一位臺灣大學英語教師之教學信念與語言轉換

(1)

國立屏東大學英語學系碩士班

碩士論文

指導教授：梁中行博士

一位臺灣大學英語教師之教學信念與

語言轉換

A TAIWANESE COLLEGE ENGLISH

TEACHER’S TEACHING BELIEF AND

CODE-SWITCHING PRACTICE

研究生：鍾志豪撰

(2)

(3)

(4)

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is not easy for graduate students to complete their theses, but I did it! But for the helps of many people, I would not have completed my study. First, I would like to express my thankfulness to my advisor, Dr. Liang Jong-Shing. I learned many invaluable experiences from him. In the process of working with my thesis, he gave me many insightful comments and suggestions for revising my thesis. Under his guidance, I could complete my thesis smoothly.

I would also thank my committee members, Dr. Mei-mei Chang and Dr. Jackie Chang. Their constructive comments and suggestions helped me improve my thesis. Without their assistance, I would not have completed my study.

Next, I would express my gratitude to Dr. Tung-tao Yu, who allowed me to observe his class. His generosity let me collect data smoothly. But for his help, my study would have been incomplete.

In addition, I would like to thank two of my classmates, Claire and Sharlene. They always accompanied me during my thesis-writing process. Thank you so much.

(5)

(6)

iii

A TAIWANESE COLLEGE ENGLISH TEACHER’S TEACHING

BELIEF AND CODE-SWITCHING PRACTICE

ENGLISH ABSTRACT

Abstract

The study aimed to investigate one college English teacher’s teaching belief and his code-switching practice in class. The participant was a male college teacher who taught Advance English in a southern university. The teacher and his class were observed for 12 weeks, from September, 2014 to January, 2015. The data were collected through the interview, classroom observation, and the stimulated recall interview. During the period, four class periods in the beginning, in the middle, and near the end of the semester were chosen for data analysis. The data were

transcribed verbatim for data analysis.

The major findings are as follows. First, the teacher’s classroom language use showed a fixed pattern. In order to offer students much English input, he used more English in the beginning of the semester. As time went by, the time that he spoke English decreased; instead, he spoke much Chinese near the end of the semester. Second, the teacher’s code-switching fulfilled the following functions: translation, managing the class, metalinguistic uses, building rapport with students, providing instructions, and communicative uses. Third, after the researcher compared the teacher’s teaching belief and his code-switching practice, the findings showed that his teaching belief was consistent with his actual practice in the aspects of language use and code-switching.

The study concluded with the implication for English education, limitations for this study, and the suggestions for future research.

(7)

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Poplack’s Classification of Code-switching ... 10

Table 2 The Coding System Used in the Study ... 30

Table 3 Data Collection Schedule ... 31

Table 4 The Time of Chinese and English Used by the Teacher ... 34

Table 5 The Time of Chinese and English Used in Each Stage ... 35

(11)

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

When I was in college, our teachers seemed to talk to us only in English in classes. At that time, I thought it was natural for them to do so because we majored in English and they intended to help us master the language. So, I was satisfied with such an English-only learning environment. However, when they talked about some topics that were unfamiliar or complicated to me, I found it difficult to understand them. At that moment, I wished they could have added some Chinese so that their explanations would be more comprehensible to me. I then said to myself, “With some Chinese, I could have understood my teachers a lot better.”

(12)

2

teacher’s code-switching enhanced Taiwanese junior high school students’ reading ability. In China, Tian and Macaro (2012) also found that Chinese students whose teacher code-switched in the classroom performed better on their vocabulary learning than those who received L2-only instruction from the teacher. Because of the positive effects, Horasan (2014) and Liu (2010) suggested that teachers’ code-switching be considered an efficient strategy in language learning.

Yet, there are some researchers disagreeing with the use of code-switching in the classroom. For example, Ríos and Campos (2013) found in their survey study in Costa Rica that one-third of the teachers in their study claimed that code-switching sometimes negatively affected their students’ language learning. In addition, Selamat (2014) investigated the Malaysian English teachers’ perceptions of code-switching. The results indicated that 80% of the teachers agreed that students would rely on L1 if their teachers code-switched from English to Malaysian. The teachers also believed that due to the reliance on the teachers’ code-switching, the students lost the chances to become independent learners. To sum up, teachers’ code-switching in classrooms may affect students positively or negatively. However, the teachers’ language use is likely to be influenced by several reasons, one of them being by their teaching beliefs (Liu, Ahn, Baek, & Han, 2004). Therefore, I found it necessary to explore the relationship between teachers’ teaching beliefs and their code-switching practice.

(13)

3

their “putting students on tasks” (p.103), “choosing language to interact with

students” (p.123), and “using materials in addition to the required textbook” (p.150). Regarding code-switching, teachers may have their own teaching beliefs about when to switch to the students’ L1 in English classes. As for the relationship between teachers’ teaching beliefs and their actual practices, Liu et al. (2004) proved that teachers’ actual behaviors in code-switching were affected by their own beliefs. However, Edstrom (2006) studied her own code-switching practice and found that her code-switching practice sometimes did not match with her own teaching beliefs; that is, the percentage of the teacher’s L1 use was not consistent with her own teaching belief. Therefore, in the present study, I focused not only on the functions of the teacher’s code-switching, but also on the relationship between the teacher’s teaching belief and the code-switching practice. To be specific, I chose to study one male college teacher to further examine whether or in what ways his teaching belief affected his code-switching. If the teacher’s teaching beliefs about code-switching were inconsistent with his actual practices, what factors might be responsible?

Research Questions

(14)

4 research questions were specified:

1. How does a college EFL teacher use his language, L1 and L2, in the classroom? 2. What functions does the teacher’s code-switching fulfill in the classroom?

(15)

5

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews theoretical and empirical studies on code-switching and teachers’ teaching beliefs. The chapter is divided into three parts: teachers’ language use in L2 classrooms, code-switching, and teachers’ teaching beliefs. First, I discuss the issue of teachers’ language use in L2 classrooms, including advantages and

disadvantages of L2-only instruction and L1 use in L2 classrooms. The second part includes the definition and the functions of code-switching, and some empirical studies on code-switching in foreign language classrooms at college level. And the third section starts with the definition of teachers’ teaching beliefs, and then the relationship between teachers’ teaching beliefs and actual practice, and the related empirical studies on teachers’ teaching beliefs and code-switching are introduced.

Teachers’ Language Use in L2 Classrooms

(16)

6

Advantages and Disadvantages of L2-only Instruction

Some researchers endorse L2-only instruction in the foreign language classrooms (Huang, 2009; Krashen, 1982; Lin, 2007; Turnbull, 2001). For example, Krashen (1982) claimed that students’ language acquisition could be successful if they are exposed to the language that is beyond their linguistic level and received sufficient L2 input. To this end, English-only instruction offers the students the most sufficient way of learning an L2. Huang (2009) also advocated that teaching students only in L2 improved their L2 ability. She interviewed 10 senior high school students in Taiwan, some of whom stated that they had confidence in English learning owing to English-only instruction, and that the students’ vocabulary and listening ability were improved. Furthermore, Lin (2007) recommended that Taiwanese elementary school students should be exposed to English as much as possible, so that the students could spend much time thinking about what their teacher said in class. Finally, Turnbull (2001) indicated that his maximum use of L2 could increase students’ learning motivation. His viewpoint was shown as follows.

Although my students may have been resistant to my use of the TL [target language] at first, they quickly adjusted and often thanked me at the end of a school year for teaching them in French. They told me that they learned so much because I spoke French to them most of the time… My students often told me that they realized that French could actually be used for real-life communication; English was not necessary to survive. (p. 533)

Based on the teacher’s saying, the maximum use of the target language would be helpful for the students. By being exposed to the target language, the students were able to realize how French could be used in the real life, so that their learning

motivation would be enhanced.

(17)

7

should be addressed. Huang (2010) mentioned three weaknesses: cognitive, affective, and practical aspects. In the cognitive viewpoint, as Skinner (1985) argued, using L2 exclusively did not help students to connect words and thinking rapidly, and it slowed and impeded “acquisition of meaning,” and hence, was harmful to the process of the “concept development and cognitive language proficiency” (p. 383). As for the affective aspect, students’ frustration and anxiety would increase if teachers gave lectures only in L2. For example, as Tsao (2004) found out,

Taiwanese college-level vocational students complained that they felt anxious and frustrated when their teachers gave English-only instruction since it caused their misunderstanding and confusion about the lectures. Regarding the practical

perspective, L2-only instruction was difficult for teachers to conduct since they might spend much time explaining something in English. Nunan and Lamb (1996, pp. 99-100) provided an example shown below that the teacher spent a great amount of time explaining the ideas to a student only in L2.

S: Teacher, what is the meaning of “lettuce”?

T: If you go to a snack bar, you’re very hungry, and then you ask for

something to eat- a cheeseburger. But you don’t like some of the things they put inside it, like vegetables, so lettuce is one of the things inside the

cheeseburger, the big leaf inside it. It’s part of the cheeseburger, OK? S: I think so.

T: OK, now I want you to get in pairs and prepare a dialogue where you go to a restaurant or a snack bar and you have to say what you want to eat.

S: Please can you give me a lettuce and a Coke?

(18)

8

shorten the process of explanation or save the precious learning time. Due to several weaknesses caused by L2-only instruction, it seems inevitable for teachers to use students’ L1 in English classrooms.

Advantages and Disadvantages of L1 Use in L2 Classrooms

Since there are still some drawbacks in L2-only instruction, some researchers concur the use of students’ L1 in L2 classrooms. For instance, Schweers (1999) asked four ESL teachers to fill out the questionnaire to investigate their perceptions of L1 (Spanish) use in L2 (English) classrooms. The result indicated that the use of L1 helped students learn English better with a positive attitude toward “the process of learning English” (p. 13). McMillan and Rivers (2011) invited 29 English native speakers to fill out the survey which focused on the teachers’ viewpoints of the use of students’ L1. The finding suggested that students’ L2 learning was enhanced if their L1 was used moderately, but that the teachers should not overuse the students’ L1. Atkinson (1987) in his discussion of the students’ L1 in the classroom listed several reasons why the teachers would use the students’ L1 in L2 classes, such as saving time or checking comprehension. These findings suggested that the teachers’ use of L1 is helpful for students to learn English better.

(19)

9

language learning. Also, Pablo, Lengeling, Zenil, Crawford, and Goodwin (2011) interviewed three French and five English teachers to figure out their perceptions of using students’ L1 in L2 classrooms. The findings indicated that some teachers argued against the use of the students’ L1 in L2 classrooms because the students lost opportunities to speak L2, and because the students depended more on the teachers’ use of L1.

This section discussed pros and cons of L2-only instruction and L1 use in L2 classrooms. After reviewing literature, I found that the issue of teachers’ language use in classrooms is still disputed by many researchers. In spite of the controversial opinions among the researchers, the teachers sometimes still switch to students’ L1 in L2 classrooms, especially in EFL classrooms. In the next section, therefore, some studies related to code-switching were reviewed.

Code-switching

In a bilingual or multi-lingual society, people often code-switch when communicating with one another. According to Fromkin, Rodman, and Jyams (2007), code-switching refers to “the movement back and forth between two

languages or dialects within the same sentence or discourse” (p. 539). In foreign or second language classrooms, teachers also often switch from the target language to the students’ L1 for various reasons. For example, Lai (1999) pointed out that teachers sometimes code-switched in order to convey their own ideas quickly. Bilgin and Rahimi (2013) found that teachers could also create a relaxing atmosphere for students to learn a language by switching from L2 to students’ L1. Hence, to help students learn a language efficiently, code-switching can be deemed by teachers an effective strategy (Horasan, 2014; Liu, 2010).

(20)

10

2001), but Poplack’s classification is often used to figure out the types of teachers’ code-switching in the classroom. Her typology is related to syntactic point of view. That is, code-switching is divided into tag-switching, inter-sentential switching, and intra-sentential switching. The examples of these three types of code-switching are displayed in Table 1.

Table 1

Poplack’s Classification of Code-switching

Type Example

Tag switching Ok, at last, woman bees, ha, ha, they didn’t get, go out to work, but 怎麼樣 [then what] ?

Inter-sentential switching Ok, very good, very nice, very nice, 下課以後把它貼在黑板上面，其他同學可以看。[I will stick them (flash cards) on the blackboard and other students can have a look.]

Intra-sentential switching 如果你想當什麼，你就站起來說 [If you want to be someone, you then stand up and say] I am a police officer.

Note. From “Codeswitching in the primary EFL classroom in China- Two case studies” by X. Qian, G. Tian, and Q. Wang, 2009, System, 37, pp. 722-723.

(21)

11 the functions of code-switching were introduced.

Functions of Code-switching

In the language classroom, teachers’ code-switching functions differently from those in the natural setting because the teachers should be concerned with pedagogical purposes (Eldin, 2014). For example, Flyman-Mattsson and Burenhult (1999) found out four functions of code-switching occurring in the classroom: topic switch,

affective functions, socializing functions, and repetitive functions. Topic switch refers to the alternation from the target language to the students’ L1 based on the topic being discussed, such as explaining grammar points. When teachers code-switch for affective functions, they express their emotions in students’ L1 to build a close

relationship with the students. When teachers switched to L1 for socializing

functions, they “signal friendship and solidarity by using the addressee’s L1” (p. 8). Repetitive functions refer to that teachers code-switch in order to help students clarify what their teachers say in class.

In addition, Rolin-Ianziti and Brownlie (2002) listed the functions of the teacher’s code-switching in three categories, including translation, metalinguistic uses, and communicative uses. The teachers shift to students’ L1 to translate words or phrases to help students understand the equivalents of the target inputs. As for the metalinguistic uses, code-switching occurs when the teachers want to use students’ L1 to comment or contrast some concepts that are presented in L2. As to the

communicative uses, the teachers code-switch to students’ L1 to meet the

communicative aims, such as classroom management, teachers’ reaction to students’ requests and emotional expressions.

(22)

12

coding system is made up of two functions, pedagogical and social functions. The pedagogical function refers to the language-oriented code-switching, including translation, metalinguistic uses, and communicative uses. The social function, on the other hand, is related to “the social and managerial atmosphere in classroom” (p. 112). It consists of managing the class or building rapport with students and

providing instructions (e.g. pointing to the specific part, nominating a student, giving instructions or prompts).

In conclusion, some researchers identified different functions of the teachers’ switching. In classroom research, the researchers considered teachers’ switching in different aspects, including the functions of teachers’ and students’ code-switching, the factor that affects the teachers’ code-code-switching, and different

viewpoints of code-switching between teachers and students. Hence, some studies on code-switching in foreign language classrooms at college level were reviewed.

Studies on Code-switching in Foreign Language Classrooms at College Level

(23)

13

students would be deprived of the chances to use L2 for negotiating meaning.

Hence, to help students’ language learning, Polio and Duff recommended the teachers to teach students in the target language through repetition and paraphrase.

Liu (2010) investigated the English teachers’ code-switching in the EFL classrooms. A total number of 261 college students and 60 teachers from three different universities in China was asked to fill out the questionnaire. Eight classes were randomly chosen to be observed and audio-recorded. The results showed that the teachers switched from English to Chinese for the translation of words, grammar explanation, classroom management, emphasis on some points, and rapports

establishment with students. A similar result was reported by Khonakdar and Abdolmanafi-Rokni (2015). They observed 60 Iranian college EFL teachers’ classrooms to explore the teachers’ code-switching through filling out the questionnaire. The researchers listed several situations that the teachers code-switched in classes, including translating, giving instructions effectively, and clarifying. Studies mentioned above suggested that many researchers have been considering the functions of the teacher’s code-switching in the classroom.

Every teacher switches to fulfill different purposes, but his or her code-switching may be affected by the students’ language proficiency. As Ahmad and Jusoff (2009) claimed, teachers’ behaviors on code-switching differ from each other based on their students’ English proficiency. For example, Greggio and Gil (2007) investigated teachers’ and students’ code-switching in the elementary and

(24)

14

and vice versa. However, the teacher code-switched more often in the beginning level than in the pre-intermediate level of class. Second, the different functions of teachers’ code-switching were found in the beginning and pre-intermediate levels of classes. For example, the teacher in the beginning level class code-switched for the start of the class, grammar and structure clarification, provision of meanings of the words, and other functions, while the other teacher in the pre-intermediate level class switched from English to Portuguese and vice versa to check students’ understanding of the grammar, structure, and vocabulary, to help students be aware of English pronunciation, and to create a relaxed classroom atmosphere. Third, compared to the teachers’ language use in different classrooms, Greggio and Gil indicated that students both in the beginner and pre-intermediate levels code-switched when “maintaining the flow of conversation”, offering the L1 meaning of the L2 vocabulary, and checking the understanding of the grammar points (p. 389).

In addition to students’ language proficiency, some researchers compared and contrasted the differences between the teachers’ and the students’ use of

(25)

15

evaluating for grammar explanation), clarification and confirmation, and the

maintenance of students’ attention, whereas students shifted to L1 for the functions of meta-language, equivalence (i.e. when participants do not know English meaning), and classroom routines (p. 37). Furthermore, the teachers thought it necessary to code-switch in order to help students understand the lesson and attract the students’ attentions, while the students considered it important to code-switch because of their lack of vocabulary knowledge. Meij and Zhao (2010) analyzed 4 Chinese teachers’ English classes and the teachers’ and students’ questionnaires in China to explore the participants’ viewpoints of code-switching in the classrooms. They found that teachers and students had different perceptions of code-switching. That is, the teachers preferred to switch to Chinese moderately (i.e. code-switching for 5 minutes in a 45-minute lecture) while the students wanted their teachers to use their L1 frequently. In sum, these studies indicated teachers’ and students’ different perceptions of code-switching.

(26)

16

the teacher code-switched to fulfill five functions, including expressive, directive, meta-linguistic, poetic, and referential functions. Also, she collected students’ and the teacher’s perceptions of the teacher’s code-switching. For example, the students held the positive attitude toward the teacher’s code-switching because they thought it necessary for their teacher to code-switch to explain words, grammar, and

complicated concepts. As for the teacher participant’s opinion, Weng indicated that the teacher agreed to code-switch in class, but the teacher should take the course goals into consideration.

Both Chang (2009) and Weng (2012) pointed out the different functions of the teacher’s code-switching, as well as the teacher’s and students’ opinions about the code-switching in class. However, their studies did not consider the teacher’s teaching belief that might affect the teacher’s code-switching. In this study, therefore, I aimed to fill the gap by investigating the relationship between the teacher’s teaching belief and his code-switching practice in the classroom.

To sum up, code-switching occurs in foreign language classrooms very

frequently, and there are some functions for teachers to switch from one language to another. Different teachers may have different perceptions about code-switching, so teachers’ teaching belief is also an important factor in teachers’ language use in classrooms. By exploring teaching belief, I could realize why teachers switched from English to Chinese. In order to understand the relationship between the teachers’ teaching beliefs and code-switching, some related studies were reviewed in the next section.

Teachers’ Teaching Beliefs

(27)

17

be discovered from teachers’ objectives, values, and beliefs, and the teachers’ beliefs can help teachers make decisions or actions (Richards & Lockhart, 1996).

Sinprajakpol (2004) suggests that teachers’ beliefs have a considerable effect on the teachers’ actual classroom behavior because they were formed by the teachers’ judgments and perspectives, and the judgements and perspectives also affected the teacher’s actual practice in the classroom. Hence, teachers’ beliefs are important in teaching processes.

Many researchers defined teachers’ beliefs in different ways. However, in Richards and Lockhart’s (1996) book, Reflective Teaching in Second Language Classrooms, they saw teachers’ beliefs as the teachers’ perceptions or thoughts about teaching. In my study, I also focused on the teacher’s teaching belief about code-switching in the classroom. Hence, I adopted their definition.

The Sources of Teachers’ Teaching Beliefs

Teachers’ teaching beliefs come from different sources. Richards and Lockhart (1996) suggested that teachers gradually developed their beliefs over time, and that their beliefs included subjective and objective dimensions. There are six sources of teachers’ teaching beliefs, including the “experience as language learners, experience of what works best, established practice, personality factors, educationally based or research-based principles, and principles derived from an approach or method” (pp. 30-31).

(28)

18

helped to write down the words” (p. 30). Therefore, the teacher might think of vocabulary instruction as an important part in class. Second, teachers’ teaching beliefs are also based on the strategies they have used in the past. Richards and Lockhart gave an example of a teacher’s comment: “I find that when checking answers in a whole-class situation, students respond better if given the opportunity to first review their answers with a partner” (p. 31). In this case, the teacher

encouraged the students to review the answers with their partners. Third, teachers’ teaching beliefs are established by practices. That is, after years of teaching practice, the teachers will come up with the best teaching styles they prefer. Richards and Lockhart provided a teacher’s report, “In our school, we do a lot of small group learning. We’re encouraged not to stand in front of the class and teach whenever it can be avoided” (p. 31). In this example, because of the positive effect on students’ learning, the teachers were encouraged to do group learning instead of traditional learning. Fourth, teachers’ teaching beliefs are influenced by their personalities. Teachers with different personalities prefer to conduct different teaching activities. For example, an out-going teacher may prefer to ask their students to do drama in the class (p. 31). Fifth, teachers can form their own teaching beliefs based on some educational principles. For example, the teachers might apply cooperative learning into their own classes after taking a course related to it. The final source of teachers’ teaching beliefs is based on the methodological principles. It is possible that

teachers believe some strategies are effective, so they apply the strategies into their own classrooms.

(29)

19

next section, therefore, the relationship between teachers’ teaching beliefs and actual practice was discussed.

The Relationship between Teachers’ Teaching Beliefs and Actual Practices

Some researchers have looked at how teachers’ teaching beliefs and their actual behaviors interact in the classroom. Xu (2012) believed that teachers’ actual

practices were determined by teachers’ teaching beliefs because the way they planned lessons and the decision regarding the lessons they made would influence what they taught. In addition, Clark and Peterson (1984) reviewed other researchers’ studies, indicating that teachers’ planning and thinking might be influenced by their beliefs and vice versa. Therefore, the teachers’ teaching beliefs did affect their classroom behaviors. Some researchers have investigated the relationship between teachers’ teaching beliefs and their actual practices, including classroom management, vocabulary instruction, and writing instruction.

Evrim, Gökçe, and Enisa (2009) investigated how teachers’ teaching beliefs about classroom management were related to their actual practices. A 29-year-old female EFL college teacher in Turkey participated in their study. The data were collected through the questionnaire, and the participant’s classes were videotaped for three class hours. The teacher was also asked to write her own beliefs about

classroom management before observation. They found that the teacher’s teaching beliefs were consistent with her own actual teaching practice in the aspects of teaching, learning, and the teacher’s role. For example, in the teaching aspect, she believed that teaching should occur in a non-threatening and cooperative

(30)

20

cooperation with one another. In the learning aspect, she claimed that learning should account for students’ individual differences, like their backgrounds, interests, and learning styles. And in her actual practice, she provided different reactions for different students (e.g. the off-task hyperactive student and the wandering student). As for the teacher’s role, she believed that being a guide or a facilitator could improve teacher-student relation. In her actual practice, upon seeing students who

misbehaved outside the class, she would forgive them, asking them to think about their behaviors.

Chen (2005) invited four EFL junior high school teachers in Taiwan to explore the relationship between their teaching beliefs and actual practices in vocabulary instruction. Their classrooms were observed by video- and audio-recording, and the data were collected through classroom observations, questionnaires, and interviews. The major findings indicated that teachers’ teaching beliefs about vocabulary

instruction were not always consistent with their actual practices in four aspects: the keyword method, dictionary look-up, situational context, and vocabulary learning strategies teaching. For example, three of the teachers in Chen’s study claimed that they would ask students to look up unknown vocabulary in dictionaries, but in their actual practice, they did not do so. The reasons that caused the discrepancy between their teaching beliefs and practices were the students’ English proficiency level, the students’ learning motivation and interest, the students’ grade levels, students’ discipline, materials the teachers used, and students’ emotions.

(31)

21

showed that their teaching beliefs did not always match with their teaching practices in pre-writing tasks, writing activities, and error analysis. Basically, the three

teachers claimed that they taught writing through the process writing approach. But, the teacher-centered writing instruction was conducted in their actual practices. The reasons why their teaching beliefs and actual practices were not aligned were due to the limited time, the lack of students’ persistence and motivation, students’

anticipations of the test, and the classroom management. Melketo concluded that the teachers’ teaching beliefs did not reflect what they actually did in the writing classes.

In conclusion, inconsistencies seem to exist between teachers’ teaching beliefs and their actual practices in the aspects of classroom management, vocabulary instruction, and the teaching of writing. Such inconsistencies indicated that the teacher’s teaching beliefs did influence their actual practices. In reference to teachers’ code-switching, the teachers’ language use in class might also be reflected by their teaching beliefs. Hence, to get a general picture of the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and code-switching, some empirical studies were reported in the next section.

Studies on Teachers’ Teaching Beliefs and Code-switching

(32)

22

than 25% English in class, whereas most of the teachers who considered English necessary spoke more than 55% English in class. In addition, Flyman-Mattsson and Burenhult (1999) studied two male Swedish teachers and one female French teacher, who could also speak Swedish, to see their code-switching. The data indicated that their teaching beliefs about the use of the students’ L1 (Swedish) to teach grammar matched with the teachers’ actual behaviors. To be specific, the teachers believed that students’ L1 was a beneficial means to teach grammatical structures. And in actual practices, the teachers did code-switch to the students’ L1 during grammar instruction. The findings mentioned above proved that teachers’ code-switching may be influenced by teachers’ beliefs.

Some researchers also found that teachers code-switch in the classroom because they believe doing so helps students’ language learning. Farjami and Asl (2013) conducted an interview study with 20 Iranian teachers from different universities, and found that these teachers believed that code-switching could increase positive

atmosphere, reduce class pressure, foster the students’ learning process, and help the students understand and comprehend the lectures. According to the findings, Farjami and Asl concluded that teachers believed that their code-switching not only assisted students to learn L2, but also helped create a stress-free environment, so that the students could get involved in the class.

(33)

23

classroom, but she actually used 23% of the L1 in the classroom. Second, over the four months when her class was audio-recorded, the average use of English in April (42%) was much more than that in January (18%), in February (22%), and in March (17%). She explained three possible reasons why she spoke more L1 than expected: building rapport with students, helping students achieve multiple objectives, and her being lazy. Also, Selamat (2014) found inconsistencies between the teachers’ teaching beliefs and their actual practices. Eleven teachers’ classes in secondary schools in Malaysia were observed, and they were asked to fill out questionnaires and interviewed. She pointed out that in spite of their preference for the use of L2 (English) in classrooms, these teachers still code-switched from L2 to L1. The reason why the teachers code-switched was due to saving time.

The relationship between teachers’ teaching beliefs and their actual practices have been discussed above. As Liu et al. (2004) proved, teachers’ teaching beliefs influenced their actual behaviors in code-switching. The teachers’ previous experiences or existing ideas did affect how they code-switch from one language to another in classroom. To my best knowledge, however, no research on the

(34)

24

CHAPTER THREE

METHODS

This chapter explains the research design of this study. First, it includes the rationale of this study. Second, the participant of this study is introduced. Then, the data collection and analysis of this study are presented. Finally, the ways of constructing trustworthiness are clarified.

The Rationale

This study aimed to investigate a male college teacher’s language use and his teaching beliefs about code-switching. Due to the nature of the research questions, qualitative approach was used in this study. As Merriam (2009) stated, qualitative research is to explore “how people interpret their experiences, how they construct their worlds, and what meaning they attribute to their experiences” (p. 5). In this study, I was interested in understanding how the teacher code-switched in his classes and how he interpreted his code-switching behavior, so I conducted the qualitative study with a focus on his ideas about code-switching. Mackey and Gass (2005) also noted that qualitative research is natural and holistic. Because of the above

(35)

25

The Participant

To conduct the study, a male college local English teacher teaching English to non-English majors in National Pingtung University (NPTU) was invited. Before choosing this teacher, I kept three criteria in mind in order to find out the appropriate participant. First, focal teachers had to be bilingual because it was more likely to see them code-switching from English to Chinese in the class. Second, the potential participants should have experiences of teaching English to non-English majors; this criterion was based on the suggestion of Bilgin and Rahimi (2013), who indicated that teachers’ teaching experience would very likely affect their code-switching in the classroom. Third, the teacher had to teach students with lower English proficiency levels. In NPTU, non-English-major students are required to take Freshman English for two semesters and Advanced English for one semester. The classes are classified into five levels, from Level A (the best proficiency level) to Level E (the lowest), based on their English points of College Entrance Examination before the students entered the school. Therefore, I assumed that the teachers who taught in the Level D or Level E classes would most frequently code-switch in class if they did so. Thus, I focused on the teachers who taught classes of Level D or Level E.

Keeping the three criteria in mind, I contacted the teacher to see whether he was willing to participate in my study. First, I surfed the website of NPTU to find out the classes. Then, I sent e-mails to him with the information of my research, hoping that he allowed me to observe his classes. After that, I invited him to participate in this study. He was first asked to sign a consent form (See Appendix A), which consisted of the information and the guidelines related to this study. I assured the teacher that the data collected in the class were used only for the research purpose.

(36)

26

the real purpose of this study, it was hoped that the teacher might teach in a natural way.

The Teacher

The teacher was a male lecturer, holding a PhD in English. He was part-time teaching English to non-English-major students (Level D) in NPTU as the study was conducted. He had been teaching English for 11 years with different levels of students, including junior high school students, college students, and adults.

In the interview with me, the teacher talked about his general opinion about teaching English to non-English-majors. His opinions would be roughly divided into three parts. First, his English class was basically test-oriented. That is, since the students were usually required to pass the specific level of English proficiency tests, he, as their teacher, should help them to pass the tests, so that they could graduate from college smoothly. Second, he would do his best to create a relaxing learning atmosphere. He explained that he would try to teach students English relaxingly, so that they could learn English under not much pressure. Third, he provided students more English input. He hoped that the students could listen to and speak English in the class. By doing so, they could learn English efficiently.

Based on his opinions about teaching English to non-English majors, he was willing to help his students to learn English well. Despite the test-oriented

instruction, he still encouraged his students to use English in class. He hoped that they could learn English in a relaxing atmosphere.

Data Collection

(37)

27

consent, each of his lessons over the entire semester was videotaped. The recorded lessons helped me discover the functions of his code-switching in classroom

discourse. In addition, the interview was conducted before the observation to probe his teaching belief and perceptions of code-switching in classroom discourse. In the end of the semester, I also conducted the stimulated recall interview with him, so that he could recall some specific moments when he code-switched in class, providing his interpretations of the code-switching in the tape. In the following sections, I

elaborated how data were collected.

Classroom Observation with the Video Camera

To understand how the teacher used both English and Chinese in the classroom, I decided to videotape his class over a whole semester. As Bottorff (1994) suggested, videotaping is beneficial for researchers to obtain teachers’ verbal and nonverbal behaviors, and the data recorded by the video camera are not only the most complete but can also be preserved permanently, so the data can be reviewed whenever

necessary. However, as Johnson (1992) indicated, the existence of the video camera may cause threatening effect on the people involved. Therefore, in order to lessen the students’ fear of video recording in the study, the observation started in the beginning of the semester with the hope that the students were accustomed to the video camera and my presence in the early few weeks. Prior to each class, I went to the classroom and set up the video camera in the back of the classroom, so that the teacher and the students were not interrupted by the video camera.

Interviewing the Teacher

(38)

28

researchers delve into people’s behavior, perceptions, and their interpretation of their lives (Lichtman, 2010; Merriam, 2009). To understand the teacher’s teaching belief about code-switching, a semi-structured interview was carried out. As Merriam (2009) explained, a semi-structured interview is flexible and open-ended, and the interview guide can help researchers to focus on the interview questions in the pre-established framework. In this study, I interviewed the teacher in the beginning of the semester to understand his beliefs in code-switching in classroom discourse. The interview questions (See Appendix B) were adapted from Chen (2005). During the interview, the teacher was asked further questions to clarify some unclear points. By probing, I was able to get more information from the teacher about his language use in class.

A Stimulated Recall Interview

(39)

29 him why he code-switched at a specific moment.

Data Analysis

In this section, the ways of how data were analyzed are introduced. This section starts with the coding system of language teacher code-switching used in this study. Then, the procedure of data analysis is introduced.

The Coding System of Functions of the Teacher’s Code-switching

The coding system used in this study was based on Moradkhani (2012), which was adapted because it was the most comprehensive coding system among the several that I had reviewed (Flyman-Mattsson & Burenhult, 1999; Rolin-Lonziti & Brownlie, 2002). The scheme includes six functions, including translation, metalinguistic uses, communicative uses, managing the class, building rapport with students, and

(40)

30 Table 2

The Coding System Used in the Study

Function Subcategory

Translation Translation of a word

Translation of an entire sentence Metalinguistic uses Contrast

Comment

Grammar explanation Highlighting

Communicative uses Clarification

Checking comprehension Directives

Marker

Managing the class Reprimand or disapprove Giving feedback

Reminder Building rapport with students Telling jokes

Revealing emotions Providing instructions Giving instructions

Giving prompts Pointer

Nominate

Using administrative vocabulary

Note. Adapted from “The typology of EFL teachers’ code-switching: A validation study” by S. Moradkhani, The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 37(1), pp. 113-115.

The Procedure of Data Analysis

Merriam (2009) has stated that “Collection and analysis should be a

(41)

31

Tenth Day (Week 4), the midterm exam (Week 10), the dance contest (Week 13), and the New Year’s Day (Week 16), and the final exam (Week 18). In total, the class was observed for 12 weeks. The data collection schedule, the duration of the classes, and the time the teacher actually talked are shown in Table 3.

Table 3

Data Collection Schedule

Stage Week Date Total class time Actual teacher talk % Beginning 2 103/09/26 1:28:32 0:55:39 63 3 103/10/03 1:22:20 0:55:45 68 5 103/10/17 1:20:58 0:46:55 58 6 103/10/24 1:22:50 0:51:10 62 Middle 7 103/10/31 1:20:48 0:55:58 69 8 103/11/07 1:21:45 0:55:48 68 9 103/11/14 1:25:54 0:53:12 62 11 103/11/28 1:14:04 0:49:04 66 12 103/12/05 1:03:08 0:26:14 42 End 14 103/12/19 1:17:29 0:52:53 68 15 103/12/26 1:20:16 0:55:00 69 17 104/01/09 1:07:00 0:46:00 69

(42)

32

Second, to analyze the functions of the teacher’s code-switching, I coded his utterances based on the coding system adapted from Moradkhani’s coding scheme. Afterwards, I calculated the frequencies of different functions of the teacher’s code-switching to see when he frequently code-switched from English to Chinese.

Third, the data from the interview (See Append E) and the stimulated recall interview (See Append F) were also transcribed verbatim in Chinese to obtain the teacher’s teaching belief and his perceptions of code-switching in the classroom. The interview data were analyzed through content analysis to generalize the themes. It is noted that I translated some of the transcripts from videotaped recordings and interview into English to show the findings.

Trustworthiness

The issue of trustworthiness is crucial for qualitative researchers because it “lies at the heart of issues conventionally discussed as validity and reliability” (Seale, 1999, p. 467). In order to ensure the trustworthiness of the result of this study, three

techniques were adopted: prolonged engagement, persistent observation, and triangulation (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Merriam, 2009).

(43)

33

classroom were familiar with my presence, and I was able to get reliable data.

Second, through persistent observation in the field, the researchers are more able “to identify those characteristics and elements in the situation that are most relevant to the problem or issue” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 304). In this study, I observed the teacher and the whole class in almost entire semester, which allowed me to get general ideas and then focus on specific incidents where the teacher code-switched in the classroom. By doing so, more supporting data were obtained.

Third, to avoid misinterpreting the data, I also triangulated the research findings through several data collected in this study. Triangulation means that the researcher utilizes various types of data, methods, investigators, and theories to verify findings (Ary, Jacobs, & Sorenson, 2010; Shenton, 2004). In this study, after collecting the data, I checked whether the data from my observation, the interview, and the

stimulated recall interview were consistent. With the use of these multiple data sources, the internal validity was increased.

(44)

34

CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter reports the findings of this study. First, the pattern of the teacher’s language use in the classroom is discussed. Then, the functions of the teacher’s switching is displayed by the way of the frequency distribution of his code-switching based on the coding system mentioned in Chapter Three. Finally, the teacher’s teaching belief and his actual practice about code-switching is compared and contrasted.

The Pattern of the Teacher’s Language Use in the Classroom

The first research question is to investigate the teacher’s language use in the classroom. As mentioned in Chapter Three, only six weeks of the teacher’s classes, totally 12 classes, were picked up for data analysis. Therefore, the time of the teacher’s Chinese and English use in the 12 class periods was reported. Table 4 displays the time of Chinese and English the teacher spoke respectively in class.

Table 4

The Time of Chinese and English Used by the Teacher

(45)

35

As shown in Table 4, the teacher spoke 18154 seconds (93.3%) of English in these six weeks, ranging from 2460 seconds to 3278 seconds. As for the Chinese the teacher spoke in the classroom, the longest time is 680 seconds, in Week 15, and the shortest one is 61 seconds, in Week 2. Totally, the teacher spoke only 1296 seconds (6.7%) of Chinese in these six weeks, indicating that the teacher spoke much more English than Chinese. This finding supported Tai’s (2003) study. She indicated that the teacher in her study spoke much more English (95%) than Chinese (5%). The reason for using more English in class was because the teacher of her study would like to provide adequate English input for students.

One noteworthy characteristic about how the participating teacher used his language in this study is that as time went by, he used more Chinese, from 130 seconds to 980 seconds, as shown in Table 5.

Table 5

The Time of Chinese and English Used in Each Stage

Stage (Weeks) English (%) Chinese (%) Beginning (2,3) 6553 sec (98.0) 131 sec (2.0) Middle (7,8) 6521 sec (97.2) 185 sec (2.8) End (15,17) 5080 sec (83.8) 980 sec (16.2) Note. sec: second

Table 5 reveals that the teacher spent more time speaking English (6553 seconds, 98%) than Chinese (131 seconds, 2%) in the beginning of the semester. Way into the middle of the semester, the teacher slightly decreased his use of English (6521

(46)

36

gradually decreased, and the time of Chinese gradually increased.

The Functions of the Teacher’s Code-switching in the Classroom

The second research question is to explore what functions the teacher’s code-switching fulfills in his teaching process. In order to answer this research question, I counted the times of each function of his code-switching. In total, six functions were identified in the data, in a decreasing order, which included translation, managing the class, metalinguistic uses, building rapport with students, providing instructions, and communicative uses. Table 6 shows the times of the six functions.

Table 6

The Times of the Functions of the Teacher’s Code-switching

Function Frequency (%)

Translation 114 (67.1)

Managing the class 23 (13.5) Metalinguistic uses 16 (9.4) Building rapport with students 14 (8.2) Providing instructions 2 (1.2) Communicative uses 1 (0.6)

Total 170 (100)

As shown in Table 6, the teacher’s code-switching occurred most frequently for the translation (67.1%) purpose, followed by the functions of managing the class (13.5%), metalinguistic uses (9.4%), building rapport with students (8.2%), providing instructions (1.2%), and communicative uses (0.6%). In the next section, each of the functions fulfilled by the teacher’s code-switching was discussed.

Translation

(47)

37

sentences into Chinese in order to help students understand the text. Episodes 1 and 2 display how the teacher code-switched to fulfill this purpose.

Episode 1

T: Do you know what trays are? SS: (Silence)

T: If you go to a restaurant, waiters will put the food on a tray. They can serve at the table, 托盤那種東西。 [something like trays]

(Extracted from Nov. 7th, 2014)

Episode 2

T: You name it, I have them all, which means…? (The teacher sees students.)

SS: (Silence)

T: The girl just says “You name it, I have them all.” Basically, that means she has every pretty much, every celebrity’s autographs. Okay? Name one, and I’ll show you the autograph. Alright? 你講的，我都有。 [You name it, I have them all.]

(Extracted from Sep. 26th, 2014) In Episode 1, the teacher explained the meaning of the word, tray.

Episode 2 occurred after a listening practice. In both episodes, the teacher provided students the Chinese equivalents after he felt the students did not understand the meaning of the word or the sentence. As shown in the

videotaped recordings, when the teacher asked the students the meanings of the word, tray, or the sentence, you name it, I have them all, none of the students showed any responses. Even after the teacher elaborated the meaning of tray or paraphrased you name it, I have them all in English, no students responded to him. The teacher then finally switched from English to Chinese to translate the targeted English word and sentence.

(48)

38

The same situation is also reported in the studies of Moradkhani (2012) and Liu (2010). They both indicated that the teachers’ code-switching frequently occurred for translation. Hence, for the EFL teachers, they often switched from L2 to L1 to translate unknown words, phrases, or sentences for students. By doing so, the students were able to quickly understand the meanings of words, as Nunan and Lamb (1996) suggested.

Managing the Class

The teacher also code-switched to manage the class. After analyzing the data, three subcategories under the function of managing the class were found:

reprimanding, giving feedback, and reminding students of something.

Reprimanding

The teacher pinpointed the students’ inappropriate behavior during the class. In other words, a student might do something wrong in class, so the teacher used

“utterances that show students have done something wrong” to indicate the students’ inappropriate behavior (Moradkhani, 2012, p.114). Episode 3 shows how the teacher disapproved the student’s sleeping in class.

Episode 3

(T is asking a student to answer the question.) T: ((a student’s name)). Number three. (A student is answering the question.) T: So, what’s your answer?

S: Noisy.

T: Yeah, noisy. ((a student’s name)), 你跟他一起坐嘛, 要不然你這樣背對我睡, 你是正對著攝影機睡喔。 [Go to sit with him. If you turn your back on me to sleep, you sleep in front of the video camera.]

(49)

39

In Episode 3, the teacher asked a student who was facing the video camera, sleeping, to answer the question. After the student answered the teacher’s question, the teacher asked the student to sit next to another classmate, instead of turning back to the teacher. In this case, the teacher quickly switched to speak in Chinese to show his disapproval of the students’ behavior.

Giving Feedback

The next subcategory under this function is giving feedback. The teacher switched from English to Chinese when giving students feedback on their

performance. In Episode 4, the teacher gave a student feedback after sharing the viewpoint with the class.

Episode 4

T: ((a student’s name)), right? English genius, what do you have to say about this, 煎餅磨坊的舞會？[Le Bal au Moulin de la Galette] What do you feel about this?

S: People mountain people sea. SS: Wow! (Clapping)

T: Yeah. Wow, 很會耶吼。 [You are something.]

(Extracted from Oct. 30th, 2014)

In Episode 4, the teacher asked the students to share their reflections after he showed the ten most expensive paintings in the world. After one student shared his own viewpoint of the specific painting, the teacher code-switched to give him positive feedback, 很會耶吼, on his performance.

(50)

40

how the teacher shifted from English to Chinese to repeat the students’ utterance.

Episode 5

T: Okay. And how about number two, making home movies? SS: 拍攝家庭電影。 [making home movies]

T: Okay, that’s a very nice translation, alright. SS: (Laugh)

T: 拍攝家庭電影 [making home movies], okay. You didn’t miss the single word.

(Extracted from Sep. 26th_{, 2014)}

In Episode 5, the teacher was introducing the noun phrase, making home movies. At first, he asked if any students knew the meaning of making home movies. Then, the students translated the phrase correctly into Chinese. After that, he directly repeated the students’ Chinese translation, 拍攝家庭電影. In the transcripts, he switched 17 times from English to Chinese to repeat the students’ Chinese.

According to Richards and Lockhart (1996), repetition is seen as a kind of feedback on content. After reviewing the 17 cases, I found that the teacher gave the students positive feedback on their performance by repeating their words. In the stimulated recall interview, the teacher expressed another reason why he repeated the students’ Chinese.

When he (a student) answers the question, he may answer the question from other corners of the classroom. But other students from the other corner of the classroom do not hear (the answer). The purpose of repetition is that through my mouth and my microphone, the classmates can know what his (the student’s) answer is. This is my habit.

(51)

41

According to the teacher, the purpose of repeating students’ Chinese was to confirm that all of the students knew what the student said in class. The teacher also added that repeating the students’ Chinese was his habit. The teacher explained that when the student answered the question, the student’s voice sometimes was so low that other students who sat far away from him or her might not clearly hear the student’s Chinese answer, so the teacher switched from English to Chinese to repeat what the student just said. After the teacher’s repetition, as shown in the videotaped recordings, the other students really knew what the student just said.

Besides the positive feedback, the teacher also gave students negative feedback on their performance of answering his question. Episode 6 shows how the teacher gave negative feedback to the students.

Episode 6

T: Rio, which city is it? SS: (Silence)

T: 你們今天眼神太多問號了。 [You have a lot of question marks in your eyes.] I am not happy with that.

SS: (Laugh)

T: Rio, which city? It’s in Brazil. 里約熱內盧。 [Rio de Janeiro] SS: Oh…

T: (Laugh) Okay, Rio de Janeiro, all about carnival,

(Extracted from Dec. 26th_{, 2014)}

(52)

42 Reminding

The last subcategory under this function is reminding. When the teacher’s code-switching took place for reminding, he aimed to help students remind something important. In Episode 7, the teacher switched from English to Chinese in order to remind the students that there would be no meeting the next week because of the National Holiday. The following episode illustrates how he shifted from English to Chinese as a reminder.

Episode 7

(At the end of the class)

T: Okay, let me take the attendance very fast. (T is taking the attendance.)

T: Okay, 記得我們下禮拜沒有上課喔。 [Remember that we don’t have the class next week.] Bye bye.

(Extracted from Oct. 3rd_{, 2014)}

In conclusion, the teacher switched from English to Chinese in order to manage the class. To reach the purpose, the teacher code-switched when reprimanding students’ behaviors, giving feedback, and reminding. After reviewing the

videotaped recordings, the students also gave the teacher with some responses, like verbal or non-verbal responses after he switched from English to Chinese.

Metalinguistic Uses

(53)

43 Comment

Comment refers to that the teacher offers peripheral explanations related to meaning (Moradkhani, 2012), which is different from translation, by which the teacher directly provides the L1 of words, phrases, or sentence. Episode 8 illustrates how the teacher gave comments on the specific idea.

Episode 8

(The teacher is explaining the conversation.)

T: Tanya said, “Oh, so that’s why you haven’t been returning my phone calls!” Yeah, but people just don’t talk on the phone anymore. We use Line, right? Okay. This is the situation like 已讀不回。

[ignoring read messages]

(Extracted from Sep. 26th_{, 2014)}

In Episode 8, the teacher intended to explain the conversation that the students had read in the textbook. The conversation was about two people who had not seen each other for a long time, so they asked each other how they had been recently. One person, Tanya, said that her friend did not return her phone call. The teacher gave a comment on this situation by using an instant messaging application, Line, as the example. After someone read a message, he or she did not reply to the person who sent the message, which is the similar case with what the conversation was about. Therefore, the teacher code-switched from English to Chinese to give the comment of this situation, 已讀不回, instead of translating the sentence, Oh, so that’s why you haven’t been returning my phone calls directly into Chinese.

Contrast

(54)

44

teacher code-switched to make comparison between the two Chinese terms. For example,

Episode 9

T: You know, you take a piece of woods, and use a knife to carve to…you know, become a Doraamon, something like that. Carving, so what is it?

S: 雕刻。 [carving]

T: 雕刻。 [carving] Okay, question. 雕刻 [carving]，雕像 [sculpture], is there any difference?

S: 一個動詞，一個名詞。 [One is a verb, and the other is a noun.]

(Extracted from Oct. 31st, 2014)

In Episode 9, the teacher explained the difference between sculpture and carving. In Chinese, these two words are sometimes translated in the similar way, so the

teacher asked students whether the students could differentiate the meanings of carving and sculpture. The purpose of switching from English to Chinese, in Episode 9 was to make comparison between these two Chinese terms.

Grammar Explanation

The teacher also switched from English to Chinese to teach grammar. Episode 10 shows how the teacher code-switched in explaining a grammar rule.

Episode 10

(T is checking the answer on grammar exercise.) T: Alright, the last one. It…

SS: It is painted.

T: It is painted every seven years. Every seven years, 頻率嘛，現在式。 [Adverbs of frequency, present tense.] It is painted every seven years.

(55)

45

Here, the teacher first asked students to answer the question, It ___ every seven years. After several students read out the answer, is painted, the teacher repeated the students’ answer; then, he gave the grammar explanation. In this episode, the

teacher explained why the present passive, is painted, was used in this sentence by giving the clue, adverbs of frequency, present tense.

However, in Episode 11, the teacher explained the grammar after the students gave a wrong answer to the question.

Episode 11

(T is checking the answer on grammar exercise.)

T: Okay, Number two. I… When I was twenty two, I… SS: had been.

T: No, you don’t have to. You don’t have to say “had been.” “Had been” means before. You went to Asia when you were twenty two. 你是 22 歲才去那邊的，如果你用過去完成式，你在那之前就去過了。 [You went there at the age of twenty-two. If you use the past perfect, that means you had been there before.]

(Extracted from Dec. 26th, 2014)

In Episode 11, the students were asked to answer the question, I ___ to Asia when I was 22. The students first provided the answer, had been. However, the teacher directly corrected the students’ answer. After that, the teacher began to explain why went was a better choice in this sentence. To help the students tell the differences between the usages of went and had been, he code-switched to Chinese.

Highlighting

(56)

46

(p.113). That is, the teacher provided advice on language learning. In Episode 12, the teacher was teaching students how to pronounce some words.

Episode 12

T: How about this (T writes down crisp in the blackboard)? SS: /krɪsp/ (pronounce the word).

T: /krɪsp/ (pronounce the word), right? (T writes down “s” in the end of the word “crisp” in the blackboard.)

SS: /krɪsps/ (pronounce the word). T: Do it again.

SS: /krɪsps/ (pronounce the word).

T: Yeah, something like that. Sometimes it’s hard. You know, you don’t have to say every sound. Alright? /krɪps/ (pronounce the word). It seems that if you say it too correctly, it sounds non-natural. Let me give you a Chinese example. (T writes down “螞蟻” (ants) in the blackboard.) 這兩個字你就不能講太準，單獨來看。 (point to the SS to sound it out.) [You cannot say these two words (ants in Chinese) too correctly. Read it by a single word.]

SS: ㄇㄚˊ。 [ma2.]

T: 國音沒學好，一副中文不好、英文也不好的樣子。[You don’t learn Chinese phonology well. It seems that Chinese is not good, and so is English.] ㄇㄚˇ。 [ma3]

SS: ㄇㄚˇ。[ma3.] T: ㄧˇ。 [i3.] SS: ㄧˇ。 [i3.]

T: Okay, put them together. SS: ㄇㄚˊ ㄧˇ。 [ma2 i3.]

T: ㄇㄚˊ ㄧˇ，這個往下掉的不見了, 對不對? 變成ㄇㄚˊ ㄧ ˇ。 [Ma2 i3. The falling intonation is missing, isn’t it? If you put something in combination, some sounds are reduced. It becomes ma2 i3.]