell, 1998) for later retrieval. 3.4.4 Generating Categories and Themes When analyzing the selected data from the annual reports, the most important and intellectually challenging task was thematic analysis (Marshall & Rossman, 1999). Generating categories was the preliminary step in the coding process of thematic analysis. In this case, different types of annual reports were coded respectively for the identification of categories relevant to the two research questions－the characteristics common to ETAs’ classroom activities and the potential benefits these classroom activities might bring. The researcher determined what the data really meant and constructed categories using data-driving coding, which is also termed open coding (Gibbs, 2007), ensuring that categories were “carved out of the data” rather than predetermined (McMillan & Schumacher, 2001, p.468). Data sets with similar meanings were combined under the same category (internal homogeneity); differences among categories (external heterogeneity) were made clear as well (Patton, 2002). Regarding the research questions, the categories identified covered themes such as different types of cultural learning, how kinesthetic-oriented students learn through hands-on activities, opportunities for contextualizing learning, the use of games and activities to maximize student participation, and so on. Furthermore, the researcher were constantly comparing the categories identified to group similar and recurring ones (McMillan & Schumacher, 2001). Combining similar categories helped to uncover relationships among categories and thus yielded salient themes which occurred frequently. The process of identifying text descriptions to corroborate themes was repeated and revised if necessary. Eventually, themes were generated to portray a more general and holistic picture of the common characteristics of ETAs’ classroom activities and what potential benefits these classroom activities might bring in co-taught lessons, because the emerging themes were obtained via person 29.
(43) triangulation, time triangulation, and space triangulation (Denzin, 1989). Namely, data triangulation demonstrated the internal consistency and convergence underlying the themes in this study.. 30.
