English in Inclusive Multilingual Preschools
Researching the Potential of a Teacher Education Model for In-Service Teachers
0531
2021
978-3-8233-9500-3
978-3-8233-8500-4
Gunter Narr Verlag
Kirsten Birsak de Jersey
The study addresses the question of how preschool teachers who work in regular state inclusive preschools can be qualified to teach English as a foreign language. Through the longitudinal case study, which followed the principles of participatory action research, substantial insights were gained which can be transferred to other pre-primary contexts.
<?page no="0"?> Giessener Beiträge zur Fremdsprachendidak�k Kirsten Birsak de Jersey English in Inclusive Multilingual Preschools Researching the Potential of a Teacher Educa�on Model for In-Service Teachers <?page no="1"?> GIESSENER BEITRÄGE ZUR FREMDSPRACHENDIDAKTIK Herausgegeben von Eva Burwitz-Melzer, Wolfgang Hallet, Jürgen Kurtz, Michael Legutke, Hélène Martinez, Franz-Joseph Meißner und Dietmar Rösler Begründet von Lothar Bredella, Herbert Christ und Hans-Eberhard Piepho <?page no="2"?> Kirsten Birsak de Jersey English in Inclusive Multilingual Preschools Researching the Potential of a Teacher Education Model for In-Service Teachers <?page no="3"?> © 2021 · Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG Dischingerweg 5 · D-72070 Tübingen Das Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. Internet: www.narr.de eMail: info@narr.de CPI books GmbH, Leck ISSN 0175-7776 ISBN 978-3-8233-8500-4 (Print) ISBN 978-3-8233-9500-3 (ePDF) ISBN 978-3-8233-0301-5 (ePub) Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http: / / dnb.dnb.de abrufbar. www.fsc.org MIX Papier aus verantwortungsvollen Quellen FSC ® C083411 ® www.fsc.org MIX Papier aus verantwortungsvollen Quellen FSC ® C083411 ® <?page no="4"?> 9 1 13 1.1 13 1.2 14 1.3 17 2 23 2.1 23 2.2 30 2.2.1 30 2.2.2 33 2.2.3 35 3 39 3.1 39 3.2 41 3.2.1 42 3.2.2 45 3.2.3 47 3.3 49 3.4 59 3.4.1 61 Contents Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Disciplinary relevance of the research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Personal relevance of the research: the impetus to develop a preschool teacher education research project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Resulting survey of the research structure and research procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Relevance of introducing English in preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research on early language learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendations of education policy for the preschool level The European Commission’s recommendations . . . . . . Austrian education policy for the preschool level . . . . Austrian preschool teacher education curriculum . . . . Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English in the multilingual inclusive state preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data collection to identify the features of the teacher development context: macro level of case study . . . . . . . . . . . Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work . . . . . . . The size and characteristics of children’s groups . . . . . State preschools offering German as a second language State preschools offering English as a foreign language Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing a foreign language generally and English specifically in preschool: perspective of the children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool: perspective of the teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preschool teachers’ education in teaching English: offers and needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <?page no="5"?> 3.4.2 63 3.4.3 65 3.4.4 66 4 73 4.1 73 4.2 76 4.3 79 4.3.1 81 4.3.2 84 5 87 5.1 89 5.2 93 5.3 94 5.4 99 5.4.1 99 5.4.2 101 5.4.3 103 5.5 106 5.6 109 5.7 113 5.7.1 113 Preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preschool teachers’ disposition to teach English to their groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Logistically accommodating English in the state preschool context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research on language teacher education in general . . . . . . . . Research on language teacher education for early language learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Competences required for teaching English in preschool . . . . Communicative English language competence . . . . . . Pedagogical content knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The preschool teacher education project: researching professional development through an approach of participatory action research . . . . Survey of the research questions structured as multiple case study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aligning research and teacher education through an approach of participatory action research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An outline of the preschool English teacher education model as support system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The central features of the preschool English teacher education model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher education organised as in situ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher education organised as participatory action research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher education organised as reflective practice . . . The complexity of roles of the teacher educator and researcher The role of the teacher educator to support preschool teachers’ English teaching competences: An overview of the components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The components of the preschool English teacher education model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Giving participatory demonstration lesson . . . . . . . . . 6 Contents <?page no="6"?> 5.7.2 116 5.7.3 119 5.7.4 122 5.7.5 127 5.8 133 5.8.1 134 5.8.2 138 5.8.3 156 6 159 6.1 161 6.2 162 6.2.1 165 6.2.2 166 6.2.3 168 6.2.4 171 6.3 193 6.3.1 194 6.3.2 198 6.4 209 6.5 213 7 219 7.1 220 Teaching the children cooperatively . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Integrating English to support independent practical work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Supporting teachers to develop communicative English language competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Integrating reflective approaches for professional development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A survey of task-based language teaching and learning and related approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Defining an understanding of tasks that is appropriate for the preschool context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An English course for the children: the structure of the preschool task sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case study design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Context features of the selected preschool sample: meso level of case study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The groups of children in the preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . The preschool timetable: focus on the morning routine Profiles of participating preschool teachers . . . . . . . . . . Data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Survey of the action research cycles and related data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Survey of the data related to the research questions . . Organising and interpreting the data: presenting findings . . . Reflecting on the triple role of colleague, teacher educator and researcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Presenting case study results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A survey of the implementation process of the research project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Contents <?page no="7"?> 7.2 228 7.2.1 228 7.2.2 240 7.2.3 248 7.2.4 316 7.3 321 7.3.1 322 7.3.2 326 7.3.3 334 7.3.4 338 7.3.5 342 8 353 8.1 354 8.2 367 8.3 370 375 397 397 411 416 421 423 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The teachers’ re-assessment of their attitudes towards introducing English in preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The teachers’ motivation to become involved in the process of teaching English to preschool children . . . . The teachers’ developing English teaching competences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The teachers’ reflective practice as a social community of practice: a summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Evaluating the components of the teacher education model . Participatory demonstration lessons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teaching the children cooperatively . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Independent practical work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Supporting communicative English language competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reflective approaches for professional development . . Conclusions and Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effectiveness of the teacher education model . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfer potential of the teacher education model to qualify preschool teachers in-service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reflection of the research design of the study and suggestions for further research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 1: Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 2: Interview Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 3: Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Contents <?page no="8"?> Acknowledgements When I took on the challenge of researching in the field of English preschool teacher education for this PhD work, I knew I had years of hard work in front of me. I could not have kept my motivation up had I not had the supportive environment in my family, my friends and colleges, and especially academically. “Without sufficient motivation, individuals with the most remarkable abilities cannot accomplish long-term goals” (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei 2008: 56). Though I am still not so convinced about having ‘remarkable abilities’, I can proudly present now the output of this long-term research. A number of people I want to sincerely thank: My deep gratitude firstly goes to Marita Schocker for her brilliant academic guidance and emotional support. She helped me to find my path through the maze of research processes and assisted me to find the way back onto the right track when I got lost in a one-way street. She has become a true friend in rain and sunshine. At the same time, I had the luck of being advised by Michael Legutke, always at the right time. He clarified my sense of direction, kept me on track together with the encouragement that he believed in my research, that it was a new field of study and would be a worthwhile contribution to early foreign language teaching and learning, for which I extend my thanks and much appreciation. I am also thankful to Vivienne Mellor-Schwartze for her readiness to answer quick question at any time. Special thanks has to go to all the enthusiastic and devoted preschool teachers who were prepared to leave the trodden path to try something new and challenging in the ways of language teaching. Teaching cooperatively and researching together was an enriching and inspiring experience for us all and I appreciate their dedication during the project. I always admired their patience and professionalism in the care for all the children and the respect they held for each little personality. The interest and eagerness for language learning the children showed throughout the project was the best proof for all involved that we are doing the right thing. Their enthusiasm to learn English, their laughter and affection were our reward. In my personal life, this research could not have possibly been achieved had it not been for the patience of my family and sacrifices, understanding and devotion of my husband, Rupert. My daughter Olivia deserves extra thanks for patiently giving her statistical expertise and my son Clemens for saving me ever so often with his IT abilities. Even though we live on the other side of the world from each other, my mother, Tonia, has remained my constant <?page no="9"?> internet companion, brain-stormer, follower and critical reader of the trials and tribulations of this research. 10 Acknowledgements <?page no="10"?> Abbreviations Abbreviation Term AR Action research BAfEP Bildungsanstalt für Elementarpädagogik CARPs Classroom action research projects CLC Communicative language classroom CLIL Content and language integrated learning CLT Communicative language teaching EFL English as a foreign language ELL Early language learning EP Exploratory practice FLL Foreign language learning FLTE Foreign language teacher education GSL German as a second language PAR Participatory action research SLTE Second language teacher education ST Student teachers TE Teacher educator TBLL Task-based language learning TBLT Task-based language teaching YL Young learners ZEKIP Salzburger Verwaltungsakademie-Zentrum für Kindergartenpä‐ dagogik <?page no="12"?> 1 Introduction 1.1 Disciplinary relevance of the research The study presented here addresses an area that foreign language pedagogy research has only recently attended to. It is the question of how to qualify teachers for early language learning (ELL) contexts. As Zein (2019) argues in the introduction to a volume on international research and practice of early language learning and teacher education: In the rapidly changing political, social and globalised economic landscapes of the 21 st century, language has become cultural capital. … A significant educational policy change characterising this tendency is early language learning: the teaching of a foreign or second language to children. Early language learning policies have become a worldwide phenomenon. (p. 1) Johnstone (2009) supports this view when he describes early language education as being “possibly the world’s biggest policy development in education” (p. 33). This development is reflected in the European Commission’s call for further action in the field of early childhood education “to improve the mastery of basic skills, in particular by teaching at least two foreign languages from a very early age” (European Commission 2018: 2.). The term ‘early education’ comprises the two contexts of the preand primary school level. This study focuses on the first level of early childhood education, the preschool. The European Commission (2011a) clearly establishes the benefits of early language learning at this early level of education for various reasons (for more details see chapter 2.2.1). Referring to studies in early child development education, the European Commission (2018) concludes that “there is an overwhelming consensus that the staff working in early childhood education and care provision is a crucial factor in determining its quality” (p. 58; see also Early et al., 2007; Urban et al., 2011; Urban et al., 2012). While this seems an obvious consequence to draw, the need for qualified early foreign language teachers has not resulted in the provision of context-ap‐ propriate teacher education programmes. Recent international and European reviews in the field of early language learning and teacher education therefore express their concerns “over the shortage of adequately trained teachers … and the inadequacy of teacher education programmes … for early language learning <?page no="13"?> teachers” (Zein, 2019, p. 2). The resulting shortage of publications on early language teacher education relates both to language teachers for the primary school context (see the review of studies provided by Wilden & Porsch, 2017) and for the preschool context (see the review of studies presented by Zein & Garton, 2019; whose volume on early language teacher education covers research related to children between the ages of 3 and 12). For further discussion see chapter 4.2. The shortage of relevant research is also due to the fact that if studies do exist, they are situated in what may be described as privileged acquisition contexts which do not represent the current population of preschool children. As Legutke et al. (2009) have already observed in their methodology for teaching English in the primary and preschool, it is one of the issues of early childhood language education that “only a very selective and privileged group of children” have access to preschool English education. Therefore, results from pilots in preschool language education in the past have been obtained from samplings which do not represent the multi-lingual profiles of today’s preschools, but instead predominantly monolingual groups of German children. (p. 141). For further discussion see chapter 2.1. It is against this disciplinary background that I became interested to develop a teacher education research project for preschool teachers to gain the compe‐ tences to implement English as a foreign language (EFL) for all children attending a regular, inclusive and multilingual state preschool. I felt that through my comprehensive personal professional background as English preschool teacher and teacher educator (TE) I would be able to draw on my expertise which I had acquired both in the field of teaching English to preschool children and of educating teachers. This professional background will be outlined in the following chapter. 1.2 Personal relevance of the research: the impetus to develop a preschool teacher education research project My professional background covers ample experiences with teaching English in various preschools in the Salzburg area. For the past twenty years I have been teaching English at state, parish and private preschools (to children aged 3 - 6) and at primary schools to small groups of children (aged 6 - 10 years) to support their transition from the preschool context to the primary school context. Since 2005, I have been employed as a class teacher in a private preschool, which subscribes to the immersion method of teaching English: this preschool is selected by the parents who wish to send their children to a preschool 14 1 Introduction <?page no="14"?> with a dedicated English language profile. My position in this preschool gave me the opportunity to develop and test task plans and resource materials for early language learning empirically, which included the permission to film the children throughout this time. As a result, I was able to reflect on the quality of tasks and materials as an ongoing process of my professional development: I could observe the ways in which the children responded, if the tasks managed to involve them or if the support that I had provided proved to be appropriate. I was able to integrate relevant theory in developing preschool tasks through a master course on early language learning that I had attended simultaneously (see next paragraph). During this time as preschool teacher, I felt that I would need to widen my horizon: my practical experience which I had been able to develop would need to be supplemented by theoretical knowledge so that I could substantiate what I was doing in practice and reflect on its appropriateness in supporting the children to learn English. I also wished to be able to aptly address the needs of the increasingly heterogeneous groups of preschool children in a professional way. I was therefore motivated to take a master course that educates primary and preschool teachers in-service to teach English which I completed in 2008 (M.A. E-LINGO - Teaching English to Young Learners (YL), Pre-school and Primary School, www.e-lingo.eu). This Master’s course subscribes to a teacher education model of reflected experience and develops experienced primary and preschool teachers’ competences through research-oriented approaches of learning to teach. It involved reflecting on video-recordings of children learning English which were integrated through a comprehensive media data bank (mediated reflection of practice) and conducting classroom action research projects (CARPs) in participating students’ home classrooms (direct reflection of practice). Experiences were then exchanged and reflected in virtual teams and research results presented and shared in face-to-face meetings. Various tools to support reflection that integrated relevant theory such as journal writing and portfolio work were included (Landesstiftung Baden-Württemberg et al. 2008; Benitt, 2015; Zibelius, 2015). My resulting Master’s thesis covered academic empirical research done collaboratively with a participating colleague on ‘Materials to Promote English Oral Production in a Pre-School Setting’ (2008). The expertise that I gained through this experience provided the basis for my next step of professional development as a preschool teacher educator for in-service teachers (which means for preschool teachers who work at their preschools with experience in childhood pedagogy but with little or no skills in teaching English). In-service teacher education involved offering courses for 15 1.2 Personal relevance of the research <?page no="15"?> teacher education seminars at the Salzburger Verwaltungsakademie-Zentrum für Kindergartenpädagogik (ZEKIP). In 2012 I started teaching English once a week in an inclusive multilingual state preschool which accepts all the children of its catchment area - a context in which German is a second language for the majority of the children as they come from multicultural and therefore multilingual family backgrounds. The preschool teachers joined my lessons to gain experience in how to teach English to their groups of children. I integrated relevant theory to support informed reflection and answered questions individually at various opportunities. All this happened informally on a voluntary basis and was motivated by preschool teachers’ wish to develop in this field. Through the expertise I developed in teaching in various preschools and educating preschool teachers at preschools and in seminar courses I was able to develop the competences that are directly relevant for the research which will be presented in the study here: I became well aware of the needs of preschool teachers and of the challenges it would involve implementing an additional English language program in this context. It is through the long-term and heterogeneous involvement with teaching young learners that I could experience the ease at which children acquire a new language - an insight that is backed through research results (see recent summary in: Nikolov & Mihaljevic Djigunovic, 2019) - and consequently I was convinced that English would be a rewarding component of a child’s preschool education. Finally, I was able to develop my teaching skills and produce materials and tasks which meet heterogeneous preschool children’s language learning needs. These materials are also the basis of a publication that is being prepared on a methodology for preschool English teaching which will provide tasks and course materials empirically tested in the various practice contexts in which I have worked (Title: ‘Teaching English in Preschool’). These tasks and materials have also been integrated on the video platform of the E-LINGO Master’s course when it was re-accredited in 2016 which is why E-LINGO was able to offer a special preschool track that addresses this context’s particular language learning needs. I have also become a regular member of the E-LINGO teaching staff and am responsible for tutoring preschool teachers’ course work since that time. My motivation to embark on the thesis research resulted from the experiences I have outlined above: I wanted to find out if it were possible to educate experienced preschool teachers to teach English for the context of the regular inclusive, multilingual state preschool, which accepts all the children in their catchment area. This meant that I needed to be able to identify a preschool that would qualify as a representative sample case both as regards preschool teachers’ 16 1 Introduction <?page no="16"?> qualification and children’s backgrounds. I was aware that the contextual framework of preschools is characterized by a number of constraints which relate both to Austria’s early language learning policy (→ chapter 2.2.2) and to unfavourable working conditions at state preschools which are not provided with any extra support when they wish to introduce additional programmes for preschool children (→ chapter 3.4.4). Despite these obvious contextual constraints, I had at the same time become convinced that participating teachers would benefit from the experience. I was faced with their often-prevailing attitudes of German first in the beginning which had quite understandably resulted from their concern that introducing another language would be too demanding for their children. However, in time they were able to reassess their initial attitudes the more they were exposed to credible examples of authentic tasks, which demonstrated that the children participate with enthusiasm, benefit from the extra language on offer and develop competences in an additional language with ease. It was during this time that I started to design a teacher development project for in-service teachers of English in the regular state preschool. It will be outlined in the following chapter. 1.3 Resulting survey of the research structure and research procedure The study has addressed the issue of the gap between recommendations for early childhood foreign language learning and the lack of provision for the education of qualified teachers in the relatively young domain of early foreign language education. It will empirically research the potential of educating pedagogically experienced preschool teachers in-service to teach English. The study will first discuss why it is relevant to introduce English into preschool (→ chapter 2). To do so, it will draw on existing research on the benefits of early language learning (which includes the issue of language choice). It will provide a survey on the way that European and consequently Austrian early language learning education policies have considered early language learning in their recommendations and curricula (both as regards learning languages in the preschool and to preschool teacher education). This will be followed by a detailed analysis of the contextual factors that affect the introduction of English in preschool (→ chapter 3). Providing comprehensive contextual information is required if the research uses a case study design. This seemed appropriate in view of the focus of my study: as 17 1.3 Resulting survey of the research structure and research procedure <?page no="17"?> there are only few empirical studies on early foreign language teacher education (FLTE), the research will be conducted in the form of a multiple case study “that considers unique localities in their diverse schooling contexts” (Zein, 2019, p. 5) and is, according to the survey of studies presented by Zein and Garton (2019), the dominant research design in this academic field of study at the moment. But the format of case study research is not only appropriate in the light of the limited knowledge base we have on early language teacher development. It also supports the recognition “that quality teaching is unique to the locality where the teaching is carried out, … what is needed within individual contexts, the requirements for qualifications in different locales and the cultural and normative practices of teaching [that] will always be locally specific” (p. 6). Consequently, a first step of my research involved a questionnaire survey that was sent to all state preschools in the Salzburg area (my context of work) so that I would be able to identify the features of the macro level of the case study (see chapter 5.1 and 6.1 for an overview of the case study levels) that I had in mind. It served two purposes: The first purpose was that I would need to find out if my offer to educate preschool teachers to teach English would be asked for and if the context would be generally supportive of the teacher education project. If it were, what support would I need to provide in the general set-up for the teacher education so that teachers were able to potentially develop the competences I had identified? To do so, the questionnaire addressed the following relevant topics: (a) the general contextual framework of preschool teachers’ contexts of work (including preschools’ size, features of children’s group with a focus on their languages and the availability of German as a second language (GSL) and of English as a foreign language; (b) preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing foreign languages in general and English in par‐ ticular by focusing on their perceived benefits or disadvantages for the children; (c) preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool in general and at their preschools in particular and their qualification to do so. The second purpose was that I would need to detect a sample preschool for my research project that would qualify as being representative for both teachers’ and children’s educational backgrounds and find a preschool that would be prepared to participate in my research with teachers who would need to qualify as a community of practice and be willing to commit themselves to actively participate, despite the general unfavourable contextual situation I was well aware of. Both purposes could be fulfilled, as will be demonstrated (→ chapter 6.2). In a next step, the content of the teacher education project will be identified by presenting results of a literature research in the areas that are relevant 18 1 Introduction <?page no="18"?> for the design of my preschool teacher education project. They comprise the knowledge base on professional language teacher education (in general and for early language learning in particular) and the competences that are required for teaching English in preschool. Findings of these topic areas provided the basis of defining the content of my preschool teacher education project and allowed me to draw conclusions for the appropriate research approach (→ chapter 4). On the basis of the needs-analysis of the preschool teacher context in chapter 3 and the identification of features of appropriate teacher education processes that would have the potential to develop preschool teachers’ required competences in chapter 4, a teacher education model was designed in chapter 5. This model considered the existing knowledge base on language teacher education and at the same time tailored its particular components to meet the needs of participating teachers of the preschool context in question. It emerged that it would be through an approach of participatory action research (PAR) that both the interests of research and teachers participating in the study could be aligned. It was expected that the following general research questions could be answered as a result: What teacher education model for introducing English into preschool would develop the teachers’ competences needed to teach EFL effectively and accommodate the complexities of the preschool context at the same time? What evidence is there that they have successfully developed the competences intended? In an approach of participatory action research, teachers’ action and research of their professional development are closely related. While chapter 5 will focus on the design of the teacher education model, chapter 6 will focus on the research design as multiple case study. It will first describe the three levels of the case study: the macro, meso and micro level (→ diagram 1): 19 1.3 Resulting survey of the research structure and research procedure <?page no="19"?> Figure 1: Diagram 1: Multiple case study design Next, the chapter will outline the sampling strategy and present results of the analysis of the context features of the selected preschool both on the meso and micro levels of the case study. It involves both a survey on teachers’ perception of the contextual constraints and affordances as a community of practise (meso level of the case study) and of individual preschool teachers’ profiles (micro level of the case study). A survey of the action research cycles, and related data collection will conclude this chapter. Chapter 7 will present case study results. They first include a survey of the implementation process of the research project, which will be related to the action research cycles the project involved (→ chapter 7.1). The next chapter will present individual teachers’ case studies and will summarize developments that may be generalised for participating teachers as a community of practice at the preschool (→ chapter 7.2). The case studies will demonstrate if the purposes the teacher education project had in mind could be achieved and to what extent. Presentation of case study results will be related to the following areas the research project has addressed: teachers’ reassessment of their attitudes towards introducing English in preschool; their motivation to become involved in the process of teaching English to preschool children; the teaching competences they were able to develop in the course of the project and the development of their reflective practice as professional habit. Both the process and the outcome of the research will be documented: teachers’ competence development during the process will be represented in individual teacher portraits which trace their particular individual developments; each individual case will be concluded with a summary which lists these competences in grid format to be able to provide a summative survey of each teachers’ competence development that may be 20 1 Introduction <?page no="20"?> compared to developments of all the teachers that participated in the survey; finally, chapter 7.3 will conclude with an evaluation of the components of the teacher education model. It will be described in what way its components have contributed to teachers’ professional development. A concluding chapter 8 will finally discuss the results of the study and will structure it following the questions that are related to the research focus of the teacher education study. This includes: the effectiveness of the teacher education model for the sample case including the integration of reflective approaches (→ chapter 8.1); the transfer potential of the teacher education project to other preschool education contexts including a reflection of the required adaptations that a transfer would involve (→ chapter 8.2); a reflection of the research design of the teacher development as participatory action research and presentation of results in the form of a multiple case study (→ chapter 8.3). Reported experiences documented in the literature will be integrated here and future research directions outlined. 21 1.3 Resulting survey of the research structure and research procedure <?page no="22"?> 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool 2.1 Research on early language learning This chapter will argue why it is worthwhile to introduce English at the preschool level. To do so it will clarify who qualifies as a young learner, will reflect on the issue of language choice and will summarize the arguments that have been put forward in favour of an early start in language learning. Young learners When reviewing international publications on research related to young learners there is an enormous variation from country to country. Ellis (2014) notes that the term young learner is vague but distinguishes between preand post- 11or 12-year-olds because of the enormous differences in children’s “physical, psychological, social, emotional, conceptual and cognitive develop‐ ment” (pp. 75,76) which result in different approaches to language teaching. Pinter (2011) remarks that it “is hard to fit ‘childhood’ into fixed age brackets. … Typically, children start preschool at around the age of 3 and then they move to primary / elementary school around the age of 5 - 7”. She defines preschool children (age 3 - 5) as follows: “No formal learning experiences, no literacy skills, large differences among children with regard to readiness for school” (p. 2). Copland and Garton (2014) in their introduction to a special issue of a journal that focuses on teaching English to young learners define young learner as follows: The rapid and comprehensive lowering of the age at which English is introduced to children in many countries, together with the spread of preschool English, means it is timely to focus on these younger age groups. … Therefore, for the purposes of this Special Issue, YLs [young learners] are those at pre-primary and primary level, roughly from the age of 3 up to 11 or 12 years old. (p. 224) While the study that is presented here focuses on the pre-primary level of preschool children aged 3 - 6, some of the research that is reviewed does not always clearly separate these two age groups. Whenever possible, this study will make this distinction. <?page no="23"?> 1 Nadia was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. Language choice One of the simple facts of life in the present time is that the English language skills of a good proportion of its citizenry are seen as vital if a country is to participate actively in the global economy and to have access to the information and knowledge that provide the basis for both social and economic development. (Burns & Richards, 2009, p. 1) English has become an international language, not only in the areas of research, businesses, politics, informatics, tourism or advertising but it has also developed to be the lingua franca which people of different nationalities share to commu‐ nicate with each other in everyday contexts. From an early age English is a language that is also familiar to children. They are often exposed to English through electronic media, games, popular songs, English loanwords or products from the toy industry, for example. These early encounters with the English language are therefore closely associated with their interests, which in turn stimulate their natural curiosity and keenness to explore the language further. Preschool teachers are generally reluctant to introduce a foreign language as the groups of children in their contexts of work are extremely heterogeneous due to their multicultural and multilingual background (→ chapter 3). This puts preschool teachers in a dilemma: on the one hand, they recognize that English is a lingua franca and therefore has a particular status in language education. Consequently, the teachers are generally open-minded and consider the idea of introducing English in preschool is an appropriate choice. On the other hand, they see the need for their groups of children to learn German as a second language first. This is expressed in the following quote of one of the preschool teachers who participated in the study which is presented here and may be considered to be representative of preschool teachers’ attitudes: “It’s difficult to say, because of course children are here to learn German, because they need it for school and their lives. They also have to learn English in the [sic] school later on. So, it is also important, I think. What should I say? ” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 1 This idea of the merits of consecutive language learning in preschool (first German - then English), that is also expressed in this preschool teachers’ quote, is a widely spread preconception among teachers as early language acquisition researchers have demonstrated: “Entgegen lange gehegter Vorurteile wissen wir heute, dass Kinder, die von frühester Kindheit an mit zwei (Erst-)Sprachen 24 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool <?page no="24"?> konfrontiert werden, dadurch nicht überfordert sind. … Offensichtlich ist die Sorge, Kinder durch potentiell widersprüchlichen Input zu verwirren, groß” (Tracy, 2008, p. 125). But the issue of language choice, that is, which potential additional language to offer in preschools if it is offered at all is yet another concern to teachers. The European Commission (2011b) in their Policy Handbook which promotes foreign language learning (FLL) at the pre-primary level suggests that it is best to offer a foreign language in preschool education, which will be continued in primary school: The aims of any EFL policy for children in pre-primary education should be to foster intercultural and multilingual education focused on the development of the child’s personal potential. Where appropriate, it could also be to provide an introduction to a particular language that will be taught later on in primary school. (p. 9) This understanding is also expressed in the Language Education Policy Profile for Austria, which was published by The Language Policy Division of the Council of Europe and Austrian’s Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur (2008b). The report recognises - if with some reservation and referring to the omnipresence of the English language in society - that English is an “inescapable part of their cultural context”: As in most other Council of Europe member states, the teaching of English dominates to the extent of sometimes seeming to be synonymous with foreign language teaching. With the exception of arrangements that have been made for autochthonous minor‐ ities and migrants, whenever discussion focuses on early-start language learning it tends to focus exclusively on English. In Austria as elsewhere the importance that is attached to developing proficiency in English makes it difficult to get a hearing for diversification, and even more difficult to imagine how it might be implemented. But English is so pervasive in international media, especially the Internet, that there is good reason to suppose that young people will learn it not only as a result of the teaching they receive at school but also because it is an inescapable part of their cultural context. (p. 8) It has been statistically established by the Special Eurobarometer 243 that “English is perceived as the most useful language by citizens in both new and old member states” (European Commission, 2006, p. 31). According to the latest data, 97 % of all Europeans study English as a first foreign language and languages other than English, French or German are rarely studied (European Commission, 2017). Nevertheless, the European Commission in the same year “reiterated the ambition of ‘enhancing the learning of languages, so that more young people 25 2.1 Research on early language learning <?page no="25"?> will speak at least two European languages in addition to their mother tongue’" (European Commission, 2018, p. 2; italics in original). This development may seem at first to contradict European education policy’s aspiration of plurilingual education and the diversification of language teaching as their additional long-term goal: “Furthermore, the co-existence of many languages in Europe is a powerful symbol of the European Union's aspiration to be united in diversity, one of the cornerstones of the European project. Languages define personal identities but are also part of a shared inheritance” (p. 2). But on closer scrutiny this is not the case as it is not a question of ‘either - or’, but of ‘both - and’: while early childhood language development obviously needs to focus on the language of instruction (German), and - in the interest of equal chances for all the children - on a foreign language, children’s first language education must not be neglected: Deutlich größeres Gewicht (als Dialekte oder Nachbarsprachen, zum Beispiel) wird auf die Wertschätzung und Berücksichtigung der Herkunftssprachen und unter‐ schiedlichen Familienkulturen der Kinder gelegt und vielfach betont, dass andere Familiensprachen als Chance und Bereicherung, nicht als Belastung oder Risiko zu betrachten seien. Es wird nahegelegt, die verschiedenen Herkunftssprachen am besten durch Elternbeteiligung einzubinden. (Sambanis, 2016, pp. 174-175) Considering the roles of different languages in elementary education, in my research project English was selected as the foreign language to be introduced in the inclusive state preschool for its relevance as a commonly shared European language that contributes to mutual understanding of people with diverse heritage languages. At the same time, English would be integrated in a pre‐ school, which is characteristically multicultural and therefore multilingual. Consequently, it would support European language policy recommendations in a context where at the same time all the languages represented by the children are equally respected and important in their own right (→ chapter 6.2.2). In practice, this means that conscious attention is given to valuing the children’s many heritage languages as a principle in the state preschool, which was selected for the research project. Two examples illustrate this preschool’s language policy: when entering the preschool there is a large paper archway greeting everybody with good morning in the various languages of the children and three times a year they have story-day in which different stations are set up throughout the preschool as story-corners. Various mothers, fathers or grandparents who represent the different cultures and languages come to the preschool with their children’s storybooks and share them in one of the stations. The children are free to go from one station to the other to listen to the 26 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool <?page no="26"?> 2 Pinter is referring to the summary of the European Union recommendations in Blondin et al. (1998). stories and have contact with the various languages. As I am a native speaker of English, I read English children’s books in one of the stations. During the day, at various opportunities, the preschool teachers engage the children in comparing words and trying to pronounce them, which is an experience that makes both the children and the teachers aware of the diversity of languages and the excitement of getting involved in learning them. It also values children’s language competences and contributes to a good rapport with their teachers. For example, I remember a situation when I could not manage the right pronunciation of a word in Turkish and suddenly I had about ten children around me all trying to teach me. Because of the philosophy to uphold mutual respect for all languages, the teacher education project that is the focus of the study here therefore began by the children telling everybody which other languages they spoke. During the participatory demonstration lessons (→ chapter 5.7.1) the opportunity was taken to encourage children to share their mother tongues and through this the children felt free to join in and share words in their various languages. Relevance of an early start in English Early language acquisition research commonly agrees that children tend to approach second or foreign language learning in a natural way showing only little or no anxiety and inhibitions as they are still in the early phases of coming to terms with their first language or languages. They have the ability to acquire languages intuitively and are “more attuned to the phonological system of the new language” (Pinter, 2006, p. 29). 2 But this general statement needs to be substantiated with regard to the following specifications. Referring to Pinter (2011) Copland & Garton (2014) note that there are contradictory results of previous studies on the ‘younger is better’ hypothesis. They therefore note that “there is no conclusive evidence for the supposed benefits of early introduction of English into the curriculum” (p. 224). They argue that if early English is offered, success depends on the quality of “age-appropriate teaching” and “learners’ attitudes towards the language and their motivation to learn” (p. 225). In summarizing the state of available research findings, they note that research-based publications into effective practices for teaching YLs continue to be quite rare. Database searches … still yield very few examples of empirical studies about the effect of pedagogies on early language learning. … It is clear that there 27 2.1 Research on early language learning <?page no="27"?> 3 The Council of Europe suggested that “school pupils should, as a rule, have the opportunity to learn two languages” (Blondin et al. 1998: 2) and recommended to their member states that English is to be included in primary schools (Council of Europe 1997: 2). As a result, many European member states brought forward the age of language teaching in their curricula (European Commission 2004: 46). This resulted in a number of research studies that investigated if initiatives to introduce English early were successful. Examples of seminal studies include the following: Studien zum Braunschweiger Schulversuch (Doyé & Lüttge 1975, Doyé et al. 1977); Modellversuch in Rheinland-Pfalz (Helfrich 1995); Untersuchungen zum Hamburger Schulversuch (Kahl & Knebler 1996); Hessisches Merry-Go-Round-Projekt (Legutke & Lortz 2002); Pilot‐ phase „Fremdsprache in der Grundschule“ in Baden-Württemberg von 2001 bis 2005 als Voraussetzung für eine flächendeckende Einführung, die wissenschaftlich begleitet und evaluiert wurde (Teichmann & Werlen 2007); EVENING Studie (Evaluation Englisch in der Grundschule, Groot-Wilken & Husfeldt 2013); The BIG study (2015): the first large-scale quantitative study that included all of the German federal states with the exception of Saarland based on tests that had been developed to investigate performance levels of English in the four skills of reading, listening, speaking and writing at the end of the fourth grade primary school. The study was able to demonstrate that the pupils could perform the tasks that tested the expected levels that the state curricula defined in all four skills and sometimes even exceeded these levels (BIG-Kreis 2015: 36, 42, 47, 63). Pupils scored better results in all of the skill areas the earlier they had started to learn English. remains a lack of classroom-based studies and ‘young learners’ in general remains an under-researched area. (pp. 226, 227) It is for similar reasons that Piske (2017) also critically examines the reasons “why the high expectations regarding the outcomes of early foreign language programs many people appear to have had in the beginning have not always been met” (p. 45). Early foreign language education was introduced on the assumption that there is a critical or sensitive period during which children acquire languages more successfully than adolescents or adults (for a summary on research regarding the critical period hypothesis see pp. 45-47). The mono‐ causal explanation of attainment in L2 learning has “led several researchers to ignore the potential influence of variables other than age-related variables on success in L2 Learning” (p. 46). They relate to the quality and amount of exposure to the target language, learners’ opportunities to use the language or teachers’ ability to create motivating learning environments (→ chapter 5.8. for further details). Finally, empirical studies that have been published under the heading of an early start in English have either researched children’s language competence development in primary school settings 3 or in bilingual immersive elementary contexts (Piske et al., 2016; Seifert, 2016). Although results from both contexts support the introduction of an early start in English, the contexts that are represented in these empirical research studies differ from the language 28 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool <?page no="28"?> acquisition context of the multilingual inclusive state preschool which is the focus of the preschool teacher education study that is presented here. Results of these empirical studies can therefore not be directly transferred to this research. No studies have researched children’s English competence development in heterogeneous, non-privileged, inclusive, multi-lingual preschool classrooms to date. This has been criticized by language acquisition researchers and European education policy alike: One consequence of training kindergarten teachers at secondary level (to date) in Austria has been that Austrian universities and research institutions (with a few exceptions) have occupied themselves little or not at all, with research referring to the kindergarten age group. The same is true, more or less, of the question of how 3 to 6 year olds relate to languages, or deal with various different languages. (Council of Europe, 2008a, p. 87) Legutke et al. (2009) in their methodology for teaching English in the primary and preschool state that insights resulting from pilots in English language education (p. 140) are limited as research is conducted in exclusive language learning contexts: [The results] were obtained with a predominantly monolingual group of German children. No pilots have been reported about multi-lingual groups of children, which today have become dominant in many urban and even rural areas. What is missing so far are … programs that consider all children of a given area. In conjunction with these pilots, the impact of factors such as diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, social status, and economic status of parents would have to be researched. (p. 141) In some studies, that are situated in more privileged contexts, the issue of how to qualify teachers for preschools that “grant learning opportunities to all students, no matter what language and cultural background they have” (p. 141) is not addressed. A case in point is a recent study conducted by Seifert (2016). Her sample is a German-English bilingual elementary nursery school for oneto three-year-old children, which is attached to a university and therefore draws 90 % of its children from parents whose background is academic. As the author critically states herself, this sample hardly qualifies as representing the children currently attending elementary education (pp. 159-160). Other studies that are extensively documented on early language learning education are also located in bilingual acquisition contexts (Steinlein & Piske, 2016). The argument for introducing early English in a multilingual inclusive state preschool therefore cannot be directly derived from existing empirical research studies of documented successes of early English even though existing research 29 2.1 Research on early language learning <?page no="29"?> in related primary and immersive elementary contexts at least implies that its introduction may be potentially worthwhile. However, a further argument strongly supports its introduction: it is the unquestionable need to provide equal learning opportunities for all the children: Angesichts der Bildungsverantwortung des Elementarbereichs muss ernsthaft disku‐ tiert werden, ob dem Kontakt mit einer ersten Fremdsprache … nicht selbstverständ‐ lich ein Platz zugestanden werden sollte. … Die Nachfrage nach kommerziellen Angeboten und Kindergärten mit bilingualen Programmen, deren Zahl sich in den letzten zehn Jahren verdreifacht haben soll, spiegelt den Elternwunsch. Da dieses Angebot aber nicht allen Kindern zugänglich ist, könnte in einem zentralen Entwick‐ lungsbereich Chancenungleichheit entstehen. (Sambanis, 2016, p. 175) Finally, yet importantly, it is with the background of my long-term experience and documented best practice examples of teaching English to all the children in the multilingual inclusive preschool that has motivated me to embark on this study (→ chapter 1.2). Its focus will be on the potential to develop preschool teachers’ competences to teach English, also because many experts have emphasized that focusing on starting age as the key variable is misleading in foreign language contexts. The age factor is not the main issue. There is a lot more to success over time. The quality and quantity of early provision, teachers, programs, and continuity are more important. (Nikolov, 2016, p. 4; see also Nikolov, 2000; Singleton, 2014) As the qualification of teachers, child-appropriate early language learning programs and the continuity of language programs (for example from preschool to primary education, and from primary education to secondary education) are believed to be just as important to successfully implement early language education as is the age factor, the next chapter will look more closely at the situation of foreign language learning in preschool as seen from the perspectives of education policy (both European and Austrian) and preschool teachers. 2.2 Recommendations of education policy for the preschool level 2.2.1 The European Commission’s recommendations Chapter 2.2.1 looks at the official European Commission’s policy recommenda‐ tions of early language teaching and learning which includes specific recom‐ 30 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool <?page no="30"?> mendations in its country report of the circumstances in Austria (Council of Europe, 2008a) and the Commission’s Policy Handbook on preschool in early language learning (European Commission, 2011a). A significant break-through has come about across European membership states with the recognition that preschool is to be regarded as the first level of early childhood education, which children should attend: Pre-school education in general has been the object of increased attention in recent years: with the aim of unlocking children’s potential, in 2009 the EU Education Ministers set a target that by 2020 at least 95 % of children aged between four and the age in which compulsory primary education starts should participate in early childhood education. (European Commission, 2011a, p. 5) Within the move towards early childhood education, early language learning has taken a prominent position. Endorsing early language learning, the European Commission compiled the policy handbook (2011a) on language learning at the pre-primary level, in which it clearly states what early language learning entails: ‘Early Language Learning (ELL) at pre-primary level’ means systematic awareness raising or exposure to more than one language taking place in an early childhood education and care setting in a pre-primary school context. (p. 6; italics in the original) Early language learning policies include both second language learning, which is the language of instruction (in the context of the study presented here: German), and foreign language learning (in the context of the study presented here: English) (p. 5). To avoid any confusion on what the European Commission is referring to, there are clear definitions: ‘Second language’ means the language of instruction for children with a minority background, if it is different from their first language / mother tongue. It means the language of instruction in the case of children with a migrant background. In multilingual countries, it means the language of instruction when it is different from the children’s first language / mother tongue. (p. 7; italics in original) Language of instruction means the dominant language formally used in the pre-pri‐ mary school setting. (p. 6; italics in original) First language / mother tongue means any language first acquired by a child. (p. 6; italics in original) Foreign language means any language used in the pre-primary school context other than the first language / mother tongue, the language of instruction or the second language. (p. 7; italics in original) 31 2.2 Recommendations of education policy for the preschool level <?page no="31"?> This policy handbook addresses member states, giving a set of guidelines and recommendations of “reflecting examples of good practice and academic evidence on how to ensure the quality, effectiveness and sustainability of language learning in pre-primary settings” (p. 4). As there is a continual debate about early language learning, the policy handbook clearly establishes the benefits: ELL activities in pre-primary settings … are instrumental in enhancing competences such as comprehension, expression, communication and problem-solving, enabling children to interact successfully with peers and adults. As young children also become aware of their own identity and cultural values, early language learning can shape the way they develop their attitudes towards other languages and cultures by raising awareness of diversity and of cultural variety, hence fostering understanding and respect. … Starting to learn a second / foreign language early can help shape children’s overall progress while they are in a highly dynamic developmental stage in their lives. Starting early also means that learning can take place over a longer period, which may support the achievement of more permanent results in language learning and in other areas of learning. When the young brain learns languages, it tends to develop an enhanced capacity to learn languages throughout life. … Children who have access to more than one language tend to transfer into the first language / mother tongue the concepts and terms they have learnt through the second / foreign language and vice versa. Hence, language processing in a multilingual mind helps stimulate cognitive competences. …. (pp. 7, 8) Nevertheless, as competence in the language of instruction is regarded as the key to providing children with equal learning opportunities, early language learning is predominantly associated with the language of instruction in pre-primary settings: Pre-primary language education aims to offer all children equal opportunities for a good start to the emotional, social and cognitive development resulting from language exposure, taking into account their needs and interests and preparing them for primary school. … Pre-primary education tends to focus on the language of instruction. (p. 10). As a result of diverse situations and needs, as well as opportunities available to offer, early language learning initiatives to include foreign language learning vary greatly throughout the member states: With some exceptions, language activities at pre-primary level are not formally structured. There are marked differences in staff competences. Moreover, resources 32 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool <?page no="32"?> and opportunities are unevenly distributed, both geographically and within different socio-demographic groups. Where an early start in language learning is seen as a key to better opportunities in life but access remains limited, early language learning has become entangled with equity issues: better education often means earlier access to good quality language tuition for the advantaged. In some cases, language learning opportunities are not offered at all in public kindergartens although this does happen in privately-run settings. In others, demand exceeds the available places. Even where opportunities are there, for some children access is more difficult - for example where parents are asked to contribute additional fees for language lessons. Furthermore, early language learning is only provided in a limited number of languages. Diversifying the offer of languages is a challenge linked to local demand, to utilitarian considerations and to the availability of adequate human and financial resources. (p. 9) While European education policy clearly supports early foreign language education at the preschool level, foreign language education for the preschool is not a priority in Austrian education policy as the following chapter will demonstrate. 2.2.2 Austrian education policy for the preschool level In Austria the European Commission’s proposal to teach a foreign language at the preschool level became eclipsed by the responsibility and immediate need to focus on the language of instruction - German. The BildungsRahmenPlan, the preschool educational plan for Austria published by the Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur (2009a), was published with an extra component dedicated to early language learning which refers entirely and exclusively to German (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, 2009b). Ac‐ cording to the European country report of Austria, the situation is as follows: Austrian kindergartens further and promote children’s acquisition of the German language above all: this applies both to children with German as a first language, and to children who have a different first language. (Council of Europe, 2008a, p. 36) Programmes designed to give children of kindergarten age a good start in primary school by ensuring that they have a sufficient level of competence in the language of schooling are high on the agenda of ministries of education and local education authorities. (Council of Europe, 2008b, p. 11) The final version does not cater for foreign language learning in its early language learning programme. “Systematic foreign language teaching (FLT) at pre-primary level does not lie within the priorities of the Austrian education 33 2.2 Recommendations of education policy for the preschool level <?page no="33"?> system” (European Commission, 2011b, p. 7) to the extent that foreign languages are not discussed at all within the compilation of the BildungsRahmenPlan. Foreign language learning was however included in the discussion in the draft of BildungsRahmenPlan. “Beim Fremdsprachenlernen im Kindergarten ist es häufig das vorrangige Ziel, eine Sprache kennenzulernen, die für alle Kinder neu ist. Durch Lieder, Reime, einfache Texte können Klangbild und Aussprache gefestigt werden” (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, 2008, p. 25). The BildungsRahmenPlan is significant for the implications of foreign language learning initiatives in Austrian state preschools, because it is the legal foundation for the education plan for all Austrian preschools. The BildungsRahmenPlan was a turning point in the organisation of preschool education. Previously, Austria had a complicated political organisation for pre‐ schools because legislation and administration lay within the responsibility and discretion of nine independent federal states. To remedy the situation, the nine federal states signed a Memorandum of Understanding in 2008, which announced a “new legal basis for pre-school education to regulate responsibilities and cooperation between the Republic of Austria and its nine federal countries” (European Commission, 2011b, p. 4). This resulted in the publication of the BildungsRahmenPlan which was compiled in August 2009 (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, 2009a; 2009b). It did not explicitly rule out that English or any other foreign language could be included in preschools but placed responsibility on the individual preschools both to cater for and to finance any initiative that may take place with no official support provided. As a result, implementation of teaching a foreign language is scarce and varies greatly from preschool to preschool as is the case in other European member states (European Commission, 2011b, p. 9). Given this situation, no support for provision of a consistent foreign language learning curriculum or teacher education programmes that qualify preschool teachers appropriately, are provided. The Country Report referring to Austria simply states that more needs to be offered in the way of other languages in addition to German (Council of Europe, 2008a, p. 86). It would seem that Lower Austria was an exception; however, the financial support of this program was stopped in 2016: In Niederösterreich, dem größten Bundesland Österreichs, wird Englisch flächende‐ ckend schon im Kindergarten angeboten (vgl. Boeckmann et al. 2011). Außer dem Englischen bezieht dort die sprachliche Bildung ab der Elementarstufe die jeweiligen Nachbarsprachen (Tschechisch, Slowakisch, Ungarisch, Slowenisch, Italienisch) mit ein. Ferner ist vorgesehen … durch andere Familiensprachen, … [die] in der pädagogi‐ schen Einrichtung vertreten sind, die sprachlichen Erlebnisse der Kinder zu erweitern. (Sambanis, 2016, p. 173) 34 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool <?page no="34"?> My research therefore addresses this situation in early foreign language educa‐ tion through an empirical study that has been conducted in a state preschool. This context can be said to be representative of many state preschools in Salzburg (→ chapter 6.2). The next section will give a more detailed insight in the preschool teacher education in Austria. 2.2.3 Austrian preschool teacher education curriculum As the focus in Austrian preschools is on German as the language of instruction, the teacher education curriculum trains prospective preschool teachers how to teach and encourage the language of instruction (European Commission, 2011a, p. 8). In the context of discussing the role of early language learning in Austrian preschools, the focus is therefore on German as a second language rather than on introducing a foreign language: The role of ELL staff is to provide an enriching, engaging environment, a structure that supports and extends learning opportunities through a scaffolding process (helping children to learn, play and solve the challenges facing them with a simple hint, question or prompt). ELL should allow them to monitor a child’s learning progress and anticipate his / her potential development through formative assessment. This will identify and build upon each child’s unique potential. There should not be any formal summative assessment of language competences involving grading. (p. 14) The education of preschool teachers in Austria takes place over a five-year span at the BAfEP (Bildungsanstalt für Elementarpädagogik) schools. They are upper secondary level schools for students between the ages of 14 and 18 years. The state curriculum combines the regular secondary school education subjects which award the A-level certificate that qualifies the students to enter university, with the compulsory subject of Didactics and Pedagogics which additionally qualifies the students as preschool teachers. For the practical work of Didactics and Pedagogics, each school is associated with a preschool, which is responsible for providing teaching practice. The students also visit other pre‐ schools for further practical experience. Until 2016 the optional subject ‘Englisch im Kindergarten: Impulse zum Interkulturellen Lernen’ was offered in Salzburg for these students in their final year of their secondary school education. But the subject was not a compulsory part of students’ education, because teaching foreign languages, including English in Austrian preschools, is not included in the preschool educational plan, BildungsRahmenPlan (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, 2009a, 2009b). According to a teacher of the subject ‘Didactics and Pedagogics’, the students did not enrol in the optional 35 2.2 Recommendations of education policy for the preschool level <?page no="35"?> subject (‘Englisch im Kindergarten: Impulse zum interkulturellen Lernen’) due to the pressures of the final year A-level examinations and therefore the subject was discontinued. At the time, the A-level examinations became centralized throughout Austria (‘Zentralmatura’), which added to students’ pressure to attain their A-level certificate as the ‘Zentralmatura’ was new for both the teachers and the students. To enable adults who already have their A-Level certificate to qualify as preschool teachers the BAfEP school in Salzburg offers an adult education evening course. It takes place in the evening to accommodate people who work during the day. The course includes the compulsory subjects: ‘Didactics and Pedagogics’, ‘German’ and ‘German as a Second Language’. The subjects, ‘English’ and ‘English as a Foreign Language’ are not included. The participants graduate with a diploma. If qualified preschool teachers wish to be educated in English teaching in Salzburg they can participate in seminars, which I offer for the Salzburger Verwaltungsakademie-Zentrum für Kindergartenpädagogik. Apart from these seminars preschool teachers are largely left to their own devices as to how they qualify for it or if, when, how and to what extent they implement English in their preschools: Exact data on language teachers in pre-primary schools are not available. Foreign language teaching could be carried out by pre-primary school teachers with a certain level of the language, however, not necessarily defined and required by regulations. Or the language may be taught by native speakers teachers, native speakers (but not with teachers’ qualifications), students of the language at teacher training colleges, language teachers from primary schools etc. At the moment there is no legislation which would set minimum requirements for people providing foreign language lessons at pre-primary level, therefore their qualifications vary. (European Commission, 2011b, p. 32) European education policy convincingly argues why early language learning should be a fixed component of the preschool curriculum, but as the Austrian preschool educational plan focuses on the children becoming competent in the language of instruction, German, to prepare them for transition to primary school, there is no room for foreign language learning. Consequently, little empirical research is available on early language education beyond the level of the language of instruction, (→ chapter 2.2.2). As has been outlined in the introduction, to attempt to bridge the gap between education policy recommendations that supports early foreign language and the reported lack of provision of early language education beyond the level of the language of instruction (German), would require a detailed analysis 36 2 Relevance of introducing English in preschool <?page no="36"?> of the contextual factors that affect the introduction of English in preschool and therefore my research would have to be organised as a (multiple) case study for lack of available data in the field. Consequently, a first step of my research involved administering a questionnaire survey that was sent to all state preschools in Stadt Salzburg. Details of the purposes of the survey and the results will be presented in the next chapter. 37 2.2 Recommendations of education policy for the preschool level <?page no="38"?> 1 (→ appendix 3: questionnaire). 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English in the multilingual inclusive state preschool 3.1 Data collection to identify the features of the teacher development context: macro level of case study Chapter 3.1 focuses on investigating the macro level of the multiple case study (see chapter 6.1 for an overview of the case study levels). The information is based on data from the questionnaire survey, 1 which I sent to all the state preschools in the Salzburg area. It aimed to provide information on the following contextual features that would be relevant for my teacher education project: a. the contextual framework of preschool teachers’ contexts of work, refer‐ ring to the size of the preschool and characteristics of children’s groups with a focus on their languages and the availability of German as a second language and of English as a foreign language (→ questions 1 & 2). b. preschool teachers' attitudes towards introducing foreign languages, in general, and English, in particular, in preschool by asking them to com‐ ment on widespread popular ideas of early language learning that they were exposed to in their community with a focus on preschool teachers’ perceived benefits or disadvantages for the children (→ question 3). c. preschool teachers' attitudes towards introducing English in preschool in general and regarding the potential introduction of English at their preschool in particular, their personal prerequisites and professional qualifications to teach English with a focus on preschool teachers’ perceived benefits or disadvantages they would associate for themselves as teachers (→ question 4). d. I would need to identify a preschool that could be used as sample for the teacher education research project that would qualify as being representative for both teachers’ and children’s educational backgrounds and the preschool’s teachers would need to be prepared to commit themselves to actively participate as a community of practice in the <?page no="39"?> project (the procedure of the selection of an appropriate sample will be addressed in chapter 6.2). The resulting set-up of the questionnaire is as follows: it first establishes the contextual framework that the preschool teachers work in and then relates their work to the teachers’ personal opinions towards introducing English in their preschool contexts. The sequence of questions was motivated by my awareness of preschool teachers’ reluctant attitudes towards introducing English in preschool through my comprehensive contact and experience with many preschool teachers. At the beginning of the project, I was well aware of the issue that the potential introduction of English in preschool had become amongst them. The topic was (and still is) very controversial and the preschool teachers only talked about it by taking the perspective of the potential benefit or the perceived disadvantage for the children and never considered the benefits or disadvantages that a professional development project might involve for themselves. For this reason, the perspective of the children was addressed first in the questionnaire (→ question 3). Through this, it was intended to convey to participating preschool teachers that the children's well-being was also important to me, that I had considered it too. If they were to come to believe that I would perceive preschool teachers only from the perspective of a teacher educator / researcher and native speaker wishing to introduce English into their preschool, the questionnaire might have failed: it would perhaps have become an emotional medium of protest against what they possibly considered to be an imposition and unreasonable demand put on them from the outside. Focusing on the children first meant they did not have to be defensive about their attitudes but could openly include and discuss their perspectives from the start. As a result, participation in the questionnaire survey was highly satisfactory as 30 out of 33 preschools participated. The questionnaire consisted of close-ended questions with response options mainly of true-false items (that included the choices of yes, partly and no) following the idea of the Likert scale (Dörnyei 2007, pp. 105-107). To understand participants’ reasons for their choices they were asked to write explanatory comments for each of their options so that they could be reconstructed and interpreted in the data analysis phase. The response options of the true-false items will be evaluated quantitatively through the IBM SPSS Statistics programme: version 24 (2016). The data will be presented in the form of tables, graphs and pie diagrams. Participants’ reasons for their choices will be further analysed qualitatively by selecting representative key quotes from participants’ explanatory comments. On first inspection of teachers’ comments, it emerged that they often did not restrict 40 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="40"?> their points of view to correspond with the focus of a particular question. For the data analysis this means that I will select comments that are relevant to the focus of each question rather than limiting myself to relate a comment only to the question that intended to prompt it. Therefore, the questions that correspond to the key quotes are noted in code form in brackets at the end of the quotes to be able to retrace the source that triggered the data in a valid way (for example: qu. 4c-1 or final comment). Chosen options that are connected to the comments are included in the coding (for example: qu. 3b-1: yes). As the questionnaire distinguished between preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English as seen from the perspectives of the children (→ question 3) and as seen from the perspectives of the preschool teachers (→ question 4) validity of findings is supported through the strategy of ‘within-method triangulation’ in the questionnaire, which allows to identify convergence of the two perspectives (Altrichter & Posch, 2007, pp. 178-179; see also Denzin, 1978 & Flick, 2004). The questionnaire was written in German; the questions have been translated in English for this publication. The preschool teachers’ comments were hand‐ written and directly taken from the questionnaires for the analysis purpose. The transcription follows the guidelines of a simple transcription system (cf. Dresing et al., 2015, pp. 27-28). The transcription is literal and only language mistakes are corrected. Words and phrases that contained features of the Austrian German vernacular are transcribed in German to support understanding of the data. Results of the questionnaire survey are presented in the next chapters following the purposes of the questionnaire as has been outlined in the introduc‐ tion to this chapter. The analysis of data will be used to draw consequences for the set-up of the teacher education project to provide support for participating preschool teachers so that their needs are able to be addressed appropriately. 3.2 Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work The identification of a preschool that would qualify to represent the working conditions of the general educational state preschool context in the Salzburg area would require an analysis that ideally involved all the state preschools in this education context. Questions therefore first aimed to identify the preschool’s size which included the number of groups in a preschool and the group size (→ question 1a, 1b) and the number of children who spoke German as a second or third language (→ question 1c). This would indicate how many preschools were multilingual in profile. The next question aimed to find out 41 3.2 Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work <?page no="41"?> if preschools provided support for the children to learn German and who was responsible to teach it (→ question 2a). This would provide an insight both in the workload of the staff and in their experience in the area of language teaching. Finally, the contextual framework also included the question of how many preschools actually offered English, and if they did offer English, whether the preschool teachers themselves taught English or if it were taught by external staff. It also aimed to find out if English was an integral part of an individual preschool’s programme and in what way it was organised (→ question 2b). Results are presented in the following chapters. 3.2.1 The size and characteristics of children’s groups State preschools vary from area to area. Some of the preschools are small with only one or two groups while others have up to five or six groups, depending on whether they are situated in a densely populated area or not. The size of the groups also varies. There is also a quite substantial diversity when it comes to children’s language profiles. While in some preschools almost all the children learn German as a second or third language, other preschools only have a few children with a multilingual background in their groups. Despite this heterogeneity of state preschool contexts, it would be necessary to identify a type of preschool that would qualify to be representative for the majority of preschools in this context as only then a suitable sample for the teacher education research could be identified. Data that provided this information resulted from the following questions: How many groups are in your preschool? (Wie viele Gruppen gibt es in Ihrem Kindergarten? ) (question 1a). How many children are in your group? (Wie viele Kinder sind in Ihrer Gruppe? ) (question 1b). How many children speak German as their second or third language? (Für wie viele Kinder ist Deutsch die zweite oder dritte Sprache? ) (question 1c). In statistical data 1 (below) the horizontal bar shows the number of groups that made up the sizes of the preschools, while the vertical frequency bar represents the number of preschools that had those numbers of groups (e.g., 13 preschools consist of 2 groups). Statistical data 2 (below) represents the number of children in 89 groups out of 127 groups, which took part in the survey. The horizontal bar illustrates the number of children in the preschool groups and the vertical 42 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="42"?> frequency bar represents the number of groups that comprised those children (e.g., 10 of the preschool groups from the state preschools included 20 children). From all of the 30 preschools that participated in the survey the majority of the preschools (27 preschools) comprised between two groups and four groups (→ statistical data 1) and of the 89 groups that responded to question 1b, the majority of the group sizes ranged between 19 children and 25 children (→ statistical data 2). There were only few exceptions: in terms of the size of the preschool, the smallest state preschool provided only one group while the two largest state preschools offered 6 and 5 groups respectively. In terms of the size of the groups, there were 9 preschools with small groups (13 to 19 children in a group). Reduced sizes of groups are usually due to the special needs of some of the children in the group. The largest groups comprised 25 children, which was the case in 24 groups (→ statistical data 2). Figure 2: Statistical data 1: The number of groups in state preschools Figure 3: Statistical data 2: The number of children in state preschool groups 43 3.2 Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work <?page no="43"?> The following statistical data 3 illustrates the number of children who were learning German in state preschool groups at the time of the research (horizontal bar). The vertical frequency bar relates the number of children who were learning German to the number of preschool groups comprising of those numbers, thereby showing the frequency of the numbers of the children in the groups (e.g., in 8 groups there were 13 children who were learning German as a second language). All the preschool groups comprised children who were learning German as a second language. In most of the groups the number of these children ranged between 11 and 21; but overall, the groups varied greatly (→ statistical data 3). On one extreme 2 groups had 2 children learning German, while on the other extreme 1 group had all 25 children learning German. Because of this enormous heterogeneity in the groups, statistical data 4 simplifies the situation by establishing whether preschools had over 50 % or under 50 % of their children learning German. The groups in each preschool were combined to calculate the percentage of children who were learning German in that particular preschool (→ statistical data 4). The data shows that in the majority of the preschools, the children were learning German as a second language (73.3%) (→ statistical data 4). This information was important to be able to select a representative sample. Figure 4: Statistical data 3: The number of children learning GSL in state preschool groups 44 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="44"?> Figure 5: Statistical data 4: The percentage of children learning GSL in state preschools 3.2.2 State preschools offering German as a second language The next questions aimed to find out how many state preschools offered German as a second language (→ question 2a) and if the preschool teachers were involved in teaching German to the children (→ question 2a-1). Apart from the relevance of this information to be able to select a representative context of practice for the sampling, it would also indicate if preschool teachers had some experience in teaching children languages (in this case, German as a second language), through which teachers might have developed some competence that they could then transfer to teaching English. Data that provided this information resulted from the following questions: Is German taught in your preschool? (Findet in Ihrem Kindergarten Deutschför‐ derung statt? ) (question 2a). Who teaches German in your preschool? (Wer unterrichtet Deutsch als zweite Sprache? ) (question 2a-1). The staff involved in teaching the children comprises the head of the preschool, the preschool teachers, preschool teachers’ assistants, teachers for special needs and expert language teachers who come to the preschool. With the exception of one preschool, all state preschools offered German as a second language. In over half of the preschools, the preschool teachers were not responsible for teaching the children German (→ statistical data 5). With one exception, preschool teachers otherwise shared the responsibility with expert teachers coming to the preschool and / or with the head of the preschool or other staff members. 22 of the preschools had an external expert teacher who came to the preschool to support language teaching (→ statistical data 5 & 6). 45 3.2 Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work <?page no="45"?> Figure 6: Statistical data 5: Staff teaching GSL in state preschools Figure 7: Statistical data 6: An expert GSL teacher comes to the preschool 46 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="46"?> The results of this data show that over half of the preschool teachers did not have experience in teaching German and the preschool teachers who actually taught German only shared the responsibility. Therefore, it cannot be presumed that they have developed competences in teaching a language, which the teacher education project could build on. In the sampling selected for this study none of the participating preschool teachers were responsible to teach the children German. It was the responsibility of the head of the preschool and an expert language teacher to offer German to small groups throughout the week. 3.2.3 State preschools offering English as a foreign language The second part of the question aimed at finding out whether the state preschools offered English (→ question 2b). There were three options to choose from: either English would be offered on a regular basis; it would be offered only occasionally (for example, singing an English song or chanting a rhyme every now and again) or English would not be offered at all (→ question 2b). From my knowledge of the context, preschools have two options: either the employed staff (preschool teachers or the head of the preschool) would be responsible to integrate English in their routine or a visiting teacher would offer it. A visiting teacher is a teacher who comes to the preschool to offer English on a regular basis as an extra-curricular activity. Visiting teachers are either qualified English teachers or native speakers of English. It was important to find out how many of the preschools offer English regularly through the regular staff that is employed at the preschool in question, the preschool teachers or the head of the preschool. Again, this would provide important information on teachers’ English teaching competences. It would also be interesting to learn if English were offered to all of the children of a preschool or only to a selected group of children. Data that provided this information resulted from the following questions: Is English offered in your preschool? (Wird Englisch in Ihrem Kindergarten angeboten? ) (question 2b). Who offers it? (Wer bietet es an? ) (question 2b-1). When offered by a visiting teacher, which children take part? (Wenn angeboten von jemandem von auswärts: welche Kinder nehmen am Unterricht Teil? ) (question 2b-2). The data shows that over half of the state preschools offer some form of English either as a regular activity (answered with yes) or only occasionally (meaning they only sang a song every now and again). 10 preschools offered English on 47 3.2 Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work <?page no="47"?> a regular basis (→ statistical data 7). Of these 10 preschools, only 2 offered English through their preschool teachers (→ statistical data 8). The remaining 8 preschools offered English through visiting teachers (→ statistical data 9). All of the visiting teachers taught small groups of enrolled children. Therefore, it can be concluded that the general situation in state preschools in Salzburg is that the majority of the preschools either offer no English at all or provide it only as an extra activity to an exclusive group of children. Figure 8: Statistical data 7: English offered in Salzburg state preschools Figure 9: Statistical data 8: Preschool teachers offering English regularly to their groups Figure 10: Statistical data 9: Visiting teachers offering English regularly 48 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="48"?> As there were only 2 state preschools offering English as a regular component by the preschool teacher, the teacher education project could not expect to build on any routines preschool teachers might have developed. Teaching English to all of the children would therefore be an entirely new experience for participating teachers. The questionnaire survey that aimed to identify the contextual framework that preschool teachers work in resulted in the following representative state preschool profile: it comprises three groups of children, ranging in size from 19 to 25 children with all three groups being multilingual. The preschool offers extra support to the children to learn German. This is usually done by the head of the preschool who teaches small groups of four children on a daily basis for which the children are taken out of free play. Additionally, a German language teacher visits the preschool a few times a week. English is not offered as a regular curricular component by the preschool. For my teacher education project this meant that I would have to identify a preschool that represents this contextual framework (→ chapter 6.2, sampling). It would also mean that I could not build on any routines and competences of participating preschool teachers in the area of language teaching. A further factor that would need to be considered before setting up the teacher education project would be their attitudes towards introducing English in the preschool. If they were reluctant to introduce it, they would definitely not be prepared to be qualified for teaching it. Questionnaire results that relate to this aspect are presented in the following two chapters. 3.3 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing a foreign language generally and English specifically in preschool: perspective of the children The first prompt in the questionnaire directly aimed at asking teachers to reflect on issues that they related to introducing English by taking the perspective of the children: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? (Wie beurteilen Sie das Lernen einer Fremdsprache im Kindergarten aus Sicht der Kinder? Eher als Vorteil oder eher als Nachteil? ) (question 3a). This was followed by confronting the preschool teachers with popular ideas which are prevalent and widely heard when the issue of learning English in 49 3.3 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing a foreign language <?page no="49"?> preschool is discussed both in their social contexts and their contexts of work. The question of introducing another language in preschool (here: English) is an issue as many preschool children need to learn German as their second or third language. In order to remain unbiased, the commonly heard statements were presented in the questionnaire as original statements rather than transformed into questions to mark them clearly as public opinion. Therefore, the next question was asked as follows: There are a number of personal everyday opinions you come across about intro‐ ducing English in preschool. What is your attitude in the matter? (Im Alltag hört man immer wieder die folgenden persönlichen Meinungen über Englischunterricht im Kindergarten. Wie stehen Sie dazu? ) (question 3b): - Children should learn German first (Die Kinder sollten zuerst Deutsch lernen) (question 3b-1). - Introducing English in preschool is a benefit for other languages as well, including German (Englischlernen im Kindergarten ist eine Bereicherung auch für die anderen Sprachen, einschl. dem Erlernen der deutschen Sprache) (question 3b-2). - An additional language would burden many children, because preschool life is challenging enough for them (Eine Sprache zusätzlich würde viele Kinder überfordern, weil der Alltag des Kindergartens ohnehin schon eine Herausforderung für sie ist) (question 3b-3). - Children learn a language in a playful way. If a further language (e.g., English) is offered in a child-appropriate way, children will experience that learning languages is fun and consequently they will be relaxed and open for the new experience (Kinder lernen eine Sprache auf spielerische Art. Wenn eine weitere Sprache (z. B. Englisch) kindgerecht angeboten wird, erfahren die Kinder Sprachenlernen als Spaß und sind dabei entspannt und offen für die neue Erfahrung) (question 3b-4). The data shows that just over three quarters of the preschool teachers agreed in principle that it was an advantage to learn a foreign language at this young age (83.2%) (→ statistical data 10). However, the statistic shows that up to two thirds of all the participating teachers believed that the children who speak other languages would need to learn German before a foreign language (in other words English) could be introduced (64.5%) (→ statistical data 11). There is a discrepancy here. While a high percentage of preschool teachers believed that early foreign language learning was an advantage, this percentage was also high due to the belief that German should be learnt first. The data on the one hand demonstrates preschool teachers’ concern that children would need to learn 50 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="50"?> German but at the same time they think that teaching children another foreign language in preschool would generally be a good idea. In other words, preschool teachers found themselves in a dilemma whether to prioritize German over English, but they were not against introducing foreign languages (including English) in preschools in principle. Therefore, I could assume that introducing English would not necessarily be a fundamental, categorical concern to them. Figure 11: Statistical data 10: A foreign language in preschool: an advantage or a disadvantage for the child? Figure 12: Statistical data 11: Comment on the public opinion “Children should learn German first before English is introduced” When reviewing the reasons preschool teachers gave to support their opinion on German first, the predominant arguments were that German is the official language in children’s social environment and therefore learning German would need to have priority over any other foreign language learnt in preschool. While preschool teachers’ attitudes clearly correspond with Austrian early language policies (→ chapter 2.2.2), their idea that consecutive foreign language learning is best for the children (first German - then English) is not in line with early language acquisition research results (→ chapter 2.1). Consequently, this 51 3.3 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing a foreign language <?page no="51"?> misconception would need to be addressed in the teacher education project for preschool teachers to be able to reassess their initial attitudes accordingly. The following quotes relate to this role of languages in preschool and are representative of the majority of participating teachers’ attitudes: “Zuerst Deutsch, weil in diesem Land Deutsch geredet wird. Englisch danach sehe ich als Bereicherung” (qu. 3b-1: yes). “Wir sind in einem deutschsprechenden Land → entsprechend gute Kenntnisse sind Voraussetzung! ” (qu. 3b-1: yes). “In unserem Betrieb steht das Erlernen von Deutsch eher im Vordergrund, daher wäre Englisch zusätzlich zu viel” (qu. 3a: disadvantage). “Festigung der Muttersprache und Deutschförderung stehen im Vordergrund” (qu. 3a: disadvantage). More specifically it could be found that teachers’ attitudes for or against introducing English were closely related to the competence level the children had achieved in German, but their comments generally confirm the above presented attitude of German first: “Wenn Deutsch die erste Sprache der Kinder ist, finde ich Englischunterricht gut. Die Kinder in dieser Altersgruppe lernen spielerisch, wenn das Angebot altersgemäß ist, und der Spaßfaktor gegeben ist! ” (qu. 3a: advantage). “Kinder lernen eine weitere Sprache im Kindergartenalter sehr leicht, ganzheitlich, mit allen Sinnen - spielerisch. Aber Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund sollten zuerst mal die 1. Fremdsprache (Deutsch) erlernen, Konfrontation mit zwei neuen Sprachen ist zu viel” (qu. 3a: advantage). “Für sprachbegabte Kinder ist es sicher eine Bereicherung, für die anderen, welche schon mit 2 Sprachen Probleme haben, ist ein Erfolg nicht möglich” (qu. 3a: advan‐ tage). “Bevor Deutsch als zweite Sprache nicht gut ausgebildet ist, sehe ich keinen Sinn darin, eine dritte Sprache anzubieten” (qu. 3b-1: yes). “Aber nur wenn die Kinder bereits Deutsch können. Sie lernen im Kindergartenalter leicht und spielerisch” (qu. 3a: advantage). “Für Kinder, die Probleme haben Deutsch zu lernen, ist der erweiterte Spracherwerb nicht sinnvoll” (qu. 3a: no answer). “Die allgemeine Situation bei uns im Kindergarten eignet sich nicht für eine weitere Fremdsprache, da bei uns die meisten Kinder bei Eintritt in den Kindergarten das erste Mal Kontakt mit Deutsch haben” (final comment). “Viele Kinder kommen in den Kindergarten mit einem Misch-Masch aus Deutsch und ihrer Muttersprache. Wobei zuerst die Muttersprache gefestigt sein sollte oder eine klare Trennung der Sprachen zu Hause gelernt werden soll. Da das Deutsche in der 52 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="52"?> Schule dringend notwendig ist, ist eine Verbesserung des Deutschen im Kindergarten vorzuziehen (qu. 3b-1: yes). Wenn ein Kind eine Sprache gut kann, erlernt es eine zweite leichter und jede weitere Sprache ist eine Bereicherung” (qu. 3b-2: partly). “Manchen Kindern würden zwei Fremdsprachen wohl zu viel werden, wenn sie nebenbei erst die neue Lebenssituation meistern müssen” (qu. 3b-1: partly). “Ja, ist eigentlich zutreffend → deshalb teilweise, weil wir sehr viele Kinder mit Migrationshintergrund haben die sich noch schwer in Deutsch tun und die Eltern oft nur die Muttersprache sprechen! ” (qu. 3b-1: partly). A further concern that preschool teachers associated with the idea of intro‐ ducing a foreign language in preschool, however, was not directly related to the need to learn German first, but teachers were also worried that there were children who had not yet acquired their mother tongue competently. Subsequently this could mean that these children would have to deal with learning three languages at the same time (mother tongue, German and English), which teachers considered to be too demanding for the child: “Wichtig ist eine gefestigte Muttersprache - dann können mehrere Sprachen gleichzeitig erlernt werden - natürlich ist für „uns“ die Sprache Deutsch ein besserer Anknüpfungs‐ punkt, weil kaum einer die Muttersprachen der Kinder kann” (qu. 3b-1: partly). “Nicht deutschsprachige Kinder sprechen häufig die eigene Muttersprache nicht richtig, sollen dann Deutsch lernen und noch eventuell Englisch? Fraglich? ? ” (qu. 3b-2: partly). “In unserem Betrieb ist es durch die fehlerhafte Ausbildung der Muttersprache (in sehr vielen Fällen! ) schon eine sehr große Herausforderung für die Kinder eine zweite Sprache (Deutsch) zu lernen” (qu. 3a: disadvantage). “Ihre Muttersprache soll gefestigt sein” (qu. 3b-1: partly). “Kinder sollten zuerst ihre Muttersprache beherrschen” (qu. 3b-1: partly). “Wenn es die 3. Sprache ist, wird es schwierig” (qu. 3b-1: partly). “Den Kindern, die vielleicht noch gar nicht Deutsch beziehungsweise nur wenig Deutsch können, wird das vielleicht zu viel” (qu. 3b-1: partly). Preschool teachers who considered it an advantage to learn another foreign language commented without compromising their choice through focusing on German as a second language: “Ich bin der Meinung, dass Kinder in diesem Alter mehrere Sprachen lernen können, wenn die aktiv erlebt werden und im Kindergartenalltag gesprochen und spielerische erlebt werden” (qu. 3a: advantage). “Es können beide Sprachen parallel gelernt werden. Englisch könnte auch spielerisch im Tagesablauf eingebaut und so erlernt werden” (qu. 3b-1). 53 3.3 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing a foreign language <?page no="53"?> It may come as some surprise that this last positive comment came from a preschool teacher in whose group 20 children out of 22 learnt German as a second language. As has been said above, my teacher education project would need to address the prevalent idea that the consecutive learning of languages qualifies as the appropriate approach that the majority of preschool teachers expressed. This understanding has been described to be a widely cherished myth by language acquisition researchers. Referring to Gogolin (1994), who quite some time ago criticised the prevalent monolingual mind-set of parents and teachers and argued for a multilingual understanding of education instead, Tracy (2008) wrote: Das mehr oder weniger friedliche Zusammenleben mehrerer Sprachen im Kinderkopf verträgt sich anscheinend schlecht mit unseren Alltagsweisheiten und hartnäckigen Mythen über Spracherwerb und Mehrsprachigkeit. … Es passt nicht zum monolingualen Habitus (Gogolin 1994), auf den Punkt gebracht also zur Vorstellung: ein Kopf - eine Sprache. Außerdem zwingt es uns, liebgewordene Mythen loszulassen. (p. 113; in a chapter on ‘Warum erregt der doppelte Erstsprachenerwerb die Gemüter’; italics in original) But what would preschool teachers think about introducing English in pre‐ school: would they consider it to be an asset for other languages to be learnt, including German as a second language? The data shows that over a quarter of the teachers considered it to be an asset and just under a quarter believed that this would not be the case. Almost half of the preschool teachers were undecided on the question (→ statistical data 12). Figure 13: Statistical data 12: Comment on the public opinion “Introducing English in preschool is an asset also for other languages, including German” 54 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="54"?> The teachers who did not agree that introducing English would be an asset for other languages were - from what has been said, not very surprisingly - mostly concerned that the children would primarily need to learn German and also their mother tongue. They agreed that the experience of learning a foreign language would support the children when they learn another language. However, at the same time they said that preschool children would only benefit from learning another foreign language after they were competent in German: “Nur, wenn die Kinder schon gut Deutsch können wäre es eine Bereicherung” (qu. 3b-2: no). “Nicht in einem Kindergarten mit ca. 90 % unterschiedlichen fremdsprachigen Kin‐ dern” (qu. 3b-2: no). “Es ist für später eine Bereicherung mehr Sprachen zu können” (qu. 3b-2: no). “Erst sollte die deutsche Sprache erlernt sein, weitere können folgen” (qu. 3b-2: no). “Wenn die Kinder zwischen drei Sprachen jonglieren müssen, finde ich das nicht gut. Als einsprachiges Kind mit großer Freude und Sprachbegabung eventuell” (qu. 3b-2: no). “Nur für deutschsprachige Kinder” (qu.3b-2: no). “Die Kinder wären mit drei Sprachen überfordert! ” (qu. 3b-2: no). There was also about a quarter of the preschool teachers (25.7%) (→ statistical data 12) who argued that the process of learning German would benefit if another foreign language was introduced. They referred to the English words that are frequently used in German and said children enjoyed learning many languages: “Viele neue englische Wörter und Bedeutungen verwenden wir auch im Deutschen” (qu. 3b-2: yes). “Kinder haben Freude am Sprechen vieler Sprachen, da dies lustbetont geschieht! ” (qu. 3b-2: yes). 10 of the 15 teachers who did not answer the question felt overwhelmed by it and simply included a number of question marks instead of answering the question or they quite openly admitted that they simply had no idea about the subject: “Dazu kann ich leider nichts sagen, weil ich nicht weiß wie es sich auswirkt. Ich könnte mir allerdings vorstellen, dass die Kinder die falsche Satzstellung übernehmen werden, von Englisch auf Deutsch” (qu. 3b-2: no answer). “Weiß ich nicht” (qu. 3b-2: no answer). 55 3.3 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing a foreign language <?page no="55"?> The next question (→ question 3b-3) was to find out if teachers felt that learning a foreign language in preschool would be a burden for the children because preschool life in itself was challenging enough for them to cope with. Results were heterogeneous: while 30.6% of the teachers confirmed this idea, 19.8% felt that the children would not be burdened and about half of the teachers (49.6%) had mixed views and marked partly in the questionnaire (→ statistical data 13). As the majority of the preschool teachers were undecided, no valid answer to this question can be presented here. Figure 14: Statistical data 13: Comment on the public opinion “An additional language in the preschool would burden children because preschool life is challenging enough for them” Preschool teachers’ explanatory comments for their choices if they opted for yes or partly in the questionnaire indicated that they viewed children’s low level of German as a cause for preschool life being too challenging to introduce another language. Again, this strongly supports the validity of the questionnaire as this corresponds with the reasons that preschool teachers gave in answering the other prompts in question 3b). It was apparent that the majority of the answers of partly agree were prompted by the distinction the teachers made between the children who were in the early process of learning German and the children who could speak German already. They also were concerned that some children had deficits in other areas as well which would contradict the introduction of another language: “Eher die nicht deutschsprechenden Kinder” (qu. 3b-3: partly). “Bei vielen Kindern ist die Muttersprache noch ein Problem und Deutsch erst recht. Noch eine Sprache dazu wäre zu viel. Ist die erste Sprache gefestigt und das „Regelwerk Sprache“ angekommen, sind mehrere Sprachen kein Problem” (qu. 3b-3: partly). 56 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="56"?> “Viele kommen mit wenig Sprachkenntnissen und auch großen Defiziten aus anderen Gebieten. Ein zu viel an Angeboten könnte einige Kinder überfordern” (qu. 3b-3: partly). “Kommt auf das Sprachverständnis jedes einzelnen Kinders an” (qu.3b-3: partly). “Speziell für Migrantenkinder” (qu. 3b-3: partly). Apart from considering children’s language competence levels they also re‐ flected individual children’s different abilities and aptitudes when commenting on their choice of partly agree. They also maintained that coping would depend on the contextual support provided for the child, either by their parents or the preschool: “Kommt auf die individuelle Begabung des Kindes, Förderung von zu Hause etc. an” (qu. 3b-3: partly). “Kommt natürlich auf die Begabung und Einrichtung an” (qu. 3b-3: partly). “Stimmt wohl für manche. Aber jedes Kind ist anders! ” (qu. 3b-3 partly). But what would preschool teachers think if a further language (e.g., English) were offered in a child-appropriate, playful way and consequently children would then experience that learning languages is fun and as a result they would be open for the new experience? The data shows that the majority of the teachers (85.4%) agreed that the children learnt languages in a playful way, which left only a small percentage of preschool teachers who answered partly (14.6%). None of the preschool teachers answered with no (→ statistical data 14). Figure 15: Statistical data 14: Comment on the public opinion “Children learn a language in a playful way” Preschool teachers who answered partly were again generally concerned about the children who were learning German as a second language. But at the same time, they thought that through introducing a foreign language that was unfamiliar to all of the children in a group, German native-speaking children 57 3.3 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing a foreign language <?page no="57"?> would be able to experience the challenges involved in learning a language - an everyday experience for their peers who are largely non-native speakers of German: “Außerdem verstehen die Kinder mit Muttersprache Deutsch dann, wie schwer es für Kinder mit Fremdsprache ist Deutsch zu lernen und umgekehrt, sind alle Kinder mal auf dem gleichen Level! Auch Kinder mit nicht Deutsch-Muttersprache können zeigen was sie können, ihr Auffassungsvermögen ist sehr gut” (qu. 3b-4: yes). The comments of the other teachers who opted for yes or partly did not provide any substantial answers apart from very general sweeping comments saying that if another language were introduced the approach would need to be child appropriate. They admitted that they were inexperienced and therefore could not give satisfactory reasons for their choices: “Die Methode ist ausschlaggebend” (qu. 3b-4: yes). “Kinder sind offen zu lernen, wenn sie dabei Spaß haben und ihre Interessen berücksichtigt werden” (qu. 3b-4: yes). “Ich habe keine Erfahrung damit” (qu. 3b-4: partly). “Ich denke das stimmt. Ich würde gerne eine solche Einheit ansehen und auch selber daraus lernen” (qu. 3b-4: yes). To conclude, it can be said that preschool teachers were aware of the challenges when introducing a foreign language and as a result they voiced real and genuine concerns related to this issue. Their attitudes were based largely on their familiarity with the preschool context and their experiential knowledge that they had of the children learning German. But at the time of the questionnaire survey, they could not include any other perspective that would have informed their choices, for example experiences with teaching the children English or research-based knowledge. For the set-up of my teacher education project this meant that teachers’ attitudes would need to be re-addressed by exposing them to credible, first-hand empirical evidence that learning another foreign language actually is a re‐ warding and joyful experience for the children in the context of the case study. This would involve exposing them to small-scale context-related positive and credible experiences from preschool classroom contexts. It would also mean that research-based knowledge on the principles, approaches and methods of early language teaching and learning would need to be integrated - given the complete lack of theoretical background knowledge on early language learning that the preschool teachers demonstrated in the survey. Through this, participating teachers would be supported to change their attitudes as they 58 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="58"?> would experience that introducing another language in their context would actually be a benefit for the children. It was the only way their partial reluctance to introduce English could be overcome. 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool: perspective of the teachers While the first part of the survey focused on the challenges and benefits that teachers associated with early language learning as seen from the perspective of the preschool children, the second part of the questionnaire survey focused on the teachers’ attitudes which related to themselves as potential preschool English teachers who were asked to consider introducing English in their groups: Would they think that this new area of responsibility would more likely be a benefit or a burden for them? The preschool teachers were therefore asked the following questions: From your perspective as preschool teacher, would you consider teaching English rather as a benefit or a burden? (Was halten Sie aus Sicht einer pädagogischen Fachkraft davon, die Fremdsprache Englisch im Kindergarten anzubieten? Eher eine Bereicherung oder eher eine Belastung? ) (question 4a). Can you imagine offering English yourself in your preschool? (Können Sie sich vorstellen, Englisch in Ihrem Kindergarten anzubieten? ) (question 4c). For the set-up of the teacher education project, it would be particularly relevant to be able to identify the possible reasons why teachers might consider teaching English as a burden and consequently be reluctant to become involved in the first place (→ question 4a): their needs would have to be addressed and be taken seriously and contextual support would have to be provided to overcome contextual constraints which could impede the implementation of the teacher education project. Question 4 therefore explicitly asked for preschool teachers’ competences they might have developed in this area: Had they attended the course on how to teach foreign languages during their studies and what were their motives to participate or not to participate (→ questions 4b, 4b-1). Ques‐ tion 4 also aimed to find out whether the teachers could imagine introducing English themselves in their groups (→ question 4c) and if they opted for no, what were the reasons for their reluctance to do so. Predictable reasons for their reluctance that were included in the questionnaire comprised their lack of sufficient communicative English language competence (→ question 4c-1); their general readiness and disposition to teach English to their groups if 59 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool <?page no="59"?> appropriate support was provided (→ question 4c-2) (this question also aimed at identifying those preschool teachers who would not become involved under any circumstances even if support were provided for them) and the contextual conditions at their respective preschool that they thought would support or hinder them from accommodating English in the daily life of preschool (→ question 4c-3). The questionnaire provided the option to name any other reasons why they could not imagine introducing English in their preschool (→ question 4c-4). A final comment for teachers to write whatever they felt was important to them was added at the end (not numbered in questionnaire). Before presenting results related to teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in their preschool by relating them to their personal and professional qualifications to teach English, it is interesting to look at the ratio of teachers who would see it as a benefit respectively who would feel it was a burden and those who could imagine teaching it respectively who would be reluctant to do so. Over half of the preschool teachers believed that they would benefit from teaching English in preschool (57.5%) (→ statistical data 15). Those who would consider it to be a burden were in the minority. However, when asked specifically about teaching English themselves, the majority of the preschool teachers could not imagine teaching it (65.1%) (→ statistical data 16). The discrepancy that they would find it a benefit but could not imagine teaching it, together with the already substantial percentage of preschool teachers that felt it would be a burden to introduce English to their groups in the first place (42.5%) (→ statistical data 15) confirm that the potential constraints that preschool teachers see from their perspectives need to be analysed and be taken seriously if English were to be introduced on a large-scale in preschools. Figure 16: Statistical data 15 Introducing English in preschool from the teachers’ per‐ spective: a benefit or a burden? 60 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="60"?> Figure 17: Statistical data 16: Teachers offering English in their preschools themselves The following chapters describe the reasons why preschool teachers were in favour or against introducing English in their preschool. 3.4.1 Preschool teachers’ education in teaching English: offers and needs To what extent did the preschool teachers who participated in the survey have the opportunity to take part in a course intended to prepare them to teach English in preschool and did they actually enrol for it? At the time of the research one optional course for preschool teachers’ development in the field of language teaching was offered during their preschool teacher education at the BAfEP school in Salzburg titled ‘Englisch im Kindergarten: Impulse zum interkulturellen Lernen’. It familiarized preschool teachers with basic knowledge on the methodology of teaching English to children. Available data resulted from the following two questions: Was the course ‘English in Preschool’ offered during your preservice teacher edu‐ cation? (Wurde der Kurs ‘Englisch im Kindergarten: Impulse zum interkulturellen Lernen’ im Rahmen Ihrer Ausbildung angeboten? ) (question 4b). Did you take part? (Haben Sie daran teilgenommen? ) (question 4b-1). The majority of the teachers had not been offered a course on teaching English to children during their preservice education (76 %) (→ statistical data 17) but when it was offered, the vast majority had taken the opportunity to participate (92.9%) (→ statistical data 18). 61 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool <?page no="61"?> Figure 18: Statistical data 17: Course on ‘English in preschool’ offered to teachers during their preservice teacher education Figure 19: Statistical data 18: Teachers taking part in the English course when offered For preschool teachers who had the chance to participate, almost all of them were motivated to take part because they felt that English is an international language, which their children would have to be exposed to. They considered English to be a general life skill they would need to be familiar with from an early age: “Ich finde Englisch sehr wichtig, eine Sprache, die überall gesprochen wird” (qu. 4b-1: yes). “Reiselust, Eigeneinteresse, Fremdsprachen allgemein helfen im Leben” (qu.4b-1: yes). The high attendance indicates teachers’ general interest to be educated in teaching English, but as the course was seldom offered, the majority of preschool teachers do not have any teaching skills in this area. Throughout the question‐ naire, the preschool teachers repeatedly confirmed that their lack of teaching skills was an issue to them. Preschool teachers demonstrated a generally positive attitude towards learning to teach English through their comments which they linked with ideas of how they could be educated to be able to do it. Teachers 62 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="62"?> 2 KIKUS: www.kikus.org/ en/ what-we-offer/ kikus-language-courses-for-children.html It is a method that subscribes to the communicative approach of teaching languages in a playful way. The materials consist mainly of flash cards. It offers regular courses in the form of weekend seminars. It includes lesson plans and materials and is offered by a private organisation. Therefore, courses have to be paid for by the preschool teachers themselves. suggested that it would be helpful to have a native speaker available to support them to become more secure in their speaking skills, to have a qualified person coming to the preschool to teach English and to provide them with games and materials and they suggested for the preschool to provide some extra time for them to be able to develop the competence to teach English: “Infos für die Anwendung im Kindergarten wären hilfreich, Aufbau, ebenso eigene Sicherheit im Sprechen (z. B. durch native speaker), üben können” (final comment). “Würde gerne an Fortbildungen teilnehmen” (final comment). “Ich fände gut, wenn zusätzlich jemand kommen würde, und wir eine Schulung bekämen. Gut wären Spiele oder Materialien, die uns dabei helfen können” (qu. 4c-4). “Zusätzliche Belastung und fehlende Kompetenz, auch Zeitproblem. Deshalb NUR mit Unterstützung! ” (qu. 4c-4). “Wir müssten erst eingeschult werden” (qu. 4c-4). “Die Pädagoginnen könnten das Englischlehren übernehmen, mit entsprechender Ausbildung, entsprechender Englischkenntnisse” (qu. 4c-4). “Ich habe mich mit dem Thema Sprache in verschiedenen Formen auseinanderge‐ setzt und (…) einige Kurse dazu besucht. Ich glaube, dass viele Kollegen zu wenig „Handzeug“ dafür haben - eine der effektivsten und erfolgreichsten Methoden ist meiner Meinung nach die KIKUS Methode 2 . KIKUS- Sprachlehrer / Trainer müssten aber zusätzlich in die Gruppe kommen - die Methode erfordert sehr viel Vor- und Nacharbeit - dies lässt sich nicht im normalen Dienst erledigen. Persönlich arbeite ich aber auszugsweise und sehe die positiven Erfolge, in meinem Fall KIKUS-Deutsch” (final comment). 3.4.2 Preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence Most preschool teachers in Austria are educated within the framework of the state school system of secondary education in which the subject English is a compulsory component. This, however, does not guarantee that the preschool teachers develop a level of communicative English language competence that would enable them to confidently teach English in preschool. Data referring 63 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool <?page no="63"?> to this issue resulted from the following question, which was asked to those preschool teachers who could not imagine teaching English: Do you have the feeling that your English is adequate / not adequate? (Haben Sie das Gefühl, dass ihr Englisch ausreichend / nicht ausreichend ist? ) (question 4c-1). Of those preschool teachers who answered, more than half of them felt their English competence level was not adequate to teach English (58.2%) (→ statistical data 19). Figure 20: Statistical data 19: Teachers’ communicative English language competence This is a substantial reason why they considered it to be a burden to teach it. Needless to say, a sound communicative English language competence that makes teachers feel competent is an essential part of their professional competence (→ chapter 4.1). The majority addressed this issue - if mostly only very generally - but occasionally to the extent that native-like language competence was considered by teachers to be a basic requirement to teach English in preschool. Throughout, the lack of available time to develop professionally was seen as being one of the general issues in preschool teacher education: “Kann selbst nicht so gut Englisch. Fehlende Kenntnisse und Unterlagen” (qu. 4a: burden). “Meine Englischkenntnisse sind nicht so gut” (qu. 4a: burden). “Mein Englisch wäre zu schlecht” (qu. 4c-4). “Es ist eher eine Belastung, da ich die Fremdsprache nicht perfekt spreche” (qu. 4a: burden). “Mein Englisch ist nicht gut genug, bei Pädagoginnen muss das freiwillig sein” (qu. 4c-4). “Ich bin kein native speaker” (qu. 4c-4). 64 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="64"?> “Weil die Fremdsprache nicht die Muttersprache ist, braucht es einiges an Vorberei‐ tung und Konsequenz beim Umsetzen” (qu. 4c-4). Consequently, as a first assessment of the initial situation, it seems that a basic requirement for preschool teachers to be able to teach English confidently is largely missing. It will have to be seen if preschool teachers’ existing communicative English language competence provides a sufficient basis to work from in the teacher education project. What can be learnt from the survey is that ample opportunities to develop participating preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence will have to be provided in the teacher education project as support. 3.4.3 Preschool teachers’ disposition to teach English to their groups The next question aimed at finding out whether those preschool teachers who felt that they could not imagine teaching English (→ question 4c) had the general readiness and disposition to teach English to their groups if appropriate support, including language support, was provided. Data referring to this issue resulted from the following question: Would you teach English if appropriate support were provided? (Würden Sie mit der notwendigen Unterstützung anfangen Englisch zu unterrichten? ) (question 4c-2). A high percentage of preschool teachers who responded to this question indicated that they would not want to start teaching English even if appropriate support was provided (76.7%) (→ statistical data 20). Figure 21: Statistical data 20: Teachers’ disposition to teach English if support was provided 65 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool <?page no="65"?> When reviewing the explanatory comments that preschool teachers gave to why they would not teach English in their groups even if support was provided, it became apparent that their dispositions towards teaching English were strongly influenced by taking their children’s perspective rather than their own as prospective language teachers - even though this part of the questionnaire clearly referred to themselves. The majority of the reasons related - yet again - to the contextual circumstances that German as a second language was an issue in their preschools and therefore, they would not start teaching English: “Kommt auf den Standort des Kindergartens an. Wir haben zum Beispiel 80 % Ausländeranteil und das ist deshalb für mich nicht vorstellbar. Kinder lernen teilweise schon schwer die deutsche Sprache” (4c-2: no). “Fast alle Kinder haben Migrationshintergrund. In unserem Kindergarten spricht fast kein Kind Deutsch, wenn es kommt. Deshalb ist es nicht förderlich sie mit einer weiteren Fremdsprache zu konfrontieren” (qu. 4c-2: no). “Zusätzlich nicht mehr → die Anforderungen sind für die Kinder schon hoch genug” (qu. 4c-4). “Wäre eine Überforderung der Kinder” (qu. 4c-2: no). Nevertheless, there were teachers (almost a fifth) who said they would teach English if they were provided with the necessary support: “Ich würde gerne eine Fortbildung besuchen um wieder sicherer zu werden, oder auch externe Angebote in Anspruch nehmen! ” (qu. 4c-2). 3.4.4 Logistically accommodating English in the state preschool context Last but not least, an area that may be seen as a potential constraint for teachers to integrate English in their daily preschool life are the demands of their contexts of work. From my experience with the preschool context, I felt that it might seem to be challenging for preschool teachers to imagine integrating English as an additional component of the preschool curriculum because of the logistics of accommodating this new subject in the preschool’s timetable. Data referred to in this chapter resulted from the following question (data also includes any other relevant comments made by teachers in the questionnaire elsewhere, which relate to the issue of accommodating English in the preschool context): May the reasons (against introducing English in your preschool) be related to the general situation of your preschool, such as coping with daily life in preschool and the logistics of running the morning? (Liegen die Gründe in der Allgemeinsituation 66 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="66"?> des Kindergartens, zum Beispiel das tägliche Kindergartenleben und der Ablauf des Morgens? ) (question 4c-3). The majority of teachers saw the general situation in preschool and the logistics of running the morning as the major constraints for them to teach English (76.9%) (→ statistical data 21). Not even a quarter of the preschool teachers felt that these contextual factors were not an issue in their decision to refuse to offer English in their preschool (23.1%) (→ statistical data 21). Figure 22: Statistical data 21: Logistical problems accommodating English in the state preschool context Teachers’ comments proved that they felt their morning routine was already densely packed with things they needed to do to fulfil the regular everyday requirements and meet new challenges of the educational plan, which was why teachers felt there was no space to dedicate extra work to teaching English. They also clearly complained about the growing number of challenges and responsibilities that were put upon them to bring up the children socially, which should be a shared responsibility with the parents. At the same time there was a lack of provision of equivalent staff, which would allow them to meet their tasks in a personally satisfying and professional way. Teachers were consequently - and quite understandably - concerned if they would be able to commit themselves to introducing English: “Es wird immer schwieriger alle Förderbereiche ausreichend abzudecken und bei großer Kinderanzahl in der Gruppe dem Bildungsplan gerecht zu werden und andere Lehrprogramme zu integrieren! ” (qu. 4a: burden). “Pädagoginnen müssen sehr viele Bereiche abdecken (siehe z. B. BildungsRahmenPlan, Tischmanieren…) Ich finde es sprengt den Rahmen” (qu. 4a). “Bei intensiver Bildungsarbeit und Förderung der Kinder (Integration) bleibt meiner Meinung keine Zeit, um auch noch Englisch anzubieten” (final comment). 67 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool <?page no="67"?> 3 Besk -DaZ: Beobachtungsbogen zur Erfassung der Sprachkompetenz - Deutsch als Zweitsprache. They are observation sheets that are used in preschool to assess the German language level of children. “Andere Schwerpunkte haben Priorität, unmöglich auf alles gleichermaßen einzu‐ gehen” (qu. 4a: burden). “Zeitliche Einteilung oft schwierig” (qu. 4a: burden). “Davon bin ich nicht begeistert. Der Kindergartenalltag ist so schon sehr überfüllt” (qu. 4a: burden). “Es würden mehr Vorbereitungsstunden benötigt werden, beziehungsweise wäre eine Schulung in diesem Bereich sinnvoll” (qu. 4a: burden). “Von den Kindergartenpädagogen wird bereits verlangt den Kindern Soziales beizu‐ bringen, was zu Hause versäumt wird” (qu. 4c-4). “Die Kindergärtnerinnen kämpfen genug damit den vielen fremdsprachlichen Kin‐ dern etwas zu vermitteln! Besk + Besk - Daz, etc” 3 (qu. 4c-4). “Der Vormittag ist oft zu kurz für zusätzliche Angebote! ” (qu. 3a: no answer). “Zeitmangel, zu viele Kinder, Mangel an zusätzlichem Personal! ” (qu. 4a: burden). “Können kaum den BildungsRahmenPlan einhalten, da viele Kindergartenanfänger Kleinkindniveau haben! Zusätzlich läuft ein Projekt im Kindergarten plus wöchentlich Deutschförderung” (qu. 4a: burden). “[Es wäre eine Belastung] da die Anforderungen an die Pädagoginnen ständig wachsen, und man nicht jede Verantwortung als Eltern abgeben soll. Der Lohn wächst nicht mit den Aufgaben” (qu. 4a: burden). “Die Betreuerinnen können nicht alles abdecken. Erziehen, Sprachunterricht unter‐ schiedlicher Art und so weiter” (qu. 4a: burden). “Die Differenzierung ist schwierig. Einerseits lernt ein Kind eine Fremdsprache nie mehr so leicht wie im Alter von 3-6 Jahren. Anderseits ist die Einleitung / Organisation im Kindergartenalltag schwierig (Gruppentrennung, keine Flexibilität)” (qu. 4a: burden). From the data, it became obvious that in addition to the complexity of tasks that their daily routine already involved, teachers saw the lack of staff as a paramount issue that prevented them from considering introducing English in the first place. Teachers often work to their full capacity, which leaves little to no room to include yet another educational offer: “Zu wenig Personal vorhanden für weitere Angebote” (qu. 4a: burden). “[Es ist eher eine Belastung für die Pädagoginnen], weil wir aufgrund des sehr knapp bemessenen Personalstands froh sind, wenn wir überhaupt Bildungsangebote verwirklichen können” (qu. 4a: burden). 68 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="68"?> “Eine gruppenführende Kindergärtnerin ist schon genug ausgelastet. Wenn Englisch lehren, dann eine weitere Kollegin” (qu. 4c-4). “Da immer mehr von den Pädagogen erwartet und verlangt wird, sehe ich es als zusätzliche Belastung” (qu. 4a: burden). “Das Englisch würde ich auch gerne übernehmen, jedoch haben wir leider viel zu wenig Personal. Es wäre dann keine in meiner Gruppe (qu. 4c-4). Ich würde Englisch als Fremdsprache im Kindergarten als Vorteil sehen für die Schulvorbereitungskinder. Es würde nur mit mehr Personal funktionieren” (final comment). “Auswärtige Betreuung: wir haben selber genug zu tun” (qu. 4a: burden). “Mit dem derzeitigen Personalstand lässt sich das nicht vereinbaren, dazu müsste z. B. einmal in der Woche jemand mit der entsprechenden Ausbildung in den Kindergarten kommen” (qu. 4c-4). As staff is allocated regionally to state preschools by the Personalamt des Magistrats Stadt Salzburg, it is not within the authority of the heads of the preschools to increase their staff members to be able to meet new educational challenges or to introduce innovations such as English in their preschool. As teachers’ comments have unanimously demonstrated they all felt that provision of staff was already tightly calculated. For the preschool teachers that took part in the survey who could not imagine introducing English in their preschool this clearly proved to be one important factor. For those teachers, on the other hand, who subscribed to the view that English would enrich children’s education, the already packed preschool timetable did not seem to be an issue that would stop them from accommodating English in their timetable. It is interesting to note that the preschool teachers who were in favour of English were already integrating English in their daily routine. In the data they argued that they were convinced that the children were capable of absorbing a new language with ease and that they acquired the new language with no effort whatsoever in a playful way and were generally very interested in new learning experiences at this age. They also pointed out that German-speaking children might experience and consequently become aware of how hard it is for children to learn German and consequently empathize with these children. Another dimension of this line of thought is the advantage that teachers see for all the children to be exposed to the same situation of being beginners when they learn English together (this had already been stated as a response to question 3b-4 above): “Im Kindergarten geht’s noch spielerisch, sie sind noch sehr interessiert an Neuem (qu. 3a: advantage). Ich würde mich sehr freuen, wenn der Kindergarten die Möglichkeit bekommen könnte, Englisch zu lernen” (final comment). 69 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool <?page no="69"?> “Es wäre schön 1x in der Woche Englisch ohne Mehrkosten für Eltern anbieten zu können! ” (final comment). “Es ist ein Vorteil, weil die Kinder in diesem Alter sehr aufnahmefähig sind und leicht lernen (qu. 3a: advantage). So haben auch jene Kinder, die Deutsch nicht gut können, die Möglichkeit eine Zweitsprache (English) auf der gleichen Stufe zu lernen wie jene Kinder, die Deutsch schon gut können: Englisch können beide gleich wenig” (qu. 4a: advantage). “Es geht nicht um Deutsch. Sie sollten zuerst irgendeine Sprache lernen. Es gibt jedoch auch Kinder die zweisprachig aufwachsen und deshalb ist es sicher eine Bereicherung und sie lernen ja nicht perfekt Englisch zu sprechen! (qu. 3b-1: no). Die Kinder sind sehr stolz, etwas in einer anderen Sprache sagen zu können (qu. 3b-3: no). Außerdem verstehen die Kinder mit Muttersprache Deutsch dann, wie schwer es für Kinder mit Fremdsprachen ist, Deutsch zu lernen. Und umgekehrt sind alle Kinder mal auf dem gleichen Level! Auch Kinder mit nicht Deutsch-Muttersprache können zeigen was sie können, ihr Auffassungsvermögen ist sehr gut (qu. 3b-4: yes). Mir macht es Spaß und den Kindern auch. Es braucht nicht viel Aufwand, man kann es gut in den Tagesablauf oder die Planung integrieren” (qu. 4c-4). The analysis of the contextual factors of the macro level of the case study that affect the potential introduction of English in the multilingual inclusive state preschool has clearly demonstrated that there are serious constraints which prevent preschool teachers from introducing English regularly in preschool. They relate to three main issues: lack of experience to be able to judge whether the children actually would benefit from an early language start in English; preschool teachers’ low level of communicative English language competence; lack of English language teaching education and finally lack of contextual support in the areas of provision of sufficient and qualified staff and provision of professional education for preschool teachers to develop in-service. Despite these obvious constraints, the teachers’ responses also demonstrated that the context offers potential to introduce English if teachers’ attitudes are reviewed in more detail. Two conflicting points of view relating to teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool emerged from the data. On the one hand there is the group of teachers who clearly believe that adding English to the timetable would definitely be a burden and that therefore this group of preschool teachers could not imagine - even if support was provided - that it made sense to introduce English. On the other hand, there is the group of teachers who believe that it is possible to accommodate English in the preschool routine. Interestingly, teachers belonging to this latter group are already experimenting with introducing English in their preschools. Therefore, despite obvious heterogeneous preschool teachers’ dispositions and needs, a 70 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="70"?> first conclusion to draw for the set-up of the teacher education project is that it would need to be organised in situ, that is, it would need to be strongly related to preschool teachers’ contexts of work for them to be able to experience ‘that it works’. In other words, that it is clearly a benefit for the children, which was their principal concern in the survey. The relevance of practical experience can also be concluded from the data that addresses preschool teachers’ concern to give priority to learn German first: the data revealed that it would be a misconception to conclude that teacher opt to exclude foreign language learning (including English) in preschool. They simply believe that the children need to learn German first. If teachers would experience that incorporating English in the daily routine is manageable and that children’s language development, including German, would benefit from the additional language learning experience, their attitude might further be developed in support of foreign language education. An obvious further conclusion for the set-up of the teacher education project that the macro level questionnaire survey demonstrated is that the factors affecting teachers’ attitudes are also clearly related to their competences in both their language skills and their English teaching skills. A viable strategy for the teacher education project therefore would need to provide ample initial support (both on the language and methodology levels) and it would then need to find ways to enable preschool teachers to take over and to continue offering English during the week for the by integrating it in their weekly timetables independently. Approaches and models of professional teacher education that address these contextual demands will be elaborated in chapter 5 when research on profes‐ sional teacher development is drawn on to develop a teacher education project, focusing on a support system which addresses the needs of this particular context. For the meso level of the case study a preschool needed to be identified that would fulfil two criteria: it would need to qualify as representing the context of the multilingual inclusive state preschool both as regards the children who attend it and the team of teachers that educate the children. It would also need to identify a team of committed preschool staff that is generally in favour of ‘giving it a try’ as they see generally the potential of early English language education. This question of sampling is addressed in chapter 6. After contextual affordances, constraints and preschool teachers’ attitudes and needs have been reviewed, the following chapter 4 will turn to research on professional language teacher education. It will both summarize what research has identified to be appropriate principles to set up language teacher education programmes both for language teachers in general (→ chapter 4.1) and early 71 3.4 Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool <?page no="71"?> language teacher education in particular (→ chapter 4.2). This review will provide the basic principles for the set-up of the preschool teacher education project presented here. This will be followed by a survey on the competences early English language teachers need that research has identified. It will be divided in teachers’ communicative English language competence (→ chapter 4.3.1) and their pedagogical content knowledge (→ chapter 4.3.2). As will be seen, there is an impressive overlap between the needs that preschool teachers addressed in the questionnaire survey and what teacher development studies have identified to be requirements for an appropriate set-up of teacher development projects that aspire to bring about change in the contexts of practice for which they have been designed. 72 3 Contextual factors affecting the introduction of English <?page no="72"?> 4 Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences 4.1 Research on language teacher education in general Even though research on teacher education has gained importance in language teaching both nationally and internationally (Abendroth-Timmer, 2017, p. 196), research studies on the effects of educational programmes on teachers’ com‐ petence development are still underrepresented as Legutke and Schart (2016) conclude in their introduction to the current situation of foreign language teacher research: Sucht man … nach Studien, die die Bildungsprozesse dieser komplexen Programme [they refer to university-based foreign language teacher education programmes in Germany] oder ihre Effekte für die Ausbildung der Kompetenzen der Lehrkräfte er‐ forschen, wird man bis heute kaum fündig: Die fremdsprachendidaktische Forschung im deutschsprachigen Raum hat sich dieser Zusammenhänge erst in jüngster Zeit angenommen (Roters & Trautmann 2014 mit Überblick), … die fremdsprachendidak‐ tische empirische Lehrerbildungsforschung [ist] im deutschsprachigen Raum kaum entwickelt. (pp. 10,11) The few existing empirical studies are based on individual research often done in connection with qualifying for a PhD degree and are not studies that have resulted from collaborative research projects: they have focused on investigating teachers’ experiential knowledge and their subjective theories (Appel, 2000; Caspari, 2014), on teacher education projects that focus on participants’ needs (Schocker-v. Ditfurth, 1992) or on the role of integrating practice phases in teacher education programmes (Gabel, 1997; Schocker-v. Ditfurth, 2001; Elsner, 2010; Schädlich, 2015). More recently, studies in connection with researching the effects of a blended learning Master course for primary school teachers investigated its potential for cooperative learning (Zibelius, 2015) and action research (Benitt, 2015). The situation is quite different, however, if you review international research on foreign or second language teacher education (SLTE): this has developed to become an established field of empirically grounded research as a number of recently published state of the art review articles demonstrate (e.g., Wideen et al., 1998; Singh & Richards, 2006; Wright, 2010). <?page no="73"?> Reviewing the existing body of research on professional teacher education which has only recently been termed “an emerging new agenda” for second language teacher education by Wright (2010, p. 263), the following strands can be identified that are expected to contribute to language teachers’ development. Teacher education programmes need: - to address the growing heterogeneity of learners both related to their cultural backgrounds and related to their home languages (Legutke & Schart, 2016, p. 9); to this day most existing studies are situated in more privileged learning contexts that do not represent the social reality of contexts of education today; - to focus on the teacher whose role is fundamental in creating supportive learning environments; teachers have only been a ‘factor’ that was considered in learning to teach studies since the 1990ies (Schart, 2014). It was only a decade ago when Samuda and Bygate (2018) concluded after having reviewed the state of task research in foreign language education that even though tasks in language classrooms “do not take place in a vacuum, nevertheless, until recently, much of the … literature has had a tendency to treat them as if they did. … The role of the teacher as a mediating factor … remains virtually unexamined” (p. 379). Meanwhile, the central role of the teacher in his / her contexts of work has become generally approved knowledge in general teacher education research (Hattie, 2008; 2011; Terhart, 2014; in Legutke & Schart. 2016, p 9); - to “build upon the beliefs of … teachers and feature systematic and consistent long-term support in a collaborative setting” (Wideen et al., 1998, p. 130). This was concluded after Wideen et al. had reviewed 93 empirical learning to teach studies. Wright (2010) demands that the “split of learning experience and location (or practice and theory)” needs to be overcome which consequently means that teacher education needs to be school-based and to support learning from experience (pp. 264, 265). This proposal has been first brought forward by Freeman and Johnson (1998) who argued that “learning to teach is a long-term, complex developmental process that operates through participation in the social practices and contexts associated with learning and teaching” (p. 402). In their seminal article they have “reconceptualised the knowledge base” of teachers and argued that in teacher education one would need to focus on the activity of teaching, the social contexts of teacher learning and the pedagogical process of teaching and learning; 74 4 Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences <?page no="74"?> - to be concerned “with REFLECTIVE PRACTICE (after Schön 1983, 1987), brought initially to the wider SLTE community by Wallace (1991) … [which] signals a fairly radical departure in curriculum design and teacher education practice from the prescriptive to an emphasis on the student teacher’s development of autonomous judgement and practical theory” (Wright, 2010, p. 265; capital letters in original). This results in a focus on learning from experience. The departure from the transmission approach to teacher education has resulted in a “new pedagogy … following modelled practices” (p. 275); - to be committed “to student teacher INQUIRY - into one’s own beliefs and narratives, and into the professional contexts of teaching and learning for which STs [student teachers] are being prepared” (Wright 2010, p. 273; capital letters in original). As a result, research on teacher development needs: - to subscribe to “a more ecological approach to research on learning to teach” which means to situate learning to teach in school and classrooms. … [There] are ample opportunities for future research that pursue a thoughtful and critical understanding of how individuals learn to teach. However, … only when all players and landscapes that comprise the learning-to-teach environment are considered in concert will we gain a full appreciation of the inseparable way of relationships that constitutes the learning-to-teach ecosystem. (Wideen et al., 1998, pp. 130, 169, 170); - to take an emic perspective on teacher development processes and investigate “what happens inside the practices of L2 teacher education” ( Johnson, 2015, p. 515); - to be qualitative in nature to be able to capture the complexity of factors involved in learning to teach: Empirische Studien in der fremdsprachendidaktischen Lehrerforschung verwenden aufgrund der Komplexität des unterrichtlichen Raums und der individuellen Ent‐ wicklungs- und Professionalisierungsprozesse vorwiegend qualitative Forschungs‐ methoden … und diversifizierte Datenquellen. Oft kommen Interviews … zum Einsatz, mitunter verbunden mit der Erfassung und Kommentierung von Lehrerhandeln, z. B. über Beobachtungen. … Dabei stellt der Aktionsforschungsansatz eine besondere Verzahnung von Lehrerforschung, Kollegialer Unterrichtsentwicklung und Professi‐ onalisierungs-prozessen dar. (Abendroth-Timmer, 2017, p. 198) 75 4.1 Research on language teacher education in general <?page no="75"?> The set-up of the teacher education project of the study presented here will consider the general principles that have been summarized here: it will be situated in a context that represents the heterogeneity of children in state preschools today; it will focus on the central role of the teacher as the mediator to support language learning; it will be organised as a long-term, collaborative process that does not separate experience and location (in other words, is preschool-based and takes place in situ); it will focus on the principle of reflective practice (which means that teachers learn by both reflecting on good practice teacher models and their own teaching practice) and it will investigate in what way English may best be implemented in teachers’ context of work - the preschool (→ chapter 5). For the research approach it follows that the so-called ecological approach to research on learning to teach will be the basic defining feature of the study: it tries to capture the complexity of processes both as regards the preschool classroom and teachers’ individual development processes. To live up to this claim the research needs to be conducted as a case study. Research results that have been obtained from a selected group of preschool teachers’ experiences - who work as a team in a preschool that qualifies as a representative sample both in terms of its learners and teachers - have been selected for the mesoand micro level of the case study. It is expected that through this approach the results of the interconnectedness of teacher development, children’s progress in learning and teacher education research may be structured appropriately for readers (→ chapter 6). After the general principles of teacher education programmes and the resulting research requirements have been discussed, the next chapter reviews existing research studies on language teacher education that specifically address early language learning contexts. 4.2 Research on language teacher education for early language learning The current state of research on language teacher education for early language learning is disappointing. Publications with a title that suggests early language learning to be relevant for the study presented here often prove to be disap‐ pointing as the label young or early language learner does not always refer to the contexts of preand primary school children. The recently published handbook article on ‘Teaching Young Language Learners’ by Nikolov and Mihaljevic 76 4 Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences <?page no="76"?> Djigunovic (2019) is a case in point: they explicitly do not consider the preschool level in their contribution (children below 6 years of age): By young language learners, we mean that learners fall within the age range between 6 and 14, although we are aware of a growing number of programs for younger children. Lowering the start of English learning to the pre-primary age (below 6 years) is an emerging field of study; however, this age group is beyond the scope of this chapter. (p. 578) In other words: the field of teaching young language learners is not established but in a state of still emerging. But what research on learning to teach young learners is available? Wilden and Porsch (2017) reviewed major studies on primary English teacher education in Europe and concluded not very optimistically that there is a lack of empirical evidence of what constitutes ‘quality’ in teacher education [by referring to the most recent Eurydice report 2012]. … This research gap can be identified in general FL education, but it is especially noteworthy in the area of early FL education as this is a relatively young domain. (p. 7; italics in original) Wilden and Porsch invited researchers who are currently investigating the professional development of primary English teachers to contribute to this volume. They explicitly say that they “decided to focus on FL education in primary schooling (i.e., approximately from the ages of 6-12 years), rather than the pre-primary sector as well” (p. 7). The study which will be presented here addresses the area of pre-primary English teacher education which is situated in an inclusive multilingual state preschool with heterogeneous learners. To my knowledge no explicit teacher development studies have been published that educate teachers to teach English for the regular preschool as yet. As has already been critically commented in the previous chapter 4.1, empirical studies that are set in preschool contexts were exclusively conducted in bilingual immersive elementary contexts (Piske et al., 2016; Seifert, 2016). These contexts of practice do not represent learning and working conditions of regular state preschool contexts and therefore do not qualify as contexts of practice that mirror the growing heterogeneity of learners neither as regards their cultural backgrounds nor their home languages (cf. Legutke & Schart, 2016, p. 9). Therefore, the multilingual inclusive state preschool is the focus of the preschool teacher education study that will be presented here. Results from publications that are situated in more privileged preschool contexts (for example in preschools that organise learning in small groups of predominantly monolingual children or in preschools that offer extra 77 4.2 Research on language teacher education for early language learning <?page no="77"?> 1 CLIL stands for content and language integrated learning. language classes by qualified extra staff that parents pay for) can therefore not be directly transferred. A second recently published volume on early language teacher education (Zein & Garton, 2019) was motivated by the editors’ “shared concern that teachers in many school contexts worldwide still struggle to meet the demands of early language pedagogy” (p. 3). Zein and Garton notice “a distinct lack of pub‐ lications delivering insights into this focal area of interest. Research into teacher education of modern foreign language has been limited” and consequently “the knowledge base of early language teacher education” remains minimal (p. 4). On closer scrutiny the majority of the studies presented in this volume are also situated in primary language teaching and learning contexts (with the exception of one study that is situated in a bilingual CLIL 1 kindergarten, that is, in a preschool that integrates content and language learning and therefore research results are not directly transferable to the preschool study presented here. With these restrictions in mind, the following findings that have contributed to bringing about change in teachers who participated in projects which aimed to develop a language pedagogy for young learners can be summarized from these studies. As can be seen, there is a large overlap of documented experiences to what has been already reported in chapter 4.1; - young learners’ “English language teacher education is often inadequate in preparing teachers for the realities of the primary classroom” (Garton, 2019, p. 265). Issues involve are that: “Many teachers are not trained to teach English at primary level”; training often is “very theoretical with little input on how to put it into practice” and “trainers themselves may not have a deep understanding of the approach and especially how it can be used in a YL context” (p. 266). In other words, the specific needs of young learners are not aptly addressed in teacher education; - “transmissive and prescriptive teaching methods … still seem to be very common in YL language teacher education … leaving teachers ill-equipped for the realities of the 21st century learner-centred and communicative primary classroom. Even where more learner-centred pedagogies are introduced, … teachers still faced difficulties in changing their traditional roles during some phases of their lessons” (Garton, 2019, p. 267, 268); - a focus of studies presented in Zein and Garton (2019) was research on “a variety of ways in which the gap between theory and practice can be successfully overcome … by introducing a more applied approach, 78 4 Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences <?page no="78"?> in particular in the form of actual teaching practice. … The opportunity to teach in actual classrooms, enabled a much deeper understanding of learner-centred pedagogies” (Garton, 2019, p. 268); - apart from classroom-based experience, also “practitioner research is … shown to be successful in bringing about change in teaching practices” for example “through collaborative action research” (Garton, 2019, p. 269); - almost all of the studies highlight “the importance of collaboration in YL language teacher education research” (Garton, 2019, p. 271) for teacher development projects to be successful. Reported forms of collaboration include peer collaboration or collaboration between trainees and teacher educators; - primary English teachers struggle to appropriately implement a child-ap‐ propriate methodology due to teachers’ limited language proficiency and limited pedagogical content knowledge (Wilden & Porsch, 2017). From the limited knowledge base on early language teacher development that has been summarized in this chapter, no new insights for the set-up of the teacher development project that will be presented here can be delineated. Available studies largely confirm results from language teacher development programmes that have been presented in chapter 4.1. In contrast to the not very prolific state of research in the area of early language teacher education there is quite a large body of research that has tried to identify the competences teachers need to gain on how to teach English as a means of communication. This will be summarized in the following two chapters. Competences will distinguish between teachers’ communicative English language competence and their pedagogical content knowledge. This survey will be used as a basis for designing the content of the teacher education project of the study that is presented here. 4.3 Competences required for teaching English in preschool It has meanwhile become an acknowledged perspective in second language acquisition research that learning a language is aptly understood as a complex communicative, social event that may not be appropriately described if you consider just on one isolated variable - for example, a feature of the grammar of a language - alone. But the procedure of isolating individual variables of the target language in order to understand language learning processes in quantitative research designs had been the prevailing research tradition in language acquis‐ ition research until about a decade ago. It was at an international conference for 79 4.3 Competences required for teaching English in preschool <?page no="79"?> teachers and researchers of English in 2008 (the biannual TESOL Convention in New York) that Johannes Eckerth, a language acquisition researcher from King’s College London, challenged this hitherto prevalent approach. He recommended a new research paradigm instead that would be able to capture the complex process of language learning understood as a complex, communicative and social event in more inclusive ways. He argued as follows: A task is always more or less adequate for a certain group of learners. Tasks are carried out by individuals with different dispositions in different settings. What individual learners do when confronted by task X is likely to be co-determined by a host of other variables. In other words, tasks, patterns of interaction, cognitive processes, and learning outcomes may not be directly related. We may therefore conclude that a generic understanding of task-based interaction and learning should be complemented by an inquiry into local settings, curricular purposes, and individual dispositions (Eckerth 2008, conference handout, n.p.; as cited in Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2018a, p. 99). An awareness of the crucial role of ‘local settings’ or ‘contexts’ has since then become a major factor that researchers increasingly consider in their studies on language learning. As the research presented in this work is also set in a particular language learning context, I will need to describe the specific competences teachers need to develop so that they will be able to address their particular learners’ needs appropriately. These competences have been identified by research that subscribes to the above mentioned contextually situated research paradigm. It has meanwhile addressed a number of different language learning contexts, ranging from primary to adult language learning. This has resulted in a generally agreed on approach to teach languages, the task approach or Task-based language teaching (TBLT) (see summaries in Müller-Hartmann et al., 2013; Müller-Hartmann & Schocker 2016a; 2018b). Even though the general principles of the task approach are established, teachers will still need to clarify what kind of tasks qualify as appropriate for their particular group of learners - in this case: preschool children - so that they have the potential to develop their communicative English language competence in a way that suits their language learning needs. Developing appropriate tasks for their particular groups of children is there‐ fore a basic competence which preschool teachers need to develop. This is demanding. I have therefore illustrated the general task principles that research has identified by designing preschool tasks as a model, which I will use in my teacher education programme to make it more accessible for the preschool teachers who participate in my study (→ chapter 5.8). 80 4 Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences <?page no="80"?> A further competence that teachers need to develop is a solid communicative English language competence, which enables them to use the foreign language in a confident, flexible way so that they can appropriately mediate the foreign language to their groups of children (→ chapter 4.3.1). A third important competence results from the fact that the contexts we prepare our teachers for are extremely complex: learners’ needs and teachers’ experiences are heterogeneous, depending on their individual biographies, and learning is a highly unpredictable event. Teachers therefore need to be able to reflect on what they do and relate it to the effects that their teaching has on the quality of the learning opportunities they provide for the learners. This process of reflecting practice is a substantial part of a teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge - a competence they need to develop as a constituent part of their professional competence. This is described in chapter 4.3.2. 4.3.1 Communicative English language competence One of the reasons why task-based language teaching is demanding on teachers is the complex communicative English language competence it requires. Teachers need to stimulate discourse and use the language spontaneously in unplanned situations that are either created to promote language learning or are part of the classroom management (which includes classroom routines or opportunities offered by incidental learning situations, for example). English is taught through communication rather than as a subject of study, in other words: you learn a language while you are using it. This is what Cameron addresses in her methodology for teaching English to young learners when she says: “A teacher who uses a foreign language only for content of a lesson, and not for other purposes, reinforces the idea that the foreign language is a ‘subject of study’ rather than a means of communication” (Cameron, 2001, p. 203). Wilden and Porsch (2019) in their review of studies on the professional de‐ velopment of primary foreign language teachers highlight a teacher’s “language proficiency” to be a basic competence along with their “knowledge about FL teaching methodology appropriate for young learners” (p. 9; italics in original). What they summarize by referring to existing studies in primary foreign language teacher development also applies to preschool teachers: The target language is both the learning objective and the medium of communication. … The underlying assumption is that in order to be ‘good’ FL teachers, teachers need to have a high level of proficiency in the target language. This is related to notions of teachers as role models catering for a) high quality language input and b) opportunities for inter-/ transcultural learning. (p. 12) 81 4.3 Competences required for teaching English in preschool <?page no="81"?> Teaching the target language as the means of communication requires maximum opportunities for learners to be exposed to and to actively use the language. This has given rise to the debate as to whether in principle learners should only encounter the foreign target language and exclude the language of instruction (in my context: German). While it is of course important for teachers to be able to judge if and when it is appropriate to address children’s needs in their first language (if the teacher is able to do so in multilingual contexts) or in the language of instruction, teachers require a solid communicative English language competence to be able to manage the classroom discourse in the foreign language - or, as Cameron (2001) puts it, to confidently use the foreign language for the full range of functions that are created by activities and tasks in lessons”. Teachers need to be able to use the language continually. This entails “that teachers have a repertoire of language for classroom management and organisation, for discipline, for giving feedback, talking about language and for chatting with children more informally. (p. 200) In preschool giving feedback on progress in English predominantly takes place in the form of giving praise. Talking about language involves comparing words in different languages and naming the various mother tongues in the classroom, rather than talking about English. Preschool children acquire language through listening and actively doing things with objects that are topic-related, language is resulting from actively doing things that are accompanied by language (Oomen-Welke, 2016, p. 293). Tracy (2008) emphasises that preschool teachers support children’s language development best if they communicate naturally with the children: “Lerner benötigen natürlichen und reichhaltigen Input, kein Training. … Man sollte sich den Kindern gegenüber wie normale Gespräch‐ spartner verhalten … [und] mit ihnen viel und mit Freude kommunizieren” (p. 167). Despite various general descriptions of a teacher’s classroom language (as the ones summarized above), studies on the professional development of teaching primary English as a foreign language conclude that there is a lack of comprehensive empirical evidence regarding … [the] effectiveness …[of] various established principles of ‘good’ FL teaching - i.e., communicative FL teaching, playful and active FL teaching, functional language use, variety of teaching methods, individual support and differentiation, using mistakes as a resource. (Wilden & Porsch, 2017, p. 7) Non-native speakers of English in particular, as a study comparing advantages and disadvantages of native to non-native speakers of English has demonstrated, 82 4 Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences <?page no="82"?> are likely to use the language of instruction more often if their communicative English language competence is of a low level in comparison to those who speak more fluently. The level of English proficiency not only influences the amount of English spoken during the lesson, but it also influences the actual teaching process. Teachers with a low level of communicative competence were found to be “inclined to adopt a more controlled and cautious pedagogical approach” (Medgyes, 2001, p. 435). At the same time, as has already been said, Cameron maintains rightly that the language of instruction should not be excluded completely (Cameron, 2001, p. 200). This is also true for multilingual contexts. Although the context here is one in which many children at the beginning of their preschool life cannot speak German and learn to become proficient at different rates, the language of instruction remains the language of communication. As a result, after a year many of the children can understand basic German or more, and other children can also speak it. The teachers are well on the way to being able to communicate with the children for another two years while the children develop their German language competences more and more. There are also children whose mother tongue is German. Therefore, preschool teachers habitually use the language of instruction in their classroom routines, regardless of who understands them and who does not. It becomes the common language that is used between the preschool teachers and the children. Cameron clarifies her suggestion that the language of instruction should not be excluded by saying that if there is a common language that the children and the teachers share it would be very unnatural not to use it (p. 200). The relevance of this suggestion has been confirmed by my observations: children often keep using the language of instruction while the teacher continues talking in the target language. Nonetheless, it is of course appropriate to encourage the children to speak English and to establish the routine of speaking more and more English in class. But it would be inappropriate to force them. Emotional situations, confusions, critical incidents and some questions may require the common language of instruction so that issues can be appropriately solved. Similarly, it can be used to quickly abate any interruptions or disturbances to the flow of the lesson. But not only as seen from the needs of children but also from the perspective of some researchers the use of the language of instruction in English teaching may have its place. Butzkamm (2008) is a case in point. He put forward the idea of distinguishing between messageand medium-orientatedcommunication (→ chapter 5.7.4) to optimize the target language contact time and states that instead of pretending that a common language does not exist, the teachers should selectively use it (p. 327; translated by Birsak de Jersey). 83 4.3 Competences required for teaching English in preschool <?page no="83"?> Through conscious use messageand medium orientatedcommunication in the classroom it is possible to give children a high quantity of repeated exposure of the target language: Kindliche Lernende brauchen Wiederholungen. Nur wenn die gelernten Strukturen ständig wiederholt werden, bleiben die Lerninhalte nachhaltig im Gedächtnis veran‐ kert. Sie können dann auch nach längerer Pause mit geringem Aufwand wieder abge‐ rufen werden. Die erwachsenen Personen, die den Bildungsprozess begleiten, sollten die Zielsprachen dabei konsequent verwenden. Nur so können die Kinder lernen, dem Gesagten Sinn zu entnehmen. Durch Wiederholungen und Abwandlungen wird das Erlebte gefestigt. Dann kann es auch in anderen Situationen angewandt werden” (Stern, 1994, p. 19; as cited in Boeckmann). To conclude, it can be assumed at this point, that a confident, flexible commu‐ nicative English language competence is an important precondition that accounts for the quality of teaching while at the same time teachers need to learn when it is appropriate to resort to the commonly shared language of instruction if it is available. As all of the preschool teachers that have taken part in my case study are non-native speakers of English (→ chapter 3.2), there is a gap between the communicative English language competence that is required and what teachers are actually able to do. The participating teachers do not feel confident to speak English continually and spontaneously. Therefore, a focus on developing preschool teachers’ classroom discourse competences will be integrated in my teacher education project. I will look at the possibility of developing participating teachers’ speaking skills from the level they are at in a way that assists them to create a task language classroom (→ chapters 5.7.4 and 5.8). 4.3.2 Pedagogical content knowledge Apart from a sound communicative English language competence, prospective English teachers need to be able to “make it [the target language] comprehen‐ sible to others” (Shulman, 1986, p. 9). This knowledge came to be termed pedagogical content knowledge in 1986 for the first time by Shulman. He defined it as “content knowledge that embodies the aspects of content most germane to its teachability … [that is] the ways of representing and formulating the subject that makes it comprehensible to others” (p. 9). Through pedagogical content knowledge, teachers develop “the capability to transform content into accessible learning forms” (Burns & Richards, 2009, p. 3). It consists of both theory and practice and the inter-relationship of these two 84 4 Research on professional language teacher education and teacher competences <?page no="84"?> 2 ‘Disciplinary knowledge’ then involved linguistics, literary studies and cultural studies. It did not include the 4th discipline of knowing how to teach languages (literature/ s or culture/ s) or language pedagogy, as it is also called. This area of applied linguistics has meanwhile developed to be a firmly established field in the discipline. components and ultimately culminates in knowledge of how to teach and how to facilitate learning. The question of what this knowledge base consists of has been explicitly addressed by research conducted in connection with finding out how teachers develop professionally. This required addressing the question of what qualifies as the knowledge base of second language teacher education to begin with (Freeman & Johnson, 1998, p. 407; Johnson, 2009, p. 21). Freeman and Johnson were among the first to react against the idea that until then prevailed the discussion that disciplinary knowledge 2 and theories of second language acquis‐ ition (SLA) alone would prepare teachers adequately for language classrooms (Freeman & Johnson, 1998). Instead, they argued, the knowledge base of teacher education would need to be reconceptualised to include pedagogical content knowledge ( Johnson, 2009, pp. 21-22). This knowledge base cannot be defined without a particular group of learners in mind. What can be defined, though, is the general approach and principles for teaching languages (→ chapter 5.8). The pedagogical content knowledge appropriate for a particular group of learners may only be developed by ‘translating’ these principles in the design of tasks that then have to be tested in practice and reflected on their appropriateness for this particular group of learners. This way teachers will gain an insight into problems that can occur, they will develop a perception of how to put theory to practice and will become aware of how they respond in and to their context (Schön, 1983, pp. 54-55; Johnson, 2009, p. 23). Reflecting practical experiences and drawing conclusions to improve the quality of learning for a particular group of learners form the basis for teachers’ decision making in classrooms. Therefore, what qualifies as appropriate content for a particular group of learners can only be defined through this process of reflection in context. This research therefore consequently sets up a teacher education model which supports participating teachers to develop the pedagogical content knowledge for their preschool groups. The resulting research questions, the description of the preschool teacher education model and general approach that has been chosen to be able to understand and to reconstruct teachers’ development processes will be in the focus of the next chapter. 85 4.3 Competences required for teaching English in preschool <?page no="86"?> 5 The preschool teacher education project: researching professional development through an approach of participatory action research It is the purpose of this study to understand in what way preschool teachers can be educated to teach and to implement English in a regular preschool in an effective and sustainable way and in doing so include all the children who attend the preschool. Regular refers to preschools that do not offer a particular pedagogic approach to enhance the teaching of foreign languages within the preschool routine (for example preschools that subscribe to immersion education). Effective means that there is evidence that the children develop communicative English language competences, that is, the children are able to use English as a tool to do meaningful things with the language. Sustainable means that introducing English is not a burden to either the children or the teachers and can therefore become an integral part of the preschool curriculum. Including all the children means that the children’s participation is not dependent on criteria such as their linguistic competence in German (either as their mother tongue or their second language), their age (whether they are perceived as being too young), their social or intellectual skills or speech difficulties, for example. Due to the general recognition in applied linguistics that the teaching profes‐ sion is complex and therefore requires designs of professional development and research approaches that aptly capture this complexity (→ chapter 4), a number of collaborative forms of teacher development and research have emerged in the past and have meanwhile become established approaches (see surveys in Savoie-Zajc & Descamps-Bednarz, 2007; Burns & Richards, 2009; Burns, 2010; Caspari, 2016). While the nature of practitioner - teacher educator - research collaboration in participative research differs, all types of collaborative research have in common that they advocate doing research ‘with’ rather than ‘on’ practitioners … [and direct research] toward changing practices, since its primary goal is to produce change in a concrete situation … [and the research is] aimed at bringing the world of research and the world of practice closer together and to mediate between these two cultures in order to construct knowledge leading to informed practice. (Savoie-Zajc & Descamps-Bednarz, 2007, p. 578) Through this approach they “mobilized” practitioners’ practical “pedagogical and didactical knowledge” (p. 578). <?page no="87"?> This research approach entails bringing together what Lave and Wenger (1991) have termed ‘communities of practice’, within which these researchers and practitioners operate” and in doing so belong “to a group engaged in common practices whose members … construct between themselves a method of acting and thinking about their everyday affairs according to their own constraints and resources. (p. 580) The term that seemed appropriate to describe the teacher development / re‐ search design of my study is participatory action research: action research refers to research that is organised as a cyclic development process which would be required to address and to understand the complexity of concerns of both theory and practice that related to my study, and it would depend on the committed participation both from the teacher educator as an expert preschool practitioner and researcher and participating preschool teachers to sustain the development process. Two general research questions resulted from the purpose and approach of my study: What teacher education model for introducing English into preschool would develop the teachers’ competences needed to teach EFL effectively and accommodate the complexities of the preschool context at the same time? What evidence is there that they have successfully developed the competences intended? With this focus, the teacher development study that is presented here covers all three of the main concepts of professional teacher development that Terhart (2011, pp. 206-210) distinguishes: 1. As seen from a structural theory perspective, teachers’ tasks are complex and inherently contradictory in nature due to contextual conditions. Con‐ sequently, professional teachers manage to cope with often contradictory uncertainties in a reflective, competent way. 2. As seen from a competence-oriented perspective, teachers’ required knowl‐ edge, skills and motivational disposition needed to teach effectively need to be identified first. This knowledge base must be derived from empirical research evidence. Consequently, teachers are able to act in a professional way if they can build their work on these relevant areas. 3. As seen from a biographical perspective, teachers’ development closely relates to individual teachers’ biographies and professional ideas of self. The focus of this study is on preschool teachers’ competence development (2) but also considers contextual affordances and constraints (1) and relates teachers’ developments to individual teachers’ biographies and resulting profiles (3). 88 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="88"?> While chapter 5 will present a survey of the research questions in detail and will focus on the design of the teacher education model, the ensuing chapter 6 will focus on details and issues related to the research approach that participatory action research entails. 5.1 Survey of the research questions structured as multiple case study The teacher education project is organised in the form of a multiple case study that the research questions are assigned to. The case study comprises three levels: the macro level (the evaluation of the survey of state preschool in the Salzburg area) (→ chapter 3), the meso level (all the participating preschool teachers of the selected preschool that would represent preschool teachers’ joint development as a social community of practice) (→ chapter 6.2) and the micro level of the case study (the individual participating preschool teacher’s development processes presented at first as separate individual case studies followed by a concluding summary of their experiences) (→ chapter 7) (→ diagram 2; also presented in chapter 6.1 to describe the levels further): Figure 23: Diagram 2: Multiple case study design The following table (→ table 1) provides a survey of the research questions of my study and relates them to these three case study levels and the corresponding chapters in which the research questions are addressed. 89 5.1 Survey of the research questions structured as multiple case study <?page no="89"?> Research questions and related chapters of the study MACRO Level Teacher development context EFL in multilingual inclusive state preschools in the Salzburg area (→ chapter 3) 1. Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work (→ chapter 3.2): The size and characteristics of children’s groups (→ chapter 3.2.1): How many groups are in your preschool? (question 1a). How many children are in your group? (question 1b). How many children speak German as their second or third language? (question 1c). State preschools offering German as a second language (→ chapter 3.2.2): Is German taught in your preschool? (question 2a). Who teaches German in your preschool? (question 2a-1). State preschools offering English as a foreign language (→ chapter 3.2.3): Is English offered in your preschool? (question 2b). Who offers it? (question 2b-1). When offered by a visiting teacher, which children take part? (question 2b-2). 2. Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool: perspective of the children (→ chapter 3.3): How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? (question 3a). There are a number of personal everyday opinions you come across about introducing English in preschool. What is your attitude in the matter? (question 3b). - Children should learn German first. (question 3b-1). - Introducing English in preschool is a benefit for other languages as well, including German. (question 3b-2). - An additional language would burden many children because preschool life is challenging enough for them. (question 3b-3). - Children learn a language in a playful way. If a further language (e.g., English) is offered in a child-appropriate way, children will experience that learning languages is fun and consequently they will be relaxed and open for new experiences. (question 3b-4). 90 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="90"?> 3. Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool: perspective of the teachers (→ chapter 3.4): From your perspective as preschool teacher, would you consider teaching English rather as a benefit or a burden? (question 4a). Can you imagine offering English yourself in your preschool? (question 4c). Preschool teachers’ education in teaching English: offers and needs (→ chapter 3.4.1): Was the course ‘English in Preschool’ offered during your preservice teacher education? (question 4b). Did you take part? (question 4b-1). Preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence (→ chapter 3.4.2): Do you have the feeling that your English is adequate / not adequate? (question 4c-1). Preschool teachers’ disposition to teacher English to their groups (→ chapter 3.4.3): Would you teach English if appropriate support were provided? (question 4c-2). Logistically accommodating English in the state preschool context (→ chapter 3.4.4): May the reasons (against introducing English in your preschool) be related to the general situation of your preschool, such as coping with daily life in preschool and the logistics of running the morning? (question 4c-3). MESO Level Teacher development context The participating selected preschool: as a social community of practice Profiles of preschool teachers (→ Chapter 6.2.4) What were the participants’ initial attitudes towards introducing English? What initial experiences (knowledge and skills) did the teachers have in the area of English teaching? What communicative English language competence did participating preschool teachers have? 91 5.1 Survey of the research questions structured as multiple case study <?page no="91"?> MICRO Level The individual participating preschool teachers: individual teachers’ competence development and summary of common experiences (→ chapter 7.2) 1. The teachers’ reassessment of their attitudes towards introducing English (→ chapter 7.2.1): Were the teachers able to reflect on and re-assess their attitudes towards introducing English in their contexts? In what way did the support provided by teacher education assist them in the process of re-assessing their attitudes? 2. The teachers’ motivation to become involved in the teaching process (→ chapter 7.2.2): Did the teacher education engage the teachers in the process to teach English, despite their initial reluctance to introduce it into their groups? What elements of the teacher education contributed to it? 3. The teachers’ developing English teaching competences (→ chapter 7.2.3): Did the teachers gain competences in integrating English tasks into their daily routine in a way that suited their teacher personality? What individual strategies did they develop in this process? Did the teachers gain English teaching competences to create a ‘powerful learning environment for language learning? Did they develop the confidence to use the foreign language in the classroom? 4. The teachers’ reflective practice as professional habit (→ chapter 7.2.4): Were the teachers able to reflect on their English teaching? In what way did the design of the education model support the teachers in this process? Did the teachers become involved in their professional development, by making use of the reflective tools that the teacher education provided? Table 1: A survey of the research questions and related chapters of the study The following chapter will specify why an approach of participatory action research qualifies as a suitable design to answer these research questions and to align the interests of research and teacher education. 92 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="92"?> 5.2 Aligning research and teacher education through an approach of participatory action research Action research is a well-established approach in language teacher development and offers a synthesis of research and teacher education. It seemed appropriate to meet contextual demands for various reasons (cf. Burns, 2010, p. 11). The approach supports the development of teachers’ competences while it inte‐ grates reflective tools that provide research data on the effectiveness of the developmental processes at the same time. It focuses “on issues and questions related to immediate practice and application” (Burns, 2009, p. 114). In my case, the research addresses preschool teachers’ developing English teaching competences in the framework of a teacher education model, which is primarily concerned to accommodate both participating teachers’ individual needs and the demands of their preschool context. Both teachers’ needs and contextual demands have a tremendous influence on teachers’ disposition to introduce English into preschool (→ chapter 3). We know from research in ways language teachers develop that teacher education is “the sum of experiences and activities through which individuals learn to be language teachers” (Freeman, 2001, p. 72). During the process of developing their teaching competences, preschool teachers need to become active and reflective so that they will “think for themselves and reach their own conclusions about their professional practice” (Allwright & Hanks, 2009, p. 141; referring to Giroux 1988). Action research is an approach that supports these processes. A further distinctive feature of the study presented here is that teacher education is based on the idea of teacher development rather than teacher training: while “in teacher training content is generally defined externally and transmitted to the teacher-learner through various processes …, in teacher development the content generally stems from the teacher-learners who generate it from their experience” (Freeman, 2001, p. 76). In this sense, action research is expected to contribute to teachers’ knowledge development through teachers exploring and analysing their own practice in this study. Following the same line of thought, Burns describes action research as empowering the teachers to become ‘agents’ rather than ‘recipients’ of knowledge (Burns, 2009, p. 116). As has been mentioned in the introduction, action research is considered to be an appropriate tool for teacher development but is equally recognised as an approach for qualitative research in general (Burns, 2007, p. 987). It has been widely used as a qualitative research approach in applied linguistics (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; McTaggart, 1997; Wallace, 1998; Burns, 1999, 2010; Edge, 2000). Qualitative researchers explore contexts of which there is little or no knowledge 93 5.2 Aligning research and teacher education <?page no="93"?> available yet. Therefore, they need to focus “on understanding the process of what is going on in a setting. … It is exploratory - its purpose is to discover new ideas and insights, or … [to] generate new theories” (Croker 2009, pp. 7-9; italics in original) so that first contextually grounded insights are available for further scrutiny with larger populations. Burns describes the focus of this research approach aptly as follows: “Action researchers are interested in understanding what their explorations reveal, so developing personal practitioner knowledge and ‘practical theories’ is a central focus of this type of research” (Burns, 2009, p. 114). Research practitioners (in this case preschool teachers) need to gain particular understandings that precisely relate to and are suitable for their individual situations - a process that is referred to as Exploratory Practice (Müller-Hartmann and Schocker, 2018a, p. 108; referring to Allwright & Hanks, 2009, pp. 172,173). The preschool teachers first need to gain an understanding of what it means to introduce English into their context (how the children respond to it, for example). At the same time, they need to develop a concept of the teaching processes that are appropriate for their context which involve an approach to teaching languages through tasks (→ chapter 5.8). In the research literature a distinction between action research and exploratory practice (EP) is made, depending on the intention the teacher-researcher pursues with his or her research (Hartman Müller & Schocker, 2018a, p. 108). But two conceptually distinct processes, “taking action for understanding, and taking action for change” are simultaneously involved in practitioner research, with AR focusing on taking action for change and EP focusing more on action for understanding” (Allwright & Hanks, 2009, p. 172; italics in original). The research of this study aligns both concerns: exploratory practice and action research. After these introductory comments as regards the general research and teacher education approach of the study, the following chapters will describe the features, components and content of the teacher education project. This will be preceded by an illustrating model of the teacher education project, which I have developed to meet the particular demands of the preschool context (→ diagram 4: ‘Preschool English teacher education model through participatory action research’ in the next chapter). 5.3 An outline of the preschool English teacher education model as support system The English teacher education model is based on the concept of participatory action research, which includes reflective practice through its investigative and 94 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="94"?> exploratory nature (→ chapters 5.4.2 and 5.4.3). It involves teachers directly in the processes of researching and reflecting on the teaching and the way it affects their children’s early foreign language learning. These processes are expected to promote professional development by encouraging the teachers to be respon‐ sible for their own learning. From the aspect of accommodating demanding contextual factors (→ chapter 3), researching the effects of introducing English in their groups of children can be the initial motivating factor for the teachers to become involved in the teaching process. Wallace’s ‘Reflective Practice Model of Professional Development’ funda‐ mentally informed the design of my model (→ diagram 3). His central focus is on the practice element that supports teachers to develop their professional competence by reflecting on their practical experiences through which their initial ideas and concepts are challenged and developed. Theoretical knowledge is integrated in the process of reflection (Wallace, 199, p. 56). Figure 24: Diagram 3: ‘Reflective Practice Model of Professional Development’ (Wallace 1991: 49) This diagram is included again for further discussion in chapter 5.4.3. My teacher education model is more comprehensive than Wallace’s because it needs to accommodate the specifically challenging context of a preschool learning environment. It would need to be tailored to meet the particular needs of preschool teachers and their learners in an interdependent process by providing a comprehensive support structure. Otherwise, teachers’ initial concerns and contextual constraints might have impeded the implementation of the project. Consequently, the model integrates three central features and provides a number of components that are expected to support participating teachers’ development. Features and components will be discussed below. 95 5.3 An outline of the preschool English teacher education model as support system <?page no="95"?> Figure 25: Diagram 4: Preschool English teacher education model through participatory action research NB: The numbering in the model is there for the convenience of referring to the corresponding features. The English teacher education is situated at the workplace of participating preschool teachers throughout duration of the project, in other words, it takes place in situ (→ # 1) (→ chapter 5.4.1). The advantages of this basic feature are obvious: it allows participating teachers to explore their own teaching context and it provides a familiar environment for teachers to work in. Through this, the teachers are able to gain credible first-hand experience of the potential of introducing English within their contexts and it provides vivid and trustworthy insights into the teaching processes. While in situ education offers practical opportunities for the teachers to develop their English teaching competences, looking at it from the aspect of accommodating the contextual factors, it aims at providing the teachers with opportunities to reassess their reservations about introducing English in their context so that they become involved and motivated to participate in the teacher research project. 96 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="96"?> Stage 1 of the model indicates what the participating teachers and the teacher educator contribute to the teaching and learning situation. Participating teachers are qualified preschool teachers. Often the term ‘second or foreign language teacher education’ is used to refer to “how beginning language teachers acquire knowledge and skills and begin to build a working model of effective teaching” (Wright, 2010, p. 260; referring to Burns & Richards, 2009) - but in the study that is presented here participants are experienced preschool teachers in-service who are to be educated to teach English as a foreign language as an extra-curricular offer to their groups of children. In the project they are there‐ fore considered to be professionals who cooperatively work with the teacher educator and develop their additional competences to teach English in the process. What they do is based on the experiences and knowledge that they have accumulated over the years (e.g., the rapport they have established with their children and the routines they have developed in their classroom management). It is therefore assumed that they will not lapse into the role of novice teachers who are largely dependent on the teacher educator. The teacher educator (→ # 4) supports the teachers to develop their English teaching competences and to implement the project in their preschool. S/ he guides the teachers by taking on the role of a counsellor to build up a rapport that is best described as ‘collegial’, in order to avoid a hierarchical teacher-student relationship, which would be inappropriate given preschool teachers’ experiences. They will be encouraged to actively participate in teaching English to their groups. In the process of implementing the model the teacher educator has various responsibilities: s/ he gives participatory demonstration lessons once a week to teach both the teachers and the children in their respective groups (→ chapter 5.7.1); s/ he supports the preschool teachers in their independent practical work (→ chapter 5.7.3); s/ he makes provision for teachers to develop their communicative English language competence (→ chapter 5.7.4); s/ he familiarizes the teachers with and encourage them to engage in reflective approaches for professional development (→ chapter 5.7.5) and s/ he integrates relevant theory which is related to teaching English to young learners (→ chapters 5.7.5.4). Stage 2 of the model covers the reflective practice process during which the teachers reflect on their various practical experiences and develop experiential knowledge relating their experiences to their theoretical knowledge to make informed decisions about their teaching. The core of the practice element of the reflective practice cycle of stage 2 is teaching the children cooperatively through participatory demonstration lessons followed by teachers’ independent practical work (→ # 5). These components are a fundamental support system for the teachers to develop their English 97 5.3 An outline of the preschool English teacher education model as support system <?page no="97"?> teaching competences because they provide opportunities to gain experiences that may prompt reflective practice. The teacher educator and the preschool teachers share the responsibility of teaching the children cooperatively (→ chapter 5.7.2). The preschool teachers join in and teach in the lessons given by the teacher educator (participatory demonstration lessons → chapter 5.7.1) and continue teaching the children independently during the week (independent practical work → chapter 5.7.3). Through this cooperative work, the teacher educator enables participating teachers’ development to be centred on their practice and s/ he provides opportunities for the teachers to observe the learning process and progress of their children, which they can subsequently build upon. This is expected to be much more credible and effective than if teachers would accumulate knowledge that they have obtained independently of their workplace, which they would need to try and transfer to their situation without any immediate support. It is expected that through this procedure a dynamic teaching / learning situation is created that gives momentum in the teaching / learning processes and keeps the education centred on practice. From the aspect of accommodating contextual factors, the teacher educator’s role of teaching the children her/ himself and continuously assisting the preschool teachers in the process provides a powerful support structure in trying to introduce English into the preschool routine. The reflection part of stage 2 covers the components that have been included to encourage preschool teachers’ engagement in reflective approaches for pro‐ fessional development (→ # 6). They include materials development and journal writing (→ chapter 5.7.5.1 & 5.7.5.2). The process is also stimulated through interviews that explicitly relate to participating teachers’ perspectives on the research questions. It is important that teachers reflect on their experiential knowledge and relate it to relevant theory that Wallace terms received knowledge to describe an established source of knowledge that has been published and / or is research-based. In my model I use the term relevant theory as it is integrated in reflecting on teachers’ development whenever it seems appropriate for teachers to understand the reasons for demonstrated or experienced practices or to develop them further. The reflective cycle that is connecting # 5 and # 6 indicates that reflection has neither a beginning nor an end. It signifies the continuous process of teachers’ professional development which the education hopes to achieve (→ # 7). The next chapter will describe the three central features of the teacher education model in detail. 98 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="98"?> 5.4 The central features of the preschool English teacher education model 5.4.1 Teacher education organised as in situ A central feature of action research is that teachers’ development processes are organised in situ. This means that the entire project is situated within the sample preschool in which all the participating teachers work. This feature is based on an understanding of teacher development that has been suggested by a sociocultural theoretical perspective: researchers who subscribe to this view argue that human cognition is understood as originating in and fundamentally shaped by engagement in social activities. … Cognition cannot be removed from activity since it originates in and is framed by the very nature of that activity. … It takes prolonged and sustained participation in social activities that have a clear purpose … within specific social contexts. ( Johnson & Golombek, p. 2011, p. 3) Meanwhile a large body of research literature reports on the effectiveness of organising teacher education as participation in situ. Through this approach, teachers are supported to develop “the essential procedural knowledge to confront the realities of the classroom”. It also helps to avoid the “separation of subject matter knowledge (what to teach) from pedagogical knowledge (how to teach)” (p. 2; italics in original) but instead simultaneously develops the two closely related dimensions of the activity of teaching in an integrated way. This central role of the context has recently been confirmed by an action research study conducted with secondary English teachers in Germany: … Contexts [in which teachers work] shape how and why teachers do what they do. Knowledge does not just develop by accumulating information, but is shared, negotiated and co-constructed through experience in the communities of practice in which the individual participates. Therefore, teacher education needs to create opportunities for teachers to reflect on the appropriateness of their theories of learning in their local contexts. (Müller Hartmann & Schocker, 2018a, p. 107) The preschool teachers will experience in what ways English can be taught to young learners through being exposed to examples of ‘how it can be done’. Teachers may reflect on the appropriateness of what is happening in their classrooms, rather than just being exposed to a transmission-oriented approach in which “teachers learn about language, second language acquisition, and language use … separate from the pedagogical concepts, procedures, and 99 5.4 The central features of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="99"?> activities that constitute the activity of actual teaching” ( Johnson & Golombek, 2011, p. 2). By locating the teacher education in an established teaching environment, an authentic situation is used for teachers to “connect the input to their own knowledge, experience and ongoing practice” (Freeman, 2001, p. 76). Poehner notes that it is not sufficient to merely [expose] teachers to the latest theories and initiatives without providing the conditions (e.g., time, opportunities to practice, and feedback) required for them to be linked to - and to potentially improve - actual classroom practice, which is at the very heart of professional development. (Poehner, 2011, p. 189) A further reason to organise teacher education in situ is that it is strategically im‐ portant for teachers to experience how to overcome contextual constraints that may severely obstruct the implementation process. As my survey demonstrated, teachers experience their contexts of work as challenging and demanding (→ chapter 3). It affects their motivation, their available time and energy considerably when they attempt to meet a new challenge, as is the introduction of English in their groups. Situating the teacher education in the workplace of participating preschool teachers puts no undue extra demands on the teachers. Instead, teachers can integrate the new subject in the daily routines of their educational work. The teacher education design also needed to consider a prevailing general reluctance of teachers to introduce English into the preschool context which my survey has also demonstrated (→ chapter 3). Through offering the teacher education in situ the preschool teachers would be able to directly experience the potential of learning English with their groups of learners. This would support them to make valid judgements on the benefits of implementing English in their context. If it worked with their group of learners, it would qualify as a credible experience that could directly affect their attitude in a positive way and would contribute to their developing skills and knowledge while taking part in the teaching process. A further benefit of organising the teacher education project in situ means that teachers are able to work with their group of children: their familiarity with the context supports teachers’ confidence to actively participate in the lessons in cooperation with the teacher educator. It has been repeatedly reported in teacher development studies that when teachers develop their English teaching competences with the groups of children, which they are familiar with they feel competent and safe: “From their experience (they) know what works in the classroom and what does not. Hence, they are much more ready to depart from 100 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="100"?> rules and take responsibility for their own actions” (Tsui, 2003, p. 29) if they encounter new challenges. As the preschool teachers have already developed a rapport with their children and can rely on their authority and classroom management, they “are better able to respond to student needs and classroom events that require decisions and actions because they have well-established routines, which they can call upon to respond to a variety of unanticipated events” (p. 38). Consequently, it is expected that initial inhibitions to experiment with introducing a new language will be reduced and instead a non-threatening environment for them to teach in will be established (Van Avermaet et al., 2006, p. 195). Only recently, in summarizing the insights of her review on empirical research on effective primary English teacher education, Dausend noted that it has become visible how important it is for learning to take place in meaningful settings, even for teacher students at university level. They need ample opportunities and situations to experience themselves, to communicate, to discuss, to reflect on ideas and practical experience with other teacher students. (Dausend, 2017, p. 122) 5.4.2 Teacher education organised as participatory action research The questionnaire survey I conducted at the beginning of my research identified a distinct gap between teachers’ general interest to introduce an English programme in preschools and a widespread perception of contextual constraints that might impede its implementation (→ chapter 3). The most effective approach to overcome these constraints would be to bridge this gap by encour‐ aging preschool teachers to become part of a collaborative investigation in the process of teaching English in which they would be directly involved and would play an active part. After more than a decade of experiences with participatory action research, this approach to introduce innovations in educational contexts has come to be seen as “a powerful form of staff development” (Burns, 1999, p. 15). The practice of investigating change processes collaboratively in shared contexts of work was expected to promote “self-reflective enquiry within the social situations” in question (Carr & Kremmis, 1986, p. 162). As all of the teachers of the sample preschool would be participating in the action research project the educational purpose could be aligned with the contextual needs. It is a unique feature of this research project that my sampling did not consist of a group of student teachers who would focus on their professional development in teaching English, but it entailed instead pedagogically experi‐ enced preschool teachers who were initially reluctant and hesitant to introduce English into their context in the first place. As action research “is highly contextualized within the personal daily workplace and provides a way to open 101 5.4 The central features of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="101"?> up, question, and investigate the realities of the teaching situation” (Burns, 2009, p. 116), it seemed to be a suitable approach to involve preschool teachers to develop their professional competence in the field of teaching English to the children: “It can take your thinking in new directions and can be modified flexibly as you progress, as there are no fixed ‘rules’ about how the research process should proceed or what the outcome should be” (p. 116). Moreover, a motivating factor to take part in action research as a team might result from this approach: Perhaps the most important aspect … is that, if the 'vibes' are right (i.e., if the group dynamic is positive), working as a member of a team is much more motivating than working on our own. We are much more likely to follow through on the action research tasks we set ourselves if others are there to spur us on. (Wallace, 1998, p. 210) The teacher education project would need to be perceived as relevant by participating preschool teachers so that they would become involved and remain motivated. To make this happen, they would need to experience that introducing English in their groups was doable and rewarding in the long run. Therefore, participatory action research was designed and carried out as a longitudinal case study that covered a period of two and half years. It was set in an inclusive, multilingual state preschool in Salzburg and involved the participation of the teacher educator and all the preschool teachers at the preschool whose experiences will be described in the case studies (→ chapter 7.2). It proved to be viable to carry out the research over this long period of time because it could take place within the established timetable without causing any disruptions to participating teachers’ routines. Experiences documented from other teacher development contexts which had subscribed to an approach of participatory action research confirmed that this important requirement for teachers to be willing to take part can be achieved (see for example the experiences of secondary English teachers in a longitudinal teacher development study conducted by Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2018a). They concluded that action research proved to be “low-scale in terms of size and interference in classroom processes” (p. 107). The preschool teachers’ participation was not mandatory. The desired sus‐ tainability of the research as a longitudinal case study would depend on preschool teachers’ participation “viewed as a choice, not as an imposition” (McIntyre, 2008, p. 15). McIntyre describes this voluntary nature of participation where the participants are put under no pressure as common-sense participation (p. 15). For my research project, this meant that the preschool teachers were free to commit themselves to their own comfort levels within the parameters 102 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="102"?> the teacher education project had established in the beginning. This involved observing the children’s responses during participation lessons which the teacher educator gave, taking part in the teacher education by teaching the children cooperatively with the teacher educator and reflecting on their English teaching competences that they were developing in the process of the project. For me as a teacher educator and researcher I respected at all times that each individual teacher had her own teaching style that she had come to perceive as suitable to create her particular group dynamics. The voluntary nature of the degree of teachers’ involvement was intended to give the preschool teachers ownership over their research, “in the production of knowledge and improvement of practice” (McTaggart, 1997, p. 28). The idea of ownership is fundamental to the approach of participatory action research (p. 6). As will be demonstrated, the preschool teachers cooperated closely throughout this extended period of time and beyond to develop their professional competences they would need to teach English. In an approach to teacher education that is based on action research the “teacher becomes an ‘investigator’ or ‘explorer’ of his or her personal teaching context, while at the same time being one of the participants in it” (Burns, 2010, p. 2). The investigation and exploration, which are referred to here, are closely associated with the process of reflective practice, of “taking a self-reflective, critical, and systematic approach to exploring your own teaching contexts. … [Critical meaning that teachers take] a questioning and ‘problematising’ stance” towards their teaching (p. 2). The next chapter will look more closely at the concept of reflective practice that action research involves. It is one of the central features of my teacher education model. 5.4.3 Teacher education organised as reflective practice The idea of teacher education organised as reflective practice has been system‐ atically described for the first time by Donald A. Schön (1983) in his book on The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Michael Wallace (1991) has built on the notion of teachers as reflective practitioners and provided a framework designed for foreign language teachers’ professional development. I will base my approach predominantly on the concepts put forward by these two researchers. Schön analyses reflective practice as involving two processes: re‐ flection-in-action and reflection-on-action (Schön, 1983, p. 54-55). Reflection-in- action takes place during the action (p. 54), in our case during the teaching process: This means that it results in spontaneous reactions to incidental situations while teaching. This is closely associated with knowing-in-action 103 5.4 The central features of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="103"?> 1 Wallace talks of professional ‘development’ but sometimes uses ‘education’ as a synonym. which Schön describes not only as spontaneous reactions, but also as “intuitive performance” (p. 49). Reflection-on-action takes place after a practice phase or activity has been completed, in my case teachers after the English lessons when teachers reflect on their teaching. Wallace (1991), in his ‘Reflective Practice Model of Professional Development’, recommends that teaching practices are to be reflected continuously as to their appropriateness to the group of learners and teachers in question. As has been already outlined in the introduction to chapter 5.3, the model that I have designed to meet particular preschool teachers’ needs takes Wallace’s ‘Reflective Practice Model of Professional Development’ 1 (p. 49) (→ diagram 5) as a fundamental guideline. This model will be referred to here again and it will be described in detail so that the changes made which would suit preschool teachers’ needs become apparent. Figure 26: Diagram 5: ‘Reflective Practice Model of Professional Development’ (Wallace 1991: 49) Stage 1: The target group in Wallace’s reflective model consists of trainees. The trainees in my case are qualified, employed preschool teachers who are involved in their profession (Wallace, 1991, p. 48) and who have developed competences in managing preschool groups. But as regards the purpose of my project, they may or may not have had some experience in teaching foreign languages (including English) and they will have developed certain attitudes, knowledge and skills from their general preschool teaching experience in general and from teaching German as a second language in particular. Following Wallace’s model, it is “the stage the person … is at before beginning [the] process” (p. 48). It is a 104 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="104"?> fundamental assumption underlying his model that the primary agent in the development process is not an academic researcher or expert (in my case the teacher educator), but rather the trainee her/ himself. I refer to this idea when I build on participating preschool teachers’ contexts and expertise: The ‘reflective model’ deliberately highlights the trainees and what they bring to the training / development process. … [It] emphasises the fact that people seldom enter into professional training situation with blank minds and / or neutral attitudes … [which includes], ideas, beliefs, … etc. all of which shape our behaviour in various typical or consistent ways. (p. 50) This is particularly true for second language teacher education as we know since Lortie’s study (1975) who described “the phenomenon whereby student teachers arrive for their training courses having spent thousands of hours as schoolchildren observing and evaluating professionals in action” (Borg, 2004, p. 274) as apprenticeship of observation. “This contrasts with novices learning other professions, such as those of lawyers or doctors. … This apprenticeship, he argued, is largely responsible for many of the preconceptions that pre-service student teachers hold about teaching” (p. 274). Johnson and Golombek (2011) refer to Lortie’s early findings (1975) when they say that “teachers typically ground their understandings of teaching and learning as well as their notions about how to teach in their own instructional histories as learners” (p. 1). Wallace (1991) describes ideas, beliefs and attitudes as constructs, that is, a cluster of related concepts (p. 50). Just as the trainees that Wallace has in mind, the preschool teachers develop from the basis of a cluster of existing attitudes, ideas and beliefs on how children should be taught in general and how languages should be taught to children in particular. Therefore, it is a fundamental requirement to build on their attitudes, but also their knowledge and skills that they have accumulated through their experiences. This entails the need to re-assess their acquired teaching habits which may not support children’s language learning appropriately. Stage 2: Received Knowledge covers “facts, data and theories often related to some kind of research” (Wallace, 1991, p. 12). Wallace uses this terminology to stress that the trainee “has ‘received’ (the knowledge) rather than ‘experienced’ it in professional action” (p. 12). His term experiential knowledge derives from Schön’s knowing-in-action and reflection (p. 13). He sees the experiential knowl‐ edge in professional action (practical experience) as the core of his reflective model which is in “a close, reciprocal relationship” with received knowledge (p. 52). This is depicted in his diagram through a reciprocal arrow that connects the experiential knowledge and relevant theory. The idea is that reflection works 105 5.4 The central features of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="105"?> two ways: reflecting on received knowledge in association with classroom experi‐ ence, and reflection on classroom experiences which is fed back into the received knowledge (p. 55). His model aims at providing a framework to accommodate the connection between theory and practice through a reflective process. During this process teachers develop their pedagogical content knowledge which is one of the essential competences my teacher education project aims to develop. It will therefore subscribe to this idea on the role of relevant theory in the reflective development process as the teachers will need to reflect on why they do what they do and for this purpose, they need to appreciate the theory that informs practice. In my model, received knowledge covers relevant theory that relates to the teaching of English to children. It involves the principles of the task approach and related research to understand the ways in which children learn foreign languages and may be best supported in this process. To support the reciprocal process of reflecting practice, relevant theory is integrated after or in between teaching practice phases if clarification and in-depth understanding of a practical incident is required. Wallace emphasizes that these two related elements of a teacher’s knowledge base, “the practice element … on the one hand and the reflective process on the other hand” (p. 56) need to be the core of what effective teacher education is about. Before I turn my attention to the central components of the preschool teacher education model (→ chapter 5.6), which involve participatory demonstration lessons for preschool teachers to observe and take part in and also involves teaching the children cooperatively, the following chapter will first focus on the resulting complex roles of the teacher educator who, through this model, shares the responsibility to teach the children. 5.5 The complexity of roles of the teacher educator and researcher The role of the teacher educator has been widely discussed in connection with approaches of professional development through action research. In their research Savoie-Zajc and Descamps-Bednarz (2007) describe the “composite role” of teacher educator and researcher as follows: She was first of all an external resource who provided participants with the conceptual and practical frameworks to help them pinpoint the professional concerns upon which they wished to work and to reflect upon. She also organised the context where participants could share their experiences … with group members. The resource role 106 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="106"?> extended to suggesting reading materials or websites when participants were seeking information on specific topics. … She was, finally, a researcher. (p. 582) In the context of the preschool teacher education process, s/ he also has to adopt a comprehensive number of roles. S/ he is responsible to provide the content of the teacher education (such as the pedagogy of teaching English to children), to support teachers to re-write existing teaching materials to suit their children’s language learning needs (or to develop completely new teaching materials), to design preschool tasks and demonstrate in what ways they address children’s needs (which involves managing the processes resulting from putting the tasks to practice), s/ he needs to acknowledge and aptly react to contextual constraints, s/ he takes preschool teachers’ attitudes, skills or concerns seriously and s/ he is able to establish a rapport with both the preschool children and with the participating preschool teachers. Her/ his heterogeneous roles may best be described as that of a ‘counsellor’: The counsellor should assist in developing teaching competence. It is the teacher’s own conscious development and growth that matters. … The counsellor cannot limit his task to the transmission of his own understanding but must take the skills, knowledge and values of the learner as the point of departure. (Handal & Lauvas, 1987, p. 1, 7) Ideally, the teacher educator organises the education project in a way that her/ his relationship to the teachers qualifies as collegial cooperation so that the preschool will be supported to become pro-active, play an active role and do not become completely dependent on the teacher educator: Teaching is first and foremost a “helping profession,” which depends on the relation‐ ship created between the teacher and the learner. It is crucial therefore to determine which forms of help, or teaching, are most effective within that relationship. Such a determination depends on a number of variables: the purpose of the help (its objective), the particular context in which the help is being offered, and the interaction that makes up the process of offering and receiving it. (Freeman, 1990, p. 103) This involves taking an emic insider’s perspective so that the subjective mean‐ ings and understandings that participants associate with their workplace and their development could be understood and eventually be reconstructed. It would be their interpretation of the situation that I needed to uncover to be able to view their development processes and the required support that needed to be provided from their angle (Croker, 2009, p. 8). Support involved developing the preschool teachers’ confidence by actively involving them in teaching the children from the beginning so that they would 107 5.5 The complexity of roles of the teacher educator and researcher <?page no="107"?> systematically develop their competences and ultimately become autonomous professionals. In education autonomy is “the capacity of an individual to be an independent agent, not governed by others” (Boud, 1981, p. 18; as cited in Bailey, 2006, p. 56). “[It is] not an ability that has to be learnt but a way of being that has to be discovered and rediscovered” (Breen & Mann, 1997, p. 134; as cited in Bailey, 2006, p. 56). The teacher educator therefore has to encourage active participation of the preschool teachers from the beginning so that ideally a non-hierarchical relationship of working cooperatively with the children will result. This differs from the relationship of a teacher educator and a student-teacher. Preschool teachers are to keep their role as expert preschool teachers, in which “the context is very much an integral part of their teaching act” (Tsui, 2003, pp. 30-31), rather than having them lapse into the role of novice teachers, for whom the “context is very often taken as something external and ignored” (pp. 30-31). By working together, collegially an authentic equality can develop between the teacher educator and the preschool teachers, despite preschool teachers’ inexperience in the field of teaching English. This collegial relationship helps to contribute to an environment that is conducive for the preschool teachers to operate as experts as they take part and teach English with the teacher educator in the same lessons and continue during the week. In Tsui’s study on exploring the concept of expertise in teaching she clarifies this distinction between the different roles of novice preservice teachers and experienced in-service teachers as follows: “Novice teachers tend to act according to rules and guidelines laid down by people with authority, whereas expert teachers rely on their own judgment and exercise autonomy when planning” (Tsui, 2003, p. 25). This role description of teachers in-service and teacher educator resembles the characterization of language learners’ roles as independent learners in a classroom: Learner roles in an instructional system are closely linked to the teacher’s status and function. … Some methods are totally dependent on the teacher as a source of knowledge and direction; others see the teacher’s role as catalyst, consultant, guide, and model for learning. (Richards & Rogers, 2001, p. 28) With these general considerations on the role relationship between the teacher educator and participating preschool teachers in mind, the following two chapters will describe in detail the required competences of the teacher educator so that the aforementioned non-hierarchical relationship of working coopera‐ tively with the children and teachers’ developing through this process will be supported. This is done by describing the components that have been integrated in the teacher education model. 108 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="108"?> 5.6 The role of the teacher educator to support preschool teachers’ English teaching competences: An overview of the components The teacher educator’s role to support participating preschool teachers’ English teaching competences may be structured in five components of what the teacher educator needs to be able to do (→ diagram 6). This involves the following four purposes: to prompt the teachers to re-assess their attitudes towards introducing English in the preschool; to motivate the teachers to become involved in the teaching process; to assist the teachers in developing their knowledge and skills to teach English and to engage the teachers in reflective practice. As preschool teachers lack the images and practices of an approach to teach English for this particular target group of preschool children, teacher education needs to be organised in a way that they can observe and reflect on expert teacher models so that they will be able to develop appropriate practices for themselves. Therefore, my teacher education will expose teachers to ample practical experiences to teach English to children. Teachers will become involved through organised processes of observation, active teaching participation and reflection. In pro‐ viding model-learning primarily through participatory demonstration lessons that are given by the teacher educator during which the preschool teachers observe the teacher educator in action, teach the children cooperatively with her/ him during these lessons and continue teaching English throughout the week in their routines they are encouraged to reflect on the teaching processes and relate them to the learning outcomes of the children. The following survey of components in this chapter, will be elaborated in more detail in the next chapter. 109 5.6 The role of the teacher educator to support preschool teachers <?page no="109"?> Figure 27: Diagram 6: The role of the teacher educator in the English preschool teacher education 1. Giving participatory demonstration lessons to include both the teachers and the children The participatory demonstration lessons serve a dual purpose in that the teacher educator teaches both the teachers and the children. On the one hand, s/ he demonstrates good practice for the preschool teachers to observe. They are to participate actively by taking over parts of the lesson and may join in spontaneously if they wish. At the same time, s/ he teaches English to the children. In this project the teacher educator is responsible for teaching all the children in an allocated time that is provided within the routine that is reserved for the English lesson once a week in the classrooms of the preschool teachers. This involves organising cooperative learning opportunities for the preschool teachers in the teaching process of the lessons (→ chapter 5.7.1). 2. Teaching the children cooperatively The component of teaching the children cooperatively involves the teacher educator and the preschool teachers working together in a team to teach their group. This serves various purposes: it provides support to initiate the teacher education project; it attends to addressing and to managing any contextual constraints; it aims to develop a dynamic learning atmosphere to sustain teachers’ motivation to teach English and it supports the development of a sense of community between the teachers within their context (→ chapter 5.7.2). 110 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="110"?> 3. Integrating English into the daily routine to support independent practical work Independent practical work entails the preschool teachers continuing to teach English to their children during the week. Opportunities for teachers to become involved are provided in early morning free play, which is a time where the children decide for themselves what they would like to do without instruction from the preschool teachers and during the participatory demonstration lessons when the preschool teachers are co-teachers with the teacher educator. The preschool teachers are responsible for their own independent practical work. They organise their English teaching during the week and decide what they would like to experiment with, when they consider it to be convenient for English to take place and the degree to which they are able to become involved (→ chapter 5.7.3). 4. Supporting teachers to develop their communicative English lan‐ guage competence The preschool teachers need to be able to use the target language with ease and spontaneously. It is therefore a priority to use methods that assist them to develop their classroom speaking and interactive skills, following the concept of the communicative approach according to which you learn a language while using it. The way you learn a language will determine how effectively you can recall and apply your knowledge (Ellis, 2003, p. 108). It is expected that this is done best by supporting teachers through providing a repertoire of ready-made chunks that can be built upon and that may be varied depending on the situation which will enable the preschool teachers to access the language instantaneously in classroom interaction. The teacher educator is responsible to support the preschool teachers to build up a substantial repertoire with a solid foundation of correct and situationally appropriate everyday language chunks. To accomplish this, s/ he must encourage the common language between the preschool teachers and her/ himself to be English and s/ he needs to be available to answer language-related questions and to review the repertoire. Task plans will be provided to the preschool teacher, which contain detailed relevant language for the particular lessons (→ chapter 5.7.4). 5. Integrating reflective approaches for professional development To support the process of professional development in a sustainable way, approaches that promote reflected experience are incorporated in the teacher education. They comprise materials development, journal writing, 111 5.6 The role of the teacher educator to support preschool teachers <?page no="111"?> individual personal interviews and integrating relevant theory. It will have to be seen in how far teachers are able to engage in these reflective processes. It is ultimately a teacher’s personal decision if one considers contextual demands. The teacher educator therefore will have to adopt the additional role of encouraging the preschool teachers to become involved in the reflective processes. Materials development involves judging the appropriateness of avail‐ able materials, using them for their own teaching and developing them further for their own use to suit their group’s needs. The teacher educator gives the preschool teachers access to all the materials that are used in the lessons (→ chapter 5.7.5.1). Journal writing involves the teachers in documenting their reflections on their English teaching by writing down their impressions, experiences, thoughts and opinions, their ideas, anecdotes and critical incidents (→ chapter 5.7.5.2). Individual personal interviews serve the dual purpose of providing data for the teacher researcher on preschool teachers’ development process and of supporting the preschool teachers in the reflective process through their interactive form, as they encourage negotiation of meaning between the teacher educator and the teachers. They provide a defined support structure through the interview dates that are set times. The teacher educator will also need to respond to and to prompt spontaneous conversations during the morning of the participatory demonstration lessons to encourage reflection (→ chapter 5.7.5.3). Integrating relevant theory is to support preschool teachers’ under‐ standing of the principles, concepts and approaches that are appropriate to teach children English. This includes the approach of the communi‐ cative language classroom (CLC) and the developing of this approach to task-based-language-learning. The teacher educator teaches English through the task-based approach takes opportunities to clarify the related theoretical assumptions and illustrates theoretical principles through referring to the theory in the lessons (→ chapter 5.7.5.4). As a result of my empirical research of developing and experimenting with English preschool tasks in various preschool contexts, a handbook on ‘Teaching English in Preschool’ will be developed and refined in the course of the work done in connection with the teacher education project (→ chapter 5.8.3). It provides the content for the preschool teachers so that they can be supported to integrate English. It entails a compilation of English task plans, accompanied by relevant classroom target language the teachers need to put the tasks to 112 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="112"?> practice and integrates relevant theory. Another purpose of the handbook is that it may support transferability of the teacher education project to other preschool contexts (→ chapter 8.1). Teachers would also need to adapt existing task plans so that they will meet the particular needs of their groups of children. Following this overview of the components of the set-up of the teacher education project, the following chapter will describe them in detail. 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model 5.7.1 Giving participatory demonstration lesson The instructional process is primarily based on participatory demonstration lessons, which illustrate the task methodology and support an understanding of the underlying pedagogy through practical examples. Wallace (1991) warns that demonstration lessons assume the craft model of learning to teach, in which in the “the young trainee learns by imitating the expert’s techniques, … following the expert’s instruction and advice” (p. 16). Through the concept of reflecting practice, however, observing the practices of an expert teacher is the basis for follow-up reflection that goes far beyond the level of just imitating a master teacher (p. 15): “The reflective model sees the demonstration lesson as … another kind of experience to be analysed and reflected on, and then related as appropriate to the trainee’s own practice” (p. 16). For my target group of preschool teachers, it is particularly important to de‐ velop clear ideas of what teaching English to children entails. An understanding of demonstration lessons that reduces participating teachers to develop purely from observation and imitation would not serve the purpose of educating teachers to become autonomous professionals. Instead, they are learning while they are directly experiencing the effects of their teaching through active participation: Experiential learning involves both observing the phenomenon and doing something meaningful with it through an active participation. It thus refers to learning in which the learner is directly in touch with the phenomenon being studied, rather than just hearing, reading or thinking about it. (Kohonen, 2001, p. 23; referring to Keeton & Tate, 1978) Therefore, I have organised my demonstration lessons as participatory demon‐ stration lessons in which the teachers learn by taking an active part as co-teachers. 113 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="113"?> 2 Johnson and Golombek are referring to the principles of Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development that is understood as an interactive process mediated by culture, context, language, and social interaction (ibid.). Through this, teachers develop a deeper understanding of the processes involved in teaching: From the perspective of “teacher learning as a field of inquiry, … learning takes place in a context and evolves through … constructing new knowledge and theory through participating in specific social contexts and engaging in particular types of activities and processes” (Burns & Richards, 2009, p. 4). In teacher education development research, there is an increasing push “towards designs that are fully embedded in social contexts and that emphasize participation as the main vehicle of engagement and learning” (Freeman, 2009, p. 17). This is very much the case in this model. The participatory demonstration lessons are given by the teacher educator and take place within the groups of the preschool teachers with the intention that the teachers attend the lessons to observe the teacher educator and the children’s reactions and to actively participate in order to gain first-hand experience and knowledge of how to teach English, for example how to stimulate the children’s curiosity to acquire the language or how to sustain their concentration and attention span. As the teaching will be happening in their own preschool contexts, they will be able to develop their ideas and English teaching competences by directly relating them to the circumstances they are familiar with, for example the dynamics of their particular group. As has already been outlined above when the central feature of the benefits of organising teacher education in situ were described, the idea of participatory demonstration lessons is based on the sociocultural perspective according to which: Human cognition is understood as originating in and fundamentally shaped by engagement in social activities and, therefore, it follows that what is taught, is fundamentally shaped by how it is taught, and vice versa. Likewise, what is learnt, is fundamentally shaped by how it is learnt, and vice versa. Cognition cannot be removed from activity since it originates in and is framed by the very nature of that activity. From this stance, knowledge for teaching must be understood holistically, and the interdependence between what is taught and how it is taught becomes crucial to both the processes of learning-to-teach as well as the development of teaching expertise. ( Johnson & Golombek, 201, p. 3; italics in original) 2 To involve participating preschool teachers actively in the teaching process the teacher educator needs to encourage them to take part in the activities (for example to join in and take over the English games or read stories), to contribute to managing the classroom in English (for example by telling the children it’s 114 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="114"?> your turn, put it in the middle, don’t look, it’s taking too long) and to take over parts of the lesson for themselves (for example by acting out or reading stories, singing songs, doing a song-based activity using props and instructing games. It is essential that the teacher educator gives her/ his full attention to the preschools teachers when they take over the lesson in order to ensure that the children give their attention to the teachers: s/ he needs to focus on the preschool teachers, respond to them but not address the children or join in in the teaching process to contribute to the development of their independent work. To prepare taking over parts of the lesson, the teacher educator and the teachers discuss and plan the next lesson and what part they would like to take over in that following lesson. The English course for the children that is the basis of the separate handbook ‘Teaching English in Preschool’ is the content of what is taught in the participa‐ tory demonstration lessons. It is based on the task approach to language learning, which has developed from the idea of the communicative language classroom and consists of empirically tested task plans. By observing the children, the teacher educator and the preschool teachers together will brainstorm on the task plans from one lesson to the next to suit the needs of the particular group of children concerned. I will organise this through brief discussions taking place at the end of the lessons to negotiate the plans for the following week. To ensure that they can concentrate on the lessons and interact with the children, they will be given the written task plan for each lesson through e-mail communication, which include selected chunks of classroom language for them to use in the respective lessons plans. The most suitable arrangement for the participatory demonstration lessons to take place is in circle time: this is a time for the children to concentrate on the teacher who is offering activities to the whole group and who covers topics that interest the children. This allocated time would cause minimal disruption to the timetable. On the day of the participatory demonstration lessons the preschool teachers will coordinate their morning routine so that the teacher educator will be able to visit each group with its preschool teacher in a convenient rotation system which will enable all the children of the preschool to be included. Table 2 shows an example of a rotation system in the preschool timetable, which accommodates participatory demonstration lessons without interfering with the general routine of the morning. 115 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="115"?> 3 When Marie left the preschool a year before the project finished, she was replaced by Kathie. Time in the rou‐ tine Marie / Kathie 3 (participants) Nadia (participant) Betty (participant) 8: 30 Snack time Free play Free play 9: 00 Circle time: participa‐ tory demonstration lesson Snack time Snack time Free play Storytelling Snack time Free play Storytelling 9: 40 Free play Movement in the gym Circle time: par‐ ticipatory dem‐ onstration lesson Free play Movement in the gym 10: 20 Movement in the gym Time outside Movement in the gym Time outside Circle time: par‐ ticipatory dem‐ onstration lesson Time outside Table 2: An example of a rotation system to accommodate the participatory demonstra‐ tion lessons 5.7.2 Teaching the children cooperatively The idea of cooperative learning in education and of cooperative development in professional teacher education have been supported in the learning to teach English literature for a long time (Edge, 1992; Edge & Richards, 1993). This chapter clarifies the concept and explores its potential as a professional development tool in my research. Edge’s idea of cooperative development involves a speaker and an understander who have agreed to work together over a particular period of time, whereby the speaker is the explorer (that is s/ he is actively teaching), while the understander is the observer (observing her / him while s/ he is teaching). The understander “abandons her / his personal opinions, experiences, knowledge, and possible solutions. … The understander’s attention is completely focused on the speaker rather than on his or her own thoughts or feelings” (Edge, 1992, pp. 66-67), to the point that it is the speaker and not the understander who has to be satisfied from his answers to any questions (p. 68). In the context of my teacher education model, preschool teachers, as a rule, are not in a position to observe each other for logistic reasons. This process cannot be accommodated in most 116 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="116"?> preschools because of lack of time and small staff numbers. It is also a matter of where preschool teachers’ priorities lies. They run a busy and unpredictable morning routine in which caring for the children is the top priority in their professional idea of self. To set the concept of cooperative learning in motion would require dedication to the process and a high level of attention from the understander. Therefore, the idea of cooperation as I understand it in my teacher education model involves support from the teacher educator in that s/ he and the preschool teachers share the common goal of teaching the children English together. The purpose of this process of teaching the children cooperatively is not only one of offering practical experience, but it is also one of enabling the implementation of English teacher education in the preschool context (→ 1 below); of sustaining motivation to teach English through the children’s positive response and progress in English (→ 2 below) and of establishing a sense of community as English teachers from the beginning (→ 3 below). These multiple purposes that cooperation in the context of teaching the children cooperatively entails, will be described in detail in the following. 1. Enabling the implementation of English teacher education in the preschool context As a result of the constraints of the preschool context to provide space for professional development, the design of the teacher education approach requires the teacher educator to be the central change agent who would need to demonstrate that teaching the children English would qualify as a rewarding experience to both the teachers and their children. This may be understood as an additional support structure that is needed to enable the implementation of English in the preschool in the first place. 2. Sustaining motivation to teach English through the children’s positive response and progress in English Another factor to be considered in the design of the model is the question of how to stimulate the teachers’ motivation to develop their competences in teaching English and how to sustain their involvement in the long term. The motivation to invest energy is a major factor for any form of productive work and learning. It is an everyday experience that has been confirmed by motivational psychologists’ empirical research: “Without sufficient motivation, individuals with the most remarkable abilities cannot accomplish long-term goals” (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008, p. 56). It is common knowledge that positive experiences sustain motivation. By teaching the children in the participatory demonstration lessons, the teacher educator provides preschool teachers with the first positive experiences of their children learning English. Preschool teachers with 117 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="117"?> little or no experience would be introducing English to children with no pre-knowledge during the week they are in the process of developing their English teaching competences. For this situation to become dynamic and stimulating with some level of momentum for both the preschool teachers and the children to learn enthusiastically, the teacher educator would need to initially set the learning processes in motion so that the preschool teachers would be able to build on the initial prompts provided by the teacher educator. This process may be described as creating a dynamic learning atmosphere for everyone to cooperate. To be able to sequence task plans to sustain the teaching momentum, the teacher educator equally depends on the teachers to integrate English during the week. “How much children hear and how often they have opportunities to interact in English is a very crucial variable” in learning a language (Pinter, 2006, p. 38). Children need substantial exposure to the language in order to be able to acquire, consolidate and use their English in the lessons and they are part of the dynamic learning atmosphere in the classroom. 3. Establishing a sense of community as English teachers from the beginning Teaching the children cooperatively also includes the idea that all of the teachers of the preschool involved in teaching English will interact and will support each other so that the entire preschool is committed in the project. This relates to the relationship between the preschool teachers and the interaction between their groups that provides a support system that creates a rich learning environment: Als besonders effektiv hat sich die Fortbildung vor Ort herausgestellt, an der alle Mitarbeiter/ innen eines Kindergartens teilnehmen. Die Übertragbarkeit auf die pädagogische Praxis ist dann besonders groß, wenn alle Beteiligten einen gemeinsamen Lernprozess durchlaufen haben. In diesem Zusammenhang kommt der Supervision eine besondere Bedeutung zu. (Hartmann & Stoll, 1996, p. 175) Teaching cooperatively also provides the opportunity to interact and to support each other to enhance the mutual learning process: … Teacher learning is not something that teachers need achieve on their own - it is a social process that is contingent upon dialogue and interaction with others, processes through which teachers can come to better understand their own beliefs and knowledge as well as reshape these understandings through listening to the voices of others. (Burns & Richards, 2009, p. 239) 118 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="118"?> Johnston (2009) takes the idea of cooperative learning a step further when he explicitly concludes that “teachers can only learn professionally in sustained and meaningful ways when they are able to do so together” (p. 241; italics in original), because the teaching learning process is fundamentally a social process (p. 241). To make this happen in the busy morning routine, all the teachers will be covering the same themes at the same time, for example they will all work simultaneously on the theme of ‘Farm Animals’. To prepare this topic, all the teachers of the preschool will collaborate to plan an excursion to a farm that they will organise for the whole preschool to take part in. The English course for the children runs parallel to the themes that would be currently addressed in preschool or vice versa, which means that the themes that the preschool covers also result from the themes that are suggested in the English programme. By coordinating themes and covering identical topics throughout, the teachers are more likely to be able to discuss procedures and give each other support. It is widely recognised that “a group has greater resources than any single member alone” (Dörnyei & Murphey, 2003, p. 3). By teaching cooperatively, teachers may be able to support each other, brain‐ storm ideas, exchange experiences, reflect together, encourage each other and share their enthusiasm, all of which may encourage professional dialogue. Creativity rarely happens in isolation but needs to be stimulated. If mutual understanding and exchange of ideas take place between the staff members and the teacher educator, the creativity can flourish, and the environment is conducive to learning. This process is referred to in the literature as teacher learning in collegial supervision (Poehner 2011, p. 109; referring to Glatthorn 1987): Teacher learning in collegial supervision occurs through interaction in the social and cognitive activity of teaching rather than through the transmission of knowledge. This epistemology of teacher learning acknowledges that teachers have expertise that can be used to solve dilemmas that arise in their practice. (p. 109) 5.7.3 Integrating English to support independent practical work The preschool teachers are responsible to integrate English in the daily life of the preschool throughout the week. It is their choice when and how they implement English, which may range from using teacher talk (→ chapter 5.7.4) during the daily routine to teaching complete lesson. Complete lessons, as terminology refers to dedicating a complete circle time to a task plan of up to half an 119 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="119"?> hour (structure of preschool task plans → chapter 5.8.3: table 4). Learning in preschool is organised as follows: The morning starts with a morning routine that covers two main parts: free play in which the children choose their own activities (7: 00 a. m. to 8: 30 / 9: 00 a. m.) and a structured time that consists of snack time, circle time, craft activities, and movement in the gym (8: 30 / 9: 00 a. m. to 10: 30 a. m.). The structured times are organised and carried out by the preschool teachers. Table 3 below shows an example of a morning routine so that readers not familiar with the ways that learning experiences are organised at preschool understand the contextual opportunities to integrate English in teachers’ routines. There is some flexibility in the way the routines are organised depending on the children’s dispositions and their concentration spans, which may require teachers to adjust their structured time. To integrate English in the morning routine is challenging for preschool teachers as they are not accustomed to speaking English with the children and the children are not used to their teachers speaking English to them. As there is no routine or habit to support natural communication in English, situations first need to be established whereby the teachers and the children can use their English comfortably together. Using their circle time for the participatory demonstration lessons and the teacher educator taking part in free play on the mornings of the participatory demonstration lessons are situations which are suitable to support the teachers in the process: Using their circle time for the participatory demonstration lessons: Circle time is a time for the whole group to come together for lessons and activities, which are planned by the preschool teacher. It provides several situations that can support the teachers in their independent practical work. Firstly, it is a time for concentrating and learning, in which the children are in the habit of sitting quietly, listening, focusing and responding. Secondly, through the lessons being participatory demonstration lessons, the children may expect not only the teacher educator but also the preschool teacher to speak English to them. Thirdly, through the participatory demonstration lessons the children are to become attentive to the new language they will learn and ready to build on their skills. The teacher educator taking part in free play: The teacher educator takes part in free play first thing in the morning to demonstrate to the teachers how to encourage the children to play with the English activities. It seems to be an ideal situation because the children are free to play and make their own decisions about what they would like to do before the preschool programme begins, such as choosing to do crafts, going to the book corner, playing the gym. Through the authentic situations that free play offers, the teacher educator 120 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="120"?> would have the opportunity to chat informally to the children, establishing the habit of using English outside of the structured participatory demonstration lessons and showing to the teachers how English may be used in an authentic situation to encourage the children to participate. This may generate a sense of normality and authenticity to communicate in English, for both the teachers and children. An example is to encourage the children to select English books from the book corner, by saying: ah, look at this book; I know this book; Should we look at it together? Should I read it to you? And using gestures to support their understanding. Another example is to encourage the children to play games, by saying such chunks as: do you want to play a game with me? We could play this game together, as s/ he looks at the games or points to them. S/ he may also encourage the children to draw by saying: let’s draw a house; the house has some windows; here are some flowers, or she may encourage them to do a craft activity by saying: we need some scissors to cut the paper, demonstrating it while s/ he is speaking. As the gym is open at this time the teacher educator can join the children there and integrate English in the gym activities together with the preschool teacher. An example would be sports activities that are based on the concept of the total physical response (Asher, 2012) in which the actions are said by the teacher while the children are performing them, for example jump, jump, jump. As the preschool teachers are supervising the children during free play, they can join in easily and have the possibility to write down chunks of language that they hear to expand their classroom language repertoire. Time Parts of rou‐ tine Purpose Examples 7: 00 →8: 30 / 9: 00 Free play A time to learn through playing with friends and to learn how to entertain themselves A time when the children make their own decisions on what they want to do Activities cover: Drawing and doing craft ac‐ tivities, doing puzzles, playing games, looking at picture books, going to the gym, building with blocks, playing with cars, dressing-up, role-play, listening to songs on a CD and singing along 8: 30 / 9: 00 →10: 30 Snack time A time to learn to eat together sociably An opportunity to reinforce food vocabulary, questions and an‐ swers of likes and dislikes 121 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="121"?> Story‐ time A time to come together for a story to be read by the preschool teacher An opportunity to be immersed in a fantasy world and to listen to the language and comprehend the story through pictures. Circle time A time to come together and focus on what the teacher is pre‐ senting to them A concentrated time of sitting in a circle to focus on the teacher for the particular topics s/ he is presenting; to have picture books read to them, to sing songs, chant rhymes and play games, and to step into fantasy worlds Topics may cover: Self-awareness, feelings, friends, children around the world; the children’s environment The change of seasons; annual celebrations; different foods; an‐ imals Taking part in their fantasy world Craft activi‐ ties A time to develop their fine motor skills and create their own arts and craft work Painting, drawing, cutting and gluing activities Move‐ ment in the gym time A time for the children to de‐ velop physical coordination, to overcome the apprehension to try to do something, to become fit and strong Climbing wall bars, playing ball games or movement games, such as running and jumping to music 10: 30 Time out‐ side A time to run around freely, play with friends in the garden, be in nature (such as climbing trees) Sand box, children’s cars, playground equipment (slide, climbing, gym) Table 3: An example of a standard structure of a morning routine in preschool 5.7.4 Supporting teachers to develop communicative English language competence It would be a fundamental requirement to provide a support structure that assists preschool teachers to develop their English language skills. Two aspects would need be considered. Firstly, preschool teachers vary greatly in their level of English-speaking competences. Experiences range from preschool teachers having received very little English education at school to teachers having lived in an English-speaking country for a period of time. Consequently, some teachers do not feel competent when they communicate in English while others only need little support. Secondly, due to the voluntary nature of the teacher education project, it was agreed that the time preschool teachers invest in the teacher education project remains within the preschool timetable so that attending extra English classes would not be required, for example. 122 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="122"?> It is for this reason that preschool teachers need support to develop their communicative English language competence at their own levels with a system that gives them confidence to use the language instantly and easily for the various purposes they need it for to manage their classrooms. An important principle to support communicative English language competence development is to develop language chunks (Lewis, 2012; Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2016b). Chunks are readily available combinations of words that are frequently used in a particular context to support communication. Examples of chunks involve collocations (to read a story, to draw a picture, to catch a ball) and phrasal verbs (sit down, calm down, stand up, line up, find out, hurry up, join in, put on, look for, look at, deal with), some are more cryptic in their meaning than others (carry on: continue; watch out: be careful; put up with: tolerate; hold on: wait) or they involve popular chunks that are frequently used in preschool for classroom management (as quiet as a mouse) and for encouragement (as brave as a lion) (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2016b, p. 5). This first survey of classroom-related chunks demonstrates how fundamentally important they are to manage the language classroom effectively. There are a number of terms for chunks that are used as synonyms in the literature, for example, multi-word expressions, multi-word items, multi-word units, lexical phrases, formulaic sequences or utterances. Different terms appear in this section due to various researchers using their preferred terms. It is beyond dispute that chunks are a key characteristic of the English language. If teacher education focusses on integrating them in teachers’ com‐ municative language development, they will develop fluency and idiomatic language use (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2016b, pp. 2-4; Schmitt & Carter, 2004, pp. 1-2). Language production is not subject to conscious efforts to think about which elements of the language may go together when teachers want to say something in the classroom, but through chunks, language is automatically available as language “performance is based on memory retrieval” (Logan, 1988, pp. 514-515). Language becomes immediately accessible for communication (Nattinger & De Carrico, 1992, p. 114; Ellis, 2003, p. 108; Schmitt & Carter, 2004, p. 5; Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2016b, p. 5). The focus of chunks is on their functional use in communication, which is ideal for preschool teachers as they are in a context in which they predominantly need appropriate speaking skills to manage communication in their classrooms. Through a system of accumulating chunks, lexical patterns are soon recog‐ nised. These patterns provide support for preschool teachers to build up a foundation of chunks to work with, like in the following example: I want you to go and sit down, I want him to go and sit down, I want you to come and give it 123 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="123"?> to me, I want him to come and put it on the table. As this example demonstrates, even demanding grammatical structures that are frequently needed to manage preschool classrooms may be acquired easily by teachers this way. Language acquisition research acknowledges this idea of “lexical patterning” as an impor‐ tant first step to language development noting that “language learning is based on the ability to extract patterns from input” (Schmitt & Carter, 2004, p. 13). An idea that is supported by language pedagogy that focuses not so much on acquiring grammar but chunks of words instead: An important part of language acquisition is the ability to produce lexical phrases as unanalysed wholes or 'chunks', and … these chunks become the raw data by which the learner begins to perceive patterns, morphology, and those other features of language traditionally thought of as ‘grammar’. (Lewis, 2012, p. 95) In other words, if teachers are to get “quick and easy access to linguistic means … [they will] need to acquire a solid repertoire of formulaic chunks” (Ellis, 2003, p. 108). In supporting teachers to develop communicative English language competence through chunks, a pragmatic way for preschool teachers to acquire a solid target language repertoire is provided that directly relates to the language relevant for the lessons, for managing their classroom and for building up a pool of phrases they need to use in their daily preschool life. In the teacher education model, various opportunities for teachers to develop their communicative English language competence are offered. 1. Using English as the common means of communication between the teacher educator, the preschool teachers and the children The teacher educator speaks English throughout the teacher education project and encourages the teachers to converse in English with her / him. Through this natural exposure, the teacher educator provides as much English discourse as possible which serves various purposes: the teachers pick up intonation patterns, pronunciation as well as chunks of language in the process and become actively involved, depending on their individual competence levels; they observe the teacher educator interacting with the children in the reoccurring social interactions which take place in the familiar situations that the preschool context generates and that naturally promote the communication between the teachers and the children. “[Developing] automaticity … requires frequent opportunity to link together the components of utterances so that they can be produced without undue effort” (Skehan, 1998, p. 18). By establishing English as the commonly shared language between the teacher educator, the preschool teachers and the children language routines may develop more easily so that 124 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="124"?> teachers become more confident to use the target language as a natural means of communication with the children: Conversations occur within highly conventionalized boundaries, and employ a number of stereotyped and standardized procedures for characterizing the entailed social interactions. Lexical phrases provide easy access to these social interactions, for they are ‘ready-to-go’ for particular situations that are frequent and predictable, and are easily recognizable as markers of these situations. (Nattinger & De Carrico. 1992, p. 114) 2. Attending participatory demonstration lessons The participatory demonstration lessons support the teachers in their language development by involving them actively in the teaching process in cooperation with the teacher educator. They join in and take over parts of the lesson. It is through the task of taking over parts of the lesson that the preschool teachers are encouraged to contribute actively so that they may engage in discourse with the children from the beginning. To make preschool teachers aware of the different purposes of language in the preschool, a distinction between teacher talk and everyday language they use for small talk with the children, called chitchat here, would be important for encouraging the teachers to reflect on the language, which is appropriate to choose for different purposes when teaching. Teacher talk may be categorized in messageand medium-orientated language (following Butzkamm & Dodson, 1980) that the teacher needs for a particular lesson and during the daily routine: - Message-orientated language refers to genuinely using the language to engage in real communication with the children. The list of examples includes the following areas where message-oriented language is needed: - personal concerns: are you okay? What happened? Come and sit on my knee. - Classroom management: Put it under your chair, please. Shut the door, please. Be quiet, please. It’s your turn. I would like you to come over here, please. Swap places with Sally; - instructions: you are not allowed to look. Turn over one card. We have to guess; - classroom routines: It’s time to tidy up. Make a circle of chairs. It’s time to go outside. Put on your coats everybody. It’s cold outside. - Medium-orientated language refers to communicative language use that is required to perform the target task: 125 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="125"?> 4 Here the teacher has a bag of soft animals and / or toys that belong to Teddy and is going to take them out one by one to show the children. The children do not know what is in the bag so they are curious to find out. The soft animals and / or toys should support the lesson, by helping the teacher to introduce the topic. - task plan: mmm, I can’t remember, where do you think the rabbit is, under the pink one or under the blue one? Where did Sally hide the snail, who can remember? What is missing? Mmm, let me guess, do you have a cucumber on your plate? - classroom management: choose one animal. You can have a cat or a dog. If you want to, you can take the horse. Which colour do you want, red, yellow, blue or green? How many have you got? You only need five. Chitchat refers to small talk happening in the classroom. The teacher may speak spontaneously to the classroom puppet / teddy bear / soft animal in an authentic way, without the necessity of the children understanding her / him in order for the lesson to run smoothly, for example: mmm, let me see, what have we got in here? 4 Ah, Teddy I didn’t know you put your rabbit in, too; ah, you also have a little hen, that is just what our story is about today; come here Teddy, sit on my knee and let’s look into your bag together; you do have a lot of things in here today. This usage of chitchat breaks unnecessary silence and therefore gives the children situations to hear as much fluent language as possible, which in turn provides opportunities for incidental learning to take place. 3. Collecting a repertoire of relevant chunks of English The task plans establish a foundation for a repertoire of relevant chunks to manage interaction in English. It is the responsibility of the teachers to expand their repertoire by collecting language chunks, noting them down in brief form from their experiences in the lessons, during their own practice and their daily experiences. 4. Contacting the teacher educator for advice The teacher educator can be referred to for advice, explanations, clarity and consolidation. Through the simple medium of emails, telephone calls and contact on the day of the participatory demonstration lessons the preschool teachers are able to contact the teacher educator for individual context-specific support, for example for particular language needed to manage the discourse related to certain topic areas they intend to cover in the lessons. It is also essential that the teacher educator offers the possibility to explain grammar and clarify structures which may support the teachers to consolidate 126 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="126"?> the patterns in the chunks and that support teachers to understand the way language is structured. 5.7.5 Integrating reflective approaches for professional development It is a central concern of experiential learning to stimulate “the process of extracting personal meanings from experience through reflection” (Kohonen, 2001, p. 32). Reflective practice, both in-action and on-action (Schön, 1983) “assists teachers’ lifelong professional development in enabling them to critique teaching and make better-informed teaching decisions” (Burton, 2009, p. 298). It comes as no surprise therefore that approaches now used in teacher education rely heavily on reflection as a central part of the learning process (ibid.: 302): Professional development is defined as an ongoing learning process in which teachers engage voluntarily to learn how best to adjust their teaching to the learning needs of their students. Professional development is (…) an evolving process of professional self-disclosure, reflection, and growth that yields the best results when sustained over time in communities of practice and when focused on job-embedded responsibilities. (Diaz-Maggioli 2003, p. 1) In this teacher education project, four opportunities for teachers’ reflection are incorporated in the process of professional development: materials development (→ chapter 5.7.5.1), journal writing (→ chapter 5.7.5.2) interviews (→ chapter 5.7.5.3) and integrating relevant theory (→ chapter 5.7.5.4). As reflective practice is essentially a personal commitment, the degree of involvement will be deter‐ mined largely by a teacher’s individual motivation: “Training or education is something that can be presented or managed by others; whereas development is something that can be done only by and for oneself ” (Wallace, 1991, p. 3). 5.7.5.1 Materials development The role of materials development in teacher education has been defined as a practical undertaking, which “involves the production, evaluation and adaptation of language teaching materials by teachers for their own classrooms” (Tomlinson, 2001, p. 66). Teachers design additional teaching materials that consider the particular learning needs of their children. In the process of designing materials, teachers reflect on why they design materials the way they do, in other words, they reflect on the design principles of materials. Materials development is also referred to in the literature as product-oriented teaching in courses and has been recommended for teacher education purposes 127 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="127"?> as “the product [is used as] a trigger for reflective thinking” (Dausend, 2017, p. 121). Products may include any materials that teachers develop and use as teaching resources. This process of materials development therefore potentially contributes to teachers’ professional development in that they integrate relevant theory to produce teaching materials that are appropriate for the children. This purpose is supported by experiences in other teacher development contexts: The process of materials writing raises almost every issue which is important in learning to teach: the selection and grading of language, awareness of language, knowledge of learning theories, socio-cultural appropriacy. … Teachers need to be able to write their own materials … as a means of professional development. (Tomlinson 1998: 111-112) Teacher-made materials are often most effective in communicating a concept, struc‐ turing an activity, or motivating a lesson, because they are usually tailored to the special needs and interest of a specific class and situation. (Curtain et al., 1988, p. 220) This competence of developing materials and reflecting on its appropriacy is vital for the preschool context: Although abundant language materials to teach English are offered commercially to teach young children English, it can be difficult to find English teaching materials that accommodate the needs of a particular group of preschool children of mixed ages, varying abilities and experiences. Published materials also do not consider possibilities for repetition and variation in task plans which sustain interest and allow for language acquisition to take place and develop. Another reason to integrate materials development in my teacher education course is that traditionally published course books are “a key component in most language programs” (Mishan & Timmis, 2015, p. 6) in primary or secondary language learning contexts. However, this is not the case for the preschool context. To my knowledge only one course book has been published that specifically addresses the preschool level using the concept of sequencing tasks, ‘Hip Hip Hooray’ (Gerngroß & Puchta, 2001). Therefore, the skill of developing structured materials is a fundamental skill for preschool teachers to develop. Another area in which teachers would develop materials during teacher education would be as a follow-up to observing the participatory demonstration lessons. As they are expected to integrate English throughout the week, teachers would need to develop materials that build on these lessons. An aspect that Tomlinson (1998) addresses and that is particularly relevant for the preschool context is that “teacher-made materials … [cover] anything which is deliberately used to increase the learners’ knowledge and / or experience of the language” (p. 2), that is “anything that facilitates learning” (Tomlinson, 2001, 128 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="128"?> p. 66). In the preschool this may cover any materials that promote children’s language learning ranging from structured task plans to a piece of fabric or a teddy bear which may be used to create fantasy worlds and support children’s imagination. Designing appropriate materials for learning English in preschool is “a strange mixture of imagination, insight and analytical reasoning” (p. 69). Mishan and Timmis, on the other hand, distinguish between resources and materials in order to point out that materials (such as a piece of fabric or a teddy) remain resources “until we add a pedagogic purpose … [in other words] until you do something with it” (Mishan & Timmis, 2015, p. 3). They add further that “resources are limitless and the potential to convert them into materials is limited only by our pedagogic imagination” (p. 3). Simple as it seems, producing materials can be a challenging process because it is dependent on a teacher’s capacity to stimulate the imagination to be able to convert resources into materials. To set this process in motion teachers need an understanding of the task approach to language learning to be able to assess if their materials support putting task features to practice. In other words, the materials must engage the children in meaningful and purposeful interaction “affectively and cognitively” (p. 25). By taking part in the participatory demonstration lessons and discussing the task plans and materials with the teacher educator for the following week, teachers may experience the effects on their children’s learning in their practical work of integrating English and consequently may develop a deeper understanding of the task approach: “An effective way of helping teachers to understand and apply theories of language learning - and to achieve personal and professional development - is to provide monitored experience of the process of developing materials” (Tomlinson, 2001, p. 67). This component of the teacher education model seems particularly relevant for preschool teachers who have had no prior knowledge of the use of materials to teach English to their groups. They probably are unable to create materials unless they have experienced - through observing and reflecting on preschool tasks in process - the ways in which various materials support children’s learning: Children actively try to 'make sense', i.e., to find and construct a meaning and purpose for what adults say to them and ask them to do. They can only make sense in terms of their world knowledge, which is limited and partial. Teachers thus need to examine classroom activities from the child's point of view in order to assess whether pupils will understand what to do or will be able to make sense of new language. (Cameron, 2001, p. 19) 129 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="129"?> The tasks and materials that the teacher educator would provide remain in the preschool so that the teachers can build on them when they develop their own supplementary materials. The continual use and familiarity with the materials may stimulate the teacher’s imagination and lead them to engage in the materials development process themselves. 5.7.5.2 Journal writing Journal writing is considered to be a “composing process” which has “the potential to function as a uniquely-effective reflective tool” (Burton, 2009, p. 303). It is therefore a significant part of the process of reflection: to document ideas and thoughts to be collected, clarified and built on in a journal which may be used for continual reference and personal professional development: A written account of these things is important, because having a record to examine encourages us to analyse it in a deeper and more objective way that we tend to avoid when we spontaneously recall past thoughts or events within the usual flow of our daily lives. The written account not only facilitates and formulates our telling or retelling of them, but simultaneously encourages and records the way we inevitably reshape the experiences. (Tripp, 2012, p. 109) Being realistic and understanding of teachers’ workloads, any form of record that supports teachers’ daily practical work would be valuable. Admittedly, this may be difficult to encourage in a sustainable way. Firstly, they need time and thought for it to become meaningful. Secondly, they already are occupied with writing various reports for the preschool, which are time consuming and thirdly, teachers who are confident in their field do not always write detailed reports and lesson plans when it is not compulsory: “Most studies reported that expert teachers planned their lessons mentally, sometimes with brief notes resembling a list for grocery shopping as a reminder” (Tsui, 2003, p. 26). For teacher development purposes, the objective would be that it is an accumulation of ideas and thoughts, along with theory, lessons, discussions and brainstorming sessions and collected in particular to document and reflect on the experiences and critical incidents during the process. While the word experience may refer to a wide set of practices to reflect on, critical incidents have been specified to refer to “an unplanned and unanticipated event that occurs during a lesson and that serves to trigger insights about some aspect of teaching and learning” (Richards & Farrell, 2005, p. 113). Journal writing triggers processes of interpreting it, reacting to it, integrating relevant theory to reflect on it and learning from it. “For teachers, a journal can serve as a way of clarifying their own thinking and of exploring their own beliefs and practices” (p. 70). 130 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="130"?> Despite the voluntary nature of preschool teachers’ degree of involvement, it would be important to encourage their documentation and reflection of critical incidents as this education project subscribes to an action research approach for which unplanned incidents are an important source to learn from. However, focusing on critical incidents as a reflective tool remains in the authority of the writer: Critical incidents are principally for the writer’s own use: the aim is for the individual to use them to develop their own professional judgement in their own way and according to their own values. So, just as it is not possible to determine in general terms how much of what kind of detail is necessary in critical incidents, so it is not possible to lay down rules about what kind of system should be used to organise a critical incident file, or indeed how systematic it should be. Those considerations can only be decided by the purposes of the person who creates the file. (Tripp, 2012, p. 69) 5.7.5.3 Individual personal Interviews The individual personal interviews serve the dual purpose of providing a data source for the research and for encouraging preschool teachers to engage in re‐ flective practice. “The typical qualitative research interview has been described as a ‘conversation with a purpose’ (Burgess, 1984, p. 102) or ‘professional conversation’ (Kvale, 1996, p. 5)” (Richards, 2009, p. 183). Through encouraging conversation, the interviews would provide an ideal environment for the teachers to focus on themselves and their teaching without being distracted. To achieve this, they would need to be planned at fixed allocated times, which would not be compromised by the daily routine of preschool life. This means that during the interview times the teachers would neither have any responsibilities towards the children, nor would the interview be interrupted by any contextual demands. As the preschool teachers who would take part in the interview need to delegate their responsibilities to other members of staff during interview time, the individual personal interviews are planned to take place once a semester in the afternoons. Group interviews at meetings and spontaneous conversations that can be encouraged during the morning could contribute further to teachers’ reflective process and provide rich data for the research. Interviews have the potential of providing a unique and relaxed time for the teachers to reflect, which they otherwise may not be used to having: a time to themselves, unburdened by any commitments or time pressure and the space to focus on their experiences with introducing English in their multilingual preschool. Interviews would need to address the purposes that the teacher education project has in mind and would involve issues related to teachers’ 131 5.7 The components of the preschool English teacher education model <?page no="131"?> attitudes towards teaching non-German speaking children English or their competence development to integrate English in their groups, for example. The interviews are semi-structured, which means they follow an interview guideline of questions that I have prepared which relate to the purposes of the teacher education project. At the same time the semi-structured interviews enable the teacher educator to prompt and encourage elaboration and clarification: A semi-structured interview, then, is one where the interviewer has a clear picture of the topics that need to be covered … but is prepared to allow the interview to develop in unexpected directions where these open up important new areas. (Richards, 2009, p. 186) As there is little space for preschool teachers to reflect-on-action, the interviews would be promising for teachers’ reflective practice to develop as it is through verbalising thoughts, beliefs and ideas that insights can be generated through processes of reflection during interaction with a knowledgeable colleague: Sometimes, the mere necessity of having to articulate our ideas to an audience can help us to develop them in ways that might not otherwise have happened. The feedback from colleagues can be motivating and rewarding, as well as providing the basis for further reflection. (Wallace, 1998, p. 208) 5.7.5.4 Integrating relevant theory Provision of theoretical knowledge supports the preschool teachers in reflecting on their experiences by integrating theoretical knowledge so that they under‐ stand the principles their teaching practice is based on. Relevant theory is presented both in connection with the participatory demonstration lessons and in extra theory sessions and as a matter of course in any spontaneous conversations that may incidentally develop. The idea is to avoid relating theory to practice in an abstract way: The responsibility of SLTE [or FLTE] … is to present relevant scientific concepts to teachers but to do so in ways that bring these concepts to bear on concrete practical activity, connecting them to their everyday knowledge and the goal directed activities of teaching. ( Johnson & Golombek, 2011, p. 2) The term relevant scientific concepts equates with relevant theory that refers to the task-based approach, which the English course for the children is based on. Preschool teachers should gain experiential knowledge through reflecting on their teaching practice in the participatory demonstration lessons that are task-based and reflect on the theory in connection with their experiences so that 132 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="132"?> the theory is accessible to them. The participatory demonstration lessons should give the teachers a sense of the relevance of theory to understand the principle of certain procedures, which are appropriate in their particular context and to help the teachers realise what can be potentially achieved in their groups: Teacher educators must realise that theory often fails to inform practice because the problems that arise in practice are generally neither caused by nor the result of teachers’ lack of knowledge about theory. Instead, the problems that teachers face are generally caused by constraints imposed on them within the social, cultural economic and educational contexts in which their practice takes place, namely the school and the classroom. This being the case, one cannot assume that theory does, or can ever, fully and completely inform practice. ( Johnson 1996: 766) They may then use the experiential knowledge that they have gained to exem‐ plify the theory that they have received which will support them to understand their teaching more deeply. 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks This chapter describes the approach that is considered to be appropriate to teach English in the preschool. It is based on the task approach to language teaching and learning. Participating preschool teachers will gain an understanding of the principles on which the process of teaching preschool children is based, and they will understand in what way the task approach has developed from com‐ municative approaches to language teaching and learning. This chapter will first give a survey on task-based language teaching and its related approaches and will then discuss in what way tasks need to be designed to meet the particular learning needs of preschool children. Throughout this chapter reference to the competences that teachers need to develop in order to be able to design tasks (also referred to as tasks-as-workplan) and to manage the resulting processes (also referred to as tasks-in-process) will be made. This distinction, first made by Breen (1989) is important as it makes teachers aware that learners’ task performance is never predictable and that therefore managing student-teacher interaction is a demanding competence for teachers to develop (pp. 187-206; see also Ellis, 2003, p. 9-10; Kumaravadivelu, 2007, pp. 7-29; Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2011). 133 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="133"?> 5 Ellis (2003); Nunan (2004); Samuda & Bygate (2008); Müller-Hartmann; Schocker; Pant (2013); Carless (2002; 2003; 2004); Dreßler (2012); Kolb (2008); Van den Branden (2006; 2007). 5.8.1 A survey of task-based language teaching and learning and related approaches For almost two decades the task-based approach to language teaching and learning has developed to be the generally accepted, appropriate approach to teach languages worldwide. Since the publication of the first task methodology (Willis & Willis, 1996), numerous researchers have confirmed the effectiveness of this approach through various empirical studies. 5 It has consequently been adopted by European language policy, which recommends this approach for language teaching and learning across Europe: The approach adopted here … is an action-oriented one in so far as it views users and learners of a language primarily as ‘social agents’, i.e., members of society who have tasks (not exclusively language - related) to accomplish in a given set of circumstances, in a specific environment and within a particular field of action. … We speak of ‘tasks’ in so far as the actions are performed by one or more individuals strategically using their own specific competence to achieve a given result. (Council of Europe, 2001, p. 9) Task-based language teaching is an approach that developed from the approach of communicative language teaching (CLT). Communicative language teaching is based on the commonly agreed idea that languages are acquired best through the social act of communicating meaningfully with each other (Littlewood, 1981; for a summary of developments see Legutke & Schocker-v. Ditfurth, 2003). In the 1970s Hymes generated the term ‘communicative competence’ to emphasise the relevance of the sociolinguistic contexts involved in language acquisition and learning: Within the developmental matrix in which knowledge of the sentences of a language is acquired, children also acquire knowledge of a set of ways in which sentences are used. From the finite experience of speech acts and their interdependence with sociocultural features, they develop a general theory of the speaking appropriate in their community which they employ, like other forms of tacit cultural knowledge (competence) in conducting and interpreting social life. (Hymes, 1971, p. 279; acknowledging contri‐ butions by Goodenough, 1957 and Searle, 1967) Linguists and methodologists at the time agreed that the sociolinguistic per‐ spective of learning languages taking place in the social context of classrooms 134 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="134"?> 6 Widdowson (1978); Brumfit & Johnson (1979); Littlewood (1981). 7 Skehan (1998); Richards & Rogers (2001); Nunan (2004); Ellis (2003); Van den Branden et al. (2006, 2007); Willis & Willis (2007); Samuda & Bygate (2008); Müller-Hartmann & Schocker (2011), Müller-Hartmann, Schocker & Pant (2013). needed to play a substantial role when learning a language. 6 “If we are to adopt a communicative approach to teaching which takes as its primary purpose the development of the ability to do things with language, then it is discourse which must be at the centre of our attention” (Widdowson, 1979, p. 254). This new per‐ spective resulted in a substantial process of reconsidering previous approaches to language teaching, which the professional community had subscribed to. Although oral and audio-lingual approaches to teaching also focused on the idea of language as communication, they concentrated mainly on frequently needed linguistic structures, using classroom practices such as drills and memorization to train them. In doing so, they neglected the development of skills that are needed to use language spontaneously in authentic communicative situations, that is, real-life situations, in which the language that is required may only be predicted up to point. “Whereas the sentence’s structure is straightforward, its communicative function is variable and depends on specific situational and social factors” (Littlewood, 1981, p. 2; italics in original). This consideration together with the growing awareness that the classroom would need to become a place for meaningful interaction between students, the idea of learning languages through tasks developed. Instead of using prefabricated chunks of language to teach communication, teachers would need to develop tasks that are appropriate for their particular group of learners and that would potentially develop the communicative English language competences that match their particular needs. Meanwhile a large number of research studies have provided strategies on how teachers can be assisted in this process of selecting, re-writing or designing tasks. 7 The first longitudinal empirical research on tasks was conducted over a period of ten years and goes far beyond the idea of ‘teaching a language’. It includes the social context of learning and addresses learners’ heterogeneous communicative needs (Van den Branden et al., 2006; 2007). Van den Branden and his team have acknowledged that for the classroom to become a place of meaningful interaction, tasks need to consider the particular environment in which they are enacted. Therefore, teachers’ mediating competences to support learners’ developing communicative English language competence is important, as learners’ language output may no longer be predicted. Van den Branden and his team of researchers have illustrated this complex interplay of the need to create a positive and safe environment in the language learning context, 135 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="135"?> of designing meaningful and relevant tasks for the children and of providing interactional support when mediating tasks in process in a three-circle diagram (→ diagram 7) that they termed ‘Powerful learning environments for language learning’ (2006, p. 199; 2007, p. 97). The research context covers all educational levels, including the preschool. The English course for the children that will be used in my teacher education subscribes to this basic research-based model of a rich language learning environment for language learning. Figure 28: Diagram 7: ‘Powerful learning environments for language learning’ (Van den Branden et al. 2006: 199; 2007: 97) The outer circle that focuses on creating a safe learning environment in the social context of classrooms because “children who feel safe and well in a classroom, may be expected to be more open to the activities and the language input they are confronted with than children who feel ill at ease, are afraid or feel threatened” (Verhelst, 2006, pp. 204-5). A positive classroom atmosphere is substantial for learners’ affective well-being and its positive effects on task-based interaction and the language learning processes has been confirmed by a number of other researchers (Van den Branden et al., 2007; Krashen, 1981; Burt & Dulay, 1977). The larger inner circle addresses the need to create tasks that children consider to be meaningful and relevant to them. Teachers need to develop the competences to be able to select and / or design tasks that involve and engage the children in meaningful interaction. Language learning is both an “active process that can only be successful if the learner invests intensive mental energy in task 136 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="136"?> performance” and an “interactive process that can be enhanced by interaction with other learners and / or with the teacher” (Van den Branden, 2006, p. 10). Müller-Hartmann and Schocker (2011, pp. 63-68) have focused their empirical research on the quality of task features that support these processes which is why I will include their research results here. They have identified five central features of a task that I will take as a basis in my task model for the preschool that is developed below. The inner circle in Van den Branden’s task model is dedicated to the nature of the interactional support and the quality of the mediating interventions of teachers, which contribute significantly to the learning process. The inner circle indicates the growing awareness of the prominent role of the teacher that language acquisition research had neglected for a long time: Tasks do not take place in a vacuum; nevertheless, until recently, much of the task-based learning and teaching (TBLT) literature has had a tendency to treat them as if they did. … The role of the teacher as a mediating factor in task-based language development remains virtually unexamined. (Samuda, 2001, p. 119) Meanwhile, empirical researchers were able “to confirm the belief held by many education experts that student motivation is related to the teacher’s motivational practice. … Student motivation and learning achievement are correlated” (Guilloteaux & Dörnyei, 2008, pp. 55-6). Teachers need to assist the children to achieve the language learning goals by encouraging their initiative and supporting them to become proactive agents of their learning. To manage this, teachers need to develop competences in two related areas: one area concerns teacher’s attitudes of responding to the needs of the individual child. Van Avermaet et al. (2006, p. 195) identified six affective qualities that teachers need to be able to develop a learner-centred attitude. A second area is directly related to what preschool teachers need to be able to do to manage the classroom discourse effectively. I will draw on long-term research conducted by Devlieger and Goosens (2007) who have developed an assessment tool that categorizes teachers’ competences to create a powerful TBLL environment. They focus on primary school children, but their findings will be adapted to the interactional strategies preschool teachers require. Following the task research of this summary, the next chapter will describe what understanding of task-based language learning is appropriate for the preschool context. It is this concept that the teachers who take part in the teacher education project will use as a guideline for their work. 137 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="137"?> 5.8.2 Defining an understanding of tasks that is appropriate for the preschool context The recognition that task-based language teaching qualifies as a valuable approach to teach languages at any educational level has prompted more empirical research that has been conducted at various language learning levels. Studies addressed young adults learning languages at university (Ellis, 2003), secondary school students learning English (Müller-Hartmann et al., 2013) or primary school children learning English (Carless, 2002; 2003; 2004; Dreßler, 2012; Kolb, 2008). Task research has also been conducted sporadically at the preschool level (Van den Branden, 2006; 2007). But apart from Van den Branden and his team of researchers, to the best of my knowledge, no empirical studies on the effects of working with tasks with preschool children in inclusive settings have been conducted as yet. To be able to develop a task model that is appropriate for children at the preschool level I will therefore draw on existing empirical task research that I have summarized in the previous chapter. I will first draw on Van den Branden’s tripartite concept of a powerful language learning environment to establish my overall task framework as it includes all the dimensions that are relevant for language teaching and learning at the preschool level. According to this overall framework, preschool teachers need to be able to create a positive and safe learning environment (→ chapter 5.8.2.1), they need to be able to consider task features when designing tasks for the children (→ chapter 5.8.2.2) and they need to manage the language resulting from children that are working with the tasks effectively, in other words, they need to provide appropriate interactional support (→ 5.8.2.3). I will integrate task research done by Müller-Hartmann and Schocker (2011; 2013) and Schocker (2015) that focused on clarifying the features of a task for secondary and primary school English in chapter 5.8.2.2. Teachers need to develop competences in these three general domains that Van den Branden has identified. For my teacher education this general structure will be taken as the basic model to structure teachers’ competences. They will be specified to meet the particular demands of the preschool context and pedagogy appropriate for preschool children. 5.8.2.1 Creating a positive and safe language learning environment Research shows that a positive, non-threatening, safe environment is funda‐ mental to promoting interaction and language learning. “Children and adults alike are known to resist learning when learning is unpleasant, painful, or being attempted in a punitive environment” (Curtain & Pesola, 1994, p. 54). 138 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="138"?> 8 Life skills involve confidence building, social skills and motor skills. 9 ‘Who Stole the Cookies from the Cookie Jar’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4h). 10 Bundesländerübergreifender BlidungsRahmenPlan, Austria (2009a). 11 ‘Parents’ Day’ is a day where the parents are invited to the preschool to celebrate both ‘Mother’s Day’ and ‘Father’ Day’. A positive and safe language learning environment is of top priority in preschool because the emotions of the children control their well-being, their feelings, their attitudes, their motivation and their development of life skills. 8 A positive and safe language learning environment supports preschool children to be receptive and to take part enthusiastically. If, for example, the rhyme ‘Who Stole the Cookies from the Cookie Jar’ 9 is being chanted in role-play, the teacher needs to be aware that the children may find it threatening to be accused of being a cookie thief which would distress them. Their performance is directly related to their emotional state, which is controlled purely by their emotions, rather than rational thought, at this young age: Kinder sind von Beginn an soziale Wesen, deren Beziehungen von Emotionen geprägt sind. Mit zunehmendem Alter gelingt es ihnen immer besser, ihre Impulse zu kontrollieren, ihre Emotionen zu regulieren und Bewältigungsstrategien einzusetzen. (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, 2009a, p. 10) 10 For this reason, the ability to create a positive and safe language learning environment is the key to maximizing the learning potential in preschool. Preschool teachers therefore need to be dedicated to the children’s well-being and make them feel secure from the beginning: “Stabile und sichere Beziehungen vermitteln Kindern Geborgenheit, tragen wesentlich zum kindlichen Wohlbe‐ finden bei und fördern das Vertrauen in sich selbst und die Umwelt. Emotionale Sicherheit zählt zu den zentralen Lernvoraussetzungen” (p. 11). Establishing a good rapport with the children is fundamental to creating a good classroom atmosphere. Developing it requires teachers to care for the children individually, to be prepared for the situation that some children will have more difficulties to come to terms with than others, no matter if these difficulties are caused by lack of concentration, confidence, perhaps shyness or learning difficulties. For example, when children learn a poem by heart to present at ‘Parents’ Day’ 11 together and chant it individually, the teacher needs to be able to react spontaneously and appropriately to help each child in the situation to perform. This presupposes a learner-centred attitude of the teacher so that s/ he can treat each child with respect and interest. The children need familiarity and predictability in the classroom situation so that they feel secure and are relaxed as a group together. This relates to a teacher’s classroom management 139 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="139"?> competences: through the predictable structure of rules, rituals and routines children know what to expect and what is expected of them, for example a ritual can be established to choose leaders for the day and line up at the door. Ringing the bell to tidy up can become a routine. Children learn quickly what is expected by observing the others and soon the chunks accompanying the actions become familiar, for example, It’s time to tidy up. That goes over there. Put it on the shelf. What do you have there? This breaks down hesitation and encourages familiar language to be used. Teachers need to develop competences in integrating rules, rituals and routines for the children that are relevant and meaningful to classroom management. The process of task-based language teaching in itself also contributes to the positive and safe language learning environment. A principle in task planning is to balance demands and support so that the children are able to attain task goals and anxiety is avoided which may otherwise develop fear to meet challenges. Krashen (1981) also put forward this idea of children failing because they are tense and used the metaphor of the affective filter to describe this phenomenon: if the affective filter is up it prevents the children from taking in the input that is made available to them. Lightbown and Spada described this appropriately as a metaphorical barrier that prevents learners from acquiring language even when appropriate input is available. ‘Affect’ refers to feelings of anxiety or negative attitudes that … may be associated with poor learning outcomes. A learner who is tense, anxious, or bored may filter out input, making it unavailable for acquisition. (Lightbown & Spada, 2013, p. 106) It is through caring, interactional support that the children are taken seriously and are supported to perform their tasks. By being interested in what the children say, by respecting their ideas and opinions, the teacher generates a positive and safe language learning environment while interacting with the children. 5.8.2.2 Considering the task features when designing tasks A further area that teachers need to develop is the ability to design tasks that “have the potential to motivate learners to invest energy in task completion” (Van den Branden, 2006, p. 175). In other words, tasks need to motivate the children so that they become involved and take an active part in the lessons. Unlike in primary schools, the children in preschool do not yet have the incentive to learn something for the sake of learning, but instead their curiosity and enthusiasm are the motivating factors, which stimulate the learning process. 140 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="140"?> The motivating factor therefore lies in the process and not in the linguistic out‐ come (Dörnyei, 2002, p. 149): “The relationship between motivation and learning behaviours is by definition stronger than that between motivation and learning achievement because the latter is also influenced by other, non-motivational factors such as the learners' ability, learning opportunities and instructional quality” (Dörnyei, 2002, p. 149). In the following, the task features that have been identified to support learning a language through long-term empirical classroom research (various sources, see below, particularly Müller-Hartmann & Schocker-von Ditfurth, 2011) will be drawn on and adapted to meet the particular learning needs of children in the preschool. The dimension of a task’s potential to motivate the children so that they become involved is also the first task feature that empirical research identified. 1. Tasks have the potential to support learning if they motivate learners to become involved To capture the children’s interest and engage them enthusiastically in doing a particular task, the task must be appropriate for the children’s age, the content must be interesting and relevant to the world of a young child and it must be accompanied by meaningful language that the children need so that they are able to do the task (Schocker, 2015, p. 48; Schocker & Müller-Hartmann, 2009, p. 64; 2011, p. 63). At most educational levels this means that students’ experiences which they bring to the classroom need to be addressed through real-world tasks that directly relate to what they can do with language outside the classrooms and that they find interesting to do. However, preschool children only have limited domains outside the classroom for which they need English: children do not use or need to use English much outside the classroom, they may use English on holidays, for speaking to tourists and perhaps for the computer, but possibilities for creating relevant ‘real-world’ tasks for them are limited. Therefore, pedagogical tasks are predominantly used. Pedagogical tasks simulate real world tasks in that they use topics that are of interest to the children and offer activities that are meaningful to the children as they provide opportunities for relevant, meaningful language to be used (Nunan, 2004, p. 20; Cameron, 2001, p. 30). For a pedagogical task to qualify as a real meaningful task for the children it needs to be authentic, that is, situated in the children’s experiences and needs, so that it is of personal interest to them, which then will stimulate their curiosity. “A task needs to allow learners to use language for purposes that they find worthwhile” (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker-von Ditfurth, 2011, p. 22). The following examples would qualify as 141 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="141"?> 12 ‘The King and Queen Game’ (→ appendix 1: materials 3a). 13 ‘Who Stole the Cookies from the Cookie Jar’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4h). 14 ‘The Rainbow Game’ (→ appendix 1: materials 3c). ‘real’ meaningful task for the children’, examples which all demonstrate that the traditional distinction between ‘pedagogical and real-world’ tasks is not quite clear-cut, because children play games and role-plays at home and in kindergarten in a natural way as part of their daily lives: - playing guessing games such as ‘The King and Queen Game’ 12 where two teams choose food for the picnic without the others seeing it and they guess which food they like or have or want; - following instructions in English when the teacher is managing the classroom, for example lining up at the door or describing someone to choose a partner; - being detectives by finding out who stole the cookie from the cookie jar through the rhyming poem; 13 - being the fastest in ‘The Rainbow Game’ 14 in the gym, where two teams of children compete their rainbow, asking each other if it is the right colour. For preschool children, activities and tasks that are associated with a ‘fantasy world’ also qualify as meaningful and real for the children, for example, when teddy bears are having a picnic this can become just as real as a picnic the children have with family and friends: Children’s fantasy seems to be one of the most meaningful and readily engaged parts of their mental lives. If our aim in education is to encourage that sense of meaningfulness and engagement with reality, we might sensibly explore why their fantasy worlds are so meaningful and engaging to them, and see whether we can use what we learn to serve educational purposes. (Egan, 1988, p. 46) As children use language for communication and not for the sake of learning a language, they need to have a clear and genuine communicative purpose to use the language freely for a task that they consider worthwhile to do in order to become involved and engaged. This means that the task purpose is not about acquiring new language but simply results in using the language as a means to an end to perform the task (for example in playing a guessing game where they acquire the chunks of I like / I don’t like, I want / I don’t want and I have / I don’t have). Cameron (2001) addresses this dual perspective on tasks by saying that “for the children a classroom task should have a clear purpose and meaning; for the teachers, the task should have clear language learning goals” 142 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="142"?> (p. 31). Children’s motivation, however, can only be sustained if the goals are realistically attainable for the children. In conclusion, it can be said that teachers need to develop competences in selecting and designing tasks that are appropriate for their children, which appeal to the children because they qualify as real tasks, motivate them to become involved and engage them in doing the task while they are using meaningful and relevant language in the process and learning it as they go along. 2. Tasks have the potential to support learning if they are complex Providing opportunities for children to choose their own language and to contribute to the content in a way that suits their interests and needs qualifies as a form of task complexity. It enables individual learning to take place and accommodates heterogeneous learners’ needs (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2011, p. 65). In preschool, the limited language available and the limited abilities of the children should not restrict this possibility. Teachers need to be open-minded to include the children’s ideas in their task plans, for example changing rules of games if children suggest this or selecting the cards to be used in a game following their ideas. The tasks need to be set up so that children can do them on their own and together with their peers so that they can choose the language they need and use it depending on what each child is able to do. Target tasks by definition provide the opportunity for children to choose their language, depending on what they can already say. This may be one-word utterances or chunks of language or sentences that the children retrieve from their language repertoires and now use to do the task. Learners’ language is activated and consolidated in this process by the language acquired through previous tasks, so that each activity provides an opportunity for them to experiment with language to achieve the goal of the target task. To conclude, teachers need to develop the competence of setting up tasks in which it is possible for the children to contribute to the process of the task. The tasks need to be planned in such a way that the teachers pass over autonomy to the children to enable them to complete the task on their own using meaningful language of their individual choice. 3. Tasks have the potential to support learning if they integrate a focus on form Tasks by definition focus on triggering meaningful interaction with the children. However, research has demonstrated that a focus on form may support language development. Form includes the subskills of words, grammar and sounds, that is, pronunciation and intonation (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2011, p. 211). A teacher may focus on a form element before, while or after a task has been 143 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="143"?> completed. While it is no problem as regards a focus on the sound elements of language (through songs, chants or rhymes, for example) it is more challenging to understand what focus on form means for preschool children when it comes to the grammar of a language. As young children have not developed the cognitive skills to understand complex structures yet, the concept of grammaticalised lexis (Lewis, 2012, p. 89) is a good way to start and seems appropriate. Following this idea, learners are not made aware of a structure but instead language is treated as a multi-word unit or language chunk (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2016b, pp. 2-8). Grammaticalised lexis is integrated in the task by involving the children in discourse, using language in an authentic way and naturally in the process to get their task done (Tomasello, 2009, pp. 69-88). In the preschool this implicit focus on form is appropriate, by building up language habits through repeated exposure in various situations. Children have the ability to comprehend unanalysed chunks, to use them and then to change them for further communication as they start to identify patterns (Butzkamm, 2008, p. 247). They recognise regularities in the grammatical forms through repeated exposure and continue using the form while they are focusing on the meaning (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2011, p. 210). The following two examples taken from my preschool teacher learner discourse data illustrate this point: If we are going to play after circle time, the children tell us what they want to do. We ask, and what about you? They respond, I want to draw … I want to play with the blocks etc. What they can say in this production context they have developed from other routines in which they have acquired this form before, such as craft activities, in which the teacher gives the children a choice between red and blue paper: Teacher: Do you want blue or red? What about you? Child: I want the red one. In the second example the teacher addresses the wrong pronoun the child has used, in order to make the child aware of the two different forms of pronouns: Teacher: Where is the ball? Child: He has it (child pointing at Sophie). Teacher: Who? Sophie? She, she has it? Child: (nods). Teacher: She’s not a he. She’s a she. With time, the children notice and become aware of patterns and are able to use and fill them with new content: 144 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="144"?> An important part of language acquisition is the ability to produce lexical phrases as unanalysed wholes or 'chunks', and that these chunks become the raw data by which the learner begins to perceive patterns. (Lewis, 2012, p. 95) Teachers may support this process by making learners aware of the form they are using, relating it to the “emerging focus on the grammatical form by the learner” (Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2009, p. 94) in the process. That means, that while doing the task, teachers need to support the children to notice the form they are using while interacting with them, as the example above demonstrated. Focus on form in the preschool therefore is not about explicitly explaining grammar rules, it is more about giving corrective feedback on language that emerges naturally in the learner-teacher discourse and that does not interrupt the flow of the meaning-focused interaction. “A task requires the participants to function primarily as ‘language users’ in the sense that they must employ the same kind of communicative processes as those involved in real-world activities” (Ellis, 2003, p. 3). To fulfil a set-up in which participants function primarily as ‘language users’ the children need to have a non-linguistic goal in which they use the language as a means to achieve their goal while the teacher has her / his language learning aims in mind. In a guessing game, for example, the children’s goal is to find out the answers, while the teacher’s aim is that the children acquire the language that they need in order to complete the task. To conclude, teachers not only need to develop competences in planning tasks which require the children to use language as a means to attain a non-linguistic goal (see previous task features # 1 and # 2) but they must not lose sight of their language learning goals. To support the children to develop their awareness of form teachers need to be able to repeatedly expose them to new forms through offering varied tasks and to integrate corrective feedback in an unobtrusive way to support the children’s language development aptly. 4. Tasks have the potential to support learning if they sequence the task process and balance task demands and task support The need to sequence tasks though balancing task demands and task support (Cameron, 2001, pp. 26-28) is obvious. Tasks need to be challenging for the children so that they are encouraged to become involved and invest energy in doing the task, but without going beyond what the children can do as this may lead to frustration and the children giving up on the task. The task difficulty needs to consider the range of what the children can realistically attain (Skehan, 1998, pp. 98-103). They must be within the children’s experiences so that they can make sense of them (Cameron, 2001, p. 4). Therefore, tasks need to be 145 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="145"?> designed that are challenging for the children but at the same time provide enough support to make them doable for them. This support can be provided through pre-tasks that are coherently planned in a task sequence (p. 31) so that the children may consolidate and build up the language that they need to do the target task. Supportive pre-tasks are, for example songs, rhymes, picture books or total physical response activities that contain relevant language to help the children to do the target task. The relevant language may be built in one of the daily routines, for example when doing the attendance. When the teacher calls out the names of the children, they may answer by telling the teacher their favourite colour, if this is seen as relevant language for the target task the teacher has in mind. To conclude, teachers need to develop competences to design task plans in which the topic, the activities and the outcome (the target task) are logically, clearly and consistently connected so that they keep the children involved and provide enough support. A working definition of what qualifies as appropriate preschool task that results from this reflection would be as follows: A preschool language task is a holistic activity. It takes place in a positive and safe learning environment. It involves the children’s real and fantasy worlds, engages them in a playful way and uses the target language as a means to attain a relevant and meaningful goal for the children. 5.8.2.3 Providing interactional support to learners The final competence area in Van den Branden’s model (2006, p. 199; 2007, p. 97) is dedicated to the interactional support that teachers need to provide so that they are able to support their children in their language development. I have already argued why it is important to integrate teachers’ English teaching competence development in my teacher education model when I described its central components above. The focus there was to provide language support for teachers participating in the teacher education project whose English competence is not well developed. They would therefore need support that gives them confidence to use the language instantly and easily for the various purposes they need it for to manage their classrooms. It was argued that this is best done by providing readily available combinations of words that are frequently used in the preschool context to manage communication. Teachers would develop fluency and idiomatic language use simply and quickly and be able to build up a foundation of chunks to work with through the various opportunities for language development (→ chapter 5.7.4) which the teacher education would provide and integrate in the teacher development project. 146 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="146"?> The chapter here describes what preschool teachers need to be able to do in the classroom to provide interactional support to their learners and to manage their classrooms effectively. While interactional support is important in any language learning context, a teachers’ interactional support is particularly important for preschool children: In infant classes, teachers are the learners’ most privileged partner: they can provide the learner with rich input, can stimulate production and can interactionally follow up their comprehension and production by negotiating meaning of input that learners do not understand and by pushing output which learners find hard to produce. (Verhelst, 2006, pp. 209-210) I have structured this chapter by drawing on two empirically grounded sources that have tried to describe and categorize teachers’ competences in the area of providing interactional support: a. Van Avermaet and his colleagues (2006) focus on teachers’ attitudes. They argue that appropriate interactional support for children requires teachers to develop a learner-centred attitude so that they are able to recognize that each child is different and requires interactional sup‐ port that matches his or her personality. They therefore focus on the affective qualities that teachers need to develop and have structured them in six categories: expectations, willingness (which can also be seen as open-mindedness), empathy, flexibility, tolerance and enthusiasm (p. 195). b. Devlieger and Goosens (2007) focus on the competences primary school teachers need to develop to provide appropriate interactional support. They have categorized them in three areas: mediation, construction and negotiation of meaning and differentiation. I have adapted their competence model for the preschool by drawing on my empirical data from this context. In the following I will discuss Avermaet`s affective qualities for the preschool context (a) and then the three areas of mediation, construction and negotiation defined by Devlieger and Goosens (b): a) Interactional support: focus on teachers’ attitudes To give children appropriate interactional support teachers need to recognise the children’s individual identities, taking into consideration their personalities, abilities and individual learning needs: 147 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="147"?> Kinder verfügen über unterschiedliche Interessen, Begabungen und Bedürfnisse sowie über vielfältige Ausdrucksweisen und Kompetenzen. Jedes Kind durchläuft demnach eine einzigartige Bildungsbiografie. Es hat das Recht, in seiner Individualität respektiert zu werden und sich nach seinem eigenen Lern- und Lebensrhythmus zu entwickeln. (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, 2009a, p. 2) Verhelst (2006) addresses this dimension of classroom discourse when she says “teachers provide interactional support to those learners who need it (the most). They adapt the quantity and quality of their interactional support to the particularities of the learners’ task performance, and of the learners themselves” (p. 201). It is the teacher’s awareness, consideration and subsequent actions that promote meaningful interactional support in a positive and safe language learning environment. A learner may need more time to think about something. S/ he may need small comments to break the silence: mmm, what do you think? You have three to choose from, or s/ he may need a different classroom set-up to feel more confident to speak, such as sitting next and close to the teacher in the circle rather than opposite on the other side. The six basic affective qualities it takes for teachers to develop so that they are able to respond appropriately to each individual child are described in the following and examples from preschool classroom discourse from my data are added to illustrate the categories (Van Avermaet et al., 2006, p. 195). Expectations: “From an affective point of view, the success of task-based lessons … depends on the teacher’s (high) expectations of the students’ ability to perform tasks and of the fact that they will learn language from performing the tasks” (p. 195). Expectations require a fine balance of judgement on the part of the teacher. If you over-expect a child to perform, there is the danger that s/ he might not perform well. If you under-expect a child’s performance s/ he may lack stimulation, become bored and may no longer want to take part. The teacher’s expectations therefore have a substantial influence on the children as individual learners. They usually develop from an understanding that a teacher has gained about that child: the child’s perceived personality, aptitude and progress in learning. The way a teacher perceives a child will influence their task performance. Teachers need to be aware of their own expectations and relate them to the perspective of the child so that they can develop competences to judge how best to react in a situation: Any learner outcome will be significantly shaped by the learners’ own perception of … their assumptions about what they themselves should contribute; their view of 148 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="148"?> the nature and demands of the task itself; and their personal definitions of the task situation. (Breen, 2009, p. 344; as cited in Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2011, p. 153) The affective quality of a teacher’s expectations is illustrated through the following preschool classroom scene: The children in the group were practising a ‘Mother’s Day’ poem to recite to their mothers. They were taking it in turns to say it alone. As Elena was shy, the teacher suggested that the whole group could say the poem with her. Elena’s assumption of her contribution was that it was enough that she was listening to the group saying the poem. The teacher’s expectation was that Elena should be saying the poem as well, because the teacher asked the children to say the poem with Elena to support her to try and say it. It seems that the view of the demands was perceived differently by the teacher and the child. From the teacher’s perspective, she had lessened the demands for Elena, as she could chant the poem with the group, but for Elena the idea of saying the poem may have still been too daunting. Willingness: “From an affective point of view, the success of task-based lessons … depends on the teacher’s willingness to share responsibility for the task performance and control of the learning process with the students” (Van Avermaet et al., 2006, p. 195). Sharing responsibility for task performance requires teachers to learn to give up some of her / his authority so that the children can take over, with a certain amount of autonomy over their learning. Transferring autonomy in preschool requires the set-up of a stable framework that provides a scaffold for the children but will give them the space for individual choices at the same time. For example, the routine steps when playing a game or a role-play provide the framework, but the children may choose what to say within the given structure. In other words, it is only within this framework that preschool children may take over a certain degree of responsibility in the task performance. As preschool children are very young, taking over responsibility may result in little English language interaction if the children are not prepared for it. Teachers therefore need to know how to plan sequenced tasks, to reflect on when it might be appropriate for the children to actively co-design a task step. The following example from my preschool data demonstrates in what way a teacher’s willingness to share responsibility for the task performance may be provided through a structured task that offers a stable framework for the preschool children. It is a pre-task that prepares the children to do the target task of playing ‘The Rainbow Game’: a racing game in which two teams try to make their own rainbow faster than the other team can manage it. It is based 149 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="149"?> 15 ‘The Rainbow Game’ and the song ‘I Can Sing a Rainbow’ (→ appendix 1: materials 3c) on the song: ‘I Can Sing a Rainbow’. 15 The preschool children are one group and make one rainbow together. The colours of the rainbow are to be in the same order as they appear in the song. The children know the song well and they are familiar with the target language (Is it red? Is it yellow? - Yes, it is. No, it isn’t). They take it in turns to find the right colour to put down for their rainbow. At the beginning of the lesson, the teacher puts down coloured cards representing the rainbow as they sing the song together. She then goes to the other side of the room with another set of cards and puts them face down showing the children the colour first, encouraging them to call it out. This set-up supports the children to make the rainbow, because the first set of cards near them helps them to remember which colour came next and the second set is to create the rainbow. To demonstrate the rules of the game the teacher is the first one to have a turn and this way models the task for the children. She explains what she is doing. She runs to the cards, picks one up without looking at it and asks, Is it red? because that is the first colour sung in the song. The children who can see the colour say, No, it isn’t. Her response is, Oh no, we have to find the red one. The teacher runs back to the children and asks who would like to have a turn. She stands near the rainbow colours to help the children. They have a turn one after the other. After a few turns when the game is running smoothly, she steps out of the game and sits down at the side to hand over the responsibility of the task performance to the children. She does not stand up again. Quietly and in an unobtrusive, relaxed manner, she repeats some of the rules every now and again. The teacher becomes an audience and is showing her excitement when they get the right colour. Empathy: “From an affective point of view, the success of task-based lessons … depends on the teacher’s empathy for the particular affective and cognitive problems individual students face and for their specific language learning needs” (p. 195). In preschool empathy is an essential quality needed by teachers to be able to reflect on a child’s reactions and to understand why a child reacts the way s/ he does in order to be able to respond appropriately. Only then can a teacher develop the rapport with the children that is needed to establish a supportive classroom atmosphere: Empathy is the art of stepping imaginatively into the shoes of another person, understanding their feelings and perspectives, and using that understanding to guide 150 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="150"?> 16 ‘Who Stole the Cookies from the Cookie Jar? ’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4h). 17 ratiocination is a process of exact thinking your actions. So, empathy is distinct from expressions of sympathy - such as pity or feeling sorry for somebody - as these do not involve trying to understand the other person’s emotions or point of view. (Krznaric, 2014, p. 8) The following simple example illustrates the affective quality of a teacher’s empathy: the lesson was based on the rhyme, ‘Who Stole the Cookies from the Cookie Jar? ’ 16 in which individual children in the circle are, one after the other, accused of stealing the cookies from the jar. After the teacher had read the book, the preschool children chanted the rhyme. This quite innocent little rhyme could have been quite unpleasant for some children. The full attention is on the individual child, one after the other, because in the song each child is first accused of being the culprit which is then denied until it’s the next child’s turn to be accused. As children’s real world and fantasy world are closely connected, they often fall into one, which is why the children may have actually really felt accused in that situation. A boy obviously felt very uncomfortable even before he was accused and started to climb around on his chair, onto the floor and onto his chair again. The teacher understood the situation and through her empathy, she could step into his shoes. She did not tell him to sit still or expect him to answer the question when he was accused. She answered it for him and moved on, leaving him to climb around on his chair further, until he stopped of his own accord. Flexibility: “From an affective point of view, the success of task-based lessons … depends on the teacher’s flexibility in adapting his support and interventions to different students and allowing for different routes and rates of language acquisition in his classroom” (Van Avermaet et al., 2006, p. 195). For teachers to be flexible they need to be open-minded, an attitude which develops out of empathy, tolerance and the willingness to change one’s own views of a situation. Reacting spontaneously to a situation means that teachers need to be able to reflect-in-action, that is, they instantly recognize in a situation whether an intervention is required to adjust to the situation. Being able to re‐ flect-in-action is a matter of “thinking about doing something while we are doing it” (Schön, 1983, p. 54), acknowledging that “someone reflecting in action does not separate thinking from doing, ratiocinating 17 his way to a decision which he must later convert to action” (p. 68). Doing and thinking are complimentary (p. 280). The competences that are needed for teachers do develop this kind of 151 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="151"?> flexibility in the teaching process are developed best through the routine of reflecting on teaching experiences and on critical incidents. Tolerance: “From an affective point of view, the success of task-based lessons … depends on the teacher’s tolerance of interlanguage errors, disparate opinions, diversity in task performance conditions and use of languages other than the language of instruction if the students prefer to do so or find it helpful” (Van Avermaet et al., 2006, p. 195). I will describe each of the dimensions of ‘tolerance’ addressed by Van Avermaet in the following: Tolerance to interlanguage errors: The way interlanguage errors are viewed influences a teacher’s response to children’s task performance: [Errors] provide evidence of a system - that is, evidence of the state of the learner’s knowledge of the L2. They are not to be viewed solely as a product of imperfect learning. … Second language errors are not a reflection of faulty imitation. Rather, they are to be viewed as indicators of the learner’s attempt to figure out some system. (Gass & Selinker, 2001, p. 78) Languages are taught with the perspective of focusing on what children can achieve. Children need self-esteem so that they can build up their confidence to take part in task performance. “Young children who are corrected systematically and overtly may refrain, in the end, from adding their own contribution to the conversation” (Verhelst, 2006, p. 205). Error correction is therefore a delicate process. “All teachers can foster children’s self-esteem by emphasizing what children can do rather than what they can’t do” (Pinter, 2006, p. 101). Once a preschool child is engaged in task performance s/ he concentrates on using the language to communicate, s/ he does not focus on the language-form. The teacher has to respond in such a way that the child’s train of thought during the spontaneous talk is not interrupted: Teachers face a difficult choice in deciding whether or not to intervene when a student or pupil is performing a task. They have to make this decision on the basis of their own perception of the goals of the task, the goals their students have set for themselves, how far the students have progressed with a particular task and they have to bear in mind the details of their students’ needs and personalities. (Van Avermaet et al., 2006, pp. 193-194) If teachers are aware of a child’s interlanguage processes (that is the way a child constructs new representations of the target language as s/ he is experimenting 152 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="152"?> with it), they can understand that interlingual errors are a natural part of a child’s learning process. As a result they may develop the tolerance needed to react appropriately when children interact in English. Tolerance of diversity in task performance conditions: The concentration span of some children is often quite short and they are easily distracted. In preschool, this can contribute to children’s diversity in task performance and demands a teacher’s patience. Some preschool children who are distracted will need time to regain their concentration; they may stand up when they take part in the language discourse or walk around while they are listening. To view each child individually, rather than having the same rule for everyone, teachers’ reactions can boost the concentration of the children concerned. This sometimes demands a certain degree of tolerance because teachers may feel they need to immediately reinstate their classroom management; however, for as long as the teacher does not have the feeling that any particular child’s behaviour disturbs the other children, her / his tolerance to these situations can enhance the children’s task performances. To develop the attitude that responding individually to each child may be more appropriate than to insist rigorously on established classroom management rules will support teachers to develop their competences in conducting tasks performance conditions that create a relaxed atmosphere by providing interactional support for each child. Tolerance of using languages other than the language of instruction if the students prefer to do so or find it helpful: Communication is the top priority of children. To insist on the target language being spoken, whether it is the foreign language (English) or the language of instruction (German), does not take their well-being into consideration. It disregards their needs and their individuality. In both contexts the teacher’s tolerance towards other languages is fundamental for the children to feel confident and secure and for them to have a sense of belonging to the group which is central for their well-being in class: … Forbidding young children to use their own language might restrain their overall language production by increasing the affective threshold they have to cross. Toler‐ ance towards the children’s mother tongue and explicit attention to it might, on the other hand, contribute to a learning climate in which the children feel accepted for who they are. (Verhelst, 2006, p. 205) 153 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="153"?> Enthusiasm: “From an affective point of view, the success of task-based lessons (…) depends on the teacher’s enthusiasm with his learners’ performances, ideas and opinions, in task-based teaching in particular and in teaching in general” (Van Avermaet et al., 2006, p. 195). In preschool a child responds strongly to an enthusiastic teacher whether s/ he is presenting and conducting an activity to the group or whether s/ he is helping an individual child. The teacher’s enthusiasm becomes a motivating factor for the children to become involved. Her / his enthusiasm towards their performances encourages them to do their best as individuals, which boosts their confidence and helps them to overcome their shyness to speak. Teachers need to develop the competences to listen to the children; to listen to their ideas and opinions and to show their enthusiasm. Through this the children feel that they are taken seriously which builds up their self-esteem. These factors pave the way for the children to maintain their motivation to learn. After categorizing the affective qualities teachers need to develop to provide interactional support to the children in the preschool, I will now describe the competences preschool teachers need to develop to provide appropriate interactional support for the children to develop their English competences. b) Interactional support: focus on teachers’ competences Devlieger and Goosens (2007) have categorized teachers’ competences in three areas: mediation, construction and negotiation of meaning and differentiation. These competences resulted from classroom discourse analysis of data gained through their long-term research in primary classrooms. I have adapted their competence model for the preschool by drawing on my empirical data from this context. Their findings are presented in regular print (Devlieger & Goosens, 2007, pp. 128-129) with examples for the preschool taken from my data added in italics. As the authors categorize their findings following Van den Branden’s tripartite competence model in which teacher’s competence to provide interac‐ tional support is the third component, the numbering of competences begins with the number 3: 3.1 Mediation 3.1.1 The teacher responds to children who signal problems with the task (reactively); e.g., confirming rules of language games or English chunks, they may ask for to give support. 3.1.2 The teacher attempts to detect children's problems in task perform‐ ance (pre-actively); e.g., when playing language games. 3.2 Construction and negotiation of meaning 154 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="154"?> 3.2.1 The teacher checks whether children comprehend the input and rephrases if necessary, s/ he makes her/ himself intelligible in every possible way; e.g., children don’t always answer the teacher’s ques‐ tion, Do you understand? The teacher therefore has to be able to ‘read’ what a child communicates non-verbally and if necessary s/ he repeats the input clearly and slowly using gestures and demonstrations to make sure the children understand. 3.2.2 The teacher supports input comprehension in various ways: visually by means of pictures, drawings, objects; by means of children’s foreknowledge; another frequently used way to support understanding in the preschool are puppets who have the purpose to be credible communication partners for the teacher and the children. 3.2.3 The teacher supports children in producing output and expressing their meaning and intentions. S/ he tries to unravel incomplete messages (e.g., by negotiating meaning, reformulating, verbalizing non-verbal messages); e.g., s/ he prompts the children when they point to an object to ask a question. 3.2.4 The teacher corrects grammatical errors in a positive and implicit way; the teacher recasts or reformulates incomplete or wrong utterances of the children, corrects while focusing on the content of the message; in the preschool repeating the utterance without interrupting the game or conversation is often required. 3.3 Differentiation 3.3.1 The teacher gives ‘weaker’ children (often the younger ones in mixed preschool groups) opportunities to learn from the ‘stronger’ children (often the older ones in mixed preschool groups); e.g., by grouping children so that peers support each other - in action songs, for example during which two children clap each other’s hands or grouping the children in team games. 3.3.2 The teacher specially supports and motivates weaker children, e.g., by using additional pictures or visual aids; by giving the children individual attention, looking at them in particular, while repeating instructions; by playing the games on a one-to-one basis with them. 3.3.3 The teacher tries to control the impulsiveness of the children who want to dominate an activity. 3.3.4 The teacher reacts to differences in pace between the children, e.g., more advanced children are chosen to help in classroom management (lining children up at the door through using language, choosing children through rhymes, saying “Simon says…,” and leading other language games). 155 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="155"?> Following the description of the approach and the procedures that are appro‐ priate for the preschool context in this chapter, a final chapter will provide a structure of the preschool task examples and course materials for the English course for the children, which I have developed for this context and have made available for teachers participating in the teacher education project. The task and materials illustrate the English task pedagogy which has been described above. All the task examples have been developed by me and they have been empirically tested in various preschool contexts. 5.8.3 An English course for the children: the structure of the preschool task sequence Tasks and related materials for an English course for the children were developed and tested during the pilot phase of my teacher development study (→ chapter 6.3.1). The design of tasks and related materials is based on the theoretical foun‐ dation of what qualifies as appropriate tasks in general and for the preschool context in particular (→ chapters 5.8.1 & 5.8.2). An English course for the children would need to support the teachers to be able to teach English through tasks in a way that would meet the needs of the children. This involved illustrating preschool tasks as workplan which included relevant theory, accompanying suggestions for teacher talk, related materials and media. But it would also need to cover preschool tasks in process, that is video-recordings of best practice sample lessons on a DVD that were recorded of tasks that my colleague and I had tested before. Video-recordings were not mandatory for my teacher education study as participating teachers were able to directly participate in the demonstration lessons, which I organised at their preschool. However, exemplary video-recorded preschool tasks will be needed if the teacher education is to be transferred to other contexts for which a separate handbook titled ‘Teaching English in Preschool’ is being prepared. This extra publication will result from this project, but it is not the focus of the study (Birsak de Jersey, in preparation). Tasks and related materials will be sequenced following the structure of the E-LINGO Master’s course (→ table 4). 156 5 The preschool teacher education project <?page no="156"?> Task phase Description of task phase Clarifying the target task Clarify the task purpose and relate it to the materials the children will work with (e.g., a story, a song, a game): what can children do with language and how can they demonstrate what they can do at the end of the task cycle in the target task; offer choices, involve children in choices, activate their ideas of possible target tasks to choose from. Select the language (chunks, words etc.) learners need to do the target task. This may be both: • Language you revise / activate (familiar language) or • Language you plan to introduce (new language) Examples of target tasks: Playing an interactive game; Buying things at a kiosk; Reconstructing and acting out a story; Talking about favourite places; Presenting favourite animals; Sharing food preferences etc. Pre-task phase Activate learners’ pre-knowledge, pre-teach new language Target task phase (including presenta‐ tion of target task) Plan a set of shorter activities (i.e., practice activities, task support) leading up to the children actually performing the target task. Activities should provide opportunities to practise the language needed to do the target task. This phase ends by the children performing the target task. Post-task reflection Think of some form of reflection of the task process including feedback on children’s performance of the target task, con‐ sidering reflection of: - What helped us learn (focus: learning process)? - What have we learnt (focus: content)? - What did we do well, what could we have improved (focus: form / performance)? Table 4: Structure of preschool task plans For the purpose of the teacher education project, I adapted this basic structure to meet participant teachers’ needs: first, the procedure that teachers are to follow for each task phase is described (involving explanatory comments related to areas of classroom management and language use, for example). This is followed by relevant basic theory in the form of task features which the suggested procedure is based on (in brackets at the end of the description of the procedure) and the resulting teacher talk that is required to support teachers to put the task to practice. 157 5.8 The content of the teacher education: teaching English through tasks <?page no="158"?> 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design In applied linguistics different types of qualitative research approaches have become more and more productive in the last two decades (Duff, 2008). This is related to the growing recognition that almost every aspect of language acquisition and use is determined or significantly shaped by social, cultural, and situational factors, and qualitative research is ideal for providing insights into such contextual conditions and influences. (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 36) The same is true for the field of foreign teacher education. It is “context-bound” (Zein, 2019, p. 5). “We know that learning to teach is complex, contextually specific, autobiographically grounded, and informed by socio-political realities. This is why quality teaching often looks different in different settings” (Zein 2019, p. 6; citing Goodwin, 2010, p. 30). Consequently, the teacher has been more in the focus of research studies because - as international research studies have recently demonstrated in a volume on Early Language Learning and Teacher Education - his / her development is “affected by multiple factors that are directly [related] to the individual teacher such as cognitions and emotions, as well as professional ecology including salaries, teaching workload and the availability of professional development activities” (pp. 9, 10). As a result, research focuses on “the lived complexity of the work of language teaching, how that work is learnt, and how it is carried out” (Burns et al., 2015, p. 597). Caspari et al. (2016), in their Handbook on Research Methods in Language Education, suggest two prototypical research designs that are frequently used if the research questions focus on issues of implementing innovations in complex contexts of practice that involve the professional development of teachers: case studies and action research (Caspari, p. 67). Case studies aspire to capture individuals, groups or institutions in their complexity and they assume that general structures may become visible through the single case/ s in question (p. 67). Action research offers practitioners a cyclic procedure in which they research their teaching and learning contexts systematically, either alone or in collaboration with colleagues and / or researchers and aim to change their contexts of practice in the process (p. 67). Both case study and action research have been recommended “for exploring uncharted territories … [as they] can provide an unparalleled understanding of longitudinal processes” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 154). Referring to Van Lier (2005, p. 195) Dörnyei continues saying <?page no="159"?> that case study research “has become a key method for researching changes of complex phenomena over time. Many of the processes investigated in case studies cannot be adequately researched in any other common research methods” (p. 155). Both of these general prototypical designs render themselves well to the research questions that are the focus of the study here: while there is general agreement across European member states that children would benefit from early foreign language education in preschool (European Commission, 2011a), this educational programme has neither become part of the final version of the educational plan for Austria (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, 2009a; 2009b) nor is it supported among the majority of preschool teachers, despite the fact that they generally recognise that children would benefit from early foreign language learning in principle (→ chapters 3). As I was convinced - both through my own and cooperating colleagues’ work in preschool - that children actually do benefit from early English, I felt the need to prove that it could be implemented successfully in the preschool context by qualifying experienced teachers in service to teach English for the regular inclusive multilingual preschool. An exploratory long-term action research design seemed the appropriate approach to meet the requirements of my research focus: I would first need to find out if preschool teachers were willing to participate, what support their education would involve and what time it would actually take for them to develop the competences to teach English. While the approach of action research has already been described in the previous chapter 5, when I argued why this approach would have the potential to contribute to participating preschool teachers’ development, the focus of chapter 6 is on describing case study as a prototypical research design that - as has been outlined in the introduction to this chapter - aspires to capture the complexity of teachers’ development and tries to delineate general insights from investigating a multifaceted single case. The next chapter will provide a survey of the levels of the multiple case study design which is followed by a discussion on the sampling strategy and methodological classifications of the sample choice (→ chapter 6.2). 160 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="160"?> 1 www.organisationalmastery.com (09.11.2019) 6.1 Case study design In research methodologies case study is described as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context” (Yin, 2003, p. 13). A case constitutes “a single entity with clearly defined boundaries. Research studies sometimes describe a series of ‘multiple cases’” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 151). Following Duff ’s definition of a case - for which she draws on various case study methodologies - a case entails the availability of multiple sources of information or perspectives on observations, in-depth study of a phenomenon in its natural context, learning from the perspectives of the participants involved in the phenomenon and resulting in-depth data collection as further distinctive features (Duff, 2008, p. 22). In my research the study is organised as a multiple case study that comprises three levels (→ diagram 8): 1 st macro level: analysis of the research / teacher development context in question. It provides information on contextual features of teaching English in multilingual inclusive state preschools in the Salzburg area and information on common features to be able to construct a profile for a sample preschool (→ chapters 3). 2 nd meso level: profile of all the participating preschool teachers of the selected preschool sample that would represent preschool teachers’ joint development as a social community of practice as “an organized group of professional people who share the same interests in resolving an issue, im‐ proving skills, and learning from each other’s experiences” (Evolution4all 2019) 1 and its context features (→ chapter 6.2). 3 rd micro level: the individual participating preschool teacher’s development processes presented both as separate individual case studies followed by a concluding summary of their experiences (→ chapter 7). Note: The description of the multiple case study levels including the following diagram 8 have already been presented in chapter 5.1 when the research questions were assigned to the three levels and reference to the related chapters of the study were included. 161 6.1 Case study design <?page no="161"?> Figure 29: Diagram 8: Multiple case study design It is expected that this approach renders itself well to trace participating preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool as well as their motivation to become involved in this process and to understand their developing English teaching competences and ultimately be able to relate them to the components the teacher education project has provided as support. 6.2 Sampling It is a defining feature of any qualitative study that it uses “a small purposeful sampling to promote an in-depth understanding of the explored phenomenon” (Ivankova & Creswell, 2009, p. 149). A number of different sampling strategies have been suggested in case study research methodologies whose distinctions are not clear-cut. They will be discussed in this chapter and related to the sampling strategy of the study presented here. Generally, sampling in qualitative research is not concerned with how representative the respondent sample is or how the experience is distributed in the population. Instead, the main goal of sampling is to find individuals who can provide rich and varied insights into the phenomenon under investigation. (Dörney, 2007, p. 126) However, with my research focus in mind, my choice of sample would also need to qualify as representing the general situation in preschools in a member state of the European Union (→ chapter 3). Only then would it be possible to evaluate how far the components of the preschool teacher education model contributed to participating teachers’ competence development and could be 162 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="162"?> 2 (→ appendix 3: questionnaire). generalised or transferred to other preschool teacher education settings (Kelle & Kluge, 2010, p. 50). Therefore, my research sample would need to represent the context of the common multilingual inclusive state preschool that consists of large mixed-age groups and may be characterised as being one of the most challenging contexts to teach English to young children. A number of reasons contribute to the high demands of this context: for most children German is a second language that needs to be acquired by the children; state preschool teachers’ workload is already considerable, and their communicative English language competence level is low (→ chapter 3). Had I situated my research in less challenging preschool contexts, for example in preschools that consist mainly of monolingual German speaking children with an extra language programme on offer, transferability of results would have been limited: We must … think about the likely degree of homogeneity of the features we are studying across units within the various populations to which we might try to generalise. There is little point in selecting a population that would be of great interest to our audience if it is likely that the features we are studying are so heterogeneous within it that generalisation from our investigation is likely to be ill-founded. (Hammersley, 1992, p. 88) I have therefore identified the features of a sample preschool that would support generalization of findings both as regards the population of children attending and preschool teachers’ competences (→ chapter 3, macro level of the case study). Dörnyei (2007) classifies this strategy of sample selection as typical sampling which he describes as follows: The researcher selects participants whose experience is typical with regard to the research focus. … This strategy assumes that we have a profile of the targeted attributes … [of the population]. Although we cannot generalise from the results because we cannot claim that everybody will have the same experience, we can list the typical or normal features of the experience. (p. 128) To identify what qualifies as a ‘typical’ preschool profile I distributed a ques‐ tionnaire 2 to all the state preschools in the area of Salzburg (→ chapter 3). From the evaluation of this questionnaire survey, the following essential common contextual features and resulting criteria for selecting a ‘representative’ pre‐ school for the second meso level of my case study could be concluded: - the children who attend state preschools are multilingual and heterogeneous, a large percentage of the children are learning German as a second language; 163 6.2 Sampling <?page no="163"?> - the sizes of the groups are between 20 and 25 children differing each year with children leaving and arriving; - the preschool teachers share similar attitudes of being reluctant towards introducing English in their contexts; - the preschool teachers lack foreign language didactical and methodolog‐ ical knowledge and teaching skills; - the preschool teachers are qualified preschool teachers who follow the educational requirements of the Austrian government (→ chapter 2.2.3). For my second meso level of my case study, I would need to find a preschool that would fulfil these requirements while at the same time would be willing to actively participate in the research / teacher education project. This would require a team of preschool teachers who qualify as a community of practice as they would need to be prepared to cooperatively implement English in their preschool on a long-term basis. It would require extra work for participating teachers to become involved and to provide data about this process (→ chapter 3). In other words, the research would depend heavily on a sample that involves teachers who are willing to commit themselves to a new professional venture. Following Kelle and Kluge (2010, pp. 50,55), the sampling therefore also qualifies as selective sampling or criterion sampling, which Dörnyei (2007) defines as selecting “participants who meet some specific predetermined criteria” (p. 128). Apart from identifying a preschool that would qualify as typical it would also require finding a community of participating teachers who were willing to become involved: - the research project as a longitudinal study relied on dedicated preschool teachers, who would be prepared to include English in their already demanding contexts of work; - it depended on participating teachers’ cooperative teamwork so that the teacher education model could be evaluated. The sample would need to logistically enable cooperative work, which meant that participating preschool teachers had to work at the same location. It would also need to comprise teachers with a high morale that would enable them to constitute a motivated, willing, interested team which would create a working environment conducive to the research; - as the common attitude amongst preschool teachers was one of reluctance to introduce English, a positive attitude of the head of the preschool was a crucial factor in selecting the sample, as her / his support was paramount to carry out the research project. Ultimately, the heads of the preschools are the ones who decide what projects or innovations are introduced in 164 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="164"?> their preschool. The project would therefore also depend on convincing the head to support it so that the first steps could be initiated. In the end, a sample could be identified that met all of the criteria described above: the third micro level of my case study consisted of a team of four preschool teachers who were willing to participate in the research project (including the support of three assistants and the head). This size corresponds to the average number of participants that are reported in the research methodology literature where “case studies with 4 - 6 focal participants in one or more sites … can be seen as fairly typical. … Even if there is attrition among participants (and there usually is) there will likely be 4 - 3 cases remaining” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 152; referring to Duff, 2006). Each teacher represented a different teacher personality in terms of teaching approach, level of communicative English language competence, years of experiences in their profession and age. They all worked in one multilingual inclusive state preschool which represents the essential common contextual factors which were compiled from the questionnaire survey. It can therefore be also said that the sample meets the criterion of transferability which is “dependent upon the degree of similarity (fittingness) between … contexts” (Guba, 1981, p. 81) and as a result is potentially useful for others (Rallis et al., 2009, p. 267). Usefulness for others, in my case, means that other teacher development researchers and teacher educators interested in exploring the preschool context as a place to initiate early foreign language teaching can build on the results of the study presented here. The next chapter will specify the context features of the selected sample preschool so that the framework and resulting contextual affordances and constraints which readers may not be familiar with can be clarified. This is ultimately an important feature of any case study because “describing the setting and procedures in adequate detail provides a context for understanding the study’s results” (Ponterotto, 2006, p. 546). In the context of my study familiarity with the preschool setting and procedures contributes to a reader’s understanding of when and in what ways English as a foreign language can be integrated in the preschool timetable. Context details will describe the features of the selected preschool sample, the groups of children in the preschool, the preschool timetable, and the profile of participating preschool teachers, both as a social community of practice and as individual teacher personalities. 6.2.1 Context features of the selected preschool sample: meso level of case study It was demonstrated in the previous chapter that the selected case qualifies a typical preschool, which represents the mainstream state education system in 165 6.2 Sampling <?page no="165"?> the Salzburg region (→ chapter 3). It has an inclusive, heterogeneous enrolment of approximately 75 children from a mixed socio-economic, central suburban, high population density area. 6.2.2 The groups of children in the preschool The preschool is arranged in three groups of approximately 25 children ac‐ cording to a balanced ratio of number, age (three to six years) and gender. The number of children in the groups is adjusted according to children with special needs. Each year the ratio of the groups fluctuates as a result of children leaving to start primary school. New children join the group and replace the children who have left. The flux of children leaving and arriving each year can range from about four children up to ten or even more in a group. As a result, with the beginning of every new school year, a group needs to be re-established as a social learning community. For the new children everything they experience is not familiar. This ranges from adjusting to new routines, to leaving home and to being with up to twenty-five other children in their preschool group - doing all this without their parents and with a teacher who is a stranger in the beginning. There are no routines that could make them feel secure. This means that when one routine flows into the next the children at first do not know what is happening, why it is happening and what comes next. For example: the bell may ring which signals tidying up, but for them this equals chaos as suddenly the older children, stop playing, jump up and know what there is to be done; the older children may start making a circle of chairs and know what comes next; they line up at the door and know where they are going, while the new children are at a lost to know what to do. Only when the new children become familiar with the various routines is there a secure framework provided for them to feel comfortable and safe. The majority of the new children also need to start learning German immediately. Therefore, there is no progressive continuation of learning experience of the group as a whole from one year to the next which the children and their teachers can build on, as there is in primary school (→ table 5). The children individually progress continually in their learning experiences during their two-to-three-year period in preschool, however, as new three-year-old children join and the six year old children leave every year, the movement in the group is best described as a cycle within which there are variable ratios of children each year. The children in the groups are always three to five / six years old. 166 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="166"?> 3 Albanian, Arabian, Arabic, Bosnian, Chechen, Croatian, Deutsch, Georgian, Kurdish, Macedonian, Pashto (an official language of Afghanistan), Rumanian, Russian, Serbian, Somali, Turkish, Urdu (an official language in Pakistan) Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 New children who have just started in preschool Children who are in the middle period of their pre‐ school life Children who are in their last year of preschool Threeor four-year-olds Fourand five-year-olds Fiveand six-year-olds Table 5: The constellation of a group in preschool During the time of the research / teacher education project, there were seven‐ teen languages spoken amongst the children. 3 The majority of the children in each group were learning German as a second language. Due to the cyclic annual change, the children varied in their levels of German language competence. Many of the new children did not have any experience in learning German, while the children leaving would have had two or three years of experience (depending on the age at which they started preschool). At the beginning of the project, 88 % of the children in the selected preschool were learning German as a second language. In two of the preschool teachers’ groups (Betty’s and Marie’s) there were 21 out of 23 children and in Nadia’s group, there were 15 out of 19 children who were learning German as a second language. At the beginning of the research / teacher education project, the children did not have any experience in learning English. Due to the situation of children leaving and new children arriving, the level of English experience changed among the children as the project proceeded, which means that some children had no experience in English whereas other children would have two or three years of experience (→ table 6) which contributes to the already existing heterogeneity of state preschool children’s groups. Children in their first year Children in their second year Children in their third year New children who have just started in preschool Children who are in the middle period of their pre‐ school life Children who are in their last year of preschool No English experience One year of English Two years of English Table 6: The different levels of the children’s English experiences 167 6.2 Sampling <?page no="167"?> 4 Morning children are enrolled only to be in preschool in the morning. They are not allowed to stay for the afternoon. 5 Afternoon children are in kindergarten in the afternoon and are picked up at any point in time by their parents. 6.2.3 The preschool timetable: focus on the morning routine The research / teacher education project took place during what is called the morning routine in preschools. The morning routine structures the learning experiences of the children in free play, snack-time, circle time, storytelling, craft activities, movement in the gym and time outside. Through this, teachers are provided with a reliable framework to structure their work and the children have a predictable order of activities which provides security in their learning environment. The following table (→ table 7) illustrates a standard structure of how the morning routine may be divided up by a preschool teacher. As teachers have autonomy over their morning routine, the structured time remains flexible in the planning and varies in order and length. Classroom management is part of the half hour allocated time slots, such as setting up the circle or lining up at the door to go to the gym. As preschool teachers share the gym, they have to coordinate their times together; therefore, their timetables remain flexible to accommodate each other. The following table represents a standard structure of a morning routine in preschool. 7: 00 → 8: 30 / 9: 00 Free play 8: 30 / 9: 00 → 10: 30 Snack time (morning tea) Storytelling Circle time (a time for storytelling, projects) Craft activities Movement in the gym 10: 30 - 12: 00 Time outside, Morning children 4 are picked up 11: 15 The first group of children go to lunch. There may be two or three groups, depending on how many children are there for lunch. 12: 00 - 17: 00 Afternoon children 5 stay in preschool with no particular program. They have rest-time and a snack in the middle of the afternoon and spend time outside. Table 7: An example of a standard structure of a morning routine in preschool 168 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="168"?> The morning routine begins at 7: 00 am with free play that continues until 8: 30 / 9: 00 am. During this time, the children are in their various group rooms where they are free to play without instruction from the preschool teachers. The preschool teacher is there to assist and supervise if necessary, but she does not interfere with what the children select to play within free play. These activities include drawing and doing craft activities, games, looking at books (which the preschool teacher may read to them), building with blocks, playing with cars, dressing-up, role-play and listening to songs on a CD and singing along. The children may also go to the gym during this time. The structured programme starts with tidying up shortly before 8: 30 / 9: 00 am and continues until about 11: 00 am. It ends with the children going outside (when the weather permits): - snack time or morning tea takes place in children’s individual group rooms, where the opportunity is taken to encourage the children to acquire social eating manners; - storytelling is not only a part of circle time but may have its own allocated time in the routine. It is a time when the whole group comes together to listen to a story read by the teacher. Storytelling appeals to the children’s imagination and provides an ever-ready source for discussion. It is often used for a linguistic or a current thematic purpose. It develops listening and speaking skills and therefore is one of the main support systems to language learning and gives the children a sense of self-awareness and promotes intercultural learning; - circle time is the time in which the children come together to listen to stories, chant rhymes, sing songs and play games all of which are purposefully designed to support and advance the children’s learning. In circle time, as its name implies, the children form a circle of chairs or form a circle sitting on the floor and give their attention to the teacher to see what she has planned to offer them. It is a well-established part of the routine for concentrating and learning, the children associate it with sitting quietly, listening, focusing and responding. The concept of circle time is to promote the children’s learning through capturing their interest and stimulating their curiosity for various topics, within their real or imaginary worlds, as well as to encourage self-awareness and develop social skills. Topics vary widely, ranging from friendships, feelings, food, animals, celebrations or the seasons to wider themes such as learning about children around the world in cultural projects, caring for their environment or being interested in geographical conditions such as the ocean, the jungle or the mountains. In addition to the real world, there 169 6.2 Sampling <?page no="169"?> 6 When Marie left the preschool a year before the project finished, she was replaced by Kathie is the ever-absorbing world of fantasy which is included. Circle time has an allocated time of about half an hour, but it may vary depending on the preschool teacher’s plans or dispositions of the children; - craft activities involve the children using their fine motor skills by drawing, painting, using scissors and glue. They may design a card for special occasions or cut out snowflakes to decorate the room to support the theme of winter. This is a time for the children to enjoy being artistically creative; - in gymnastics or sports the children develop their cross-motor skills, learning to coordinate their bodies and overcome fears of trying some‐ thing new. For example, the preschool teachers set up hindrance courses in the gym where the children crawl through tunnels and slide down, walk on or jump over obstacles. They also play ball and movement games. One day a week the morning is allocated for excursions. The children have snack time first and then leave at 9: 00 am. Usually the excursion is to one of the playgrounds in the area, to a museum or they go for a nature walk in the woods. Within the morning routine, there are three on-going projects, including the teacher education project of the study that is presented here: 1. The first is the teacher education project that takes place through participatory demonstration lessons (→ chapter 5.7.1) and the teachers’ independent practical work (→ chapter 5.7.3). The following table (→ table 8) indicates how the participatory demonstration lessons fit into the preschool timetable (the table is also included in chapter 5.7.1). As I have commented above, the structured time remains flexible. Time in the rou‐ tine Marie / Kathie 6 (participants) Nadia (participant) Betty (participant) 8: 30 Snack time Free play Free play 9: 00 Circle time: partici‐ patory demonstration lesson Snack time Free play Storytelling Snack time Free play Storytelling 170 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="170"?> 7 www.stadt-salzburg.at/ internet/ leben_in_salzburg/ integration/ rucksack.htm 8 The names of the participating preschool teachers and the head of the preschool have been changed for data protection reasons. 9: 40 Free play Movement in the gym Circle time: partici‐ patory demonstration lesson Free play Movement in the gym 10: 20 Movement in the gym Time outside Movement in the gym Time outside Circle time: partici‐ patory demonstration lesson Time outside Table 8: An example of a rotation system to accommodate the participatory demonstra‐ tion lessons 2. The second project is German as a second language which is taught by the head of the preschool as well as a visiting German teacher. Children are taken out of the morning routine and are taught in small groups for about half an hour on a daily basis. 3. The last project offered by the preschool is The Rucksack Project which is an intercultural initiative organised by the city of Salzburg involving both language acquisition and social integration for the children and their parents. 7 6.2.4 Profiles of participating preschool teachers The preschool teaching staff consisted of the head of the preschool, three full-time preschool teachers, and their assistants. The preschool teachers who qualify as individual case studies (see third level of the case study above) were Nadia (→ chapter 6.2.4.2), Marie (→ chapter 6.2.4.3), Betty (→ chapter 6.2.4.4) and Kathie who replaced Marie (→ chapter 6.2.4.5). 8 Each preschool teacher was responsible for a particular group of children. They all spoke German as their native language. As has been said in describing what would qualify as appropriate sample, the teachers as individuals represented a cross section of personalities, ages, background experiences, levels of communicative English language competence and teaching styles all of which would enable transferability of results to practice contexts with similar features (→ chapter 6.2). The descriptions of profiles are based on data collected from individual personal interviews and from my own observation notes which I collected 171 6.2 Sampling <?page no="171"?> during the pilot phase of the study (survey of data collection → chapter 6.3). A survey that describes the profile of participating preschool teachers as a community of practice will be provided followed by profiles of the individual preschool teachers. Individual teachers’ profiles will be structured as follows: 1. Initial attitudes towards introducing English in their groups. What were the participants’ initial attitudes towards introducing English? 2. Background experiences in teaching English. What initial experiences (knowledge and skills) did the teachers have in the field of teaching English? 3. Communicative English language competence. What level of communicative English language competence did partici‐ pating preschool teachers have? 6.2.4.1 Survey of participating preschool teachers as a community of practice All of the participating preschool teachers had an empathetic and caring relationship with their children, both collectively and individually. They were able to communicate While they all qualified to have these basic pedagogical competences that are required to teach young children, each teacher conducted her classroom-learning environment according to her own style of teaching and the dynamics of her particular group. at the level of very young children with sensitivity, that is, they listened patiently and gave thoughtful responses. They created a secure, safe environment and had a positive attitude towards their teaching responsibilities, which they fulfilled efficiently and conscien‐ tiously. While they all qualified to have these basic pedagogical competences, which are required to teach young children, each teacher conducted her classroom-learning environment according to her own style of teaching and the dynamics of her particular group. At the beginning, the preschool teachers shared the prevailing attitude of other teachers in the questionnaire (→ chapter 3): they all supported the concept of early language learning and thought the introduction of English was a good idea in principle, but in practice they were reluctant to implement it in their context. This was due to their concern that their preschool had a high percentage of children who were learning German as a second language and consequently the children would need to develop their German competence first. Taking part in the English teaching process proved to be a challenge for the preschool teachers. Despite their general knowledge of didactics and methodology from their actual preschool teacher education, they lacked any 172 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="172"?> idea of how to implement English systematically in their preschool and did not have any substantial practical experience in the field. Only a few English songs had been included in their preschool programme every now and again. Their English education ranged from one participant having minimal in‐ struction of two years of English educationto the other participants having received eight years of English education at secondary school, who graduated with the A-level certificate, which is a matriculation qualification to entitle university access (equals Abitur in Germany, → chapter 2.2.3). The two tables below present an overview of the preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence. The categorization of competence levels is not based on any formal language tests that were administered before, during or after the project had been completed but is based on teachers’ selfassessment and my observations of their competences during the project. Table 9 is based on teachers’ self-assessment and comprises four competence levels. Table 10 is based on data that I have collected both through teachers’ self-assessment during interview sessions and my observations during the morning routines. Table 11 lists the competence descriptors that I have used for table 10. Competence levels were simplified and comprise three levels ranging from low to medium to high. They are structured following the competence areas required to teach English to preschool children. I classified the dimensions of teachers’ communicative English language competence following existing descriptors (Council of Europe, 2001, pp. 28-29; Council of Europe, 2000, n.p.; self-assessment grid), then simplified them using the data that was available for my sample. I added a descriptor to evaluate teachers’ competence to speak English confidently as being fundamental to manage task-based language teaching in preschool. This process of categorizing the communicative English language competence of preschool teachers resulted in the following competence areas: the ability to use English confidently, skills of oral comprehension and of oral interaction (aspects: responsiveness and fluency). The following grid concludes by noting the formal English language qualifications of participating preschool teachers. 173 6.2 Sampling <?page no="173"?> Compe‐ tence Competence descriptors Teachers Evaluation not at all true slightly true quite true true Confidence to speak The teacher was confi‐ dent to speak English. Nadia ✓ Marie ✓ Betty ✓ Kathie ✓ The teacher was pleased to have the opportunities to speak English and communi‐ cated in English to me happily. Nadia ✓ Marie ✓ Betty ✓ Kathie ✓ The teacher was confi‐ dent and felt comfort‐ able to carry out an interview while being recorded. Nadia ✓ Marie ✓ Betty ✓ Kathie ✓ Oral compre‐ hension The teacher was confi‐ dent in her oral com‐ prehension of English. She did not feel that she had any problems in this area. The teacher could understand extended speech on familiar topics. Nadia ✓ Marie ✓ Betty ✓ Kathie ✓ Oral interac‐ tion: respon‐ siveness The teacher felt confi‐ dent that she could an‐ swer questions to ex‐ press her opinions and thoughts in English. She could interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that made regular interac‐ tion possible. She could take an active part in Nadia ✓ Marie ✓ Betty ✓ Kathie ✓ 174 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="174"?> discussion in familiar contexts accounting for and sustaining her views. Oral interac‐ tion: fluency She felt confident to speak to me without looking for words and without switching back to German. She could present clear, detailed descriptions on a wide range of subjects related to her fields of interest. Nadia ✓ Marie ✓ Betty ✓ Kathie ✓ Formal quali‐ fication Secondary school edu‐ cation, rewarded with the higher school cer‐ tificate of A-Levels: A matriculation quali‐ fication to entitle uni‐ versity access. Nadia ✓ Marie ✓ Betty ✓ Kathie ✓ Table 9: Descriptors of preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence levels based on teachers’ self-assessment English competences Nadia Marie Betty Kathie The ability to use English confi‐ dently Medium Medium Low High Their skills of comprehension High High High High Oral interaction: responsiveness High High Low High Oral interaction: fluency Medium Medium Low High Accuracy Medium Medium Low High Table 10: Descriptors of preschool teachers’ communicative English language compe‐ tence levels based on teacher educator’s observations. Summary of participating teachers’ English competence levels 175 6.2 Sampling <?page no="175"?> Competences Competence descriptors Note: In the following they refers to participating teachers, I refers to the teacher educator. The ability to use English confidently High They were confident to speak the language and enjoy the opportunity to do so. Me‐ dium They were not confident to speak English, but were happy to use English when they talk to me. Low They were not confident to speak English and do not speak it, except for a few learnt language chunks. Oral compre‐ hension High I could conduct the interviews in English without interrup‐ tions to explain myself. I did not need to consider choosing vocabulary to help in comprehension. Me‐ dium I could conduct the interviews in English, with only a few interruptions to explain words. Nevertheless, I did not need to consider choosing vocabulary to help in comprehension. Low I had to speak German some of the time and translate what I was saying. Oral interac‐ tion: respon‐ siveness High They answered in English consistently to all of my ques‐ tions. They did not have a problem to be recorded for the research data. Me‐ dium They answered in English consistently, but relied on code-switching as help strategy to get their message across. They did not have a problem to be recorded for the research data. Low They did not answer in English but responded in German throughout. Oral interac‐ tion: fluency High They communicated with me without looking for words and without switching back to German. Me‐ dium They did not have to interrupt communication when talking to me when they needed to look for words every now and again and switch back to German occasionally. Low They did not speak English during communication. Table 11: Descriptors of competence levels grouped in high - medium - low The following chapters will portray individual participating preschool teachers’ profiles. 176 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="176"?> 9 Betty was talking about the participatory demonstration lessons becoming loud because the children wanted to show me what they knew, which prompted her to say this comment. 10 Nadia was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. 6.2.4.2 Nadia’s profile Nadia completed her preschool education at the BAfEP school in Salzburg (→ chapter 2.2.3) and had more than ten years of preschool teaching experience. She was in her mid-thirties. Nadia’s style of teaching was conducted strictly according to her plans in a quiet, efficient and orderly learning environment. “Die sind wahrscheinlich braver oben, bei der Nadia. Die Kinder sind glaube ich braver. Sie sind ruhiger im Morgenkreis. Also unsere sind schon lebhafter. Nadia ist schon streng” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 9 The children did not influence her general plans. Betty once commented that if Nadia goes to the playground because the children want to play football, then they play football. She does not change her mind if they all want to play on the swings and slide instead; but her decision is made with the knowledge that the children love playing football and only need to start to play to become involved. She had a calm temperament with the children and never raised her voice. By addressing the children individually and sensitively, she quickly dealt with any disturbance gently but firmly without allowing the situations to escalate. The children responded to her immediately. She had a good rapport with her group. A quiet relaxed atmosphere was important to her. In free play she set the atmosphere by soft music playing in the background. 1. Nadia’s initial attitude towards introducing English in her group When asked whether she thought the children would benefit from learning English as a foreign language, Nadia expressed her concern about introducing English in a mixed age group, saying that it was of benefit to those children who were older and already were familiar with the German language but that she expected that it would be difficult for the youngest ones with little or no German: “Es ist eine Bereicherung für eben ältere Kinder. Kinder die auch schon in der deutschen Sprache Erfahrungen haben” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 10 177 6.2 Sampling <?page no="177"?> 11 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? 12 Nadia was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. Nadia explained her positive attitude towards the children learning languages at an early age by saying that the children learn naturally in a playful way and will benefit later in school from the experience: “I think the children are open-minded and the more languages [that] they get to know, the better. They are able to learn it [at] this age until 6 years. It’s just learning like, like playing. It’s not learning vocabulary. They learn it [by doing it]: learning by doing [through] books and games and songs. Ja, sie sind es dann gewohnt auch weiter Sprachen zu lernen und dann auch für die Schule. Like music each language has its own sound and that’s what I think when they get to school it’s normal to repeat and play with other languages. So, they get to know it in the kindergarten and they are open-minded to get to know new things. I think it is right” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 11 On the one hand, Nadia wanted to introduce her children to English, but on the other hand she was well aware of the necessity to learn German and therefore considered if children should not learn German first. When asked about her opinion on the commonly heard statement: Die Kinder sollen zuerst Deutsch lernen, Nadia found herself to be in a dilemma to respond that she could not resolve at first: Would she subscribe to the idea of early language learning in general or would she agree that specifically English would be beneficial for the children. In the end she felt learning German was more important: “It’s difficult to say, because of course children are here to learn German, because they need it for school and their lives. … They also have to learn English in the [sic] school later on. So, it is also important, I think. What should I say? Young children like Schirra, she’s three years old and she doesn’t speak German, because she speaks Turkish. Of course, it’s important for her to learn German. It’s very [utterance] difficult” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 12 In the end she could resolve her dilemma: she argued that as long as the children enjoy the experience of learning the language, one cannot be wrong. Her contemplation showed that she reflected on her thoughts to be open-minded about the idea of the younger children joining in: 178 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="178"?> 13 Nadia was asked comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: on: An additional language would burden many children, because preschool life is challenging enough for them. 14 I started to talk to Nadia about her reflecting on her teaching, which prompted her to say this comment. 15 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? 16 Nadia was asked to comment on: Before the project, did you integrate English in your group? Did you do English with the children? 17 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you know the project ‘Kindergarten means English’? It was an initiative of the city of Salzburg to integrate English in preschool. Nadia is referring to the time of this initiative. “Ich denke, wenn die Kinder Freude daran haben, dann kann man nichts falsch machen. Wenn auch junge Kinder Freude an der Sprache haben, oder? Wichtig ist die Freude an der Sprache” (Nadia, 26.03.15: Int. 2). 13 2. Nadia’s background experiences in teaching English Nadia had completed a university early language learning course for German at the Pädagogische Hochschule, Salzburg: Universitätslehrgang frühe sprachliche Förderung Deutsch. Nevertheless, she felt that she did not know how to teach a foreign language and had no formal education to teach English: “Wenn man nicht weiß, wie man es umsetzen soll, wie soll man es machen? ” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 14 Despite this comment, she did have a sense of how to teach languages to children implicitly: “It’s just learning like, like play. It’s not learning vocabulary. They learn it [by doing it]: learning by doing [through] books and games and songs” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 15 Nadia had already sung some English songs with her children and had taught them a few words, but she knew that integrating English involved more than only singing a few songs and learning words every now and again: “Of course, like ‘If You’re Happy and You Know It’ or ‘Itzy Bitzy Spider’ [two popular children’s action songs] eben auch in snack time, [I said] fruit and vegetables in different languages, but also sometimes in English” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 16 “You can sing ‘If You’re Happy and You Know It’, in the morning circle, but that’s not a project. We tried to make some games and songs in English, but that is not a project like you make it [sic]” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 17 179 6.2 Sampling <?page no="179"?> 18 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you teach through sequencing, building up activities, step by step? I asked Nadia this question after she had confidently said that she sang some songs and taught some words. 19 Nadia was speaking German to me before the lesson; therefore, I reminded her and told her I would always speak English to her especially because I wanted the children to hear me only speaking English. This prompted her to say this comment. 20 Nadia wanted to talk about integrating English into her daily routine. Through her efforts to integrate English and her considerations of what it entailed she showed interest and initiative to try to implement it prior to the research project. Nadia was well aware that she needed experience of how to integrate English systematically through task sequencing. She did not lack the confidence to learn how to do it. Her main concern was that she needed a collection of materials in order for this process to be supported: “Nein, so weit bin ich noch nicht, dass ich es sequenzmäßig machen kann. I have to learn it and I have not [sic] this Fülle an Liedern oder so, damit man zu bestimmten Themen das und das finden kann. We have ‘If You’re Happy and You Know It’. [We have] a few songs and games, but not this [possibility that] you can put this and this [together] for spring. So viel haben wir einfach nicht, dass ich sagen kann, ‘Ich nehme alles zum Herbst [oder] alles zum Frühling’, oder so. Kann ich leider nicht” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 18 3. Nadia’s communicative English language competence Nadia had her A-levels in English. She was confident in her English comprehen‐ sion and could understand me well. She was less confident in speaking, saying that she occasionally needed to find the right words and wanted to know if she was allowed to use code-switching as a support strategy when communicating in English with me: “I like it to hear English because I learn. Ich verstehe besser als ich spreche. Verstehen tue ich gut, nur ich mixe die Sprachen immer untereinander … wenn das nicht stört. Wir können gerne Englisch reden, nur dann sage ich manches auf Deutsch, weil es mir auf Englisch nicht einfällt, wenn es dich nicht stört” (Nadia, 13.10.15: Int. 8). 19 She chose to speak German every now and again, because she felt she could then express herself better. Code-switching was a strategy she used regularly to support herself to communicate with me as the following example demonstrates: “I think what’s important in the practice, ich sag’s mal auf Deutsch, es fällt mir auf Englisch nicht ein …” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 20 180 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="180"?> 21 Nadia was not confident in her speaking skills, which prompted her to say this comment at the beginning of the interview. 22 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you feel about your English? 23 I went back to her room to confirm our meeting in the afternoon and commented that the morning was very busy, which prompted her to say this comment. “You can speak English, but I mix the languages. Sometimes I speak German. Sometimes I speak English” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 21 Nevertheless, she could converse spontaneously with me in English, speak to me at an even tempo, was able to express her point of view even if sometimes her chunks of language were not colloquial but literal translations from German to English (for example, to make English songs rather than to sing English songs). She was aware that her speaking skills were not perfect and encouraged me to correct her for them to develop: “My language is not so good: Wenig practice. Please, if I say something wrong, please correct me” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 22 6.2.4.3 Marie’s profile Marie completed her preschool education at the BAfEP school in Salzburg. She had ten years of work experience as a full-time preschool teacher when the research project started. She was in her late twenties. She was a confident preschool teacher who had a relaxed style: she was not concerned about the children’s noise level or restlessness and did not react immediately to disturbances: “Sorry, my group is pretty loud, isn’t it? I have lots of wild boys, but it’s okay for me. They are good kids. I want them to be themselves. That’s important. Children need to be themselves, especially in free play” (Marie, 10.11.15: int. 13). 23 Marie generally planned her morning routine, but she remained flexible. She was conscious of her heterogeneous group ranging from a group of quiet, shy girls to a group of quite loud boys. She strongly felt that children had to have a time during the morning to be themselves and allocated free play to be this time. In her room she had set up an area for the boys over in the far corner where they could be loud and boisterous. When it was necessary for her to intervene, the children responded quickly, without her raising her voice. She maintained a relaxed and friendly manner with the children and she was able to direct boisterous behaviour in a routined order when she required quiet concentration. She had a good rapport with the children. 181 6.2 Sampling <?page no="181"?> 24 Marie was asked to comment on: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? 25 Marie was asked to comment on: What was your attitude and now what are your thoughts towards the project? 26 Marie was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. 1. Marie’s initial attitude towards introducing English in her group When asked whether she thought the children would benefit from learning English, Marie responded with a general, positive comment: “Je früher man eine zweite Sprache lernt, desto leichter tut man sich. Sprachen sind der Schlüssel zur Weltkommunikation” (Marie, 27.03.15: int. 3). 24 Although Marie initially thought it would be good to introduce English into her group, she became less enthusiastic when she was considering the logistics of finding the time to integrate English in her already busy timetable: “At first when I heard of the project, I thought wow that would be great for the kids, because it is a chance to learn another language, to get new input, but on the other hand I was a little sceptical, because we have so many projects” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 25 But allocating time proved not to be her main issue. Marie represented preschool teachers who considered introducing English in a mixed age multilingual group too demanding and felt strongly that if children could not speak any German then they should not begin to learn English at the same time (→ chapter 3): “Manche Kinder die kein Deutsch sprechen, da sind wir schon froh wenn man sagt, zuerst am Anfang, ‘Ich muss auf die Toilette, es tut mir etwas weh.’ Wenn sie das einmal können, dann können wir natürlich mit Englisch anfangen. … Die einfachen Verständigungen meine ich damit, … wie: ich habe Durst, ich brauche ein Wasser, oder ich habe Hunger. Wenn die das können, sage ich, ‘dann Englisch’ - davor sage ich einfach nur eine Sprache. … Es geht wirklich nur um diesen Basiswortschatz” (Marie, 27.03.15: int. 3). 26 Her attitude was reinforced by her perception that it was too much for the younger children to learn yet another language, because they were too young to concentrate in her circle time, let alone in an English circle time during the participatory demonstration lessons. She also seemed to be uncertain if some children would benefit from learning English, because they did not respond orally and therefore there was no observable evidence that learning English had taken place: 182 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="182"?> 27 Marie was asked to comment on: Would you like to say anything before we start? 28 I reminded Marie of the fact that children need time before they are able to demonstrate what they have learnt in English and that a silent phase might still be evidence of Marie: They are really interested in it, but there are also some kids, it’s too much [for them], because they can’t talk [sic] German good [sic] enough, and then English [is introduced]. It’s another language they don’t understand, so they just sit here and sie starren. Teacher educator (TE): And if there are children who are staring and not taking part, this may mean that it happens later on. But it may still be taken in. Don’t you think? Marie: I don’t know, because they don’t speak German and now it’s March and they are here since September. … It’s too difficult. I mean, Selma is a small girl and Belma is also a small girl. For the kids that are bigger, the older ones, it’s okay, but [for] the younger ones, like the two girls, it’s too much. TE: When you say, ‘too much’, what do you mean? Marie: Too much, I mean that the small kids just sit here. They don’t learn German either. They just sit here and here. Sie lernen es nicht. Sie sind in einer anderen Welt (Marie, 27.03.15: int. 3). 27 Marie did not believe that the younger children could learn any English. This worried her because she was under the impression that teaching a foreign language to the children in circle time meant that they were to be actively involved in learning the language at all times. She could see no sense for the children who she thought were ‘just sitting there’ and not benefiting from the exposure to the new language. It was obvious that she was not familiar with knowledge in early language acquisition where silent phases are quite common. Only when she had learnt through theoretical input that children learn languages tacitly was she reassured that being exposed to English might not be too demanding for the children. They were enjoying the English activities - even if they were not responding. She came to understand that the children learn at their own pace and that the younger children benefit from peer group learning with the more mature children, learning by listening and watching the older children joining in. Only then did she become aware that it was not expected that the children were to perform or that their English competences would be assessed, for example. It was from then on that she started to cautiously challenge her previous assumptions and was prepared to offer English to all the children in her group: “Yes, yes, it is okay. Now I know they don’t have to learn things. So, it’s okay for me, but when I know they should learn the things, I think it’s [too much]. When you say it is okay, then it’s also okay for me. In German [they] also sit [there] and listen” (Marie, 27.03.15: int. 3). 28 183 6.2 Sampling <?page no="183"?> learning taking place. I continued by asking her if she could imagine integrating English to all the children in her group. 29 Marie was asked to comment on: Before the project, did you integrate English in your group? Did you do English with the children? 30 Marie was asked to comment on: Would you like to say anything before we start? She expressed her concern about the expectations that may be put onto the children. Even though Marie now understood the theory and how it related to the English lessons her original attitude proved to be rather hard to shake as it had developed from the experiences that she had with her children finding it very difficult to learn German as a second language. It was going to take more than one discussion with me for her to be able to completely re-assess her attitude. 2. Marie’s background experiences in teaching English Before the teacher education project began, Marie did not have any experience in teaching English. She had only sung one or two songs in English. “Not really. Just one song - ‘Head and Shoulders’, just 2 songs but not more” (Marie, 27.03.15: int. 3). 29 She did not have any idea of how languages are learnt in a systematic and organised ‘lesson’ situation. Her images of language teaching made her assume that the children would need to learn vocabulary. She associated the idea of ‘teaching English through lessons’ with expectations and achievements and not with a relaxed, playful atmosphere that would not burden children: TE: They take it in too, but not in a way that they ever feel that they have to learn English. Marie: So, it’s not a problem when the younger ones don’t remember …? TE: No, furthermore they are probably taking it in without us noticing it. Marie: At what age should they learn the words in English? TE: It is not about learning words at any particular age. At some stage they will start understanding and join in (Marie, 27.03.15: int. 3). 30 After observing the teaching in action in the first participatory demonstration lessons, Marie did realise that teaching English in preschool takes place in a playful way, which was quite different to her secondary school English learning experiences, which she had initially transferred to what preschool English learning would involve (e.g., learning words, participating orally, involving competence assessment). Therefore, she felt it would take some years before she would become competent to design and sequence preschool tasks. She felt that they required imagination and creativity on her behalf to be able to design 184 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="184"?> 31 Marie was asked to comment on: Do you think you will be able to develop ideas and sequencing? 32 Marie was asked to comment on: Do you feel confident to speak English? 33 Betty was asked to comment on: What has motivated you during the project? them in a playful way. Responding to whether she thought she would be able to develop ideas and sequence tasks one day she answered: “Maybe in some years, but not now, because I have to look to [sic] your lessons and learn much [sic] how to do it, because you don’t make [sic] a lesson like in [secondary] school. You make [sic] it spielerisch and so I have to learn a lot for myself how to do it. Now I have too zu wenig Ideen wie ich es machen soll” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 31 3. Marie’s communicative English language competence Marie had her A-levels in English. She was competent in comprehending English and she spoke English to me during the morning and throughout the interviews, although she was not overly confident in her speaking skills. She was undecided when asked to comment on the quality of her communicative English language competence and felt that she did not manage to use English in a consistently good way: “Sometimes it is okay for some things, but then I think, ‘Mein Gott! My English is the worst ever’” (Marie, 27.03.15: int. 3). 32 She may have lacked the routine exposure to English and to communicating in English that contributed to her uncertainty. When she spoke English, she lapsed back into German occasionally for words she did not know; but she did not have difficulties finding words to express her point of view. Her English was not always accurate, but she managed to communicate effectively what she wanted to say. 6.2.4.4 Betty’s profile Betty completed her preschool education in Germany and was always dedicated to her profession. “Mein Beruf ist für mich Leidenschaft” (Betty, 07.06.17: int 33). 33 She was the most senior member of the team and was in her early sixties. Betty’s style of teaching was one of spontaneity and complete flexibility as she adjusted her plans to match the children’s responses and preferences. She was guided largely by their dispositions and their reactions and was therefore dedicated to observing the children’s interests and capabilities. If the children showed lack of interest, she concluded that it was because of the topic which did not interest them and therefore she changed it immediately, discarding her prepared work: 185 6.2 Sampling <?page no="185"?> 34 Betty said that she was only enthusiastic about something when the children were, which prompted her to say this comment. 35 Betty was asked to comment on: Would you prepare compete lessons like this again? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). 36 Betty was talking about the participatory demonstration lessons becoming loud because the children wanted to show me what they knew, which prompted her to say this comment. “Wir fangen mal an. Wir beobachten die Kinder. Es gehört eigentlich zu meiner Arbeit. … Wir beginnen mit der Arbeit und wenn [wir] jetzt zwischendurch aber bemerken, die Kinder interessiert das nicht mehr, dann ist die Vorbereitung umsonst, dann schwenken wir um auf das Thema, das die Kinder interessiert” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 34 Betty gave the children a certain amount of autonomy to decide what they would like to do rather than insisting on what was to take place, which created a busy and enthusiastic learning environment that seemed to fully accommodate the disposition of her group: “Ich bin überhaupt nicht die Planerin. Ich achte immer. Ich schaue immer was brauchen die Kinder heute - wie sind sie jetzt gerade darauf ? Soll man jetzt nach draußen gehen oder lieber eine Geschichte erzählen? ” (Betty, 21.03.16: Int. 20). 35 It was important to Betty that the children were lively and free to do what they felt and suited their needs. She made a clear distinction between preschool and primary school classroom behaviour here, saying that in preschool it should not be expected that the children always sit quietly and raise their hands like in primary school. She was, on the contrary, concerned about the children who were quiet: she thought she needed to involve the quiet children more instead of keeping the children quiet: “Die ruhigen Kinder, die sind für mich wesentlich auffälliger als die die immer etwas sagen wollen. Dies ist noch ein elementarer Bereich, sie müssen nicht ständig sitzen und die Hände hoch geben. [Ich] denke mir, es passt auch nicht, meiner Meinung [nach]” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 36 1. Betty’s initial attitude towards introducing English in her group When asked whether she thought that introducing English is beneficial or not, Betty answered positively, stating that the children learn a language quickly at this age and are open-minded: 186 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="186"?> 37 Betty was asked to comment on: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? 38 Betty was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. 39 I was talking to Betty about ideas that we could do in her group. I commented that I was impressed by her enthusiasm, which prompted her comment. “Das sehen wir als Vorteil, ja. Warum ist es von Vorteil? Weil die Kinder sehr schnell lernen, in dem Alter. Sie sind einfach offen dafür” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 37 In practice though she did share the general attitude of being reluctance to introduce English because only two children in her group spoke German as their native language at the beginning of the project. She was therefore very sceptical of the idea of introducing English into her group: “Also, bis für kurzem hätte ich noch gedacht, wenn wir Englisch anbieten überfordert es unsere Kinder. Ich habe gedacht, ‘Super, wir machen jetzt Englisch [sarcastically]. Einundzwanzig Kinder können nicht einmal Deutsch und wir fangen jetzt mit Englisch an’. Ich war sehr, sehr skeptisch” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 38 As ‘Betty’s plans’ generally responded to the children’s perceived needs, her attitude towards any project or programme was formed by observing the children: “Wenn ich nicht begeistert bin kann ich das nicht weiter geben was ich mache. Ich bin auch oft erst begeistert, wenn ich merke die Kinder springen an” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 39 2. Betty’s background experiences in teaching English Betty had never taught English before. Rather than addressing her lack of knowledge and skills in teaching English in interviews, it was her main concern that her English was generally not good enough to teach it. When asked whether she would teach English she immediately answered that it would burden her due to her very low communicative English language competence and that she would not be able to do it on her own. Betty also felt not confident in her capabilities to develop ideas and prepare for the lessons: “Oh, mich würde es belasten [Englisch im Kindergarten zu unterrichten]! … Ich alleine würde es nicht können. Das glaube ich nicht. Dafür spreche ich nicht gut genug Englisch. … Weil ich nicht so gut sprechen kann, würde ich es mir nicht zutrauen. Wenn ich das so vorgemacht bekomme - ich bin begeistert von diesem Buch, ’The very hungry caterpillar’. Finde ich super, aber ich wäre von alleine nicht darauf gekommen, das mit den Kindern zu machen. Oder was du uns vorbereitet hast, das ’Dark, Dark 187 6.2 Sampling <?page no="187"?> 40 Betty was asked to comment on: If you were asked to teach English in preschool, without the project how would you feel? 41 Betty told me that she had not started with many phrases because she wanted to make sure she said them correctly, which prompted her to say this comment. 42 Betty was talking about her English competence. I commented that she understood me well, which prompted her to say this comment. 43 Betty wanted to integrate more English through chunks of language, which prompted her to say this comment. House’ - das finde ich ganz toll, aber ich weiß nicht ob ich das könnte” (Betty, 23.05.15: int. 1). 40 Although Betty felt that she could develop more confidence if she had a role-model to follow, she was not convinced that she could take over what she observed and integrate it in her repertoire of teaching. 3. Betty’s communicative English language competence Betty’s comprehension of English was good. She could understand me well. However, she did not have any confidence to speak English. Consequently, she only spoke German to me during the interviews: “Ich glaube das Verstehen ist nicht unbedingt das Problem, es ist das Sprechen. Diese Überwindung: sprich Englisch. Ich glaube es ist schwierig” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 41 “Manchmal höre ich einfach Predigten die über Internet übertragen werden, ich verstehe nicht alles aber den Rest reim ich einfach zusammen. Aber je mehr ich höre, desto mehr, denke ich mir, verstehe ich, nur sprechen, das ist dann schwierig” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 42 “Ich kann denken in Englisch. Ich kann was ich jetzt sage im Englischen denken, aber das Aussprechen, das ist was ganz anders” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 43 Betty learnt English only in her last two year at secondary school. She spoke English using chunks of language that she knew, but she was not able to speak spontaneously. 6.2.4.5 Kathie’s profile Kathie completed her preschool education at the BAfEP school in Salzburg in 2013. Before she started work at this preschool, Kathie had worked for two years in a preschool with a similar multilingual profile. She was in her early twenties and was the youngest of the participating teachers. Kathie joined the preschool to replace Marie and therefore took part in the project for the last two semesters. She fitted in her team well and was eager to become part of the project. Her style of teaching was energetic, enthusiastic and 188 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="188"?> 44 Kathie was asked to comment on: How do you bring English into your routine? 45 Kathie was pleased that one of her children was saying words in English instead of German, which prompted her to say this comment. confident. She had a good rapport with the children and she capably took over Marie’s group of somewhat exuberant children with a friendly but firm manner, which the children responded happily to without any adjustment problems. In free play, the children played quietly in her room. When she did not have to prepare or organise something for the day, Kathie played the guitar and sang to provide a relaxed, playful atmosphere. She did not play with the children, but if they did not know what to do, she made suggestions. Kathie was well organised in her room and planned her circle times from beginning to end, but she had a certain degree of flexibility in her concept of time. Her moment for starting circle time was not necessarily dictated by the time on the clock, but rather by what was happening in her room. If the children became restless or wanted her to play with them, she would decide whether it was a good moment to start her circle time: “… I think it is important that they play on their own in free play. If they want me [to play with them] then that is a signal to start my circle time” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 44 She was quite decisive in her plans. Once she had decided what was going to happen, she continued consistently but in a relaxed manner; that is, she neither put herself under time pressure, for example to tidy up quickly, nor did she raise her voice with the children. 1. Kathie’s initial attitude towards introducing English in her group Kathie had a positive attitude towards introducing English in preschool: “I think it is a very important language, also for the later life and I think from the beginning on it is important that children learn other languages” (Kathie, 08.06.17 Int. 34). 45 She was pleased that the preschool was offering English, because she enjoyed speaking English and had wanted to include it in her programme in her previous preschool, but English teaching was not permitted there: “I think the project is great for the children. I always wanted to do English with my children. I wasn’t allowed to. … I was in a kindergarten for about two years and we 189 6.2 Sampling <?page no="189"?> 46 Kathie was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. 47 Kathie was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. 48 Kathie was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. didn’t talk English [sic], because the head of the kindergarten didn’t like English and so she said to us, ‘No English in my kindergarten’” (Kathie, 21.10. 16: int. 25). 46 Although Kathie had been eager to introduce English, she admitted that she was a little sceptical when she first heard that there was an English project taking place for the entire preschool to include all the children, because she was well aware of the issues in preschools where learning German as a second language had to be a top priority: “How should I say it? First of all, I was a little bit skeptisch [TE: sceptical], yes, sceptical when so many children don’t speak German and everybody is doing it. But when I saw you the first time, it was great” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 47 Despite this concern, and perhaps influenced by her newly gained experiential knowledge of teaching English, Kathie continued her thoughts by saying that integrating English in preschool was a good preparation for English in primary school. Through her own experience of talking to parents she found English valuable for the children to learn because it is a lingua franca and supported the practice of children learning both German and English together: “I think English is very important for the children because they learn it also in school. So, they learn it now in the kindergarten and I think it would be easier for them. What should they learn first: German or English? I think both. Because German we speak all around us, in Austria where we live. But we also need English because I can’t speak to her mother (pointing to a child). I don’t know African. She also speaks English, so I can understand her, when she speaks English and when I also speak English we can communicate together. So, when the children learn English they can communicate with other children” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 48 She confirmed her thoughts about learning both languages at the same time by noting that many preschools offered various projects and therefore she saw no reason why a preschool should not choose an English project. Nevertheless, she was aware of the potential difficulties of very young multilingual children needing to learn two or three languages at the same time: 190 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="190"?> 49 Kathie was asked her opinion on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: An additional language would burden many children, because preschool life is challenging enough for them. 50 Kathie was asked to comment on: Did you do the extra subject ‘Englisch im Kindergarten: Impulse zum interkulturellen Lernen’? 51 Kathie was asked to comment on: If I weren’t here, would you have started English - if Bianca said to you that your English was good and she would like you to do English in your group? “I think the children of today, they have to learn so many things, so why shouldn’t they learn English. There are so many projects, also in this kindergarten, where I say, ‘No’, [to them], but English, it is fun for them, they love it. They can learn for their life. But I also think that it is difficult for some children, they have three languages. Maybe they speak German then Turkish, so they have to learn English also. I think for these children it is a little bit difficult” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 49 2. Kathie’s background experiences in teaching English Kathie had some English teaching education. The secondary school offering preschool education (BAfEP) provided a one-year optional subject called ‘Eng‐ lish in Kindergarten’ in the second year of her education. She was 15 years old at the time. She was not impressed by the course, because she felt that the approach of lecturing about how to teach English in preschool without involving any practical work would not prepare her to actually teach English: “… There was a subject in the second year: ‘English in Kindergarten’. It was, I think, about 3 hours a week and so we learnt also ‘How can we teach English to children? ’ but it was only for one year. … We didn’t learn a lot. It was a little bit boring for us. The teacher stood in front of us and talked and talked and talked, but we didn’t have any praxis. … We only sat at our tables and listened to the teacher. … I didn’t know how to teach children English. It was really difficult for me to learn anything. But then you came along” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 50 On the one hand Kathie remarked that she would not be afraid to teach English, as some others might be, because she was confident in her communicative English language competence but on the other hand when she was specifically asked if she would have started to teach English on her own, her lack of English teaching skills made her feel unsure: “I think [long pause], I also think I would be afraid of the lessons, because I haven’t any Erfahrung, experience, and so I don’t know how to teach and so I think I would be afraid that I might make a mistake. So, I would ask some people who speak English very good [sic] to teach me. Wenn ich noch keine Erfahrung hätte, dann würde ich irgendeine erfahrene Person um Rat fragen. I think it is difficult” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 51 191 6.2 Sampling <?page no="191"?> 52 Kathie was asked to comment on: How would you do English if we hadn’t met? 53 Kathie was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement connection with introducing English in preschool: An additional language would burden many children, because preschool life is challenging enough for them. 54 Kathie knew I spoke English in the interviews, which prompted her to say this comment before we started. 55 Kathie was asked to comment on: Could you have imagined doing English before? ” “[If we hadn’t met] I wouldn’t do a full lesson, [I’d do] some songs and some phrases, but not a whole lesson” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 52 Even though Kathie had no experience in teaching English she was well aware that integrating English would have to take place in a playful way: “I think the children learn English in play [sic]. They play and this is the best teaching. Like you do [it]. … At school they sit at the table, look at the front and see the teacher and they only listen. I think this is the Unterschied zwischen Kindergarten and Schule” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 53 3. Kathie’s communicative English language competence Kathie had completed her matriculation certificate from secondary school, which included English (level B2). She enjoyed speaking English and was pleased to have the opportunity to use the language. She was confident in her speaking skills, conversing comfortably and fluently with me, albeit with some grammatical errors, occasionally confusing the words (e.g., say and talk) and sometimes she could not express what she intended to say altogether clearly. She enjoyed speaking English to the children and spoke easily and naturally to them: “It is no problem for me to speak English. I love English” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 54 Kathie: I think some people are afraid of it [to speak English]. [They think] that they will make mistakes to teach English in the kindergarten. Maybe their English isn’t very good so they may be a little bit afraid to teach English at their kindergarten. TE: But you don’t feel like that? Kathie: No (Kathie, 21.10.6: int. 25). 55 From the beginning, her confidence in her spoken language supported her to teach English to her group. From the profiles of participating teachers at the sample preschool, it became obvious that I would need to support teachers (by demonstrating examples of good practice and by integrating relevant theory) so that they would re-address their reluctant attitudes towards introducing another language in preschool. I would also need to support teachers to develop their English language 192 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="192"?> competence. But here, participating teachers are portrayed in detail primarily to clarify the context features of the sample preschool as processes and results of the teacher development project can only be understood with this background in mind. By describing “in fine detail the contexts in which the participants act … [helps] the reader of the report understand how the conclusions were drawn, adding to their trustworthiness” (Hood, 2009, p. 82; bold print in original). The next chapters will describe the research methodology of the teacher education study. They will discuss the procedure of data collection (→ chapters 6.3.1 - 6.3.2) and the way the data was organised and interpreted, and findings were presented (→ chapter 6.4). It will include a discussion of my triple role as a colleague (in teaching the children cooperatively), as an educator and as a researcher. It will focus on how this triple role affected the nature and quality of the data collection. 6.3 Data collection Data that is considered to be appropriate in case study research has been broadly characterized as “in-depth data collection” (Duff, 2008, p. 22). It is a defining feature of ethnographic research that is presented in a case study format which provides “a ‘thick description’ of the target culture, that is, a narrative that describes richly and in great detail the daily life of the community as well as the cultural meanings and beliefs the participants attach to their activities, events, and behaviours” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 130). But ‘thick description’ of data is not only a feature of ethnographic research, but a relevant quality criterion for qualitative case study design in general that uses an eclectic range of data collection techniques including participant and non‐ participant observation, … interviewing … [and], diary with field notes and journal entries. … These data are further supplemented by film or audio recordings as well as authentic documents and physical artefacts (and) structured questionnaires. (p. 130) For the purpose of the case study research presented here, data covers various sources that would ensure the provision of valid information to answer the research questions. Questions related to understanding the contextual factors that affect teaching English to children; to the development of the teachers’ English teaching competences both individually and as a social community of practice and to collecting data to enable evaluation of the appropriateness and potential of an English teacher education model that was tailored to meet the needs for the particular preschool context. Given the contextual constraints, it 193 6.3 Data collection <?page no="193"?> was paramount for the success of my study that data collection would fit into the daily routines of the participating preschool teachers who were involved. The question of appropriate data is closely linked to my role as researcher and teacher educator: To be a researcher or a practitioner is to belong to a group engaged in common practices whose members (in the ethnomethodological sense) construct between themselves a method of acting and thinking about their everyday affairs according to their own constraints and resources. (Savoie-Zajc & Descamps-Bednarz, 2007, p. 580) Through our approach of cooperative teaching, I became part of their team (→ chapter 7.3.2) which established a certain rapport of trust that helped maximise participating teachers’ truthfulness and trustworthiness towards me during the interviews. Teachers therefore did not say anything just to please me or to refrain from any negative thoughts that they wanted me not to hear (McKay, 2009, p. 226). This kind of trustful teacher - researcher rapport is essential for a study to yield valid data because “it is only the actual participants themselves who can reveal the meanings and interpretations of their experiences and actions” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 38): Qualitative research is concerned with subjective opinions, experiences and feelings of individuals and thus the explicit goal of research is to explore the participants’ views of the situation being studied. (p. 38) The data was collected throughout the two-and-a-half-year process of the teacher education project that was organised as participatory action research. The next chapter will therefore first provide a survey of the action research cycles and the related data collection that was involved during this long-term process. 6.3.1 Survey of the action research cycles and related data collection Data was collected throughout the teacher education project that was organised as participatory action research. In case study design there is no prescriptive catalogue of what qualifies as appropriate data but a researcher “will have to decide the types of data that are most relevant for [his or her] research and then choose appropriate methods for collecting them” (Hood, 2009, p. 74). Therefore, a survey of the action research cycles and a description of the purposes of each cycle (including the pilot study) (→ diagram 9) and a timeline of the cycles in the preschool year (→ figure 31) will precede the description of data which I 194 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="194"?> have collected in my research (→ chapter 6.3.2). Data will also be related to the research questions of my study. Figure 30: Diagram 9: The cycles of the research project 195 6.3 Data collection <?page no="195"?> Figure 31: Timeline of the cycles in the preschool year Piloting the teacher education research project: Identifying a represen‐ tative preschool sample, developing and testing an English course for the children, conceptualising the teacher education model and estab‐ lishing the research venue (07.10.13 to 29.06.15) In this phase the teacher education programme was conceptualized. This involved the identification of a multilingual inclusive state preschool that would qualify as representing both the population of children and the competences of preschool teachers at the time (→ chapter 3). It also comprised testing an English course for the children for its appropriateness for the state preschool children on the basis of previous tasks and materials which I had developed and evaluated in various other preschool contexts. These tasks and materials resulted from my preliminary work in connection with completing my master thesis, from my developing and empirically testing materials, activities and tasks to teach children both in my place of employment (a preschool teaching English through the immersion method) and in various state preschools in Salzburg. On the basis of this work, I designed a preschool English course for the children which I then tested in a state preschool during this pilot phase which had equivalent features to the selected preschool sample of my study. This resulted in a revised English course for the children, which I could use as a basis for my teacher education work in the trial phase. During this pilot cycle I also had the chance to familiarize myself with the working conditions of teachers in the state preschool and as a result was able to conceptualize my teacher education model that needed to be in accordance with the needs of participating teachers in the sample preschool of the study. With this background I approached the head of the sample preschool and introduced my teacher education project to her which was the first step to be able to establish the research venue. 196 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="196"?> 56 The school year starts in September. Cycle 1: The trial phase - Readjusting the project (10.03.15 to 02.06.15) In cycle 1 the project was presented to the preschool teachers who were to be involved in the teacher education. Being aware of the contextual constraints of preschools, it was offered as a trial run first to test if it were doable in the prospective participating teachers’ context. I was aware that without prospective preschool teachers’ acceptance the project could not be put to practice. This phase covered a span of three months, consisting of nine lessons, which I had prepared and taught. It involved an allocated time once a week for the participatory demonstration lesson. In this cycle, the teachers took an active part in the lessons, by joining in the activities and contributing to the classroom management in English. The preschool teachers did not take over part of the lessons yet. They were also asked to continue offering English during the week and were asked to record what they had done in a journal. At the end of this trial phase cycle all teachers agreed that the idea of introducing English for preschool children seemed worthwhile and they decided to take part in the teacher education project. Cycle 2: The official start of the teacher education project (29.09.15 to 02.02.16) The project was organised as a long-term participatory action research project and started at the beginning of October (29.09.15) in the new school year. 56 Some children had left to transfer to primary school. The new groups consisted of children who carried on from the previous year and new children who had come and joined the group. Due to the trial phase, the English experiences of the children varied (→ chapter 6.2.2). To relieve the busy preschool daily routine in order to accommodate the project, the staff decided that it would become the main project of the year. In cycle 2 it was explicitly planned that the preschool teachers would not only join in the lessons but would also take over parts of the participatory demonstration lessons. Cycle 3: The preschool teachers take full responsibility for implementing the project (16.02.16 to 01.03.16) At the beginning of the second semester of the first year the teachers ran the project on their own over a period of three weeks. They were to develop task plans and to carry them out in the allocated time of the participatory 197 6.3 Data collection <?page no="197"?> demonstration lessons on Tuesdays. During this phase when the teachers had taught independently of the teacher educator, it became clear that the teachers would need more support to be able to teach English independently of the teacher educator. Therefore, another action research cycle was organised. Cycle 4: Establishing the project as a constituent part of the preschool curriculum and end of the project (08.03.16 - 17.06.17) Cycle 4 consisted of three semesters and marked the official end of the project (08.03.16 - 17.06.17). It started directly after the teachers had run the project on their own. The purpose of the last cycle was for the teachers to take over more of the participatory demonstration lessons and eventually work independently of the teacher educator. The research lasted for two and half years because a child usually spends three years in preschool, which meant that the development of a group of children could be followed through from the beginning to the end of their preschool life. But at the same time, it became clear that teachers needed more experience and support than I had expected to integrate English in their context. 6.3.2 Survey of the data related to the research questions Verbal reports in the form of semi-structured interviews became one of the main sources of data because during the organised interview sessions (which had the dual purpose of yielding data for my research and of encouraging teachers to reflect on their developing English teaching competences) the teachers had the space to dedicate their time and concentration on the sessions. In the literal meaning of the word, the door was shut behind us during interviews and it was clear that the preschool teachers were not available for any other responsibilities towards the children or running the morning routine. Before I present a detailed list of the data which I have collected and that I will relate to my research questions, a survey of the main sources from which I drew my data in the course of the study will be given. All of the data was recorded and transcribed to make it available for my research. In order not to miss any spontaneous conversations, a Dictaphone was recording everything that was spontaneously commented on or narrated throughout the entire morning: a. Individual personal semi-structured interviews were organised times in which the teacher educator and the individual preschool teacher met. Interviews were semi-structured that is 198 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="198"?> 57 (→ appendix 2: interview guidelines). there is a set of pre-prepared guiding questions and prompts, the format is open-ended and the interviewee is encouraged to elaborate on the issues raised in an exploratory manner. In other words, the interviewer provides guidance and direction … but is also keen to follow up interesting developments and to let the interviewee elaborate on certain issues. (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 136) Through this type of interview, the researcher can focus on the respective research question while providing the teachers the space to include their perspectives, which they related to their observations, experiences or informal talks with colleagues. They were based on interview guidelines that was provided in advance. 57 Data that resulted from the individual personal semi-structured interviews will be used to document the imple‐ mentation of the project and the way in which teachers’ attitudes and progress in their competences to teach English developed. b. Spontaneous conversations were unplanned conversations which occurred during the morning of the participatory demonstration lessons in passing. They emerged when something needed to be clarified about the task design, the teaching or when critical incidents of children’s reaction to the tasks demanded clarification. c. Group interviews at meetings were organised times when the teacher educator and preschool teachers came together for sessions on relevant theory to relate theory to practical experiences and to become involved in discussions. d. It was originally planned that journals would be used so that teachers could reflect on what they had observed, experimented with for them‐ selves or any other issue that they thought would be worthwhile re‐ cording and reflecting on before it would be made available to be shared in the group. However, teachers hardly made use of this reflective tool due to lack of opportunity and pressure of the timetable (→ chapter 5.7.5.2). The journals have therefore not been used as data to be included in my analysis. e. I kept a researcher diary, consisting of critical incidents and reflections of the process of implementing English and is considered in the text of the study to be used as my interpretation of observations. It will, however, not be explicitly referred to as a separate data source but will be used to contribute to my understanding of the process. 199 6.3 Data collection <?page no="199"?> The interviews and meetings took place in both German and English. I spoke English throughout to expose participating teachers to as much English as was possible in the preschool. Through providing the teachers with contact time with the language in authentic situations, they also were to experience English as a natural everyday means of communication. The teachers were encouraged to speak English in the individual personal interviews so as to provide an opportunity to experiment with English and develop their speaking skills, but this was not made obligatory. The focus of the interviews was to encourage reflection and for teachers to express themselves in a comfortable way. The teachers therefore were not put under pressure to speak English to me. As a result, both languages were spoken in a relaxed manner during interviews. In group interviews the teachers spoke German to each other and to me. The participants are indicated by pseudonyms, while I am indicated with the coding TE for teacher educator. When the teachers say you, du or dir in the interview data they are referring to me (cf. Dresing, Pehl & Schmieder, 2015, pp. 27-28; in chapter 3.1 for details on way data was transcribed). The following table 12 will relate the data to the research questions of my study. Research questions and related chapters of the study Data collection MACRO Level Teacher development context: English in multilingual inclusive state preschools in the Salzburg area (→ chapter 3) MACRO Level: 1. Survey of state preschool teachers’ contexts of work: The size and characteristics of children’s groups (→ chapter 3.2.1): How many groups are in your preschool? (question 1a). How many children are in your group? (question 1b). How many children speak German as their second or third language? (question 1c). → Question‐ naire: quantitative, close-ended questions, following the idea of the Likert scale, with the option to comment that were distributed to 33 state preschools (→ chapter 3) (→ appendix 3) 200 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="200"?> State preschools offering German as a second lan‐ guage (→ chapter 3.2.2): Is German taught in your preschool? (question 2a). Who teaches German in your preschool? (question 2a-1). State preschools offering English as a foreign lan‐ guage (→ chapter 3.2.3): Is English offered in your preschool? (question 2b). Who offers it? (question 2b-1). When offered by a visiting teacher, which children take part? (question 2b-2). 2. Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool: perspective of the children (→ chapter 3.3): How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? (question 3a). There are a number of personal everyday opinions you come across about introducing English in preschool. What is your attitude in the matter? (question 3b). - Children should learn German first (question 3b-1). - Introducing English in preschool is a benefit for other languages as well, including German (question 3b-2). - An additional language would burden many children because preschool life is challenging enough for them (question 3b-3). - Children learn a language in a playful way. If a fur‐ ther language (e.g., English) is offered in a child-ap‐ propriate way, children will experience that learning languages is fun and consequently they will be relaxed and open for new experiences (question 3b-4). 3. Preschool teachers’ attitudes towards introducing English in preschool: perspective of the teachers (→ chapter 3.4): From your perspective as preschool teacher, would you con‐ sider teaching English rather as a benefit or a burden? (ques‐ tion 4a). Can you imagine offering English yourself in your preschool? (question 4c). Preschool teachers’ education in English teaching: offers and needs (→ chapter 3.4.1): 201 6.3 Data collection <?page no="201"?> Was the course ‘English in Preschool’ offered during your preservice teacher education? (question 4b). Did you take part? (question 4b-1). Preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence (→ chapter 3.4.2): Do you have the feeling that your English is adequate / not adequate? (question 4c-1). Preschool teachers’ disposition to teach English to their groups (→ chapter 3.4.3): Would you teach English if appropriate support were pro‐ vided? (question 4c-2). Logistically accommodating English in the state pre‐ school context (→ chapter 3.4.4): May the reasons (against introducing English in your pre‐ school) be related to the general situation of your preschool, such as coping with daily life in preschool and the logistics of running the morning? (question 4c-3). MESO Level Teacher development context The participating selected preschool: as a social community of practice Profiles of preschool teachers (→ Chapter 6.2.4) MESO level: What were the participants’ initial attitudes towards intro‐ ducing English? What initial experiences (knowledge and skills) did the teachers have in the area of English teaching? What communicative English language competence did par‐ ticipating preschool teachers have? → Question‐ naire: quantitative, close-ended questions, following the idea of the Likert scale, with the option to comment that were distributed to 33 state preschools (→ chapter 3) → First individual per‐ sonal semi-structured interviews: coded as Interviews 2,3 and 4 (based on information from the questionnaire 202 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="202"?> also used to be able to identify participants who would qualify as representing the group of inclusive multilingual state preschool teachers in the sample → My observations (re‐ searcher diary) MICRO Level The individual participating preschool teachers: individual teachers’ competence de‐ velopment and summary of common experiences (→ chapter 7.2) MICRO Level 1. The teachers’ reassessment of their attitudes to‐ wards introducing English (→ chapter 7.2.1): Were the teachers able to reflect on and re-assess their attitudes towards introducing English in their contexts? In what way did the support provided by teacher education assist them in the process of re-assessing their attitudes? → Individual personal semi-structured inter‐ views → Spontaneous conver‐ sations with the pre‐ school teachers during the morning 2. The teachers’ motivation to become involved in the teaching process (→ chapter 7.2.2): Did the teacher education engage the teachers in the process to teach English, despite their initial reluctance to introduce it into their groups? What elements of the teacher education contributed to it? → Individual personal semi-structured inter‐ views → Spontaneous conver‐ sations with the pre‐ school teachers during the morning 3. The teachers’ developing English teaching compe‐ tences (→ chapter 7.2.3): Did the teachers gain competences in integrating English tasks into their daily routine in a way that suited their teacher personality? What individual strategies did they develop in this process? Did the teachers gain English teaching compe‐ tences to create a ‘powerful learning environment for language learning? → Last personal semi-structured inter‐ view with specific ques‐ tions to introducing English into their pre‐ school and their English competences. → Individual personal semi-structured inter‐ views 203 6.3 Data collection <?page no="203"?> Did they develop the confidence to use the foreign language in the classroom? → Spontaneous conver‐ sations with the pre‐ school teachers during the morning → My observations (re‐ searcher diary) 4. The teachers’ reflective practice as professional habit (→ chapter 7.2.4): Were the teachers able to reflect on their English teaching? In what way did the design of the education model support the teachers in this process? Did the teachers become involved in their professional development, by making use of the reflective tools that the teacher education provided? → Individual personal semi-structured inter‐ views → My observations (re‐ searcher diary) Table 12: A survey of the research questions and related chapters of the study Table 13 (below)gives a concise description of the data sources that have been used to describe the profiles of the participating preschool teachers in the case studies (→ chapter 6.2.4) and will provide a detailed description of how research results will be presented (→ chapter 7). The different data sources that will be used in the case study which are the individual personal interviews, spontaneous conversations and group interviews at meetings will be coded as follows: they will all be referred to as ‘interview’ and numbered in chronological order of when the data was collected (interview 1, interview 2 etc.). The prompt that triggered a teacher’s response will be referenced in footnotes so that the quote is contextualised. This contributes to a clear, systematic and transparent way of presenting data. 204 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="204"?> Data source Partici‐ pants Coding Information Interview 1 14.10.14 Bianca Bianca 14.10.14: int. 1 A Meeting with the head of the preschool to discuss the possibility of carrying out the research project in her preschool Interview 2 26.03.15 Nadia Nadia 26.03.15: int. 2 First individual personal semi-structured interviews: They took place during the trial phase. To establish their initial attitudes, their initial English teaching experiences and their communicative English language competence Interview 3 27.03.15 Marie Marie 27.03.15: int. 3 Interview 4 21.04.15 Nadia Nadia 21.04.15: int. 4 Lesson 5 spontaneous conversation interview 5 21.05.15 Betty Betty 21.05.15: int. 5 First individual personal semi-structured interviews: They took place during the trial phase. To establish their initial attitudes, their initial English teaching experiences and their communicative English language competence Interview 6 05.05.15 Betty Betty 05.05.15: int. 6 Lesson 6 spontaneous conversation Interview 7 19.05.15 Betty Betty 19.05.15: int. 7 Lesson 8 spontaneous conversation Interview 8 13.10.15 Nadia Nadia 13.10.15: int. 8 Lesson 3 spontaneous conversation Interview 9 13.10.15 Betty Betty 13.10.15: int.9 Lesson 3 spontaneous conversation Interview 10 22.10.15 Nadia Nadia 22.10.15: int. 10 Second individual personal interview: First interview after the trial phase Interview 11 23.10.15 Marie Marie 23.10.15: int. 11 Interview 12 23.10.15 Betty Betty 23.10.15: int. 12 205 6.3 Data collection <?page no="205"?> Data source Partici‐ pants Coding Information To discuss their participation in the project, their children’s well-being, their approach to integrate English in their groups and their thoughts about their teaching Interview 13 10.11.15 Marie Marie 10.11.15: int. 13 Lesson 7 spontaneous conversation Interview 14 10.11.15 Marie Marie 10.11.15: int.14 A meeting organised by Marie to co-ordinate preschool and English topics Interview 15 12.01.16 Nadia Nadia 12.01.16: int. 15 Group interview as a meeting: The meeting took place towards the end of the first semester after the trial phase Three preschool teachers and the head of the preschool To discuss relevant theory Interview 16 12.01.16 Betty Betty 12.01.16: int. 16 Interview 17 08.03.16 Betty Betty 08.03.16: int. 17 Lesson 17 spontaneous conversation Interview 18 17.03.16 Marie Marie 17.03.16: int. 18 Third individual personal interviews: They took place after the preschool teachers took over the responsibility of the project (à cycle 3) To discuss their teaching experiences during this time Interview 19 18.03.16 Nadia Nadia 18.03.16: int. 19 Interview 20 21.03.16 Betty Betty 21.03.16: int. 20 Interview 21 24.05.16 Betty Betty 24.05.16: int. 21 Lesson 26 spontaneous conversation interview 22 22.07.16 Nadia Nadia 22.07.16: int. 22 General meeting at the end of the school year 206 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="206"?> Data source Partici‐ pants Coding Information Interview 23 Two preschool teachers and the head of the preschool together A meeting without Marie, because she was leaving To review the materials and task plans and discuss ideas for the following year 22.07.16 Betty Betty 22.07.16: int. 23 Interview 24 22.07.16 Marie Marie 22.07.16: int. 24 Marie’s last interview: Marie left the preschool a year before the end of the project. To discuss the merits of the project, to review preschool teachers’ confidence and competences to integrate English in their groups and to establish whether they were planning to continue the project. Interview 25 21.10.16 Kathie Kathie 21.10.16: int. 25 Kathie’s first interview: (Kathie replaced Marie) Part 1: Introducing her to the project, talking about reflective practice and explaining relevant theory Part 2: Establishing her initial attitudes, initial English teaching experiences and her communicative English language competences Interview 26 25.10.16 Betty Betty 25.10.16: int. 26 Lesson 5 spontaneous conversation Interview 27 24.01.17 Betty Betty 24.01.17: int. 27 Lesson 16 spontaneous conversation Interview 28 09.03.17 Betty Betty 09.03.17: int. 28 Personal individual interviews: Final semester of the project of the project. Interview 29 10.03.17 Nadia Nadia 10.03.17: int. 29 207 6.3 Data collection <?page no="207"?> Data source Partici‐ pants Coding Information To talk about their hesitation to do classroom action research Interview 30 28.03.17 Kathie Kathie 28.03.17: int.30 Second personal individual interview: Final semester of the project of the project. To discuss her participation in the project, the children’s well-being, her approach to integrate English in her group and her thoughts about their teaching Interview 31 02.05.17 Betty Betty 02.05.17: int 31 Lesson 24 spontaneous conversation Interview 32 29.05.17 Nadia Nadia 29.05.17: int. 32 The final person interviews: To discuss the merits of the project, to review preschool teachers’ confidence and competences to integrate English in their groups and to establish whether they were planning to continue the project. Interview 33 07.06.17 Betty Betty 07.06.17: int. 33 Interview 34 08.06.17 Kathie Kathie 08.06.17: int. 34 Table 13: Description of the data sources used for the profiles of the teachers and for presenting results 208 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="208"?> 6.4 Organising and interpreting the data: presenting findings The data will be organised following the general structure that is specified by the purposes the teacher education project pursues at the three levels of the case study and its related research questions. In case study design, data collection and analysis occur simultaneously and continuously. … At the outset, when data collection begins, case study designs can be quite tentative. With analysis from the very first interview, diary entry, or observation, research questions begin to take more solid form, the scope and direction of the inquiry emerges, and the boundaries of the case become clearer. … As you collect and analyse data … you identify categories, themes, and patterns that help explain the phenomena under consideration. (Hood, 2009, p. 78) The emergent nature of qualitative case study research results from the nature of empirical inquiry [that] is conducted within the framework of qualitative assumptions about the nature of reality and how humans can know it. These assumptions posit an empirical reality that is complex, intertwined, best understood as a contextual whole, and inseparable from the individuals - including the researchers - who know that reality. (Bradley, 1993, p. 431) By a transparent process of coding that happens “throughout the data collection process, categories, themes, and patterns that explain the phenomena under consideration begin to take shape” (Hood, 2009, p. 79). Through this process of categorizing the complex data sources, which follows a clear structure, the validity and trustworthiness of qualitative research can be achieved. The general structure categorizes participating preschool teachers’ compe‐ tence areas that have been identified in chapter 5.8 (→ table 14; below). The coding and categorization of data will follow Rustemeyer’s (1992) systematic three step procedure of content analysis. Her suggested procedure proved to be appropriate for two reasons: firstly, her focus is on the content analysis of interview data, which was the predominant data source in the research presented here and secondly, her three analysis steps of defining the category (1), explicating the category (2) and selecting illustrating quotes that are representative for the sample (3) were well suited to fit the purposes of the research. This procedure is described in the next paragraph. 209 6.4 Organising and interpreting the data: presenting findings <?page no="209"?> Content analysis steps 1 and 2: Defining the category and explicating the category Categories were pre-defined through the structure of the case study and related research questions: they were generated both inductively through an interview survey that categorized preschool teachers’ attitudes before the teacher education project started (→ chapter 3) and deductively following the theoretical analysis of the content and competences that the teacher education study intended to develop with participants (→ chapters 4 & 5). The explication of these preliminary categories required an analysis of data that would “focus on the meanings people [here: participant preschool teachers] attach to … the realities they construct to make sense of the world … [that] may reveal both the complexity of the issue and apparently contradictory ways of viewing it” (Hood, 2009, p. 81). Explication of categories would therefore be generated inductively through interview data that was collected from participants throughout the teacher education process (Rustemeyer, 1992, pp. 43-51) and “the data were arranged into themes that were related to [participants’] learning-to-teach experiences” (Van Canh, 2019, p. 48). Content analysis step 3: Providing clarity through representative positive and negative examples Illustrative examples from the interview data that are representative of the sample (meso level of the teachers as a social community of practice and micro level of individual teacher’s competence development) were then allocated to the categories (Rustemeyer, 1992, p. 93). For each data example that is used the context of its production (the prompt that triggered the data) will be specified in a footnote to contribute to the validity of the data source. The structure of the way findings are presented will follow the four purposes the teacher education project pursued and its related research questions. They were: 1. To prompt the teachers to re-assess their attitudes towards introducing English in preschool (→ chapter 7.2.1). Were the teachers able to reflect on and re-assess their attitudes towards introducing English in their contexts? In what way did the support provided by the teacher education assist them in the process of re-assessing their attitudes? 2. To motivate the teachers to become involved in the process of teaching English to preschool children (→ chapter 7.2.2). 210 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="210"?> Did the teacher education engage the teachers in the process to teach English, despite their initial reluctance to introduce it into their groups? What elements of the teacher education contributed to it? 3. To assist the teachers in developing their competence to integrate English tasks in their daily routine (→ chapter 7.2.3). Did the teachers gain competences in integrating English tasks into their daily routine in a way that suited their teacher personality? What individual personal strategies did they develop in this process? Did the teachers gain English teaching competences to create a ‘powerful learning environment for language learning? Did they develop the confidence to use the foreign language in the classroom? 4. To engage the teachers in reflective practice as a professional habit (→ chapter 7.2.4). Were the teachers able to reflect on their English teaching? In what way did the design of the teacher education model support the teachers in this process? Did the teachers become involved in their professional development by making use of the reflective tools that the teacher education provided? Presentation of findings that are related to the teachers’ developing English teaching competences (# 3), will be diversified and follow the structure presented in the following table (→ table 14). It subdivides preschool teachers’ specific competences in the three areas that they will need to develop to be able to create a powerful environment for language learning that have been defined in chapter 5.8.2. These are creating a positive and safe language learning environment (→ 5.8.2.1), considering the task features when designing tasks (→ 5.8.2.2) and providing interactional support to learners (→ 5.8.2.3). Results are not presented chronologically in the form of developmental steps or phases, but results document the degree to which individual teacher personalities managed to develop the competences that are required to teach English in preschool through tasks. The competence development is coded in three degrees of achievement: ✓ the teachers have developed the competence ○ the teachers have developed the competence to a certain extent X the teachers have not developed the competence 211 6.4 Organising and interpreting the data: presenting findings <?page no="211"?> Three competence areas Teachers need to be able to… 1 Positive and safe language learning environment Integrate rules, rituals and routines (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) Treat the children as individuals and judge the situation from the children’s perspective so that they are able to react appropriately to their learning needs (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) 2 Meaningful, relevant tasks Select and design tasks that are appropriate for their children (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 1.) Set up tasks that support the children to contribute individually Select and design tasks which require the children to use language as a means to attain a non-linguistic goal (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 2.) Develop children’s awareness of form by repeatedly exposing them to new forms through various tasks Integrate corrective feedback in an unobtrusive way so that children’s lan‐ guage development is supported (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 3.) Select and design tasks that are coherently structured, that is the topic, the activities and the outcome (target task) are clearly connected and provide support (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 5.) 3 Interactional support Encourage interaction between the children by creating a supportive learning atmosphere (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 4) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: expectations; flexibility) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: empathy) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: tolerance) Take the children seriously by listening to what they have to say and by respecting their ideas and opinions enthusiastically (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: enthusiasm) Hand over the autonomy by trusting the children to be able to do something meaningful with what the teacher has prepared (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: willingness) Mediate, construct and negotiate meaning to support the children to perform tasks (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.1 mediation) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) 212 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="212"?> Encourage interaction between the children and with her by supporting them in producing output and expressing their meaning and intentions (through corrective feedback, patient prompting etc.) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) Give children individual attention through differentiation: whether they are classified as “weaker” children or “stronger” children (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.3 differentiation) Table 14: Structure of preschool teachers’ competences needed to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (→ chapter 5.8.2) 6.5 Reflecting on the triple role of colleague, teacher educator and researcher As has been described, I assumed a variety of roles in the teacher education project (→ chapters 5.5, 5.6). This chapter first gives a brief description of these roles and addresses the questions related to the validity of my study, which result from these triple roles. My role as a colleague: to teach the children cooperatively As a colleague, I was to teach the children in cooperation with the preschool teachers (→ chapter 5.7.2), which resulted in a collegial relationship that supported the establishment of a community of practice to develop (Wenger & Lave, 1991). It was only through this situation that field access was possible because I qualified as an accepted member of their preschool community. The collegial relationship that developed was the basis for a relationship of trust that resulted in a good rapport which helped maximise participating teachers’ truthfulness during the interviews and their commitment throughout (→ also discussed in chapter 6.3). My role as an educator: to implement the teacher education model As a teacher educator, I guided and assisted the preschool teachers to develop their teaching competences (Handal and Lauvas, 1987) (→chapter 5.5) and provided the opportunities to re-assess their initially negative attitudes towards introducing English through credible first-hand practice experiences. This involved my participation as a convincing role model who demonstrated ‘good practice’ examples of early English teaching. In this role and being there for most of the morning on the day of the participatory demonstration lessons, the teachers initiated spontaneous conversations at any time to talk to me 213 6.5 Reflecting on the triple role of colleague, teacher educator and researcher <?page no="213"?> about their observations in the lessons and during the week, their teaching and thoughts that were associated with the development of the research project or with educating the children in English. Consequently, data gathering was a continual process that emerged from various situations. Through this I could gain first-hand experiences with preschool teachers' development which enabled me to have an in-depth insight into their dispositions and capabilities and to evaluate the appropriateness and potential of the teacher education in their context. My role as a researcher: to conduct the research and collect and evaluate data As a researcher, I organised and conducted the research project as participatory action research, collecting the data to evaluate the teachers’ emerging compe‐ tences in relation to the support that the teacher education model provided. This way I could evaluate the appropriateness and effectiveness of the teacher education in this context. It is a fundamental feature of participatory action research that insights develop through an emic, insider’s perspective, which my roles as a colleague and an educator supported: CR [collaborative research] requires the researcher to situate herself within the field of professional practice and to adapt her intervention by taking into account the teachers’ potential: their resources, their knowledge in action and the complexity of practice. (Savoie-Zajc & Descamps-Bednarz, 2007, p. 593). As the context is a basic component to be considered in the research, it would be essential to implement the project as ethnographic research, which advocates perceptiveness and the establishment of a good rapport and trust between participants and researchers so that in-depth, meaningful data can be collected (→ also chapter 6.3): The handling of rapport, trust, attention to authority and power relations can determine entirely how well fieldwork can proceed. A researcher who lacks sensitivity to demand in their lives of informants, or who holds fast to the comfortable distance of authority rather than becoming a learner in the culture, severely limits the nature of the data and undermines the research. (Athanases & Brice-Heath, 1995, p. 268; as cited in Schocker, 2001, p. 176) The roles as a colleague and an educator enabled me to follow an ethnographical research approach that could be based on an ecological perspective of inquiry, that is: “everything is connected to everything else … and [that] no separate part exists in any system” (Wideen et al., 1998, p. 168). Taking an ecological 214 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="214"?> perspective enables an insight in the complexity of what teacher development in this context involves: Only when all players and landscapes that comprise the learning-to-teach environ‐ ment are considered in concert will we gain a full appreciation of the inseparable web of relationships that constitutes the learning-to-teach ecosystem. (p. 170) While ethnographic research supports an emic perspective into the complexities of the research, which results in in-depth data, the issue of going native emerges. This term refers to the danger of researchers becoming so involved in the community under study that they lose the ability to keep the required distance as a prerequisite for collecting valid data (O’Reilly, 2009, p. 87). A case in point is participant observation which O’Reilly (2005) describes as “an example of an oxymoron: a contradiction in terms. … To participate involves getting involved, joining in, being subjective, immersing yourself; to observe involves being objective, keeping your emotional and perhaps physical distance, being scientific, clear-eyes, unbiased, critical” (pp. 101,102; italics in original). In-depth data collection is a defining feature of ethnographic research that accounts for its validity. But it involves strategies such as triangulation, multiple data resources and looking at one phenomenon from various perspectives so that the principle of validity is not violated. In my case the scope to do so was limited. The contextual features resulted in the three main roles that I had to adopt as they were fundamental to implement the project. I could not fall back on critical friends for triangulation to analyse and evaluate the data, in other words to research colleagues who “should have empathy for the teacher’s research situation and relate closely to his or her concerns, but at the same time be able to provide rich and honest feedback” (Altrichter et al., 2008, p. 61). I was well aware of this and therefore I strictly followed the rule that “the explicit goal of research is to explore the participants’ views of the situation being studied” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 38). The main data resources therefore resulted from individual semi-structured interviews, spontaneous conversations and group interviews at meetings in which the teachers gave their opinions and perspectives by answering specific questions relating to the teacher education model and to their teaching competences. During these situations they could talk freely, elaborating on their experiences and thoughts in a narrative way to provide ample data for me to collect (→ chapter 6.3.2). Multiple data resources were otherwise limited. It was not possible to collect data from the planned teacher’s journals (→ results in chapter 7.3.5.2) or from opportunities in which teachers work together to give collegial feedback in the sense of Edge’s concept of cooperative teaching (Edge, 1992; Edge & Richards, 1993) (→ chapter 5.7.2). 215 6.5 Reflecting on the triple role of colleague, teacher educator and researcher <?page no="215"?> These opportunities were not available due to the complex context with its busy morning routine (→ chapter 3.3, 3.4 & 6.2.3). To gain as many opportunities as possible to collect data, I recorded the mornings continually with a Dictaphone which was in my pocket in order not to lose opportunities of insights that would result from spontaneous conversations. An advantage of recordings is that they provide data collection of direct speech, rather than interpretation or re-told version of the conversation by the researcher. The teachers had agreed happily to be recorded. As the recording was not obtrusive it did not interrupt or inhibit the natural conversations that occurred between us which enhanced the rich quality of the data that I collected. The teachers represented a cross section of personalities, ages, background experiences and levels of communicative English language competence as well as teaching styles (→ chapter 6.2.4) and taught in their own groups which made it possible to gain insights from four individual contexts within the one representative pre-school sample. This enabled me to look at identical phenomena from various perspectives. As a result, I was able to select detailed quotes when I presented results of these individual case studies (→ chapter 7.2). At the same time, I could select key quotes that represented data that could be generalized for the participating group of teachers so that I could evaluate the quality of the components of the teacher education (→ chapter 7.3) as I was able to fall back on data that was triggered in different situations. As I was the one to analyse and evaluate the data, I was meticulous to provide thick descriptions and to reference prompts that triggered the teachers’ comments by specifying the situation for each quote in footnotes. According to Dörnyei (2007), “presenting the finding in rich contextualized detail helps the reader to identify with the project and thus come on board” (p. 60). I included extensive transcripts of the comments from the preschool teachers to back up my analysis and evaluation in order to enable the reader to judge the situation for her/ himself: Credence is achieved by illustrating and validating the researcher’s inferences with a representative range of low-inference descriptors that bring the particular situation or phenomenon alive. The aim is to provide a rich vivid description so that ‘the reader can vicariously experience what it is like to be in the same situation as the research participants’. (p. 292; referring partly to Johnson & Christensen, 2004, p. 539) Results are therefore not presented in isolation from the context in order to support transparency: Chapter 7 begins by giving an insight in the developing process of the research cycles (→ chapter 7.1). The following chapters that focus on the results of the case studies first recapitulate the initial situation at the participating preschool and draw the consequences for the set-up of the teacher 216 6 The research approach: participatory action research and multiple case study design <?page no="216"?> education that ultimately led to the resulting research questions which take the context into consideration (→ chapters 7.2.1 - 7.2.4). Chapter 7.3 begins by referring to the contextual constraints that are described in chapter 3 and explains the need for the teacher education to be designed as in situ before focusing on the evaluation of the components of the teacher education model. 217 6.5 Reflecting on the triple role of colleague, teacher educator and researcher <?page no="218"?> 7 Presenting case study results Before the main findings of the study will be presented, chapter 7.1 gives an insight in the implementation process of the project. The chapter structure therefore corresponds with the cycles and phases of the research project. It describes the constraints that I encountered at the preschool when I tried to set up the research project and it explains the resulting support that was provided so that the project could be carried out. Chapter 7.2 presents results of teachers’ development both by individual teachers’ case studies (the micro level of the case study) and by summarizing common experiences that may be generalised for participating teachers as a community of practice at the preschool (the meso level of the case study). The case studies will demonstrate if the purposes that were intended by the teacher education project could be achieved and to what degree they could be achieved. Finally, chapter 7.3 evaluates in what way the components of the teacher education project contributed to teachers’ professional development. <?page no="219"?> 7.1 A survey of the implementation process of the research project Figure 32: Diagram 10: The cycles of the research project (→ presented in chapter 6.3.1) 220 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="220"?> We know from experiences of professional teacher development projects which are set in other educational contexts that the successful implementation of an innovation predisposes that it is compatible with contextual demands. This refers to aspects of contextual support (e.g., extra allocated time provided by the school authority), participants’ willingness and motivation to become involved (e.g., understanding the benefits for their own professional development and the educational context in question) or accompanying support to implement the innovation in a sustainable way (Tsui, 2003; Johnson & Golombeck, 2011; Richards & Farrell, 2005; Müller-Hartmann et al., 2013). This chapter therefore describes what needed to be done so that existing contextual constraints could be overcome and relates them to the cycles and phases of the action research project. Piloting the teacher education research project: Identifying a representa‐ tive preschool sample, developing and testing an English course for the children, conceptualising the teacher education model and establishing the research venue (07.10.13 to 29.06.15) It took a number of initial steps, which had to be taken ahead of the scheduled teacher education research project to ensure that the project would be compat‐ ible with the contextual demands of the preschool in question. From the very beginning of the project during the pilot phase it was clear that the extra workload entailed would be the issue for both the head and the participating teachers of the preschool. For the project to be successful I therefore would need to clarify any extra demands which would result from becoming involved and take participants’ concerns seriously. In the preliminary discussions, the head of the preschool (Bianca) was unsure about the enthusiasm that her staff could develop towards the project, because their focus was clearly on teaching the children German as a second language. They had already briefly experienced English teaching a few years before, but they were concerned that the children learning German as a second language were overwhelmed by the extra demands that a further new language could put on them. The head therefore wanted to discuss the project with the preschool teachers first, because she was well aware of the fact that for it to be of benefit to the children, her staff would have to support it and would need to be dedicated to carry it out. Otherwise starting such a project would make no sense at all: Bianca: Ich weiß nicht, ob sie mitmachen. Kann ich nicht sagen. Kann ich wirklich nicht sagen. Es ist natürlich so, dass mit Deutsch gearbeitet wird und es ist natürlich auch so, dass manche Kinder [abwesend sind], wir haben das vor ein paar Jahren gesehen, wo die Laura (eine frühere Englischlehrkraft) am Vormittag da war. So nett, 221 7.1 A survey of the implementation process of the research project <?page no="221"?> 1 Bianca was asked to comment on: Would you be interested in your preschool participating in a project to integrate English as a regular part of the daily routine? I told her that I would like to do a project to integrate English inclusively in the groups whereby the preschool teachers would also teach the children. I explained that it would involve the teachers taking part in the teacher education research project that I would provide. 2 Betty was talking about her scepticism and that they were all not thrilled about the idea at the beginning, which prompted her to say this comment. wie es für manche Kinder ist. Die Kinder, die Deutsch nicht sprechen, die haben sich öfters ausgeklickt, weil es zu viel wird. TE: Eher nicht dann? Bianca: Na, weiß ich nicht. … Ich muss mit ihnen sprechen. Das ist jetzt wieder neu, weil mittragen müssen es die Kindergärtnerinnen. … Wenn sie es dann nicht machen hat das keinen Sinn. Die müssen es selber wollen und müssen sagen, ‘Ja wir können uns das vorstellen. Wir haben die Ressourcen. Wir probieren es’. Wenn die das nicht sagen, und ich sage wir machen es - natürlich kann man Befehle ausgeben. TE: Nein, das will ich nicht. Bianca: Aber es hat keinen Sinn, weil das Herz muss mitarbeiten damit man das vermittelt, sonst haben die Kinder nichts davon. Offensichtlich ist es sicher nett und toll, aber ich weiß nicht, ob sie sich so schnell gedanklich umstellen. … Die müssen alle dahinterstehen. Wir werden es besprechen und sie nachdenken lassen und dann werden wir noch einmal darüber reden. (Bianca, 14.10.14: int.1) 1 It was then that I decided to offer a preliminary trial phase so that the teachers could be convinced to agree to participate and would be able to judge the situation for themselves and decide if they would be prepared to continue on the basis of their newly gained experiential knowledge. However, Bianca had not clearly communicated the extent of their commitment. They were under the false impression that I would be doing the lessons while they would be in the classroom at the same time but could choose if they wanted to become involved or use the time for themselves to prepare their work. It seemed that Bianca planned to reveal all the information only after her staff had experienced the situation and consequently be convinced and be open-minded to the idea: “Bianca hat aber gesagt, ‘Wir können uns dann mal zurücklehnen und du machst dann die Arbeit’. Ich habe dann gedacht, ‘Super, halbe Stunde morgens früh können wir Vorbereitung machen‘. Aber dem war dann nicht so. Aber wenn’s dann mal gut läuft, wir haben sofort gemerkt es funktioniert, und dann machen wir es doch weiter” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 2 222 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="222"?> 3 I told Betty that we should get together to brainstorm on ideas and that Nadia suggested that we met on Tuesday, which prompted her to say this comment. 4 Betty said she can only become enthusiastic about something when the children are interested, stimulated and become involved, which prompted her to say this comment. Bianca clearly let the staff know that it was a desirable project for the preschool and for this reason it would not involve any extra work. The project would take place completely in the preschool during the teachers’ regular working hours: “Bianca hat uns gesagt wir dürfen das in der Arbeitszeit machen. Als wir damals darüber diskutiert haben, hat sie uns gesagt, es wird nichts in eurer Freizeit passieren. Wir dürfen es in der Arbeitszeit machen. Es ist etwas für den Kindergarten und dann dürfen wir es auch dann machen” (Betty, 21.03.16 int. 20). 3 Bianca’s concern was that the teachers might not develop enthusiasm towards the project. Although they were not strictly against implementing English, they felt that introducing another language to an entire group of a predominantly multilingual kindergarten would be a burden for both the children and the preschool teachers alike. These opinions were based on their experiences of the children learning German rather than on any experiences they had with the children learning English. Bianca recognised this and became quite assertive towards the teachers to introduce the project as was expressed by one of the teachers: “… Ich habe gedacht, ‘Super wir machen jetzt Englisch [sarcastically]. Einundzwanzig Kinder können nicht einmal Deutsch und wir fangen jetzt mit Englisch an’. … Aber Bianca wollte unbedingt. Ich habe gedacht, ‘Okay, dann ziehen wir das somit durch’. … Wir sind im Team gesessen - haben wir gedacht, ‘Müssen wir uns das jetzt noch antun, aber wenn Bianca das schon will, dann naja’” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 4 On the one hand, it was fundamental to have a head who was in favour of in‐ troducing the project and strongly supported it. But on the other hand, teachers were not enthusiastic right at the beginning to endorse it. But eventually - through the head’s persuasive insistence and authority - the project could be launched and piloted as a trial run. There is research evidence that re-assessing teacher attitudes predisposes that an innovation is successfully put to practice, in other words, experience of an innovation supports professional development, simply because it is convincing. As the teacher educator, I was initially responsible to contribute to the teachers overcoming their reluctance or scepticism through demonstrating examples of good preschool English teaching practice. It was therefore essential that I would immediately manage to capture the children’s interest and enthusiasm. This 223 7.1 A survey of the implementation process of the research project <?page no="223"?> 5 Betty said that while German is taught in small groups, English is part of the circle time and it works and the children enjoy it, which prompt her to say this comment. could be achieved, as presentation of results in chapter 7.2.1 will demonstrate. Piloting the project as a first step of the implementation process proved to be essential, as it resulted in the preschool teachers becoming motivated to become involved in the teacher education project (→ chapter 7.2.2). As regards their commitments, it was agreed that the teachers would observe and take an active part in the participatory demonstration lessons once a week (1), that they would continue to integrate English in their own groups during the week (2), that they would document and reflect on the implementation process (3) and that the project would take place during their working hours with no extra workload involved (4). Cycle 1: The trial phase - Readjusting the project (10.03.15 - 02.06.15) As a next step I needed to negotiate an appropriate period of time when the project could be started which would be most compatible with contextual demands. The ideal trial phase seemed to be the second semester of the school year. This is a time of the year when the mixed groups are at the most homogeneous stage possible: the new children have well and truly settled in; as they are older, their level of concentration is usually higher; the children learning German as a second language have started acquiring it; all the children know each other well and the preschool teacher has developed her rapport with the children; the rules and regulations in the preschool are clear and the routines within the groups are established and normally new children do not join the groups at this time of the year. This creates a stable and secure context for the teachers to work in and for the children to learn, which is ideal for introducing projects. All of the teachers decided that they would continue with the project as participators in action research: “Wir möchten es als Jahresthema gerne haben. Morgen haben wir eine Besprechung. Wir hoffen wir kriegen es durch bei Bianca. Weil was du hier morgens machst, möchten wir die ganze Woche weiterführen. Das kann ich aber nicht, wenn ich ein großes Thema in Mathematik habe oder sonst irgendetwas. Dann will ich dieses Thema fortführen. Und nur, wenn ich das fortführen und von allen Seiten die Praktiken ziehe, nur dann funktioniert so ein Thema, nur dann bleibt’s hängen, sonst geht’s hier rein und irgendwann wieder raus” (Betty, 05.05.15: int. 6). 5 The head of the preschool decided that it would become project of the year, which brought the research into the next cycle. 224 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="224"?> 6 Marie was asked to comment on: What was your attitude and now what are your thoughts towards the project? Cycle 2: The official start of the teacher education project (29.09.15 - 02.02.16) A fixed allocated time for the participatory demonstration lesson during the week enabled continuity of teaching and learning and a routine to be established. It meant that the lessons could not simply be cancelled but had priority over other commitments that life in a preschool involves. By providing a guaranteed fixed allocated time for the weekly lessons, the teachers could build on a systematic framework, which supported them to integrate English in their daily routines throughout the week. The teachers were also supported in their time management by the decision to have the project as their main project of the year: “Last year it was a little bit difficult for me because we had so many topics. Now we don’t have so much [sic] projects this year I can do it” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 6 Therefore, for cycle 2 it can be said that implementation of that phase ran smoothly. Cycle 3: The preschool teachers take full responsibility for implementing the project (16.02.16 to 01.03.16) In this period of time the teachers were to take over the English lessons independently of the teacher educator. English lessons were scheduled weekly on Tuesdays where teachers could dedicate a full circle time to English (in the previous cycle of the project these Tuesday lessons had been organised as participatory demonstration lessons in which they took part). The teachers were used to integrating English partly in their circle times and otherwise had taken over parts of the demonstration lessons during the week. They were willing and enthusiastic to take over the Tuesday lessons on their own without the teacher educator’s support and felt confident to do so. But teachers’ experiences with implementing the project independently of the teacher educator differed. While some teachers found they had been well prepared to embark on it, others felt that it was demanding. What proved to be an unexpected challenge for teachers was that their children expected the teacher educator to teach English on Tuesdays: this was the routine their children were familiar with. Children at that age need railings and are used to routines, they find unexpected changes in the ‘normal’ preschool procedure disconcerting: 225 7.1 A survey of the implementation process of the research project <?page no="225"?> 7 Betty was asked to comment on: Let’s talk about the lessons you gave. How do you feel about your teaching? I am referring to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). 8 Betty was asked to comment on: Do you feel the children gained from your lessons? Did they benefit? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). 9 Betty said that the children looked forward to English, which prompted her to say this comment. “Ich habe mich vorbereitet. Ich habe gedacht, okay, wir haben das Thema Eule. Ich nehme mit den Kindern das Bilderbuch von der Eule noch einmal. Unsere Kinder kennen das schon, dass wir uns in den Morgenkreis setzen und wir singen ‘Good Morning’. Das machen wir öfter, aber es war Dienstag und ich habe nicht bedacht, dass die Kinder gemerkt haben, dass es Dienstag ist und ich setz mich hin und ich singe mit den Kindern ‘Good Morning’ und, ‘Wo ist Kirsten? ’ und dann geht’s sofort los. Dann war erst mal eine Unruhe da. Sie haben dann schon noch zugehört” (Betty, 21.03.16: Int. 20). 7 While this was true for all the children’s groups, teachers’ experiences in handling this new situation of teaching their groups independently of the teacher educator varied. In Betty’s case it was that she lacked the credibility of an authentic communication partner for her children simply because her communicative English language competence was not well developed: “Sie haben profitiert, freilich, es war für mich genau wie für die Kinder eine andere Situation. Ich bin genauso wie die Kinder auf dem Weg des Lernens. Sie fand es vielleicht ein bisschen lustig. … Die haben bemerkt, die Betty ist nicht diejenige mit Englisch. Ich stehe auch dazu, dass ich es nicht so gut kann. Ich frage dich ja auch, was heißt das oder das, wie spricht man es aus” (Betty, 21.03.16: Int. 20). 8 She also relied on me being a motivating factor for the children to teach English once a week: “Wir haben eine Tabelle hinten. Montag ist Ausflug-Tag, Dienstag ist Kirsten-Tag, weil am Dienstag einfach immer Englisch ist. Das wissen die Kinder. Zweiter Tag in der Woche ist Englisch. Sie freuen sich darauf und es ist gut” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 9 This was quite different with Nadia: she was pleasantly surprised that the lessons ran smoothly. She felt more confident in speaking English and changed the lessons to suit her approach, acknowledging that the support came from integrating English quite often during the week into her morning circle (→ chapter 7.2.3.1). She felt that taking over the Tuesday lessons independently of the teacher educator worked well: 226 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="226"?> 10 Nadia was asked to comment on: Has your approach changed in integrating English? How do you feel about your teaching during this time? This question refers to the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). 11 Marie was asked to comment on: Has your approach changed in integrating English? How do you feel about your teaching during this time? This question refers to the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). “Ich war eigentlich positiv überrascht. Ich habe die Stunden ein bisschen abgewandelt, ein bisschen verkürzt, und für mich passend gemacht damit ich mich wohl fühle und dann hat es funktioniert. Ich baue öfter in der Woche im Morgenkreis was ein, eben” (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 10 Marie observed that the children were not very excited about the Tuesday lessons that she gave, but she felt they concentrated. Her experience during this time did not leave a great impression on her. Marie was in the routine of integrating English into her group through circle time (→ chapter 7.2.3.2) and therefore she felt that there was little difference between doing her English circle times and giving complete lessons, because she simply did a more comprehensive circle time: “The kids weren’t so excited, aber sie haben mitgemacht. They asked where you were, but they concentrated with me. It was just to do more in English. Normally I just do some points and not a whole lesson and that was the big difference” (Marie, 17.03.16: int. 18). 11 Cycle 4: Establishing the project as a constituent part of the preschool curriculum and end of the project (08.03.16 - 22.06.16) In the end, all of the participating preschool teachers except for Betty took over the weekly lessons independently. After the project had ended, English could successfully be integrated as a regular component at the preschool after I had left. This brief account of the implementation process is important for readers of the study to become aware of the contextual constraints and affordances in which the teacher development study was set. With this background in mind, results will be described in the following chapters. 227 7.1 A survey of the implementation process of the research project <?page no="227"?> 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education Each of the case studies will be preceded by a summary of the initial situation, which I found at the participating preschool in the beginning of my research. It will describe in what way the design of the teacher education model that I developed addressed these contextual demands and needs. These considerations led to the specification of the research questions of my study, which will conclude the introduction to presenting the case studies in each chapter. Therefore, the headlines that precede the description of teachers’ development for each of the four competence areas that were addressed through my teacher education project are as follows: Describing the initial situation at the participating preschool Drawing the consequences for the set-up of the teacher education Resulting research questions For a description of the formal procedure of the way data was organised and interpreted to present findings see chapter 6.4. 7.2.1 The teachers’ re-assessment of their attitudes towards introducing English in preschool Describing the initial situation at the participating preschool: As could be demon‐ strated through the first part of my study, the preschool teachers were sceptical about introducing English in their contexts to begin with and therefore were reluctant at the prospect of offering it (→ chapter 6.2.4). Their focus was clearly on teaching German as a second language, as 88 % of the preschool children par‐ ticipating in the case study did not speak German when they started preschool (→ chapter 6.2.2). Their views were consequently also influenced by their experiences with the children having to learn German and the children’s efforts to cope with the daily life of preschool as a consequence (→ chapters 3 and 6.2.4). Drawing the consequences for the set-up of the teacher education: The preschool teachers would need to re-address their initial attitudes in order to become motivated to become involved and be prepared to take part in the teacher education project. To be able to bring this about the teacher education model had to provide the preschool teachers with opportunities to observe English being introduced to their groups of children appropriately and successfully. This resulted in my first two research questions, which will be addressed in this chapter. 228 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="228"?> 12 Nunus is a bear that accompanies us in the English lessons. He is a credible communi‐ cation partner for the children (→ appendix 1: materials 1). 13 Singing an autumn song: the children put down the coloured leaf they were holding when their colour was sung. 14 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you bring teacher talk into your routine? She explained that it was difficult, because some children did not yet speak German and need to know what is happening around them, which prompted her to say this comment. Resulting research questions: Were the teachers able to reflect on and re-assess their attitudes towards introducing English in their contexts? In what way did the support provided by the teacher education assist them in the process of re-assessing their attitudes? 7.2.1.1 Nadia’s re-assessment of her attitude At the beginning Nadia was concerned about the children’s well-being and the burden that English learning may have on the youngest ones in her groups (→ chapter 6.2.4.2), but she soon realised that her concern was unfounded. She readdressed her concerns in the trial phase when she saw in practice that the age differences of the children in the group did not cause any problems. Instead, all the children benefited from the lessons in their own way regardless of their German competence level. Through the participatory demonstration lessons, she observed that it was possible to give English lessons that were appropriate for all the children to follow, which was essential to her. She was further re-assured when she observed that the children felt safe in the learning atmosphere I had created, that my approach to teaching English was vivid and clear and that the children’s experiences were supported by integrating rituals and routines, for example through Nunus, 12 the bear: “So eben bei diesem Morgenkreis holt sich jedes Kind etwas heraus. Ich denke, [zum Beispiel] mit den Blättern, 13 das war für alle Kinder so toll verständlich, auch für die Kinder, die kein Deutsch sprechen, weil es so anschaulich ist. Das Anschauliche, glaube ich, ist alles. Und das Liebevolle mit Nunus. Und dieses Ritual, the routine and ‘The Good Morning Song’ and the good-bye song. [All of] this gives the children some kind of Sicherheit” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 14 It was decisive for Nadia to see that learning a new language was not demanding for the younger children and the children struggling to learn German, but that they participated with enthusiasm, listened attentively and were obviously learning English. She became aware that languages are a resource that the children use quite naturally to draw cross-references between the various languages and learn from them: 229 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="229"?> 15 Nadia was asked to comment on: From your experience what is your opinion about the new children learning English from the beginning? “Man sieht schon, dass sie [the small children] einfach davon profitieren, dass sie eben diese Freude an einer anderen Sprache erleben und, ich denke auch Neriman oder Kardia, die zwar schon lange da sind, aber nicht vom Deutschen her so einen großen Sprachschatz haben, dass sie doch dann Wörter vergleichen. ‘Wie klingt das [Wort] in German? Wie klingt das in meiner Sprache, in meiner Muttersprache? ’ Die Verbindungen von den verschiedenen Sprachen, dass sie sehr sensibel sind, die Kinder, das schon; egal wie jung sie jetzt sind. Und so ist es auch bei unseren Bildungsangeboten, man denkt sie nehmen nichts auf aber sie profitieren trotzdem. Sie saugen das auf wie ein Schwamm. Man glaubt immer sie bekommen nichts mit, aber das stimmt nicht, sondern sie profitieren sehr wohl. Auch wenn es junge Kinder sind. Besonders Leonie, die kleine Leonie. Sie wirkt auch immer, ja, ein bisschen [zurückhaltend] aber sie nimmt viel auf. Sie beobachtet gut. … Die lernen halt anders. Sie lernen doch halt durch Beobachtung noch und saugen das auf. Ich denke, man darf das nicht unterschätzen” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 15 Through the participatory demonstration lessons Nadia could observe the positive effects that learning a further language had on all the children in her group and as result she was no longer concerned but managed to re-address her attitudes. 7.2.1.2 Marie’s re-assessment of her attitude Marie’s reluctant attitude towards implementing English for her entire group also resulted from her idea that children who could not speak basic German, especially the youngest children in the group, should not be exposed to yet another foreign language. She felt they would feel overwhelmed, not be able to concentrate as a result and therefore would not benefit from taking part. She was also concerned that too much would be expected of the children (→ chapter 6.2.4.3). Marie also managed to re-assess her initial reservation and again, the participatory demonstration lessons contributed to her change of attitude. She understood in principle, that children do learn when they consider something to be interesting and that the younger children learn from the older children. But to be able to change her attitude, she needed to observe the teaching processes and the children’s reactions in the participatory demonstration lessons to become ultimately convinced. She needed the re-assurance that the children were neither under pressure to learn nor would they be burdened if they took part in the English lessons: 230 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="230"?> 16 Marie was asked to comment on: What was your attitude and now what are your thoughts towards the project? 17 Marie was asked to comment on: You were sceptical about the young ones learning. Do you feel they are learning English? 18 Marie was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning? “… When you started, I saw that the kids were really - engagiert, motivated. Then der Funke ist zu mir übergesprungen. I [saw] that the kids like [it], and it is good. They take [in] everything and it is great for them” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 16 “Die Kinder haben auf alle Fälle Englisch gelernt. Es war so schön, weil es so spielerisch ohne Druck [war]. Da war kein Druck das ‘Du musst das lernen’, sondern einfach wenn sie bereit waren haben sie es dann angewendet” (Marie, 22.07.16; int. 24). 17 Her initial view that the children should learn German first before they would participate in English lessons was challenged through her observation of the children being attentive, involved and actively joining in the English lessons: “Ich habe nie gedacht, dass es die Kinder so gut anspricht; dass sie das so gut aufnehmen. Sie saugen wie ein Schwamm. [Das] hätte ich mir nicht gedacht. Auch Kinder, die nicht so gut Deutsch können, auch die haben es aufgesaugt. Von ihnen kommt halt noch nicht so viel, aber sie waren eigentlich immer von der Konzentration her dabei und haben immer zugeschaut, ‘Ah, okay’, [they thought]. Hätte ich mir nie gedacht. Ja, ganz überrascht war ich” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 18 She re-assessed her attitude towards introducing English when she realised that the children could concentrate in the lessons despite their limited knowledge of German; however, she was deeply concerned that the youngest children taking part would be overwhelmed due to their age-related low level of concentration. Her concerns were strongly formed by her observations of their behaviour in the routine of her own circle time (→ chapter 6.2.4.3). For her, to be able to re-assess her attitude, it was therefore essential that participatory demonstration lessons took place in her own group, as this enabled her to observe and follow the development of the particular children she had in mind and for whom she considered it to be best that they should not take part in lessons. She re-assessed her reluctant attitude that had resulted in her idea to exclude some of the children from learning English when she saw their development from one year to the next: she observed that the children were able to build on the pre-knowledge that they had acquired (without their teacher noticing) and that through this they were supported to take an active part in the lessons of the following year: 231 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="231"?> 19 Marie was asked to comment on: At the beginning you were worried about the new children joining in, how do you feel about that now? Why? 20 Marie was asked to comment on: What do you think about mixed groups? 21 Marie was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning? “Im Nachhinein gesehen, ist es auch für die jungen Kinder eine Bereicherung. Sie sind halt oft weggeglitten, nicht konzentriert. [Sie haben] einfach an etwas anderes gedacht. So sind sie auch im Morgenkreis, aber sie profitieren daraus, weil zum Bei‐ spiel, im nächsten Jahr dann, [haben] sie das dann nachher gewusst. [Sie denken], ‘Ah, das haben wir einmal schon gemacht’. Zum Beispiel die Raupe Nimmersatt. Da waren ein paar Kinder vom letzten Jahr. Sie haben es dann wieder darauf gehabt. Sie haben letztes Jahr nicht so intensiv [alles] mitgekriegt. Also, man merkt schon, es bleibt bei ihnen hängen. Also, es ist gut gegangen. Ich finde es dann schade, wenn die jungen Kinder, die vielleicht nicht so viel mitkriegen und nicht so viel von sich geben [nicht teilnehmen]. Sie nehmen es halt auf. Ich finde es nicht schlecht, wenn die mitmachen. Die lernen dann doch. Wie Alexa zeigt, einmal, sie hat nicht immer alles mitgekriegt, aber auf einmal kommt [sie] zu mir und fragt, ‘Marie, was heißt das? Und das ist ein daffodil’. Deshalb; das zeigt es dann. Ja, sie hat doch irgendwie aufgepasst und hat etwas mitgekriegt” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 19 “You see the difference: the older ones are more concentrated and die bekommen mehr mit als die Jüngeren, aber wenn man das immer laufend vorführt, ist es doch gut, wenn man das von jung auf [mitmacht]” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 20 Through her observations in the participatory demonstration lessons Marie could develop a positive attitude towards implementing English for all the children in her group. She agreed that no child should be excluded from taking part, be it because they could not speak the language of instruction yet or because they were too young. Furthermore, she observed that the children supported each other in a way that she would have only expected at school. This proved to her that in mixed age groups the children can learn English together and benefit and learn from each other: “Sie haben sich gegenseitig geholfen und wenn sie es nicht gewusst haben [und dachten], ‘Wie heißt das? ’ haben sie schon miteinander geredet, und das hätte ich mir nie gedacht. Ich habe gedacht, ‘In der Schule, okay, aber nicht im Kindergarten.’ Ja, da war ich wirklich [überrascht]” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 21 232 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="232"?> 22 The entire preschool went on an excursion to a farm while we were covering the theme ‘Farm Animals’. 23 Marie was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning? 24 Betty was talking about the children’s enthusiasm. Her positive attitude towards including all the children in English was further confirmed when she saw the positive effect of the children’s newly developed interest in other languages on her group as a whole. At the beginning of the project the children in Marie’s group were aware that different languages were spoken but according to her the children they did not consciously think about the other languages. A positive aspect of the project for her was that she had noticed that in the process of the children referring to the English that they knew, they also became aware of the possibility of knowing words in other languages, which generated curiosity and gave those languages recognition: “Positiv war, dass die Kinder selber auf das Englisch zurückgegriffen haben und darauf gekommen sind, ‘Ah, ich weiß das schon in Englisch,’ oder als wir beim Bauernhof waren, 22 die haben die Tiere auf Englisch benannt und gesagt, ‘Ah, schau ich kann es in der Sprache.’ Und es war dann nicht nur in Englisch, sondern sie haben es dann auch auf Bosnisch durchgegangen, auf Türkisch, wo die Kinder gewusst haben, in den Sprachen, und gefragt, ‘Wie heißt zum Beispiel jetzt Kuh in den unterschiedlichen Sprachen? ’ Das war ganz [überraschend], dass die Kinder auf das gekommen sind. Ihnen war extrem bewusst durch Englisch, dass jeder eine andere Sprache spricht. Das war vorher irgendwie so, ‘Ja, ich spreche das, ich spreche das’, aber [es war] nicht so bewusst. Das Bewusstsein ist eigentlich geweckt worden, dass es mehrere Sprachen gibt und man kann die lernen irgendwie. Also, das finde ich positiv” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 23 7.2.1.3 Betty’s re-assessment of her attitude Betty was the most sceptical of the teachers at the prospect of introducing English in the groups. She admitted that she was often reluctant to take on new ideas in general (→ chapter 6.2.4.4). “Aber ich bin oft vorher skeptisch” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 24 Betty’s scepticism diminished rapidly, and her attitude changed to one of curiosity and positive enthusiasm for the project when she saw the children’s responses in the trial phase (survey of cycles → chapter 6.3.1 and 7.1). A critical incident for Betty to review her attitude towards introducing English was her observation of one of her learners, Natia. Betty had been concerned about Natia because he had neither started speaking German nor 233 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="233"?> 25 Betty was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. 26 Betty was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. had he joined in in any of the preschool activities. She considered that it was through introducing English in her group that he was supported to participate and to start speaking German: “Wir haben zum Beispiel ein Kind, Natia. Er ist im September gekommen und ist ein afghanisches Kind und sprach kein Wort Deutsch. Gar nichts. Und wir haben uns schon Gedanken gemacht warum nicht. Nach einem halben Jahr fangen die meistens an zu sprechen. Jetzt fängt er an und wir verbinden es eigentlich mit dem Englischen. Es kommt dieses Englische und jetzt will er mitmachen, aber wir sagen ja nicht nur das englische Wort, wir sagen auch das deutsche. Also, kommt jetzt beides - beides zusammen bei ihm. Das Deutsche kommt und das Englische kommt” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 25 Betty had become aware of the benefits of the children drawing cross-lingual transfers when they were encouraged to do so through the teachers using both languages simultaneously when introducing a new activity in English, hoping that the children would benefit from their enthusiasm for learning English by being exposed to German at the same time: “Das ist faszinierend, dieses Kind auf einmal zu sehen. Der war die letzten Monate ganz anders. Aber ich weiß nicht warum, aber das macht ihm Spaß. Er will mitmachen beim Englischen, also lernt er auch das Deutsche. Es ist absolut faszinierend. Aber wir stellen es so dar, mit der Verbindung. Er hat bis jetzt nichts gesagt. Der hat nicht gesprochen. Und auf einmal geht dieses Kind auf ” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 26 Her conclusion that English was a catalyst for Natia to start speaking German proved not to be just an isolated incident that she experienced but she had continuously observed the same situation with other children. Betty was surprised and overwhelmed by the positive effects of her children making cross-references between languages, which she had not expected: “Aber ich erlebe das immer wieder. Ich erlebe das immer wieder, dass das so passiert. Ich war heute begeistert. Die Farben können sie noch, super, habe ich gedacht. Das fand ich toll. Und auch die neuen Kinder. Die neuen Kinder wachsen ja langsam herein. Sie bekommen immer wieder von dir was mit und machen so langsam mit. Anna ist das beste Beispiel. Anna ist erst seit September da - spricht sehr wenig, und letzte 234 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="234"?> 27 The preschool teachers observe the children and assess their German language compe‐ tence following the Besk -DaZ: Beobachtungsbogen zur Erfassung der Sprachkompe‐ tenz - Deutsch als Zweitsprache. 28 Betty said that the children were allowed to choose what they wanted to do in her lesson in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3) and that she was surprised how much the children were learning, which prompted her to say this comment. 29 Betty was asked to comment on: Are you managing to bring it into your routine? Woche Dienstag. So was habe ich da in meine Beobachtungszettel 27 genommen - Anna war begeistert. Sie hat bei dir mehr mitgemacht als bei mir im Morgenkreis, als in jedem anderen Morgenkreis, und heute auch. Sie war begeistert. Anna fasziniert mich im Moment. Wie im letzten Jahr, Natia - der über dich zum Sprechen gekommen ist, einfach über das Englische - so ist jetzt die Anna. Sie fasziniert dieses Englisch. Sie ist - total geht sie auf ” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 28 The participatory demonstration lessons in her own group resulted in her being convinced that combining English and German was not an issue but instead appropriate for her children as she could observe the enthusiasm and ease of the children making cross-references between languages. As the following quote demonstrates, she was convinced that teaching languages in a way that German was taught was inappropriate for children who needed to be exposed to languages in a playful, action-oriented way that they would enjoy: “Es bereichert eigentlich unseren Alltag. Es bereichert unsere Arbeit mit den Kindern. Es ist eigentlich schön. Durch das Englische wissen wir eh, lernen sie das Deutsche. Bin ich sicher, ganz sicher. Am Anfang war es ein Verdacht, aber es ist einfach so. Sie wollen dieses englische Wort sprechen und ich sag es auf Deutsch, dann lernen sie das Deutsch automatisch. Es ist einfach so. Es ist wirklich so. Alle anderen Kollegen sind jetzt wirklich auch der Meinung. Sie lernen das Deutsche über das Englische. Wir haben auch die Deutschsprachkurse in der Früh und das ist aber immer so dieses Schulische, dieser Druck - dann lernen sie nicht - über das Englische lernen sie es. Das klingt vielleicht öde, aber das ist so” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 29 The opportunity to observe all the children in the daily routine became equally significant for her to judge the potential and the appropriateness of early English. She observed how the children were looking forward to doing English and how they included English spontaneously while playing, which contributed to teachers’ enthusiasm to take part in the teacher development project. The children were learning English happily without being burdened at all. Quite the contrary effect could be observed: 235 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="235"?> 30 At the beginning of the interview, Betty enthusiastically commented on how much the children were learning. 31 Betty was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning, especially those who don’t yet speak German? 32 At the beginning of the interview, she enthusiastically talked about their outing to ‘Gut Aiderbichl’: a nearby farm (→ chapter 7.3.2), which prompted her to say this comment. “Wenn es den Kindern Freude macht. Wir sehen ja wie sie aufgehen, wie sie sich freuen, ‘Englisch ist - Englisch ist! ’ Und wenn wir aufräumen - ich läute immer und dann singen wir, ‘Aufräumen, aufräumen.’ Und jetzt geht’s immer, ‘Tidy up, tidy up.’ Es sind so die kleinen Dinge - ‘hold hands.’ Die kommen von den Kindern. Die kommen gar nicht mal von uns. Wir haben’s einmal gemacht und schon haben sie es genommen, weil es Freude macht. Es macht Freude. Es ist hängen geblieben. Das ‘tidy up’ ist hängen geblieben; manches vielleicht nicht und manches nehmen sie super auf ” (Betty, 23.10.15: Int. 12). 30 As a result of her observations, she no longer felt that the new children joining in who did not speak German was an issue. On the contrary: of the twenty children in her class eighteen children were learning German as a second language, but she noticed that they were all learning English with ease and that the new children were learning from the older children. Eventually, she firmly believed that younger children benefit from learning in mixed groups: “Wir haben in dieser Gruppe zwanzig Kinder und davon sind nur zwei mit Deutsch als Muttersprache. Achtzehn mit nicht deutscher Muttersprache und sie haben alle das Englisch ganz schnell aufgeschnappt. … In der großen Gruppe lernen die Jüngeren klar von den Größeren. Eine gemischte Gruppe ist immer sinnvoll” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 31 The in situ design of the model gave Betty the opportunities to observe situations that were meaningful to her and her children and it allowed her to use her pre-knowledge of the children to reflect on and make judgements about introducing English in her context. She confirmed that she was no longer sceptical and was enthusiastic about the project: “Ich bin begeistert. Ich find es toll, dass die Kinder so anspringen - dann weiß ich die Arbeit ist gut die wir tun. Es kommt an. Die Kinder lügen nie” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 32 “Am Anfang war ich sehr skeptisch. Habe ich schon erzählt. Viel zu viel für die Kinder, auch noch Englisch lernen. Wir haben nur zwei deutschsprachige Kinder in der Gruppe von zwanzig, aber - sie hat sich schon aufgelöst, meine Skepsis hat sich 236 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="236"?> 33 Betty was asked to comment on: What were your first thoughts towards the project? 34 We were observing the children playing an English guessing games in free play, which prompted her to say this comment (→ appendix 1: materials 3). definitiv aufgelöst. Wir sind begeistert. Wir geben es weiter an die Eltern und es ist einfach nur gut” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 33 Betty now felt she could convincingly argue that it is best for all of the children to learn English even if they cannot speak cannot yet speak German yet: “Ich erzähle das überall. Die lernen auch noch Englisch. Die Leute sagen, ‘Eure Kinder können noch nicht Deutsch’, und ich sage, das macht nichts. Englisch lernen sie trotzdem” (Betty, 24.05.16: 21). 34 7.2.1.4 Kathie’s re-assessment of her attitude Kathie started the project with a positive attitude towards integrating English in her group. She had always wanted to teach English and was pleased to have the possibility to learn how to do it. She felt that the children could learn German and English at the same time; nevertheless, she was a little sceptical after she had heard that English was integrated inclusively for all the children in the preschool as she was concerned that it would be too demanding for some of the children who were still learning German as a second language (→ chapter 6.2.4.5). But she soon realised that her concerns were ill-founded: she encountered a settled, relaxed learning environment as the project was well established when she first joined the preschool and she observed that the children enjoyed English and could learn German and English simultaneously. She showed her change in attitude towards teaching English inclusively by referring to Dilan, one of the youngest children, as an example. Dilan chose to answer in English when possible during the morning, although Kathie would have preferred the answer in German. It was not an issue for Kathie that Dilan did not answer in German, instead she was amused by it and saw it as a sign that it was appropriate to include all the children after all. Kathie was very relaxed about which language they spoke. The important factor for her was that the children enjoyed English: Kathie: … Dilan at the beginning had a big problem with German, but she had no problem with English. She talked to me, but not in German, in English, always in English. When I asked her, ‘Do you know that animal? ’ She didn’t say, ‘Das ist eine Katze’. She always said, ‘cat, dog’. Super, but I want to hear it in German (laughs). It’s very interesting. It’s funny for me [sic]. TE: Yes, but are you okay about that? Kathie: Yes, yes. 237 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="237"?> 35 Kathie was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning, especially those who don’t speak German? 36 Kathie was first asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning, especially those who don’t speak German? TE: Why do you think that happened? Kathie: The new children, they love English and the old children, they know you and they know the English lessons (the routines and the consolidated target language). Every child loves the English lessons. (Kathie, 08.06.17 Int. 34) 35 For Kathie the decisive criteria of whether it was appropriate to integrate English inclusively was the enjoyment the children had to take part and the evidence of them learning English. Again, the participating demonstration lessons that were organised in her own group seemed to be vital for her positive attitude to develop. She was reassured through the experience as she could observe the positive interaction between us all and that it was no burden for the children as English was taught in a playful way. Continuing the conversation (above), I was interested if she really felt that the new children would join English: TE: So, you are comfortable about the children who are learning German as a second language taking part at the beginning of the year? Kathie: I don’t think it is too much for them, because it isn’t frontal Unterricht. They play with you and when children play, they learn, and it is relaxed. Kindergarten isn’t like a school. In kindergarten they can play and in play they learn so much for their life and they also learn English. English isn’t a language for them, English is a play [sic]. (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34) 36 7.2.1.5 Summary of participating teachers’ re-assessment of their attitudes as a social community of practice Summarizing teachers’ common experiences as a community of practice it can be confirmed that they were all able to reflect on and re-assess their attitudes towards introducing English in their contexts. This was supported by the components the teacher education model had provided. Through the in situ design and participatory demonstration lessons the preschool teachers had the opportunity to gain experiential knowledge in a new area of language teaching that was organised within their own groups of children who they were familiar with and as a result they could reflect on the effects of learning English on the children as a group and on individual children in their groups. The provision of asking teachers to integrate English in their independent practical 238 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="238"?> work throughout the week contributed to their re-assessment of attitudes. It was essential for them to observe the responses of their children, which demonstrated that they were involved, that they participated with interest and ease and learnt English while they were enjoying the activities of the communicative English classroom. As preschool teachers have a particularly close affinity with their children, they are attuned to their needs and wishes and what they consider to be appropriate in their particular context. It cannot be said if the same effects would have been brought about had preschool teachers observed children from other preschool contexts. An issue that became evident throughout the interviews was preschool teachers’ lack of theoretical knowledge related to the general benefits of multilingual learning and language acquisition. It supported what Jim Cummins (2018) reflected in the introduction to a recently published volume on Language Awareness in Multilingual Classrooms in Europe that even though it is commonly accepted knowledge in applied linguistics that teachers need to encourage children to draw cross-lingual transfers and to support multilingual language awareness, the situation in classrooms today still reminded him of the way language learning was organised a number of decades ago when the languages of my childhood languished in solitary confinement. In this respect, the instructional assumptions underlying language teaching in many countries today have not changed much from what I experienced in my school years. … What Ingrid Gogolin (1994) called the ‘monolingual habitus’ continues to dominate all aspects of language education. For example, the increasing linguistic diversity in classrooms around the world as a result of population mobility is typically viewed as a problem to be resolved through monolingual instruction in the major school language rather than as a potential resource that can enrich learning and expand the identities of all students. (Cummins, 2018, p. V-VI; foreword to a volume on language awareness in multilingual classrooms). It would be an interesting research focus for another teacher education study to find out in what way a combination of practical experience and theoretical knowledge would contribute to preschool teachers’ attitude change of the potential of the linguistic diversity of children in multilingual classrooms so that “a more integrated and ecological approach to language education [would result] and … normalized assumptions about language and languages” would be questioned (Hélot et al., 2018, p. 1; referring to Blommaert 2010). 239 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="239"?> 37 Nadia said that she could not yet do sequencing but she used routines with familiar sentences, which prompt her to say this comment. 7.2.2 The teachers’ motivation to become involved in the process of teaching English to preschool children Describing the initial situation at the participating preschool: Through their existing attitudes and their reluctance to introduce English into their groups (→ chapter 6.2.4) the preschool teachers had not considered teaching it before; therefore, their motivation to take part in the teacher education project did not arise out of an ambition to teach English. Their initial interest was to see how the children would respond to the project. Drawing the consequences for the set-up of the teacher education: The preschool teachers would need to perceive the project to be relevant to their context that is, they would need to recognise the learning potential for the children and appreciate their contribution as educated English teachers as significant to the success of the project so that they could be motivated to invest their time and energy for the project. The teacher education model would have to be designed in a way that would motivate the preschool teachers to become involved in exploring the potential of implementing English for all the children in their context in an effective and sustainable way. This requirement resulted in the next research questions, which will be addressed in this chapter. Resulting research questions: Did the teacher education engage the teachers in the process to teach English, despite their initial reluctance to introduce it in their groups? What elements of the teacher education contributed to it? 7.2.2.1 Nadia’s motivation to become involved Nadia’s motivation to become involved was her fascination with the learning potential for the children. In my role of teaching the children cooperatively with the preschool teachers, I could increase the momentum of the children’s learning, which revealed to Nadia the children’s capabilities early on in the project (→ chapter 7.3.2). This stimulated her interest to pursue the children’s language development and motivated her to become involved in taking part in the teacher education project. She was interested to observe the ways in which the children would react to English when she spoke to them, as they were used to her speaking only in German: “Es ist interessant, wenn man eben dann Englisch redet mit den Kindern, wenn sie gewohnt sind, dass wir Deutsch sprechen mit ihnen und dann redet man dann auf einmal Englisch. Das ist sehr spannend” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 37 240 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="240"?> 38 Nadia was asked to comment on: What do you think of the children’s language? 39 Nadia was asked to comment on: When do they use English? 40 Nadia was talking about the initiative ‘Kindergarten means English’, which prompted her to say this comment. Nadia was surprised at the children’s capability to remember words and to spontaneously use the language. By observing how the children benefited edu‐ cationally from the project, Nadia became convinced that it was a worthwhile initiative: “Some children switch, and they use both languages and they remember the words. Ich bin erstaunt wie die [sich] die Sachen merken. Echt, also, wie Leon oder Magdalene, die merken sich echt viel und es kommt in verschiedenen Situationen heraus. 38 … When the black car went past, they called out, “Black car’. They say, ‘Shut the window,’ or, ‘shut the door’, when we are tidying up they say, ‘Be quiet’ [she laughs]” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 39 Nadia became curious about how the project would develop in the long run. As the composition of a group changes every year, the children would be at different levels of English. The idea of teaching all the children English in one group when their pre-knowledge of English would be at different levels intrigued Nadia. Her curiosity contributed to her motivation to take part in the project: “I find the project is so spannend. It is exciting, what comes out in the end. Das wird interessant, wenn die Großen gehen und da kommen neue Kinder und die Kleinen haben schon einen bestimmten Stand im Englisch. Es verändert sich das jetzt” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 40 It was through the participatory action research approach that Nadia recognised that it was the active participation of the preschool teachers which would make it possible to implement English systematically and effectively in her context. The support and the teacher development organised as a bottom-up experience where teachers could experience how it can be done and actually be able to observe the effects on the children were key factors for her to become motivated to take an active part in the project. A teacher educator who could demonstrate convincingly ‘how it can be done’ was fundamental for Nadia to reflect on the merits of the project. The teacher educator needed to play the role of a credible teacher model for Nadia to be motivated to become involved: “Ich denke, man müsste wirklich eine Art Lehrgang aufbauen, für Kindergärtne‐ rinnen, die Interesse haben - dass du denen dann das vermittelst. Du hast Recht, 241 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="241"?> 41 At the beginning of the interview, we talked about the project ‘Kindergarten means English’ in which the preschool teachers were expected to teach, which prompted her to say this comment. 42 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you feel about your teaching? 43 We were at the end of the interview. My closing words were to thank her and say that my aim was to see if it is possible to really implement English in preschool, which prompted her to say this comment. 44 Nadia was asked to comment on: At this stage how do you feel about the project and your participation? 45 Nadia was asked to comment on: What has motivated you during the project? man kommt nur über die Erwachsenen. 41 Wenn die sich sicher fühlen und sagen ich kann das machen, dann kann man das in den Kindergarten bringen. Man muss wirklich die Kindergärtnerinnen stärken; ihnen Werkzeug geben praktisch; Wissen geben, wie sie es machen sollen, dann könnte man das wirklich so wie der Magistrat das schreibt. Dann kann man es machen, aber nicht einfach ohne. … If you have no knowhow, I don’t know how you should do it. Es ist echt interessant. Ich bin schon gespannt auf das Ergebnis. Ich denk mir, es ist wirklich wichtig, dass du den Erwachsenen eben dieses Knowhow gibst, weil man sonst überfordert ist. Weil, wenn der Dienstgeber sagt, ‘Du machst das Projekt! ’ - aber ich weiß gar nicht wie [ich es machen soll], ist das einfach [eine] Überforderung, denke ich mir. It is also hard to go [to] a course [that is] offered and we have to write Kinderbeobachtungen and this and that, Wortstandsfeststellung” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int 10). 42 “I want to go on, I want to learn and stay in this project. I’m very excited of the results [sic] - and I give my best, I try it, but, ja, I hope it works” 43 (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 44 Once Nadia had developed the confidence in me as the teacher educator her motivation to take part in the teaching process was ultimately stimulated by being able to observe the children’s interest, enthusiasm and their capacity to take in the language: “Das Interesse der Kinder [hat mich motiviert], dass sie so interessiert waren und so viel Freude hatten eben, dass sie sich immer sehr gefreut [hatten] und auch der Lerngewinn, weil sie dann doch überraschenderweise so viel wussten. Ja, das freut einen dann auch” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 45 7.2.2.2 Marie’s motivation to become involved At the beginning of the project, it was important to Marie that any extra workload through new projects would need to be compatible with existing contextual demands and not a burden to her timetable. It was a motivating factor 242 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="242"?> 46 Marie was asked to comment on: What was your attitude and what are your thoughts about the project now? 47 The children learnt the song, ‘I Like the Flowers’. 48 Marie was asked to comment on: What has motivated you during the project? 49 Marie was asked to comment on: Do you feel you have benefited from the project? for her that the project would become the main project of the year without any other extra projects planned: “Now that I heard that we do the project again this year, I was really happy, because I know the children love it and me too and it is a great chance. Now we don’t have so many projects this year, I can do it” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 46 Marie’s motivation to become involved in the project was stimulated by the children learning and responding positively to English. It impressed her that the children could recall the English that they knew on their own accord: “Die Kinder [haben mich motiviert]. Ich finde die Kinder haben viel gelernt. Von selber - zum Beispiel am Montag, beim Ausflug, wir sind gegangen und wir haben irgendetwas gesehen und die habe oft selber übersetzt, ‘Ah schau a black cat’. … Oder mit den daffodils - das Lied. 47 Ich war total überrascht. Ich hätte es mir nie gedacht, dass Kinder das umsetzen können. Da bin ich nicht hingegangen und [habe] gesagt, ‘Schaut, das kennen wir aus dem Englischen’. Sondern die Kinder haben gesagt, ‘Schau, da sind daffodils, Marie. Schau mal, schau’. Dann haben sie das Lied gesungen. … und dann haben sie gesagt, ‘Wir können das Lied singen’, und die haben schon wieder begonnen. Ich war ganz hin und weg. Also, sie haben es immer wieder eingesetzt, wenn es ihnen in den Kopf gekommen ist” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 48 Marie was also motivated by ideas that she had collected during the project and from her evolving knowledge to teach the children English. For this reason, she was disappointed that she was leaving the project before the last year of the project had started: “Ich bin traurig, dass ich im Herbst gar nimmer dabei sein darf oder kann. … Ich werde einiges mitnehmen. Ich war auch motiviert, weil ich so viele neue Ideen gekriegt habe, wie zum Beispiel was ich umsetzen kann, weil ich hätte mir in Englisch nie vorstellen können, wie lernen die Kinder” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 49 7.2.2.3 Betty’s motivation to become involved Betty’s motivation to become involved in any projects or any preschool pro‐ grammes was very much influenced by the instant enthusiasm that her children showed (→ chapter 6.2.4.4). In the case of introducing English, the children 243 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="243"?> 50 Betty was asked to comment on the commonly heard statement in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. She had talked about Natia learning German through English (→ chapter 7.2.1.3), which prompted her to say this comment. 51 She was explaining that she planned according to the children’s reactions and interests, which prompted her to say this comment. 52 Betty told me her principles of following the children’s interests, which prompted her to say this comment. 53 Betty was talking about her own experience of understanding more and more in sermons that she listened to, which prompted her to say this comment. showed interest, enthusiasm and involvement from the beginning, which were the decisive factors for Betty to become motivated to take part in the teacher education project. She strongly followed her philosophy that she would do what the children were interested in at that moment in time because their interest indicated that they were learning. For as long as the children wanted to continue and did not become bored, she would be motivated to stay involved in the project: “Wenn dieses Fenster zu ist und die Kinder nicht wollen … dann geht auch nichts. Bin ich fest davon überzeugt. … Wenn es Spaß macht und es sie interessiert dann bleibt’s noch hängen. Wir sehen es beim Englischen ja” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 50 “Ich muss das machen was die Kinder interessiert, was in dem Moment wichtig ist. … Ich bin nur begeistert, wenn die Kinder anspringen. Ich merke, das interessiert die Kinder” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 51 “Wenn sie es aber mögen, singen wir, bis sie nicht mehr mögen. Das ist doch was wir gelernt haben - auf die Kinder zu reagieren”. … Wenn sie es mögen so lange ziehen wir es durch. Vielleicht haben wir mal ein Tief zwischendurch. Wo es mal langweilig ist. Keine Ahnung. Werden wir ja sehen auf unserm Weg” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 52 For her involvement in the teaching process, it was vital that the education was situated in her own group, because the children’s responses were Betty’s prime source for her impetus to teach. She may not have developed the interest or incentive to learn to teach English if the participatory demonstration lessons had taken place in a set-up outside the preschool. She was impressed to see how the children in her group were engaged and attentive during the lessons, listening to the sound of the language even though they could not understand it all: “Du sprichst mit den Kindern Englisch und dann denke ich mir immer - sie sind so still, sie können nicht alles verstehen, trotzdem lauschen sie dieser Sprache, diesem Klang. Sie hören einfach zu” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 53 244 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="244"?> 54 The teachers were asked to comment on: I’d like to brainstorm with you on ideas for next year. Have you got any ideas for further developments? What should we change, what should we keep? What do you think? 55 Betty was taking about the children’s achievements, which prompted her to say this comment. 56 This is referring to her ‘English Wall’ of farm animals and the food mentioned in the book, ‘The Hungry Caterpillar’. 57 I went into her room at the end of the morning and children were standing at the English wall naming the animals, which prompted her to say this comment. 58 I was talking about introducing a rhyme that the children could say for classroom management to make a circle (the words are: On my right the chair is free, I want x next to me), which prompted her to say this comment. 59 She was talking about the implementation of the project, expressing what she would like to see happen, which prompted her to say this comment. Similar to her colleagues Betty was overwhelmed by the learning capacity of the children to remember words and play English games in which they needed to use chunks of language that they had learnt: “Ich bin überwältigt von dem was die Kinder wirklich umsetzen. Wie du sagst (to Nadia) von dem Spiel, ‘Do you have…? ’ die spielen es überall - die spielen es im Bus, sie spielen es draußen, sie spielen es im Gruppenraum” (Betty, 22.07.16: int. 23). 54 “Heute war es für mich faszinierend. Wenn ich sehe, was haben die Kinder behalten. Das ist für mich absolut toll. Dann weiß ich doch es ist super, es ist gut so wie es läuft” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 55 Their English knowledge and learning capacity were clearly a motivating factor for Betty. She became ambitious to try out new word-fields and new chunks of language, whether in rhymes or daily communication with the children: “Wenn man die Kinder sieht, die Kleine, wie die davor stehen 56 und wiederholen. Das ist toll, einfach toll. Und wir machen es mit der Raupe jetzt auch. Also, jetzt ist Obst, Wochentage. Ich denke das ist was sie können” (Betty, 05.05.15: int. 6). 57 “Das ist schon schwierig. Das ist schon ein ganzer Satz. Das ist gut. So müssen wir anfangen” (Betty 21.05.15: int. 5). 58 “Die [Phrasen] müssen dann hineinkommen, so langsam, im Tagesablauf, dass die Kinder so switchen, switchen. Wie nennt sich das? Zwischen einer Sprache und der anderen. Das können Kinder, ja. Ein bisschen Englisch, bisschen Deutsch. Das würde ich mir wünschen” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 59 As the children gained their pre-knowledge from teaching the children cooper‐ atively (→ chapter 7.3.2). It proved to be a vital feature that provided the source of motivation for Betty to become actively involved the teaching process 245 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="245"?> 60 Betty was asked to comment on: Would you prepare compete lessons like this again? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). Betty had just commented that she is not the one to plan lesson, but instead the one to respond spontaneously to what the children want to do, which prompted her to say this comment. She is referring to the activity of dressing snowmen while singing the song that is connected to the activity (→ appendix 1: materials 3d). 61 Betty was asked to comment on: What has motivated you during the project? even though she was neither confident in her communicative English language competence nor in her capabilities to learn to teach English (→ chapter 6.2.4.4). Betty appreciated the educational potential of the project and the importance of researching the feasibility of its implementation for preschool education. Taking part in the participatory action research project provided the means by which she could gain confidence and the motivation to continue and become committed long-term to integrate English and assess the impact of our work: “Schneemänner haben wir gemacht. Das fanden sie alle toll. Alle Kinder aus allen Gruppen haben das bei mir gespielt, mit den großen Schneemännern. Da waren sie begeistert immer wieder. Also das bleibt da noch hängen, wenn es lang genug liegt. Da bin ich gespannt. So etwas interessiert mich dann auch immer. Was ist hängen geblieben. Hat es eine Auswirkung auf die Kinder? Bleibt was hängen? Das würde ich auch gern wissen. Und ich würde es gern wissen auf längere Zeit. Nicht nur für ein Jahr oder ein halbes, sondern, wirklich, kann man in vier Jahren noch immer etwas sehen. Das würde ich auch gerne wissen. Das ist das auch, was mich interessiert. Weil das bringt meiner Arbeit nichts, oder deiner Arbeit, wenn wir es machen und es hat langfristig keine Auswirkung” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 60 In her last interview, when she was asked what sustained her motivation throughout the project, not surprisingly, her response was that the children had motivated her. She explained that her profession is her passion and when she sees that the children enjoy taking part that is sufficient motivation to become involved in any project. It indicated to her that a project or programme is appropriate for her and her context: “Die Kinder haben mich motiviert. Es sind immer die Kinder. Mein Beruf ist für mich Leidenschaft und wenn ich sehe die Kinder mögen was gerne, dann ist das Motivation genug. Wenn die Kinder das gern machen, dann passt alles” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 61 7.2.2.4 Kathie’s motivation to become involved From the outset, Katie’s motivation was related to her personal interest to develop professionally: she wanted to gain knowledge and become competent 246 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="246"?> 62 Proper lessons is Kathie’s terminology for teaching English following task plans with clearly outlined target tasks and related language chunks. 63 Kathie was asked to comment on: What motivated you the most during the project? 64 Kathie was asked to comment on: What motivated you the most during the project? to teach English in preschool. She enjoyed speaking English and was confident in her language skills, which contributed to her motivation to integrate English in her daily routine. Kathie had already wanted to initiate English in her programme in the previous preschool, which she was not permitted to do, but at the same time when reflecting on giving English lessons she decided that she needed instruction and experience to feel confident when giving lessons (→ chapter 6.2.4.5). These factors led Kathie to be highly motivated and to be ambitious to participate in the research project: “I always wanted to do English, you know, songs and rhymes. But now I want to do proper lessons. 62 They are really good. They are not just any English but [are] planned. The children learn so much” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 63 The positive feedback I gave her also motivated her further. It confirmed that she was doing well, which gave her confidence in her ability to teach. She was also motivated by the fact that the children gave her their attention, which created a positive teaching atmosphere to support her: “You, also you. You have motivated me, when you say, ‘So, this part of the English lesson you can do it,’ like reading the book and then doing the games. So, I was not afraid of this and you always say, ‘Yes, it’s good, it’s okay,’ and you helped me a little bit. Yes, and that is what motivated me. What helps is that the children always look at me and answer” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 64 7.2.2.5 Summary of participating teachers’ motivation to become involved in the teaching process as a social community of practice Summarizing teachers’ common experiences as a community of practice it can be confirmed that the teacher education did engage the teachers in the process to teach English, despite their initial reluctance to introduce it in their groups. As regards the way the elements of the teacher education contributed to teachers’ motivation to participate, it can be said that the recurrent themes that emerged through the data may be divided in two categories: contextual demands and support and features of the teacher education. As could be seen, teachers repeatedly referred to contextual demands and support in the interviews as being decisive factors. They all unanimously agreed that no extra burden would be accepted as contextual demands already were 247 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="247"?> encumbering from their perspectives. As extra support could not be expected to diminish contextual constraints, the design of teacher education model would need to take this contextual reality seriously and provide the support needed to meet the challenges. From the support provided, the teachers explicitly mentioned that teacher education offered as in situ gave them the opportunity to become aware of the positive effects the extra language had on their children through their observations and active participation. As preschool teachers are attuned to their children’s dispositions, needs and wishes the children’s commitment and progress in learning had a significant impact on the teachers’ motivation to participate in the teacher education project. Their observations of the enthusiasm that the children showed, the initiative they demonstrated to use English independently in various situations and the language learning abilities that they revealed in the lessons motivated the preschool teachers to be interested in the children’s language learning progress and as a consequence, to become motivated to continue and to be engaged. They had become enthusiastic to teach the children and curious to see the outcome. Finally, they were fascinated by the children’s ability to absorb the language and to see how they made use of their plurilingual competences by switching between languages in a playful way. Of all the components the teacher education model considered, the teacher educator as role-model proved to be paramount. Dimensions that were brought up by the preschool teachers in the interviews focused on the teacher educator’s credibility because what she demonstrated was based on her extensive practical experience in preschool English teaching; on the rapport she managed to establish with the children which created the relaxed learning atmosphere that is required; her ability to motivate the teachers and dedication to her work and her sincerity to the project which were inspiring and finally her relationship with the participating teachers which did not focus on what preschool teachers could not do yet but what they were already able to do with support, which resulted in a relationship of trust and progress for all concerned. All of the teachers recognised that there was potential in the project and therefore they became motivated and willing to stay involved. 7.2.3 The teachers’ developing English teaching competences Describing the initial situation at the participating preschool: The preschool teachers had little or no knowledge and skills on how to teach English to the children. They had sung a song every now and again or did not integrate any English activities at all in their daily routine. Two of the teachers were not 248 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="248"?> confident in their communicative English language competence, nevertheless they did feel comfortable to speak English to both to the children and to me. One teacher did not feel comfortable to speak English at all to the children and did not speak English to me either. The fourth participating teacher was fluent (→ chapter 6.2.4). Drawing the consequences for the set-up of the teacher education: The teacher education project would need to support the teachers to develop their English teaching skills together with their communicative English language competence through experiential learning. The teacher education model had to be designed in a way that would offer the preschool teachers opportunities to observe the actual teaching process in action and to take an active part in that process. This requirement resulted in the next research questions, which will be addressed in this chapter. Resulting research questions: Did the teachers gain competences in integrating English tasks in their daily routine in a way that suited their teacher personality? What individual personal strategies did they develop in this process? Did the teachers gain English teaching competences to create a ‘powerful learning environment for language learning’? Did they develop the confidence to use the foreign language in the classroom? Structure of presentation of teachers’ competence development: The presenta‐ tion of results retraces teachers’ competence development according to the purposes of the teacher education which were defined in chapter 5.8 The content of the teacher education. The general competence that would support them to be able to create ‘a powerful language learning environment’ for the children comprised the three skills: creating a positive and safe language learning environment; providing tasks that are meaningful to children and integrating interactional support when teaching. As in the previous chapters when preschool teachers’ re-assessment of their attitudes towards introducing English in preschool (→ chapter 7.2.1) and their motivation to become involved in the process of teaching English to preschool children (→ chapter 7.2.2) were discussed, their English teaching competences will not be presented by describing the order of their developmental steps. Instead, it will be described how teachers responded as individual teacher personalities to the teacher education that they had participated in and in what ways the components of the teacher education model contributed to their development. Each case study will therefore be structured as follows: 249 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="249"?> a. The teacher’s profile as preschool teacher and her general attitude towards teaching English in the preschool Each case study will be introduced by a brief summary to re-cap on the preschool teacher’s individual profile which is related to her teaching personality and her communicative English language competence. This is followed by a description of the teacher’s general attitude towards introducing English in the preschool (→ chapter 6.2.4). b. The teacher’s personal strategies to implement English in their groups (focus: process) The individual personal strategies that the preschool teacher has devel‐ oped to integrate English in her daily routine will be presented. It will be discussed which of the components of the teacher education supported her. c. The teacher’s competences to create a powerful learning environment for language learning (focus: outcome) This will be followed by summarizing what teachers managed to achieve in the English language classroom by the end of the project. It presents each teacher’s competences following the structure of the ‘powerful learning environment for language learning’ model, which is appropriate for teaching English in preschool (→ chapter 5.8.2.). It comprises three competence areas: creating a positive and safe language learning envi‐ ronment; designing meaningful relevant tasks and providing interactional support. As in b) it will relate a teacher’s competence development to the support that the teacher education components have provided. d. The teacher’s communicative English language competence The last section focuses on the development of each teacher’s communi‐ cative English language competence in the classroom and again relates it to the support that the teacher education components provided. 7.2.3.1 Nadia’s English teaching competences a) Nadia’s profile as preschool teacher and her general attitude towards teaching English in a multilingual preschool context Nadia was aware what it entailed to teach a language. She had sung some English songs in her group but acknowledged that singing a few songs did not qualify as teaching English. Although she had completed a course for German as a second language, she did not feel that this had prepared her to teach a foreign language. She was also not confident when she was speaking in English, although she could converse comfortably to me and also spoke English 250 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="250"?> 65 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? to the children during the participatory demonstration lessons. Nadia was well organised and efficient in her timetable. She planned her daily programme and carried it though systematically. Her circle times were likewise well planned. She did not allow the children to change her plans through their spontaneous wishes at any particular time. Nadia’s organisation and her careful planning provided a good basis to support her to teach English which gave her a sense of security. When she was integrating English, it was important for her to do it in a structured way. This involved making it clear to the children when they were learning English and when they were concentrating on their regular preschool work, which meant that she was speaking German. As the children were learning German through the immersion method, she felt that she needed to make sure that the children would not be confused by mixing the two languages. When she talked to them, it had to be clearly either in English or in German. This concern very much influenced the way she integrated English in her routine. She therefore offered it during the structured time of circle time, in the gym or in snack time, when she could direct the conversation to consolidate the children’s English. She believed that this clear demarcation of situations supported the children to be able to identify which language was targeted in an activity or task: “I think it’s difficult for these young children to unterscheiden - to make a difference between English and German - and then it’s good you have this ritual, this circle, or whatever and then they know [whether it is English or German]. Ich glaube dann können das die Kinder verbinden. [They would think] ‘Ah, zu der Zeit: das ist Englisch’. You focus it on a special time in the day. Ich denke mir, children who can speak German very well - or [when if it is] their mother tongue - it is easier to speak English, to say the phrases: Shut the door. Sie vertauschen es nicht so einfach. Children who have another mother tongue, it’s very difficult for them to know what’s German, what’s English. I think” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int 2). 65 She was pleased to be given ideas on how to teach English effectively through the participatory demonstration lessons, because she could not only use them to teach English, but she could also transfer the methods to teaching German which she considered to be a very effective way to learn and to develop: 251 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="251"?> 66 Nadia was asked to comment on: Are you managing to bring it in your routine? Have you found it easy or difficult to continue English on your own during the week? 67 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you bring teacher talk in routine, where you would say ‘shut the door’, for example? ” 68 Nadia was asked to comment on: Have you found it easy or difficult to continue English on your own during the week? Nadia: This kind of, I don’t know the term you used. [It] is a Fachausdruck, ‘jump, jump, jump, jump’. TE: Total physical response. Nadia: Yes, and I make [sic] it in English and in German. It’s so fine these ideas. I can do in English and in German also, in every language, but the ideas are so good. Yes, I learn so much. (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10) 66 As Nadia was concerned that the children who were in the process of still learning German would be confused by mixing languages, she communicated in English only when it was planned during the structured times. She felt she could integrate English spontaneously throughout the week only with children who could already speak German well. With this in mind, she would have to decide at any particular moment during the busy morning routine which children she could address in English and which ones she would need to communicate within German. Therefore, she would use chunks of language spontaneously with some of the older children, but it did not develop into a routine or habit to integrate chunks of English language to manage classroom interaction at any time during the morning, such as asking a child to close the door: “It’s hard to [bring teacher talk into the routine] because we have so many little - young children, who don’t understand even German. So, I also have to switch, “Okay, he understands German, I can make [sic] English. Das ist schwierig. Was ist wichtiger momentan? ” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 67 At the end of the trial phase Nadia had established her allocated times to integrate English on a regular basis, a procedure that she continued to follow throughout until the project finished. The times she allocated to teaching English were always planned, not only because it helped her to keep the two languages separate, but also because she considered it to be a logistical challenge to integrate English as a natural component in her daily routine: “It’s difficult [to integrate it in the routine], but it’s easier when I have some fix points, like morning circle. Then I can organise it well. 68 To do English with the children is not hard, not at all. We make [sic] songs and games and die Geschichte, the story 252 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="252"?> 69 A children’s story: ‘Dad and the Cat’, by Tony Blundell. 70 The rhyme: ‘We’re Going Up’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4b). 71 Nadia was asked to comment on: What about you, have you found it easy or difficult to integrate English, you, yourself ? How do you integrate English into your routine? 72 Nadia was asked to comment on: Are you going to continue the project after it officially ends? How do you feel about your teaching, now at the end of the project? 73 The ‘Weather Witch’ is part of the English lesson routine in which the children help the witch make the weather soup of the day (→ appendix 1: materials 2a). 74 After the lesson I said: The children are all joining in. It’s wonderful. This prompted her to say this comment. It is significant that the children joined in, because without Nadia repeating the language during the week, they would not have enough contact time to consolidate their English to be able to verbally join in. about ‘Dad and the Cat’. 69 They love Wiederholungen. I can read it one hundred times and the song to go with it” 70 (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 71 b) Nadia’s personal strategies to implement English in her group (focus: process) Nadia developed competences to integrate English tasks in her group. She had acquired the knowledge and the skills in a very organised and structured way that corresponded to her professional idea of self: “I have learnt so much and I have so much material. At the beginning, I couldn’t take this and that for different times of the year. Ich fühle mich sicher, weil ich weiß eben die vorherigen Methoden, wie du es machst. Ich kann mir gut vertrauen, natürlich [mache ich manches] ein bisschen anders und schon einfacher halt. Ein bisschen vom Level her niedriger” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 72 Two personal strategies that she used to integrate English could be identified from the data: 1. Integrating English on a regular basis during the structured times of the timetable. 2. Using routines with guessing games and rhymes to organise classroom management. Personal strategy # 1: Integrating English on a regular basis during structured times As has been already described above, Nadia depended on designated times to integrate English in her busy weekly timetable: “On Friday I have an English time and it works well. I make a morning circle and I do the rituals every time, the ‘Weather witch; 73 is a great Einstieg - beginning - and ‘The Good Morning Song’ of course, and then I read a story or play a game” (Nadia, 21.04.15: int. 4). 74 253 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="253"?> 75 She told me that she did her lessons on Fridays (footnote above), which prompted her to say this comment. 76 Nadia was asked to comment on the everyday statement that is often heard in connection with introducing English in preschool: Children should learn German first. 77 A game that is called ‘The King and Queen Game’ (→ appendix 1: materials 3a). 78 I said to Nadia that English could be done at any time in the preschool routine, which prompted her to say this comment. She took care to have an allocated time slot to teach English so that she would be able to consistently integrate it in her preschool programme. She needed to provide the space to devote to it: “Es dauert einfach eine Zeit, bis man sich darauf einstellt. It needs time. I need a special English time to remind myself and that’s then easier. On Friday, or snack time to say English words and phrases. I think that is important for me, because I have to do this and do that. I need these situations or times where [I can think], ‘Okay, now it is English’ That’s important for me” (Nadia, 21.04.15: int. 4). 75 She felt she could use these designated times of the day where the children were concentrated and focused to experiment for herself and to try things out in this secure framework: “Also, das beim Morgenkreis und Jause [snack-time], wirklich in Englisch und in Deutsch - das probiere ich einfach einmal aus. I can try things out then. Beim Morgenkreis kann ich das gut ausprobieren” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 76 Nadia used the different times of her morning routine which she had allocated to teach English to offer the children various contexts to consolidate their English, for example in snack time she took the opportunity to repeat the language she had covered in her circle time when playing ‘The Kind and Queen Game’: 77 “Im Morgenkreis ist eine super Zeit. Morning circle is a good time to sing English songs and also read stories. It’s a good time. Also, für kurze Einheiten: short, not too long - or bei der Jause eben: [to name] the fruits and the vegetables, dass man die in Englisch benennt. Und immer wieder das zu wiederholen ist gut. Das glaube ich ist wichtig und das Ritual: dass man mit den Kindern so ein bisschen ein Ritual entwickelt - gerade bei unseren Kindern ist das wichtig - they know, ‘Okay, we start with ‘The Good Morning Song’ and so on, that they know what is happening” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 78 “The game with the food and picnic is good, because we play it in circle time and then we can repeat the food and the phrases when we have our Jause. We name 254 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="254"?> 79 Nadia was asked to comment on: What about you, have you found it easy or difficult to integrate English, you, yourself ? How do you integrate English in your routine? 80 Nadia was asked to comment on: Has the project helped you to develop your own ideas? 81 Nadia was asked to comment on: Let’s talk about the lessons you gave. Here I am referring to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). them in English and German too - or in the gym we make movement games - Bewegungsspiele” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 79 The content of her Friday English circle time consisted mainly of the songs, games and stories of the participatory demonstration lessons: “Ich orientiere mich an dem was ich bei dir sehe, aber es gibt auch so Anregungen, wenn ich was lese in der Fachliteratur oder ich sehe was im Fernsehen und denke wir könnten das verbinden. Also ich probiere schon etwas Neues aus, aber ich orientiere mich hauptsächlich an deinen Sachen oder Anregungen” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 80 Nadia did not have the time to spend on preparing her own teaching materials and to develop her own ideas to supplement her teaching resources. It was through using the materials and lesson plans, which I had provided that supported Nadia to consistently integrate English regularly in allocated time slots which she established for English throughout the week: “Dieser Fixpunkt, dieser Morgenkreis, ist für mich wichtig, da kann man wirklich eine schöne Einheit machen und das andere versuch ich halt einzubauen. Nach meinen Möglichkeiten, das ist aber schwierig - ja - muss man ehrlich sagen. Es ist nicht einfach so, dass ich sage, ‘Ich gestalte eine halbe Stunde’ - muss ich mir auch Gedanken machen - Dinge vernetzen - was passiert gerade im Kindergarten an Themen - wie greif ich das auf - es geht nicht so schnell. Es ist nicht so einfach. Man braucht ein Konzept und das muss durchgedacht sein und eben auch die Wiederholungen - dass es ineinander übergeht - das ist viel Arbeit. Und das gibst du uns. Daher kann ich es machen” (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 81 The components of the teacher education that supported Nadia to structure her English teaching for circle time were the participatory demonstration lessons and the task plans. They provided her with the knowledge and the skills, which she could then transfer to her own circle times and in the gym lessons: “Die Stundenbilder sind super. Wie ich gesagt habe, wenn man es alleine ausprobiert, dann da kann man sie wirklich festhalten [she means: referring to the task plans for orientation as though they are a course book] und schauen, ‘Ah wie ist das noch einmal? Wie ist der Zusammenhang? ’ [she means: what makes the task plan coherent] 255 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="255"?> 82 Nadia was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 83 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you bring teacher talk in your routine? 84 A rhyme to line up at the door (see next footnote). 85 Nadia is referring to asking the children to line up in a certain order at the door by saying the colours that they are wearing. 86 We were talking about movement. I said crawl is kriechen in German. She connected crawling to lining up at the door with the song, for example ‘One and two and three and four, Sally crawls to the door’ and through this made a connection to routines and rituals (→ appendix 1: materials 2b-1). Oder der Ablauf und diese Fragen noch einmal [she means: the chunks of language to ask the children questions]. Dieses teacher talk einbeziehen: also, das finde ich immer gut, weil dann kann man wirklich sie da festhalten. Das ist wichtig - diese Stundenbilder” (Nadia, 22.07.16: int. 22). 82 Personal strategy # 2: Using routines with guessing games and rhymes to organise classroom management. Nadia had found it complicated to randomly integrate English in the daily routine. It was neither an approach that supported her strategy of integrating English in an organised way, nor did it support her idea of making sure the children could rely on and be certain when she was speaking in German or in English. Rituals and routines helped here: “Security: Die Waage between security and new things: rituals and routines, they are security. The children know them and understand. They know, ‘Now it is English and now it is German’” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 83 As the lessons were based on tasks, they consisted of routines and rituals which are associated with real communicative situations to manage interaction in a foreign language classroom, such as telling everybody that it was time to tidy up together or to select children to help organise a particular area of classroom management. As Nadia felt more comfortable to integrate English by carefully planning it, the routines and rituals also offered her the possibility to integrate English in a clear way at times that were not within the structure of circle time, movement in the gym or during snack time: “Das kann man dann leicht einbauen, ‚Crawl to the door‘. 84 Alles zum Ritual - zum Beispiel wenn sie aufräumen sollen, sing ich immer, ‘Tidy up, tidy up’. Das singe ich eben auf Englisch zuerst, dann auf Deutsch, ‚Aufräumen, aufräumen, jedes Kind‘. Und anstellen bei der Tür. Die Kinder kennen sich aus. Und Auflockerung mit TPR oder wie du das machst mit den Farben” 85 (Nadia, 10.03.17: int. 29). 86 256 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="256"?> 87 We were talking about sequencing tasks and teacher talk, which prompted Nadia to say this comment. 88 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you use teacher talk spontaneously in your English circle times? 89 Nadia is referring to the fact that they understand very little and therefore the morning is difficult for them to cope with the new routine, the children and the staff. 90 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? 91 ‘Round and Round the World’: A rhyme to choose a child (→ appendix 1: materials 2b-5). 92 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you differentiate? “Total physical response das mach ich viel als Auflockerung. Das taugt den Kindern. Ich mache es aber dann trotzdem auf Englisch und dann immer auch auf Deutsch, aber betont in Englisch und dann aber auch auf Deutsch, weil ich denk mir die Kinder - die eben nicht Deutsch sprechen - sie verbinden das total und sie sprechen es auf beiden Sprachen total gut mit” (Nadia, 12.01.16: int. 15). 87 “I also say, shut the door and be quiet, these things. I say them in German too” (Nadia, 10.03.17: int. 29). 88 c) Nadia’s competences to create a powerful learning environment for language learning (focus: outcome) A positive and safe language learning environment Nadia’s main concern was that the children would learn German as quickly as possible in order to understand what was happening around them and feel comfortable in their environment. Consequently, her focus was on the individual children who she wanted to support to develop at their respective level at their own convenient pace. She transferred her idea of focusing on the individual child when she integrated English in her group. She was aware of the children who were shy and therefore she would encourage them to take part in her lessons by asking them if they would like to help her rather than if they wanted to perform an activity independently on their own: “I have to watch the younger children very closely. It is very difficult for them. Kindergarten is difficult for them. 89 Man muss ja sehr unterscheiden wie weit ist welches Kind vom Sprachstand her. Dann geht’s; dass man wirklich differenziert. This is also for the shy children. How do they feel in the English lesson? Das ist schon wichtig” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 90 “I ask the shy children to help me: if they want to help me to say ‘Round and Round the World’, 91 but I ask the others if they want to do it [by themselves]. But I help them all and I know the children who don’t want to do it. I don’t ask them” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 92 257 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="257"?> 93 Rhymes and guessing game for lining up at the door (→ appendix 1: materials 2b-1). 94 I said to Nadia that English could be done at any time in the preschool routine, which prompted her to say this comment. 95 Betty commented that she mostly played games with the children, which prompted Nadia to say this comment. Nadia established her positive safe language learning environment through routines and rituals. She considered them to be an essential part of the English lesson so that the children would feel comfortable through the familiarity and therefore would know what was happening around them at any particular moment. As a result, the children would be able to feel safe (→ strategy # 2) and be able to concentrate on the task at hand: “… Gerade bei unseren Kindern ist das wichtig - they know, ‘Okay, we start with ‘The Good Morning Song’’, and so on, that they know what is happening. They know it is English time and what is happening from Wiederholungen, bei der Durchführung von Ritualen: dann passt alles - sie kapieren was los ist und sie können sich auf die Sache konzentrieren. Like choosing each other - a rhyme or a guessing game. 93 They know what to do” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 94 Meaningful relevant tasks Nadia encouraged the children to speak, by using guessing games and rou‐ tines that she selected from the participatory demonstration lessons. She found guessing games to be meaningful to the children, for example, because in general children enjoy finding out answers for themselves. The excitement that the children demonstrated when they were playing the English games confirmed to her that they were meaningful to them: “Die Kinder machen einfach mit. Sie wollen raten und dann sprechen sie Englisch. Und sie kennen sich aus. Die Regeln sind alle ziemlich gleich. Sie sind dann so aufgeregt. 'The Rainbow Game’ ist sehr aufregend. Das spielen wir oft im Turnsaal” (Nadia, 22.07.16: int. 22). 95 She used routines in her lessons and during the week because she knew that the children enjoyed joining in to organise their group and that it therefore qualified as a meaningful task for them to do. She could encourage the children to speak because the routines called on each child individually to contribute to attaining the task. She noticed this because she observed that because the children enjoyed choosing each other, it was easy for her to encourage them to take part when they were doing something meaningful together. But Nadia did not design her own tasks: 258 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="258"?> 96 Children choose each other one after the other through a rhyme or a guessing game (→ appendix 1: materials 2b). 97 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you integrate English in your routine? 98 At snack time the food is on the table and they offer and pass the bowls to each other. 99 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you do it in snack time? This question was prompted by Nadia talking about revising the English chunks in snack-time that she had covered in her circle time. 100 Nadia was asked to comment on: What has motivated you during the project? “The children want to choose their friends and so they speak English. Das ist schon gut eingeführt. Ich sage nur, ‘Let’s line up at the door’, und sofort zeigen sie auf and then I choose a rhyme, or they describe each other. 96 They love helping and organising. Like organising snack. They love putting the plates and glasses on the table” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 97 To help the children develop an awareness of form Nadia was conscious of using language chunks and varying them in different contexts of the recurring structured times. For example, in snack time she followed this through taking advantage of the food word-fields to create new chunks (→ strategy # 2): “We always say, ‘Do you like bananas, carrots, apples? ’ It’s very important that it is right - grammatically right. When I repeat the sentence, I have to do it right. Like then to say, ‘Pass me the bananas, please’ or also, ‘Give me the bananas,’ damit ich noch etwas anders sagen kann, It’s not reach me the bananas” - or we say ‘Do you want the bananas’” 98 (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 99 Interactional support Nadia chose to work with games and routines because she knew she could motivate the children to interact with each other if they contributed to teamwork in the games or when they participated in organising classroom management. Nadia, however, found it difficult to trust the younger children to do the tasks on their own. Through her observations in the participatory demonstration lessons Nadia noticed that the smaller children were able to learn more than she had realised. Consequently, she concluded that she could have more confidence in these children: “Alina ist wirklich still in Deutsch. Also sie spricht wenig und dann merkt man erst was sie sich wirklich merkt. Das hätte ich nie gedacht. Neri hat mich auch überrascht, weil sie in Deutsch nicht so große Lernvorschritte macht; teilweise auch die Dianna - weil bei ihr auch ein bisschen so die Aufmerksamkeit fluktuiert, aber sie merkt sich doch viel eigentlich. Ich könnte ihr mehr zutrauen” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 100 259 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="259"?> 101 Nadia was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 102 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? In the participatory demonstration lessons, Nadia continued however to readily help the younger children to say chunks of language to the point that when a child was chosen to say a rhyme on their own, she would still habitually join in at the same time to support the child, before she had given the child a chance to do it independently. I recommended to Nadia that she should try to refrain from immediately supporting the children who she considered to need it, to briefly pause after her prompt and give the child a chance to say it on her / his own first: “Die Reime helfen den Kindern sehr - zum Sprechen zu animieren. Sie machen sofort mit. Ah, aber ich muss eben mich noch immer zurückhalten. I find it really hard not to help. I forget to wait and see. Finde ich echt schwer” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 101 But she did not need to stop and think with the older children, because she believed that they were able to learn English easily and could therefore achieve the tasks at hand. Nadia thought it would be a good idea to integrate teacher talk spontaneously during the morning to be able to address the children who were quite advanced. However, this was kept to a minimum. She found it difficult to integrate English outside of her structured framework that she had built up for herself: “Also, ich denk mir wirklich, so eben eine Josyline, die clever ist und eben auch gut Deutsch spricht, für die ist es sicher doch super, wenn ich mit ihr rede - this teacher talk - aber es gibt auch die Spezialisten wie Sava, Leon und Lena” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 102 Nadia’s case demonstrates how a concern to care for what she considers to be weak children who cannot be exposed to demanding, challenging experiences, may result, - quite inadvertently - in excluding individual children which ultimately results in putting them at an unreasonable disadvantage. d) Nadia communicative English language competence Nadia’s language competence level did not change during the project. She kept a repertoire of language chunks which she would use during her lesson. As she considered it to be important for the children to clearly recognise whether she was speaking German or English, her personal engagement to teach English was limited to her planned lessons and rituals. Her intention was to always plan the language which she would use in her lesson perfectly and well in 260 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="260"?> 103 ‘Hiding the Animals’ is a language game to encourage discourse between the children (→ appendix 1: materials 3 f). 104 Nadia was asked to comment on: Is it easier to speak English with the children now? advance. Occasionally, however, she encountered language learning situations in which the language she needed could not have been foreseen. As a result, she learnt to cope with this situation and understood that if you teach a language as communication, the language you need to manage interaction in communicative situations is only predictable up to a point. Despite her principle to be clear about which language she is speaking, she developed a more relaxed attitude to code-switching between languages in her group. As the project developed, she felt less inhibited to simply go ahead and communicate in English even if it had not been meticulously planned in advance, for example, when they were playing games. She was aware that spontaneous language results from playing games, but still had tried to predict the language she would need. In a critical incident that she refers to in the next quote, she had forgotten one of the main words that she would have needed for the game ‘Hiding the Animals’ 103 , colourful cloth or colourful material. After briefly reflecting in the situation what could be done about it, she became pragmatic and realised that it did not matter, that she could still (and would need to) continue her lesson, which is why she switched to German: “Schon [ist es jetzt leichter Englisch zu reden], aber wenn man dabei ist, es zu tun [she is referring to the situation where she is playing a game with the children], und ich hatte mir unmittelbar davor keine Gedanken mehr gemacht, was bunter Stoff auf Englisch heißt, ist es schwer. Fünf Minuten später ist es mir eingefallen, nach dem Angebot, aber mitten im Angebot ist es mir nicht eingefallen. Und dann hat es für mich ergeben, ‘Was mache ich’, egal was es jetzt ist, wenn etwas mir nicht einfällt, sag ich es dann auf Deutsch” (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 104 Nadia was aware that this was not ideal and qualified as a transitional coping strategy at most. Understandably, Nadia’s language competence remained a concern for her throughout the project. She felt confident to continue the project on her own, however, she modified her statement by saying that she would like to have the support of a native speaker to advise her if she needed it. “Ich habe gar kein Problem weiter zu machen - habe mir vorgenommen, ja, aber ebenso wie es bei dir ist, dass man immer wieder nachfragen kann - das wäre schon gut, wenn man jemand denn hätte. Notfalls sag ich mal, wenn man dann einfach nachfragen kann: ist die Satzstellung richtig, oder so. Das wäre gut, einfach, wenn man manche Phrasen abfragen kann. Also, es wäre gut, wenn ein Kontakt da ist - 261 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="261"?> 105 Nadia was asked to comment on: Are you going to continue the project after it officially comes to an end? 106 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you feel about your teaching during this time? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). wenn jemand zum Beispiel sagt, ‘Es wird flächendeckend eingeführt’, oder so. Wenn man zu einem native-speaker einfach dann immer Kontakt hat und fragen kann, das wäre super” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 105 The following conclusions can be drawn from the data in how far the language support that was provided by the teacher education (→ chapter 5.7.4) assisted Nadia in developing her communicative English language competence: 1. Using English as the common language between the teacher educator and the preschool teachers Nadia did not take full advantage of speaking English to me. In the interviews, she chose to speak German frequently, explaining that this way she could express herself better. Often, she did not switch back to English when she wanted to seriously answer me or felt passionate about telling me her point of view. As was my usual habit throughout the project, I always spoke English to her: Nadia: Kann ich auf Deutsch reden. TE: In English, you get more practice though, but you can speak in whatever language you want to speak. I’ll speak English. Nadia: Es geht einfacher. Dann kann ich gut denken. (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19) 106 2. Attending the participatory demonstration lessons Nadia spoke to me and to the children in English during the participatory demonstration lessons and conducted the classroom management and the games in English. She did not lapse back to German, but instead used this time to practise her language and her English rapport with the children. She knew the children understood that it was English time. She used this time to become accustomed to speaking English to the children and for them to become accustomed to her speaking English. Nadia believed that the children would be shocked if she suddenly spoke English to them and therefore it was good that they could hear the language in the demonstration lesson from me first. She could then build on the language routine that I had established so that she could then continue and take over which she felt provided a smooth transition for the children: 262 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="262"?> 107 Nadia was asked to comment on: Looking at the situation now after the trial period, how would you judge the potential of learning English in your group? 108 Nadia was asked to comment on: Can you imagine taking over the project one day? After confirming that she could, she was concerned about her communicative English language competence, which prompted her to say this comment. 109 Nadia was asked to comment on: Can you imagine taking over the project one day? After confirming that she could, she was concerned about her communicative English language competence. “The sound gets [sic] normal and ich versuche auf Englisch zu sprechen und für die Kinder ist es dann nicht etwas erschreckend oder sie denken, ‘Was ist los? ’ sondern, it sounds normal. [They think], ‘Ja, Kirsten spricht auch so’. The lessons are good for English to sound normal. Also, es ist nicht mehr Fremdes, sondern es ist dann selbstverständlich” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 107 3. Collecting a repertoire of relevant chunks of English Nadia felt that she was well supported by her repertoire of relevant chunks of English language. It gave her a sense of security in her language use. As she was very concerned to speak correctly, she relied on her repertoire to plan her language in her lessons: “This is a große Hilfe, wenn man nachschauen kann. Habe ich recht? Ich denke eben, wenn man so redet [oder] mal was falsch sagt, dann fällt es den Kindern nicht auf, aber wenn ich dann immer falsch wiederhole wäre das schon ein Problem” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 108 4. Contacting the teacher educator for advice Nadia used the teacher educator regularly as a language support system. She was very concerned that the children would be exposed to correct chunks and therefore was anxious to use English in the grammatically correct form. Consequently, her questions mainly concerned chunks of language, which she had written down that needed to be checked for grammatical correctness. As the following quote demonstrates, she simplified her English as correctness was quite understandably more important to her than exposing the children to richer language which she was unsure of: “… Ob das so richtig ist, was ich dann, eben, von der Sprache her - der Grammatik in Englisch - sage, also nicht, dass ich den Kindern etwas Falsches sage - ich rede halt in Englisch so, wie ich mir denke dass es ungefähr passt aber ob das immer so ganz richtig ist, weiß ich nicht. I talk to the children in English, some kind of easy sentences and so then I think okay, that’s right” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 109 263 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="263"?> 110 Marie was asked to comment on: What have you learnt from the project? She did not contact me through email or phone, but instead waited until I was there on Tuesdays. 7.2.3.2 Marie’s English teaching competences a) Marie’s profile as preschool teacher and her general attitude towards teaching English in the preschool Before the project started, Marie had no knowledge about how to teach a foreign language to her children. Her perspective of what would qualify as appropriate teaching originated from her experiences of her own language education and the children learning German as a second language in her preschool. She was therefore under the impression that the children would have to meet unrealistic expectations, which they would never be able to cope with. But after taking part in the participatory demonstration lessons, she realised that teaching English in preschool subscribes to a completely different approach and that she would consequently need to observe more teaching in action to gain a clear idea of how it should be accomplished. Once she realised that teaching English in preschool is organised in a playful way and the children are not put under any pressure, she became open-minded towards the idea of integrating English in her routine (→ chapter 6.2.4.3). Marie sometimes felt unsure whether her communicative English language competence was adequate, but this did not become an issue as she integrated English in various ways throughout the week (→ strategies below). She appreciated the variety of methods that supported her to be able to integrate English in her group easily (→ strategies below): “Die Vielfalt: Ich habe nicht gewusst, dass man so viele verschiedene Möglichkeiten hat [Kinder zu lehren]. Es macht es leichter den Kindern eine Sprache zu vermitteln” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 110 b) Marie’s personal strategies to implement English in her group (focus: process) Marie developed the competences that assisted her to integrate English in her daily routine throughout the week. She strictly kept to her decision to allocate the Friday circle time to English (→ strategy 1 below), and she was also quite spontaneous when opportunities to integrate English in her group emerged. It was a matter of taking opportunities and remembering to speak in English: “It is easy to integrate. I don’t integrate it every day - every second day, but, like the morning song [we sing] every day - or when I say, ‘Sit down’. Just easy phrases, ‘Be 264 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="264"?> 111 Marie was asked to comment on: Are you managing to bring it in your routine? Have you found it easy or difficult to continue English on your own during the week? 112 I went back to her room to confirm our meeting in the afternoon and commented that the morning was very busy. At first she said her group was loud, but I said that was no problem that it was simply busy, which prompted her to say this comment. quiet’, such things, I say them every day, without planning. It just happens - in circle time too. When I think about it, I just integrate it” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 111 Four personal strategies that she used to integrate English could be identified from the data: 1. Integrating English on a regular basis during the structured times of the timetable. 2. Using established routines during the morning. 3. Using relevant chunks to communicate with the children and to manage the class. 4. Responding to the children’s initiative to use English. Personal strategy # 1: Integrating English on a regular basis during the structured times of the timetable. Marie was concerned if she would manage to meet the challenge to accommo‐ date English in her full timetable. Even though English had become the project of the year, it did not mean that the busy daily timetable was reduced. Marie found it worthwhile to have a strict set circle time during which she could concentrate on English every week. She opted for Fridays because it was the one day, which was predictable because no extra programmes would be organised on that day. Preschools often arrange for speech therapist, eye doctors or dentists to come in and examine the children or they organise special activities such as inviting puppet companies for performances. As a rule, these kinds of appointments do not happen on Fridays. The last day of the week usually followed a relatively routined schedule and was consequently relaxed. Marie did not have to prepare for the next day or think about anything that would be happening in the following few days and could therefore concentrate on her English circle time: “Eltern-Kaffee is next week and the children are very excited and the Zahnfee is here this week. That’s why Friday is a good day for lessons, because it is the end of the week. I don’t have to think of anything else. Every day seems to have something, but not Fridays” (Marie, 10.11.15: int. 13). 112 Marie planned her English circle times by choosing activities from the previous participatory demonstration lesson to consolidate the children’s newly acquired 265 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="265"?> 113 ‘The Animal Farm’ is a guessing game using picture cards. It follows the same rules as the ‘King and Queen Game’ (→ appendix 1: materials 3a & 3b). 114 ‘King and Queen Game’ is a guessing game (→ appendix: materials 3a). 115 ‘I Like to Eat, Eat, Eat Apples and Bananas’ is a song that consists of nonsense words deriving from changing the word eat five times, using the five vowels (→ appendix 1: materials 4a). 116 Marie was asked to comment on: How do you integrate English in your routine? What suits you the best and why? 117 Marie was asked to comment on: And do you speak English in your lessons? This question was prompted by her description of her lessons. For her discipline, she needed to speak German to her boys every now and again. English. However, if the children wanted to play something in particular or wanted to choose a story, she remained flexible and changed her plans, but she made a point of focusing on one theme (for example ‘Farm Animals’ or ‘Food’). From the participatory demonstration lessons, Marie had observed that she could engage the children immediately in English by putting down material that would create a fantasy world. She used the material to connect the activities, which she selected. She practised what she had observed, for example, before playing ‘The Animal Farm’ 113 she would use green grass (material) for the farm and would take out the farm animals one by one and put them on the grass, while she made up a story about them to set the scene: “I always do English on Friday. I don’t do German, only English. I do a game. I can get them to talk that way. They get so excited that they always join in - it’s great - and sometimes I do a story - and always songs. They always know, ‘Now it is English’, because I put down the Tuch and the fantasy world can start. I always look at the lesson plans. I do Wiederholungen. I usually do some points that we did on Tuesday, but sometimes the kids choose. They have their Lieblingsspiele, [for example] ‘The Animal Farm’. But first I put down the green grass [this is a green piece of materials to represent the farm] and take out the animals and say a little story [about the animals] - and we sing our animal songs - the kids can choose; or if we do the ‘King and Queen Game’, 114 then we only do food and then we always sing ‘I Like to Eat, Eat, Eat Apples and Bananas’. 115 They love it, because it is so silly” (Marie, 23.10.15: int.11). 116 “I speak English and German. But I try and stick to English. Sometimes the boys need German” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 117 As the project advanced, Marie felt that it became easier to give lessons because she had a great variety to choose from. Nevertheless, due to the fact that she kept her German circle times relatively simple, she did not start giving complete lessons in her English ones on Friday: 266 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="266"?> 118 Marie was asked to comment on: How do you feel about teaching English now compared with the time before February? This question refers to the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). 119 Marie was asked to comment on: Would you consider doing longer circle times in English by sequencing various activities like we do on Tuesday? 120 She is referring to Betty’s English wall (→ chapter 7.3.3.3). 121 She was talking about the children who knew the English words covering healthy or unhealthy food in the morning, which prompted her to say this comment. “It’s now easier for me because I now have a bigger variety what I can do in English so I just look up and say, ‘okay, this and that I could do’, so it’s easier for me” (Marie, 17.03.16: int. 18). 118 “I don’t do it in German (a detailed task plan). We sing songs and play a game. The difference is that I usually start with a story. The kids don’t concentrate that well, you know. I have the loud boys and then the shy girls. It’s fine to do it like this (in a short circle time of one game, songs and/ or a story)” (Marie, 17.03.16: int. 18). 119 Marie was aware that some children would benefit from more opportunities to use their English. She observed Betty’s children at their English boards (→ chapter 7.2.3.3) who were interacting with each other as they said the words in English. She took the opportunity to learn from her colleague and decided that it would be a good idea to also have an English board so that her children would have the opportunity to show what they know. She was also curious to see if the children would learn the words quickly from the boards: “Malik was so good today. He remembers everything. Nikola does too; she wants to say what she knows. I want to make a Wand 120 like Betty, because I like it how the kids stand in front of it and can point to the pictures and say them. I have the pictures already upstairs, but they are not coloured. I’m curious how the kids - es annehmen. Ob sie davor stehen - ob sie dann schnell lernen oder nicht” (Marie, 10.11.15: int. 14). 121 The component that supported Marie particularly to integrate English was the participatory demonstration lessons and the written task plans with the accompanying materials. The task plans proved to be especially supportive because she could refer to them to plan and to consolidate the contents of the lessons: “It’s so great that we have the sheets from every lesson [the task plans], because I look through and think, ‘Okay, I want to try this and this’, and often the kids come and say in other morning circles they want to sing this and that song, so I just take 267 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="267"?> 122 The map is her folder which was to be her journal. It consisted of lesson plans, songs and activities. 123 Marie was asked to comment on: How do you feel about teaching English now compared with the time before February? This question refers to the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). Marie commented that it was easier for her, because she a greater variety to choose from, which prompted her to say this comment. 124 Marie was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 125 ‘Weather Witch’ (→ appendix 1: materials 2a). the map 122 and look for the song when I don’t know it auswendig” (Marie, 17.03.16: int.18). 123 Personal strategy # 2: Using established routines during the morning Marie used routines from the participatory demonstration lessons in her morning routine for her classroom management. They mainly included various ways of lining up at the door and choosing children or sending children to the coatroom. Marie found that routines were ideal to integrate English because they offered opportunities for the children to interact on a regular basis, which she could maintain with ease as they became a natural part of her morning routine, which was a further guarantee for Marie that she could sustain them easily: “Routines really help. They make it easy [to integrated English] because you can do English every day without organising it. It just becomes part of the morning and they have more English, and if you do them often enough, the kids do them automatically - they remember - and not just me” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 124 Routines also enabled Marie to integrate English in her other circle times. She sang the morning song at the beginning of each circle time, counted the children, and often did the routine of the ‘Weather Witch’ 125 in which she could encourage the children to speak. Kathie very much appreciated this when she took over the group (→ chapter 7.2.3.4). For Marie it was important to find times to integrate English, which would be compatible with her timetable. She discovered that taking the children on outings offered an opportunity to include English quite naturally: she sang English songs whenever she walked anywhere with the children outside of the preschool, for example to the playground or to the bus. Marie was aware though that integrating English through routines and games offered real English communicative activities, which songs do not do, but she felt any contact with the language was a good opportunity; especially when she could include it in her timetable easily; which was the situation here. When the children sang English 268 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="268"?> 126 In the afternoon I went back to the preschool Marie’s children were falling over each other playing wildly in the coatroom when they should have been putting on coats and shoes to go outside. This prompted Marie to say this comment. 127 Marie was asked to comment on: How do you integrate English in your routine? What suits you the best and why? 128 Marie was asked to comment on: Do you find it easy to speak English? songs, they were engaged in singing and therefore walked safely, behaving in an orderly fashion: “You know, when we go out on the street the kids have to behave. They have to line up and take a partner and we have to walk down the street and wait at the bus stop. I always sing English songs. It keeps them under control. Die kommen dann auf keinen Blödsinn. We don’t sing German songs, only English songs. It gives them another English time which is easy to keep” (Marie, 10.11.15: int. 14). 126 Marie relied on routines to integrate English throughout the week. She knew that the children needed contact time with the language and that through routines she could provide opportunities that were compatible with her busy morning routine. Personal strategy # 3: Using relevant chunks to communicate with the children and to manage the class Marie incorporated English spontaneously in her morning routine. She preferred to use planned teacher talk because she realised chunks of language would support comfortable communication between them. She knew that the children would understand her easily when she used the familiar chunks and was sure they would learn the meaning of the unfamiliar chunks quickly through repetition and contextual clues. She did, however, need to remember to speak English as she was unaccustomed to the situation: “To use English in daily things is the best, like shut the door, sit in the circle, sit on the carpet - and in tidy up time - put it away, pick up the toys, because they understand these things and I can just say them - and when they don’t understand they see what to do and then hear it over and over again. It makes it easy. It’s easy for them and for me. I like teacher talk - it works” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 127 “It’s not difficult for me [to speak English], but it is strange - and my English is not really that brilliant - I like teacher talk the best. I have to remind myself to speak English though, because the children speak German to me and I have to stay with English” (Marie, 17.03.16: int. 18). 128 269 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="269"?> 129 Marie was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning? Marie commented that the younger children did learn and that she was surprised how the older children helped them, which prompted her to say this comment. Personal strategy # 4: Responding to the children’s initiative to use English In free play Marie set up the English material for the children to play with. They sang song, looked at the books, took part in role-play and set up their own little circle times. If they were only singing songs, Marie would then try and prompted them to play a game. Many of the songs had language related games corresponding to them. When they were playing the games, she assisted them as soon as they indicated that they needed support: “In der Freispielzeit spielen sie zusammen: die Kleinen und die Großen - es ist oft dann, wenn die Kinder kommen und was zusammen singen wollen - zum Beispiel ‘Peter Rabbit‘. Die kommen immer wieder und fragen ‘Wie geht das? ’ Dann machen wir das zusammen. Dann schlag ich ein Spiel vor und helfe beim Aufbauen. Ich spiele aber nicht mit, aber ich bin da wenn die mich brauchen - die Sprache [der Kinder] klappt nicht immer” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 129 In conclusion, it can be said that Marie learnt to convey what she had observed in the participatory demonstration lesson to her morning routine to integrate English and she incorporated it on a daily basis when it was compatible with her timetable. She understood the concept of the communicative language classroom and was aware that the children would need to be encouraged to participate in relevant tasks to acquire English. Her strategies corresponded with this knowledge. However, she did not attempt to expand her strategies or extend the activities she had observed, such as adjusting songs, rhymes and games. The procedure of her English circle time was purely based on consolidating the knowledge that the children had already gained from the participatory demonstration lessons. c) Marie’s competences to create a powerful learning environment for language learning (focus: outcome) A positive and safe language learning environment At the beginning of the project Marie was quite concerned about the young children in her group who could not speak German and would now need to learn English. Like her colleagues, she had individual children in mind whom she thought an additional language would be too demanding for them. However, through her observations during the participatory demonstration lessons, Marie 270 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="270"?> 130 Marie was asked to comment on: You were sceptical about the young ones learning. Do you feel they are learning English? 131 Marie was asked to comment on: At the beginning you were worried about the new children joining in, how do you feel about that now? Why? 132 Marie was asked to comment on: What do you think about mixed groups? soon found that it was possible to integrate English inclusively for all the chil‐ dren in a group in circle time without the younger children being overwhelmed or discouraged by the experience. (→ chapter 6.2.4.3 & 7.2.1.2) Through this understanding, she came to perceive her children as individual learners in a different way: it was not a matter of protecting them from learning yet another language, but a matter of providing a powerful learning environment for them to feel comfortable and at ease when being exposed to another language. Marie was conscious of her heterogeneous group ranging from a group of quiet, shy girls to a group of quite lively boys and recognised that she needed to make sure that she involved all the children: “Da war kein Druck, das ‘Du musst das lernen’, sondern einfach wenn sie bereit waren haben sie es dann angewendet” (Marie, 22.07.16; int. 24). 130 “Ich finde es dann schade, wenn die jungen Kinder, die vielleicht nicht so viel mitkriegen und nicht so viel von sich geben [nicht teilnehmen]. Sie nehmen es halt auf. Ich finde es nicht schlecht, wenn die mitmachen. Die lernen dann doch” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 131 “… Wenn man das immer laufend vorführt, ist es doch gut, wenn man das von jung auf [mitmacht]. Irgendwann fangen sie an mitzumachen. Aber meine Buben! They are very loud, so I have to make sure the girls have a chance to join in - wenn sie so weit sind. Ich muss darauf schauen” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 132 Marie recognised early in the project that the routines which she observed in the participatory demonstration lessons would be appropriate in her daily routine and not only in the lessons. She made a point of using the routines as doable tasks throughout the week to consolidate their English. She knew that when the children were familiar with the routines, they would all join in easily at some stage and start to do them habitually (→ strategy 2). This supported a positive and safe language learning environment. Meaningful relevant tasks Marie was aware that children needed to be interested and engaged in what they were doing in order to become involved and to consequently learn English. It was one of her strategies to use language activities by focusing on a particular game that the children were enthusiastic about in her English circle times. The 271 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="271"?> 133 Marie was asked to comment on: What have you learnt from the project? 134 Marie was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning? Marie commented that the younger children did learn and that she was surprised how the older children helped them, which prompted her to this comment. game would then be accompanied by corresponding stories or songs, which made up a coherent lesson for the children (→ strategy 1): “Wenn sie begeistert sind, klappt es. They really learn English through games, Ja, und du hast gesagt, mit den Aufgaben - the kids must want to do them to learn - and they love playing the games” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 133 The games and the English routines that Marie integrated in her mornings offered the children opportunities to use their English through relevant, mean‐ ingful tasks (→ strategy 1 & 2). She integrated games and routines with the intention that the children would play the games independently and in co-operation with their peers while interacting in English. The English routines that she embedded in her morning supported the chil‐ dren to contribute individually while they supported classroom management at the same time. However, she did not expand activities and develop challenging tasks herself. Interactional support Marie organised as much contact time with English as possible for the children. The opportunities she offered were mainly to promote dialogue between the children (during the routine and while playing games). In the routines and when playing games in free play or in her circle times Marie could instantly help the children. She provided support through prompting the children when they were trying to find the chunks of language that they needed to perform an activity. She also supported them through corrective feedback that she gave by repeating their chunks in the correct form (→strategy 4). Marie felt more and more confident that her language was correct because she could fall back on an extensive repertoire of chunks for support: “… Ich spiele aber nicht mit, aber ich bin da, wenn die mich brauchen - die Sprache [der Kinder] klappt nicht immer” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24; → strategy 4). 134 When performing in English Marie was used to considering her children as individuals and therefore, she did not expect that they would all need to arrive at the same outcome. She knew the children in her group who were quiet and 272 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="272"?> 135 Marie was asked to comment on: What do you think about mixed groups? 136 Marie was asked to comment on: Do you find it easy to speak English? shy and who were learning German and was aware that they would need time before they were prepared to actively join in activities: “I have to make sure the girls have a chance to join in - wenn sie so weit sind. Ich muss darauf schauen” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 24). 135 On the other hand, there were children who needed more opportunities to express themselves which she wanted to support. Marie realised this when she watched Betty’s children who could use their English whenever they wanted to with the help of their English boards to prompt them. This motivated her to have her own language support boards in her room for her children. d) Marie’s communicative English language competence Marie was indecisive about how to classify her language level. On the one hand she said that she did not find it difficult to speak English to the children, but on the other hand she modified this statement by saying that it felt strange to speak English and that her English competence was “not really that brilliant” (Marie 17.03.16: int. 18) (→ strategy 3). 136 But as she did not feel inhibited to speak English to the children and was not really worried about her level, it did not develop to become an issue for her. The following conclusions can be drawn from the data in how far the language support that was provided by the teacher education (→ chapter 5.7.4) assisted Marie in developing her communicative English language competence: 1. Using English as the common language between the teacher educator and the preschool teachers Marie took advantage of the opportunity given to her to speak English during the mornings of participatory demonstration lessons. She made a point of speaking English to me, to the extent that when a child interrupted she spoke to her / him in English and only translated it in German when it was not clear. She also took advantage of the possibility of speaking English during the individual personal interviews. She rarely slipped into German and did so only occasionally when she could not think of a single word. It was only towards the end of her participation in the project (she left preschool a year before the project came to an end) that she no longer took full advantage of conversing in English during the interviews for reasons I could only speculate about. 273 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="273"?> 2. Attending the participatory demonstration lessons The participatory demonstration lessons offered Marie the opportunity to speak English with the children in an authentic context, which I could create as a native speaker of English for both the teachers and the children. This experience proved to be valuable for her because she sometimes felt it was strange to speak English to her group, but she became accustomed to the situation. She took advantage of the participatory demonstration lesson to only speak English. She used mostly teacher talk with the children in her own circle times and in her morning routines (e.g., It’s your turn. Put it under your chair. Let’s sing). The children responded in a natural way, which helped to continue the authentic language learning environment. 3. Collecting a repertoire if relevant chunks of English Marie kept a repertoire of relevant chunks which she added to on a regular basis. She welcomed the idea of using teacher talk, because she felt that the children would understand her easily in classroom management when they were hearing familiar chunks of language or would understand quickly through repetition and contextual clues when she would add unfamiliar chunks (→ strategy 3). She made sure her repertoire was correct. Teacher talk supported her well to feel comfortable to speak to the children. 4. Contacting the teacher educator for advice Marie also used the teacher educator as a language support system. She compiled her teacher talk and asked me to check it grammatically. We would then look through it together and she would change the chunks if necessary. 7.2.3.3 Betty’s English teaching competences a) Betty’s profile as preschool teacher and her general attitude towards teaching English in a multilingual preschool context As was discussed in the participating teachers’ profiles (→ chapter 6.2.4) Betty had little confidence in her capabilities to teach English. This was due to both her low level of communicative English language competence and her difficulties to develop ideas of her own to teach English. It was her teaching philosophy to be flexible with her teaching plans so that she could accommodate the children’s needs and respond to their dispositions at any particular point in time. As a result, it was common practice for the children in her group to express themselves and to join in her planning processes with their suggestions. As will be demonstrated, it was therefore quite a natural development that Betty built her strategies to integrate English on her teaching philosophy. 274 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="274"?> 137 Betty was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 138 Betty was asked to comment on: At this stage, how do you feel about the project and your participation? 139 Betty was asked to comment on: Would you prepare compete lessons like this again? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). 140 I commented that she should take over more of the participatory demonstration lesson, which prompted her to say this comment. Betty integrated English in her routine by transferring activities and methods in her morning routine that she had observed from the teacher educator. This ranged from applying the content of the task plans given in participatory demonstration lesson to using chunks of language from her repertoire in her daily routines. For Betty this was a positive developmental step because at the beginning of the project she believed that she might not be able to transfer what she had observed into her own routines (→ chapter 6.2.4): “Ich fand den Einstieg sehr gut. Du machst es vor, du bringst es in die Gruppe, die haben es gehört und ich kann es dann weiterführen. Ich kann es dann anbieten” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 137 Due to her learner-centred method of teaching the children, Betty preferred to integrate English in her daily routine, rather than presenting task plans in circle time: “Ich bin hier der Zuschauer, ich bin diejenige, die beobachtet, die zuschaut und dann versucht, es alltäglich irgendwo einzusetzen” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 138 “Ich bin nicht so die, die [eine Stunde] plant und dann nur Englisch macht. Nein, das bin ich nicht. Da bin ich sehr die Ausnahme” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 139 Her low level of her communicative English language competence (→ see below in this chapter) was another factor that contributed to the way she integrated English into her daily routine: “Ich finde das Englischsprechen schwer. Die einzelnen Sätze, ja und Bilderbuch vorlesen, ja, aber den ganzen Morgenkreis in Englisch gestalten, das ist eine Heraus‐ forderung” (Betty, 22.07.16: int. 23). 140 She compared herself with Tania (her assistant) who she felt could implement English in the group far better than she could. Nevertheless, she gained confidence to do parts of the English task plans in small groups which went well for Betty: “In der kleinen Gruppe machen wir das [she is referring to the activities that are part of the task plans] schon. In der kleinen Gruppe funktioniert das schon. In der großen 275 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="275"?> 141 I suggested to Betty for the second time to try and take over more of the participatory demonstration lessons so that the children see more of her in the role of teaching English, which prompted her to say this comment. 142 Betty was asked to comment on: Have you found it easy or difficult to continue English on your own during the week? 143 Betty was asked to comment on: How do you feel about taking over when I leave? How do you feel about your teaching? Betty said that she would continue the project, which prompted her to say this comment. Gruppe tue ich mich schwer. Ich tue mich wirklich schwer. Also, Tania, sie bringt schon mehr die englischen Worte raus [she means: supports the children to speak English]. Das funktioniert noch viel besser als bei mir. Keine Ahnung warum. In der kleinen Gruppe funktioniert es” (Betty, 25.10.16: int. 26). 141 Despite these difficulties felt it was not a burden to integrate English. In fact, she felt it was ‘absolutely not difficult’ for her to continue integrating English on her own during the week. This was due to her general positive attitude and the children’s enthusiasm: “Nein, absolut nicht schwierig, weil es Freude macht. Alles was Freude macht ist nicht schwierig” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 142 b) Betty’s personal strategies to implement English in her group (focus: process) Betty developed the competences to integrate English in her daily routine in a way that suited her teacher personality. She could implement English in ways she felt were most comfortable and productive for her and her group (→ below: her personal strategies). She learnt how to work with the materials freely and independently to support these strategies: “Ich habe viel gelernt. Ich habe einfach gelernt selbst damit (she means: with the materials) zu arbeiten, freier damit zu arbeiten. Am Anfang war es immer so, ich habe auf dich gewartet. … ich habe für mich immer mehr dazu gelernt” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 143 To a certain extent, Betty’s strategies were shaped by her low level of commu‐ nicative English language competence, which was her main issue when she considered implementing English in her group. She recognised quickly what helped her the most to put her strategies to practice, which was to immediately learn the chunks of language. She developed the competence to select and to use chunks that were relevant to her group and her daily routine; however, she only developed little competence in using the language spontaneously. Three personal strategies that she used to integrate English could be identified from the data: 276 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="276"?> 144 Each group had their own set of materials in their rooms. 145 Betty was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 146 Betty was talking to me about the children’s initiative to speak English to each other when the right recourse material was offered. This prompted her to say this comment. 1. Promoting the children to learn English through a learner-centred way of teaching. 2. Using relevant chunks to communicate with the children and to manage the class. 3. Integrating English on a regular basis in different areas of her preschool work. Personal strategy # 1: Promoting the children to learn English through a learner-centred way of teaching One of Betty’s strategy was to promote the children to learn English based on her learner-centred teaching. She displayed books and her materials, setting up the activities on the tables in free play to encourage the children to play English games, to look at the books and to engage in role-play, which supported the children to communicate spontaneously and through this develop their communicative English language competences: “Wir haben das Material sehr oft nach gebastelt, mal in den Ferien auch, und haben das alles jetzt da 144 und können es aussuchen. Und alles was ich da habe für das ganze Jahr kann ich immer wieder anbieten” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 145 Free play suited her style of teaching where she could circulate and help small groups or single children through assisting them in playing the games or singing the songs. With their modest level of English, the children had a natural approach to using the language, which impressed Betty. She was fascinated by the children’s ability to learn and to use their English and was impressed by their enthusiasm. This gave Betty a certain trust in the children’s ability to acquire the language at their own individual levels with her support, through materials and from interaction with the other children. This trust was essential for her to have confidence in the success of her strategy: “Die Raupe ist auch als Bilderbuch immer präsent im Raum. Die können [es] sich immer nehmen und sie sitzen da und dann lesen sie. Es ist sehr schön wenn ich das höre, ‘Wie heißt es in Englisch? ’ Das ist einfach so schön” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 146 “Die Lejla [sagt] ‘Ich bin Kirsten,’ und dann geht’s los. [She is referring to a child, Lejla, who - independently of the teacher - role-plays the teacher educator spontaneously in class]. Die anderen Kinder müssen sich hinsetzen und dann singen sie ‘Good 277 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="277"?> 147 Betty was asked to comment on: Are you writing into your journal? She showed me her calendar that she writes into and said that she forgets every now and again, which prompted her to say this anecdote. 148 Most of the songs have props that accompany them which illustrate the content and which stimulate the children to become actively involved in the songs while singing them, for example dressing a snowman with the clothes items that are part of the song lyrics while they are singing the song (→ appendix 1: materials 3d). 149 Betty said that she integrated English whenever the opportunity came, which prompted her to say this comment. 150 Betty was saying that the children are eager to tell me what they know in the lessons, which prompted her to tell me what they do during the week. Morning’, und dann holt sie sich das Buch. Sie müssen Englisch sprechen und wehe es sagt eine [etwas] auf Deutsch, ‘In English! ’ heißt es dann” (Betty, 09.03.17: int. 28). 147 According to her perspective, preschool teachers are the role models for the children and therefore the children re-enact the activities independently of the teacher prompting them to do so. Consequently, she set up the English materials in a way that they were permanently and easily available to the children in order to stimulate them to use them. Betty depended on the rich resources that were made available to her by the teacher educator. She also illustrated songs on cards (which she made herself), so that the children could independently choose an English song at any time to sing with her or to teach each other a familiar story with one child imitating the role of the teacher. “Die bringen den Zettel [the picture cards of the songs] und wir singen [das Lied, das darauf gebildet ist]. Wir holen uns [zuerst] das Material [dazu] 148 und dann singen wir. Es liegt einfach da und dann machen wir das” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 149 “Wenn die Kinder es erst einmal drinnen haben, machen sie es alleine. Das ist das Ergebnis - das ist das Ergebnis. Das ist was sie tun. Das Material steht da. Es ist eher meine Art zu arbeiten. Ich stelle das Material bereit und schaue was sie damit tun. Wenn jetzt das Buch da liegt vom Bären, da wette ich, dass sie morgen früh dann den Morgenkreis machen, die Kinder unter sich, eine nimmt dann das Buch, andere sitzen da. Das wird genauso gemacht wie heute. Die würden das morgen so wiederholen. … Die werden dann hier sitzen und es genauso machen, wie du das machst. Das kenne ich schon. Ich habe diese Woche von der Schnecke ein Buch gekauft und ich weiß schon, wie sie das machen. Dann machen die es genauso wie ich das mache. … Wir sind die Vorbilder und sie machen sich selbständig und machen das nach” (Betty, 24.05.16: int. 21). 150 In accordance with this role of her modelling an activity for the children to imitate, Betty selected activities for herself during free play, knowling that this 278 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="278"?> 151 Betty is referring to the children observing her. 152 Betty was talking about materials for free play. She thought it would be good to have an English cupboard with even more materials in it for the children to choose from. This prompted her to say this comment. would trigger their curiosity and their motivation to become involved and do what she was doing. “Sie denken, ‘Sie [Betty] 151 holt sich was’. Sie wollen ja sehen was ich tue: was mache ich jetzt? Ich hole mir was, dann sind alle da. Wenn ich sagen würde, was sie machen sollen, dass sie alle herkommen sollen, damit wir zum Beispiel ein englisches Lied singen, geht das nicht. Aber wenn ich mir was hole, sind sie alle da. So ticken zumindest unsere Kinder” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 152 Betty used the support that was provided by the teacher educator to pursue this strategy. The teacher educator’s interaction with the children in free play encouraged them to select English activities, which led to English becoming a natural part of free play, which resulted in supporting Betty to be able to integrate English as part of her free play routine during the week. Free play time became Betty’s main strategy for integrating English on a daily basis. A further component that supported Betty to continue this strategy during the week was cooperative teaching. The English that we taught the children together in the participatory demonstration lessons laid a firm foundation for the children which Betty to work with. She could build on her children’s emerging English competences by following her learner-centred approach. The participatory demonstration lessons gave her the opportunity to observe the appropriateness of the teaching materials in practice by observing the children and the ways they responded to the materials and select the activities accordingly. The resource materials were therefore essential to her to support her to integrate English. Personal strategy # 2: Using relevant chunks to communicate with the children and to manage the class Another strategy that Betty developed was to systematically use relevant pre-formulated chunks of language, which she had learnt and could then use confidently in the correct form and in the appropriate context, which enabled her to use the language to communicate with the children throughout the morning routine. Betty recognised that parts of her daily routine were ideal to integrate English routines on a regular basis, which would extend her use of chunks of language further. Using chunks included not only managing routines 279 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="279"?> 153 Betty had made an English picture board of the different coloured objects of target language with the children to decorate the room. 154 Betty was talking about the children putting pictures on her English boards for vocabulary. This prompted her to say this comment. 155 Betty is referring to her English picture boards that decorate her room. 156 Betty was asked to comment on: Would you prepare compete lessons like this again? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). and rituals and her classroom, but she also included stimuli from the children. Her strategy was to use English whenever an opportunity emerged: “Die Farben hängen immer noch da, 153 dann frage ich immer mal wieder, ‘What’s your favourite colour? ’ Es ist unheimlich schwierig für die Kinder … einen Satz zu formulieren - also deshalb hätte ich gern mehr Sätze, die ich ihnen sagen kann, ‘Bring mir mal was’, ‘Close the door, please’, aber ich will die richtig sagen, ich will es nicht verkehrt machen, deshalb habe ich noch nicht richtig damit angefangen, ‘Sit down, please’, so was. So kleine Sachen” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 154 “Mir ist es lieber auf die Kinder zu reagieren. Wir zählen jetzt noch in Englisch, aber das kommt auch oft von den Kindern und dann geht es los: 1,2,3. Das machen sie sehr gerne. So, oder immer, wenn wir nach draußen gehen, ‘Find a friend and hold hands’. Das ist schon einfach drinnen. Das machen wir immer, ‘Close the door‘. Da sind solche Sätze, die wir mal mittlerweile reinbringen, aber manchmal eben auch durch Anregung von den Kindern und nicht immer von mir. Die Kinder kommen darauf. Es fällt ihnen auf einmal wieder etwas ein. Oder sie sehen halt was da hängt 155 und es geht wieder los: draußen ist ein Vogel. Ah, Vogel in Englisch: a bird. Dann haben sie es schon mal” (Betty, 21.03.16: Int. 20). 156 The components of the teacher education that supported Betty to follow this second strategy was that she could continue to teach English in the independent practical work at any time and in any form during the week. This backed her learner-centred strategy. A further support she relied on was the teacher educator: I became a support system in that I both corrected her chunks of language in her repertoire and gave her positive feedback which made her feel confident to use them. Part of this involved collecting a repertoire of relevant chunks of language that she learnt and developed through repeatedly using them during various occasions in the morning routine. Betty created what Hatami describes as a ‘zone of safety’. Through constructing her own language discourse, she could trust herself to use the language appropriately and correctly (Hatami, 2014, p. 116; as cited in Müller-Hartmann & Schocker, 2016b, p. 4). 280 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="280"?> 157 She was talking about reading books, playing games and singing songs in her group, which prompted here to say this comment. 158 Betty was doing the theme, ‘Owls’ in her group which she also did in English. 159 The owls were on one of her English boards. 160 Froggy is the main character in a series of books written by Jonathan London. 161 Betty is referring to the caterpillar from the children’s book ‘The Very Hungry Caterpillar’ by Eric Carle. 162 Betty is referring to the song ‘Little Peter Rabbit’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4c). Personal strategy # 3: Integrating English on a regular basis in different areas of her preschool work Another strategy that Betty developed was that she integrated English in part of her morning circle time or in small groups in the afternoons by using activities from the participatory demonstration lessons (reading books and singing action songs while using props to illustrate their content). She believed that songs were among the best source to tune the children into the new language and they were easy for her to integrate in any part of her daily routine: “Dass man diese Sprache schon mal hört und spricht, dafür ist das Lied einfach am besten” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 157 Betty also used routines and rituals that she was familiar with, such as using an English chant to choose a child or making a weather chart. Betty followed the children’s enthusiasm and responses in order to plan according to their spontaneous interests and capabilities. She observed the children when they were using English in various situations during the week and acknowledged what they had learnt. She was well aware of the importance of repetition to consolidate, build on and maintain their skills: “Die Eule - 158 wir [the preschool teachers] können sie nicht mehr sehen und hören, aber sie mögen’s und die bleiben hängen. 159 Ich denke, dann können Kinder lernen, wenn wir ihnen diesen Freiraum geben. Das Thema von allen Seiten zu behandeln und das ist im Englischen genauso. Deshalb will ich immer wieder solche Wiederholungen zwischen drinnen. Den Little Peter Rabbit haben sie letztes Jahr schon geliebt und heute dann wieder und letzte Woche auch. Es ist einfach schön. Genauso wie die Raupe - die Raupe müsste jetzt noch einmal kommen für die neuen Kinder. Die Kinder lieben die Wiederholungen. Wir können sie nicht oft genug wiederholen. Einmal reicht nie. Zweimal reicht nicht. Froggy lieben sie zum Beispiel. 160 … Das muss man immer und immer wiederholen. Die Figuren, die die Kinder mögen - wie die Raupe 161 oder den Hasen 162 - oder Froggy. Die tauchen 281 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="281"?> 163 The snowman activity is based on a song in which snowmen are dressed with hats, scarves and gloves (→ appendix 1: materials 3d). 164 Betty was talking about the children learning when they want to do something and enjoy doing it, which prompted her to say this comment. 165 The children started to sing ‘The Good Morning song’ spontaneously. Once a week the preschool groups went on an excursion and the children often sang on the bus. 166 Nadia talked about the English routines that could be regularly included in their routines, which prompted Betty to say this comment. immer wieder auf. Den Schneemann 163 haben wir oft wiederholt und dann finde ich es toll” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 164 Betty confirmed that ‘repeated exposure’ particularly at this early age is a basic requirement when learning a language and she understood that it was her responsibility to make sure that the children had ample opportunities to repeat the language. “Sobald man merkt, dass die Kinder wo anders es auch wiederholen, sagen wir das Beispiel mit dem Bus, 165 aber da singen sie, unsere Kinder, halt. Wenn die da schon ‘Good morning’ singen, dann weiß ich, ‘Okay sie haben es sich gemerkt. Es ist angekommen’. Und es wird auch immer wiederholt und was immer wiederholt wird bleibt irgendwann hängen” (Betty, 22.07.16: int. 23). 166 She used her circle time also to integrate her main activity, which she initiated to stimulate the children’s interest in learning the language. She created English picture boards with the children, which decorated her room throughout the project. The activities were established in circle time, for example after reading the story in question, and then they became part of the routine at regular intervals. The children had the opportunity to add to the English picture boards during the week at any time. For Betty the boards were the children’s creation and the children felt this. They were eager to collect pictures and fill the boards and were proud to decorate their room with them. When they had an idea and wanted to add to it, Betty organised pictures for them to colour in and they then pinned them up on the corresponding board. She encouraged the children to look at the boards and say what the pictures illustrated in English by showing interest and enthusiasm herself and by praising them for their success or for trying: “[Aufhängen] läuft einfach nebenher. Heute wollen sie eine Nuss malen. Das kommt dann irgendwo im Morgenablauf: Nuss! Da fehlt noch die Nuss an der Wand. Jetzt muss ich heute eine Nuss ausdrucken und morgen wird sie bemalt. Das ist so unser 282 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="282"?> 167 Betty was asked to comment on: At this stage how do you feel about the project and your participation? She described that she integrated English by observing the children and that English had become part of their routine, which prompted this comment. 168 I commented on the children’s reaction when she asked me a name of an animal that nobody knew. They were silent in their curiosity. One child said, “Hast du das gehört, Betty? ” This prompted her to say this comment. 169 Betty was asked to comment on: Do you have confidence to do English with the children? How do you feel about taking over when I leave? How do you feel about your teaching? System. Sie kennen es, ‘Betty druckt was aus, ich male es an und wir hängen es auf ’” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 167 “Ja, und dann erinnern sie mich daran, dass ich es zeichne und die Namen dazu schreibe. Das ist einfach ein Ritual schon. Ich muss es dann zeichnen und aufhängen, aber irgendwo, es fehlt langsam der Platz. Ich will es wegtun, aber ich darf nicht. Die Raupe, sie hätte ich schon längst weggemacht, wenn die Kinder nicht gesagt hätten, ‘Nein, die brauchen wir noch’” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 168 An important component of the teacher education model that supported Betty with her third strategy to integrate English was the participatory demonstration lessons. They gave her the opportunity to observe a range of activities of a task plan in practice and to see the ways in which the children responded to them. In conclusion, in the course of the teacher education project, Betty’s strategies became well established and gave her the confidence to integrate English to the extent that she was confident to continue integrating English after the project would finish. She was aware that a teacher’s target language competence is vital but that it may not be the most important factor in this situation in the process od teaching English, controversial as this may be: “Wo die Kinder darauf anspringen, wenn die Kinder davon was haben, ist es meine Aufgabe [es durchzuführen]. Ich muss es einfach weitergeben und wenn die Kinder Spaß haben und ich Spaß habe dann funktioniert [es] auch. Ob ich das genau richtig mache oder nicht, glaube ich, das ist nicht das Wichtigste. … Wenn du das nur dienstags machen würdest, ich glaube das reicht nicht. Dann passen fünf Kinder, die unbedingt was mitbekommen wollen [auf], die anderen fünfzehn nicht und die kann ich aber erreichen mit dem Spielen, wenn ich es in Freispiel anbiete. Die kriege ich dann schon” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 169 It came as not much of a surprise that her motivation to continue to integrate English in her group after the project had finished was because she had experienced the children’s enthusiasm and language learning abilities. The children as a motivating factor to continue introducing English in the preschool remained a strong influence throughout the project: 283 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="283"?> 170 Betty was asked to comment on: Do you have confidence to do English with the children? How do you feel about taking over when I leave? How do you feel about your teaching? 171 Betty was talking about teacher talk and that she wanted to integrate more in her daily routine and hoped that the children would start speaking those chunks at some stage, which prompted her to say this comment. 172 Tania is Betty’s assistant. “Die springen so auf diesen Zug auf. Das ist einfach das Tolle. … Bei unseren Kindern, die noch nicht einmal Deutsch sprechen können, … und was nehmen [alle] diese Kinder aus dem Englischunterricht? Wenn ich es Unterricht nennen darf. Was nehmen sie mit? Ich bin so begeistert. Es ist einfach so toll. Allein deshalb würde ich es machen” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 170 c) Betty’s competences to create a powerful learning environment for language learning (focus: outcome) Through her expertise as a preschool teacher, her close affinity with the children’s motivation and her dedication to their well-being, Betty could transfer these competences when she was integrating English in her group. A positive and safe language learning environment She managed to respond to the children individually as she was aware of their dispositions and capabilities and she respected the fact that children differ in their language development. She was able to judge situations from the children’s perspective and recognised that some children needed more time to start speaking and therefore she did not put children under pressure: “Wir haben gemerkt im Kreis, wenn du da bist, manche Kinder antworten auf Englisch und eines dabei [ist] Bojan. Der spricht auch. Er gibt die Antworten auf Deutsch. Der ist noch nicht diesen Schritt gegangen. Er traut sich noch nicht. Kann ich nachvollziehen, ist okay, da warten wir jetzt. Wann sagt er die erste Antwort in Englisch. Und so möchte ich eigentlich auch, wenn ich was sage, ‘Close the door, please’, dass die Kinder das auch irgendwann übernehmen” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 171 The participatory demonstration lessons gave Betty the opportunity to observe her children’s development individually and closely in what she appreciated about my role as a teacher: that I created a positive and safe language learning environment which did not put the children under any pressure to achieve a certain outcome. She observed the ways I reacted to them and how they responded to me: “Die Selina heute hat mich auch gewundert. Die neben dir saß. Sie ist ein ganz stilles Kind eigentlich. Sie hat das alles gewusst. Ich habe nur die Tania 172 angeschaut und 284 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="284"?> 173 Betty said that she was curious to know what the children would remember, which prompted her to say this comment. gedacht, ‘Hallo, dieses Kind kann Englisch. Toll. Ja, bei uns sagt sie nichts’. Diese ruhigen Kinder die gehen auf bei dir. Es ist deine Art, ohne Druck” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 173 Through being aware of what interested her children and what they were ca‐ pable of doing, she managed to develop a certain sense of security to experiment with the language for example, when she was setting up the materials in free play (→ strategy 1). Through observing the ways in which the materials were used in practice she could judge the situation from the children’s perspective. The positive and safe language learning environment that she created was further enhanced by her competence to incorporate English rituals and routines in her classroom routines and in her circle time. She took advantage of recurring situations and to establish them as a routine to speak English, such as tidying up, lining up at the door and choosing children with familiar rhymes (→ strategy 2 and 3). Through the participatory demonstration lessons, both the children and Betty became familiar with the language and rhymes of the routines and rituals, which supported her to integrate them in her routine. Meaningful relevant tasks From her observations during the participatory demonstration lessons Betty was competent in selecting tasks that were appropriate for her children to play independently. She was capable of selecting games and picture books from the task plans that would appeal to the children to the extent that they would be motivated to play with them alone and that were doable for the children to use their English language together in small groups (strategy 1). Betty did not design tasks herself, however, she did make some of her own materials, such as the English picture boards that she developed with the children to decorate her classroom, which proved to be meaningful relevant tasks for the children that accompanied them through the project (→ strategy 3). With these boards Betty motivated the children to engage in English through her competence to support the children to contribute independently to English in the classroom and to make decisions. The children were the ones who created the boards, deciding which pictures to put on them and where, at any time during the morning. Betty’s top priority was the enthusiasm of the children. She realised that using the language to do fun activities promoted learning as well as sustained motivation and enthusiasm. She recognised early on that German as a second 285 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="285"?> 174 Betty commented that she believed that the children were learning German through English, which prompted this comment. 175 Leiter der Salzburger Verwaltungsakademie-Zentrum für Kindergartenpädagogik. 176 Betty was asked to comment on: If Herr Don told you to teach English, how would you feel? (Herr Don is from the Personalamt des Magistrats Stadt Salzburg). language was taught with a certain pressure to learn German, which she criticised: “Wir haben auch die Deutschsprachkurse in der Früh und das ist aber immer so dieses Schulische, dieser Druck - dann lernen sie nicht” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 174 She selected games and books with the idea that the children would enjoy playing the games and reading the books. This supported Betty to select tasks which required the children to use language as a means to attain a non-linguist goal (→ strategy 1 and 3). Interactional support Betty gained competences to encourage interaction between the children by creating a supportive learning atmosphere. She took her children seriously and listened to them and reacted accordingly, respecting their opinions and responding to what they were doing (→ strategy 2 and 3). As a result, Betty was able to encourage and motivate the children to become involved in English activities, which resulted in a dynamic and enthusiastic group (→ strategy 1 and 3). Her empathetic understanding that young children’s moods and concentration can swing rapidly gave her a genuine tolerance towards being flexible in her planning and consequently she integrated English at any time that she felt was attuned to her children’s interests and their depositions: “Ich verstehe unter Englischlernen was anderes wie wahrscheinlich Herr Don. 175 Das ist unterrichtsmäßig. Und ich verstehe meine Arbeit ja an den Bedürfnissen der Kinder angepasst. Jetzt ist vielleicht die Zeit und dann machen wir Englisch: nicht was Geplantes, aber zu schauen, was brauchen die Kinder heute …” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 176 Betty could hand over autonomy to the children because she trusted them to be able to play the games on their own by setting them up appropriately. She trusted the children to learn and to use their English (→ strategy 1 and 3). However, the competences Betty gained to mediate, construct and negotiate meaning to support the children to perform tasks on their own were limited because she could not use the language spontaneously. She could mediate the language by setting up 286 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="286"?> 177 Betty was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most during the project to teach English? The material helped her, which prompted her to say this comment. 178 Betty was asked to comment on: Do you have confidence to do English with the children? How do you feel about taking over the project? How do you feel about your teaching? tasks (language games songs with props) which she knew well, because she had learnt the relevant chunks (→ strategy 1): “Wir legen die Schneemänner hin und die Kinder kommen und machen was. Ich kann ihnen dann helfen. Vieles habe ich auswendig gelernt: Lieder oder irgendwelche Spiele und ich habe das Material. Ich kann zurückgreifen und das machen” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 177 Consequently, she could confirm rules and give support when the children asked for help. She was well supported by her repertoire of chunks of language which she had accumulated from the participatory demonstration lessons and the ones that she had selected for expanding her existing repertoire. She circulated to help small groups and individual children (→ strategy 1). However, her competences to construct and negotiate meaning to support the children to perform tasks were restricted to the particular chunks of language which she herself had previously acquired, because she had not developed her English language competence to a point where she could comfortably use English spontaneously. d) Betty’s English language competence Betty had developed her spoken English to a point where she could integrate English in her daily routine by using her repertoire of teacher talk, games, picture books which she had collected throughout the project. She managed to change her initial perspective that she would never integrate English to feeling confident to continue integrating English her way - as long as the children were enthusiastic and interested to continue. She would rely on the language and methods that she had observed as she was not able to develop a level of communicative English language competence that would enable her to develop and to teach complete task plans independently: “Ja, ich würde es machen, aber ich würde es nicht so machen können wie du es machst [als eine aufgebaute Stunde] sondern auf meine Art und Weise, weil ich eben die englische Sprache nicht so spreche wie du, ich würde es ebenso machen wie du [es] uns oft gezeigt hast, mit Spielen, mit Bilderbüchern, mit teacher talk, wie man es auch nannte. So würde ich es machen: mit vielen Liedern, Kreisspiele in Englisch, so würde ich mir es vorstellen können” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 178 287 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="287"?> 179 I said to Betty that I would like to have a final meeting with her to reflect on the project, her teaching and the continuation of the project after it had finished. 180 Betty was asked to comment on: Could you imagine starting a project like this from the very beginning? 181 Robin and Atnan were two boys who were in their second year of preschool and were in Betty’s group. 182 I commented that the children were eager to listen to the answer to Betty’s question about the name of an animal. Betty responded by talking about the children’s initiative to speak English to each other by looking at the English boards and using the resource materials. This prompted her to say this comment. Her communicative English language competence remained an issue for her throughout the project. She was aware that only with a sound communicative English language competence she could develop her English teaching compe‐ tences further. It became obvious to her when she compared what she could do to Kathie’s skills, whose communicative English language competence enabled her to teach with ease: “Die nehmen die Bücher ständig. Es gibt keinen Tag, wo die nicht ein englisches Buch nehmen. Da kann ich toll lesen, da habe ich kein Problem damit. Es ist einfach nur Sprechen. Die kurzen Anweisungen sind auch gut die wir täglich machen können, aber einen gesamten Morgenkreis wie die Kathie es letzte Woche oben gemacht hat, da hätte ich jetzt ein Problem” (Betty, 02.05.17: int. 31). 179 “Kathie hat es so leicht, weil sie so gut sprechen kann. Sie macht das ja fließend. Das bewundere ich. Ich finde es toll. Ich habe zwei Jahre Englisch in der Schule gehabt. … Die jungen Pädagoginnen sprechen alle fließend Englisch. Für die würde es kein Problem sein” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 180 In the second year of the project, she commented that she was still finding it difficult to speak spontaneously and that she had to trust herself to speak more. But this did not change in the course of the project: “Robin, Atnan, 181 so diese Vorreiter, sie sprechen dann mit den Jüngeren, wie heißt das in Englisch? Da hätte ich gerne, wenn mir dieser Satz auf Englisch kommt. Da bin eigentlich ich gefragt. Aber da tue ich mich immer noch schwer. Wie spreche ich das aus? Wie geht das jetzt? ” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 182 Not surprisingly, the lack of a sound communicative English language competence remained an issue for Betty until the end. Credibility with the children and trust in what one does in a classroom is a powerful support in itself. Betty did have the materials and the knowledge of how to put the communicative language classroom to practice, but she could not imagine initiating a project independently with children who had no pre-knowledge: 288 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="288"?> 183 Betty was asked to comment on: Could you imagine starting a project like this from the very beginning? “ … Ich könnte mir vorstellen es weiter zu führen aber beginnen damit finde ich total schwierig. Du hast den Grundstein gelegt, worauf man aufbauen kann. Aber von mir aus hätte ich dieses Projekt nicht gemacht und weiß nicht, ob ich das machen will. Jetzt habe ich Material. Jetzt weiß ich wie es funktioniert. … Du kannst die Sprache. Wenn ich jetzt in einem anderen Kindergarten wäre und muss da ein Englischprojekt machen weiß ich nicht, ob ich das machen würde. Ich würde mit den Kindern, so wie ich es hier mache, ein englisches Spiel [machen], singen und so weiter. Aber ich weiß nicht, ob ich das dann Englischunterricht nennen kann” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 183 The following conclusions can be drawn from the data in how far the language support that was provided by the teacher education (→ chapter 5.7.4) assisted Betty in developing her communicative English language competence: 1. Using English as the common language between the teacher educator and the preschool teachers As Betty’s comprehension in English was at a level that she could under‐ stand everything I said, using English as the means of communication between us was no problem. I spoke English, she listened but replied in German in both our spontaneous conversations and in the interviews. She felt she could not express herself in a way that would allow her to communicate what she wanted to say. As she was not confident in her speaking skills, she was not planning to speak spontaneously with the children and therefore did not take the advantage of this opportunity to practise speaking English with me in spontaneous conversations or during the interviews. 2. Attending participatory demonstration lessons By taking an active part in the participating demonstration lessons Betty heard relevant chunks of language and had the opportunity to use these chunks for the various activities. Through this she became confident to develop her personal strategies and to continue to integrate English in her preschool. 3. Collecting a repertoire of relevant chunks of English The support system of collecting chunks was taken seriously by Betty. By keeping an extensive, written repertoire of relevant chunks of language which she used on a daily basis in her routine, Betty gained confidence to use English in her daily routine. She collected chunks from the lessons and from her own experiences during the day which she found relevant 289 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="289"?> and useful. Although the repertoire supported her well in integrating English, it did not help her in her development fluently to communicate spontaneously with the children. 4. Contacting the teacher educator for advice As a language support system, the teacher educator was valuable to Betty. She relied on me to check her chunks of language that she had collected during the week and to give her and the children the words they did not know. She did not contact me through email or phone, but instead waited until I was there on Tuesdays. 7.2.3.4 Kathie’s English teaching competences a) Kathie’s profile as preschool teacher and her general attitude towards teaching English in a multilingual preschool context Kathie joined the team enthusiastically and immediately had a good rapport with the children. In her studies she had attended a class on ‘English in Kindergarten’, however she felt she had not learnt how to teach English. She had not yet had any experience in integrating English before she joined the project, but she was eager to include English in her programme. She was confident in her English-speaking skills and in herself as a preschool teacher (→ chapter 6.2.4.5). She was well organised in her morning routine and in her planned circle times. Her plans were not negotiated by asking the children what they would like to do. Kathie did not have any inhibitions to speak English to the children and the children reacted naturally to her. She joined the project at a time when it was already well underway. Her new colleagues (the participating preschool teachers) already had developed positive attitudes towards integrating English inclusively in the preschool. They were motivated to continue the project and the children were learning and enjoying it. This was an ideal situation for Kathie to start teaching English as she could begin to work with a group that already had developed skills in English and established English classroom routines for her to build on and to continue. She commented her situation in the beginning as follows: 290 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="290"?> 184 Marie sang English songs when she went on outings. When children walk in a line outside or wait at a bus stop, singing is a strategy to entertain them and to keep the group behaving in an orderly fashion. 185 I told Kathie that I was pleased that she was taking part in the project and was integrating English in her group, which prompt her to say this comment. 186 Kathie was asked to comment on: How often do you think you will integrate English into your group? 187 In this interview I explained what the project entailed for her as a participating teacher, I explained the approach of reflective practice and gave her a session on the relevant theory (TBLL and related approaches). 188 Kathie was asked to comment on: Do you think you would be able to do lessons now? Do you feel confident? “Marie always sang ‘The Morning Song’, so I do it too. The children do it automatically. We sing it every day. Also, when we go outdoors, we always sing your songs, because they just start. 184 The children love it” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 185 “Today we learnt the colours in German and they also talked English [sic] to me. They say the colours in English, and they understand me. So, I think it is possible, that we can learn English in the kindergarten every day. They know so much” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 186 Kathie spoke English to the children in the participatory demonstration lesson with ease and naturally from the beginning and immediately joined in and assisted in managing the English language classroom by giving the children instructions and organising them. Her experiences in these lessons gave her immediate confidence to give lessons and integrate English in her routine in a relaxed, spontaneous way. After having taken part in the first three participatory demonstration lessons she already felt confident to teach English to the extent that she would be able to take over the lessons: “Yes, yes, I think so. I think I would be able to [teach lessons], because I have seen you and I have seen how you are doing it, you have told me it too now 187 and so I think I can teach them or I can take a whole lesson, yes” (Kathie, 21.10.16: int. 25). 188 b) Kathie’s personal strategies to implement English in her group (focus: process) Kathie developed competences quickly, both in writing task plans for her circle times and in speaking English to the children during the daily routine. Her high level of confidence in both her language skills and in herself supported her to integrate English easily. Although she felt the workload would be quite high, she did not feel it would be a problem to introduce English into her group because she knew she could integrate English flexibly whenever she wanted to, whether it was during a 291 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="291"?> 189 Before the interview started, I commented that when we met the first time (21.10.16: int. 25), I felt that I had given her a lot of information all at once, which prompted her to say this comment. 190 The song: ‘Head and Shoulders’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4d). 191 I said that the project was coming to an end next week. She said that the children enjoyed it and learnt a lot, which prompted to say this comment. planned structured time or when speaking to the children spontaneously during the morning routine: “When we met, I listened to you and then I went out of the room and thought, “Oh, it will be much work. But I love to speak [sic] English with the children and for me it was no problem to do this, because when you work with children you can do lessons with them or count or say to them go to the door and open the door or stand in front of the window; things like this at any time” (Kathie, 28.03.17: Int. 30). 189 In free play Kathie took the English materials from the shelves and displayed them on one of the tables as a form of encouragement for the children to take them to play with, but only when the children specifically asked what they could do, did she suggest that they play with them. Her philosophy was that the children play on their own in free play without her influence, but that she would provide guidance when it was asked for (→ chapter 6.2.4.5). Kathie used the materials on a regular basis in her lessons in circle time. Displaying them and using them in her lessons seemed to be sufficient for the children to continue to take the English materials on their own accord in free play. They slipped into role-play and were able to use their English together and play independently with each other: “The children try to make also English lessons on their own. So, they play English lessons. Belma, she is the teacher, and the other children are the students, and she teaches them English. ‘What colour is this’ - ‘it’s green’ - ‘the green frog’ [from ‘Brown Bear Brown Bear’, by Eric Carle]. [They do it] like this, or [they sing] ‘Head and Shoulders’. 190 They make a good morning circle, and they sing together, speak together, look at books together or they say, ‘Kathie, close the door’ or ‘Kathie open the window’ or ‘the sun is shining’” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 191 Three personal strategies that she used to integrate English could be identified from the data: 1. Integrating English on a regular basis in structured times of the timetable. 2. Using established routines during the morning. 3. Using relevant chunks and speaking spontaneously to communicate with the children and to manage the class. 292 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="292"?> 192 I had a meeting the week before to suggest that they do a CAR on an issue in their teaching. Betty said she could not do it, which prompted her to say this comment. 193 Kathie was asked to comment on: How do you prepare your task plans? 194 A movement rhyme: ‘Up, Down, Turn Around’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4 f). 195 ‘From Head to Toe’, by Eric Carle is a picture book about movement. 196 The book, ‘From Head to Toe’ by Eric Carle was on one of the tables and I noticed it and said, “Ah, ‘From Head to Toe,’” which prompted her to say this comment. 197 Kathie was not part of the project the year before. 198 We were talking about ideas for task plans. Personal strategy # 1: Integrating English on a regular basis in structured times of the timetable Kathie used the structured times of circle time and movement in the gym to integrate English in her group. She allocated Thursday circle time for her main lesson and used other circle times for songs and stories. As she was confident in her English language skills, she felt that she was not restricted in writing her lesson plans. Betty often commented on Kathie’s abilities: “Wenn ich Kathie sehe. Wie sie eine Englischstunde vorbereitet - ich schaue gar nicht zu wie sie das macht. Sie macht es so perfekt, als wenn sie Deutsch spricht. … Sie macht das so perfekt wie du es auch machst” (Betty, 09.03.17: int. 28). 192 Kathie designed her task plans by selecting activities and materials from the task plans of the participatory demonstration lessons. She also referred to Nadia’s folder from the year before which caught her up on what the teachers had previously done and gave her a wider range of tasks and materials to choose from: “I have your plans and I use them. I mix them and add songs. It’s great. The children know so much, so I can do a lot with them. It’s funny [sic]” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 193 “That’s what I did today. I wanted to do a lesson with ‘Up, Down, Turn Around’. 194 They love it. At the moment we are doing ‘My Body- What can I do with my body? ’ - ‘From Head to Toe’ 195 is great for that” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 196 TE: I’d like to sing ‘I Like the Flowers’ soon. Kathie: We sung [sic] it already. TE: You have? Oh, Great. Kathie: Yeah, I looked at Nadia’s folder from last year. 197 She always has it on her ‘Regal’ and I can always look at it. (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30) 198 She mainly used the materials that I had provided to write her task plans. Her own contribution to her plans were new songs she chose that she turned into stories for the children to take part in. She had observed this way of singing and 293 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="293"?> 199 In the song (story) the ducks go missing one by one and at the end they all come back to Mother Duck. The children participate in the song (story) and take the ducks one by one. 200 ‘Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear Turn Around’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4 g). 201 ‘Up, Down, Turn Around’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4 f). 202 Kathie was asked to comment on: Has the project helped you to develop your own ideas? 203 Examples of the rhymes and songs (→appendix 1: materials 4). 204 Kathie was asked to comment on: How much English do you do during the week? acting out songs in the participatory demonstration lessons and adapted the idea for herself, collecting props that would support her. She also adjusted rhymes to suit her lesson: “I mostly use your materials. I add songs, like you know, and add to them [she acts out the songs], like ‘Five Little Ducks now’. These songs are like a story for the children. They love it. This is the pond [she used a round piece of blue material] and I bought these ducks to do the song, too [she showed me six ducks on her shelf]. They love it. They are allowed to do the ducks. 199 … I mix rhymes too, like ‘Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear Turn Around’. 200 I use parts of it in ‘Up, Down, Turn Around’. 201 It makes the rhyme longer” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 202 Kathie also saw songs and rhymes as opportunities for the children to speak spontaneously. She recognised that songs and rhymes provided a framework for the children. She encouraged the children to creatively add to songs and rhymes, for example, she asked them to sing each other to the door with new ideas of how their friends could move of the door: “… We change the words too [of ‘Willoughby Wallaby Woo’]. They can say where the elephant sits, like on their shoulder. Then I can get them to say more. … I do it with ‘If You’re Happy and You Know It’, too. They tell me what they want to sing next. … The friend song is good for this, too. They love to add to that. I do the same with routines, like ‘I and 2 and 3 and 4’. … They sing each other to the door and make up new things. … I help them and then add them to my list” 203 (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 204 Kathie used free play as an opportunity to introduce new English songs to the children so that the children would already be familiar with them before she included them in her task plans for circle time. Kathie very much enjoyed playing the guitar and singing and would sing the English songs as background music while the children were playing: 294 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="294"?> 205 Kathie told me that she had bought ducks to sing a song and create a story, which prompted her to say this comment. 206 Kathie was describing how she plans her circle time by using the content of the participatory demonstration lessons, which prompted her to say this comment. 207 At this time, the theme was movement and outside activities. The children were sung individually to the door to line up and they did the action that the teacher sang: 1 and 2 and 3 and 4, Anna skips to the door. 208 The children run when she is playing the drum and when she stops, they also stop and she gives a order that they carry out. 209 Kathie was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most during the project? She said routines, which prompted her to say this comment. 210 Kathie was asked to comment on: Do you write down your plans? I asked this question because Kathie talked about doing lessons in the gym. “… They get to know the songs quickly. They listen, you know, some children even join in” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 205 The other structured time that Kathie used for integrating English was her allocated time for movement in the gym. Rather than specifically planning her movement in the gym, she saw it as a time to simply integrate English with reference to the lessons she had done so that she could consolidate the language: “We make [sic] the lessons in the gym, like jump or run or stop and it is funny [sic] for the children and it is for me easy because we always make a game of it [sic]” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int.30). 206 “… Now I do ‘1 and 2 and 3 and 4’ 207 because of our theme right now. The children love jumping and skipping to the door. It’s funny [sic] for them. It’s good because I can add to it, ‘Fly like a bird to the door’. I see what they know and then I do what they don’t know in the gym with the drum” 208 (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 209 Kathie knew what she wanted to do in her lesson plans and how she was going to do it. For this reason, she had a relaxed approach to writing her task plans. She did not write in detail, but planned them by writing quick notes, often one-worded prompts. She did not write down more than what she found would be necessary. This confirms Tsui’s research that expert teachers reduce their planning and tend to write their plans to what reminded her of a shopping list (Tsui 2003: 27). Otherwise, she simply planned that she would do English, as in her gym lessons, without any explicit and detailed plan to prepare it: “… I just write notes, what I want to do with the children. I always work like that. I just need Stichwörter. … In the gym I don’t plan what I do. I just think today I do English and think what I did in circle time” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 210 295 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="295"?> 211 A team racing game in the gym (→ appendix 1: materials 3c). 212 Kathie was asked to comment on: What have you learnt from the project? 213 Kathie was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most during the project to teach English? In planning, Kathie was aware that the children needed to do tasks themselves in order to learn. She had observed that the children were able to work together as a team on their own and that she could step back and supervise them. The situations that she particularly observed were the children doing the language games in teams and carrying out the routine together. Games and the routines became a standard part of her task plan: “… I know they need to do things on their own. The games are great for this. They can play them without me, [for example] ‘The Rainbow Game’ in the gym. 211 We now play it with animals, too” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 212 “What’s great … is they can do the routines themselves. I can just stand there. They can sing each other to the door. They love it - or [they can also do] the rhyme ‘1,2,3, I want Mary next to me’ and make their own circle. They just do it” (Kathie 08.06.17: int. 34). 213 The component which supported Kathie the most to plan her task plans were the participating demonstration lessons. She observed how English could be taught and used this model to teach her lessons. She saw the materials in action and could monitor the children’s reactions. She was supported by taking over part of the lessons, because she gained her own teaching experience within the secure framework that the participating demonstration lessons provided. By the children giving her their attention, they created a learning atmosphere, which Kathie could transfer to her Thursday lessons. The task plans of the participating demonstration lessons supported her as they became the basis of her task plans. Personal strategy # 2: Using established routines during the week. Kathie took over a group where the children were used to the routines that Marie had already established. Although Kathie was capable of developing her own routines, it was convenient for her to base her work on Marie’s routines, because the children were already responsive and actively involved during these routines. Therefore, on a daily basis she began her circle time using English routines, which the children automatically started. The children were used to singing current English songs in circle time and the routine of using English to leave the room and go downstairs was also well established: 296 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="296"?> 214 The ‘Weather Witch’ and the song about the weather (→ appendix 1: materials 2a) together is one of the routines that starts the participatory demonstration lessons. 215 An elephant song (→ appendix 1: materials 4e). 216 They gave the elephant to Kathie during free play. 217 Free play lasts for an hour and a half from 7: 00 to 8: 30. 218 Kathie was asked to comment on: How do you bring English in your routine? 219 Kathie was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most during the project to teach English? 220 Kathie was asked to comment on: When do you say these sentences like ‘go to the door’ or when do you speak spontaneously to the children? “We always count the children [at the beginning of circle time]. First in German and then in English, every day. I don’t say anything to the children they just count 1-2-3-4-5 and so on, every day, and every day we sing ‘The Good Morning Song and [do the task involving] the weather and the song [about the weather]. 214 And now ‘Willoughby Wallaby Woo’ [is part of our routine]. 215 They come to me and give me the elephant 216 so we make the good morning circle and then we sing. It’s great. … Then I start, [that is] when it is not too early” 217 (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 218 “The rhymes for the routines are great. The children just do them. I don’t have to explain anything. I just start. We always use English to line up at the door to go downstairs” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 219 Personal strategy # 3: Using relevant chunks and speaking spontaneously to communicate with the children and to manage the class As she was confident to use English, Kathie quickly integrated spontaneous speech when she was communicating with the children and teacher talk. In my presence, she only spoke English to the children, using the authentic communicative situation to speak spontaneously to them. On a regular basis, she allocated the tidy up time after free play to speak English to the children. She was conscious of using both teacher talk and speaking spontaneously. She also spoke spontaneously in the coatroom when the children got dressed to go outside: “Oh, anytime, really, sometimes I just start speaking in the Garderobe to put their coats and hats on; always when we tidy up. That’s also a good time to just start talking and also for teacher talk, too: put it on the table, put it over there, put it away, put it in your box [and] give it to me. That is a routine for us now, every day. The children know what happens so I can speak freely. The same in the Garderobe” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 220 In conclusion, it can be said that Kathie developed the knowledge and the skills from the demonstration lesson with an understanding that implementing English 297 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="297"?> 221 Real lessons is Kathie’s terminology for task plans. 222 Kathie was asked to comment on: What have you learnt from the project? 223 Kathie said that she really enjoys doing English, which prompted her to say this sentence. 224 Kathie was asked to comment on: Can you imagine taking over the project one day? in preschool meant integrating English systematically through task plans and not only by singing songs and chanting rhymes every now and again. She was aware that the children needed to do task on their own. She established her Thursday lessons and continually implemented the familiar routines, which established English to be a constituent part of her morning routine: “… I’m proud of myself that I am able to make [sic] English lessons on my own. I like making [sic] real lessons. 221 You always repeat and bring in new things [and] I see it works well. The children really learn” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 222 Kathie was looking forward to continuing English after the project had finished to the extent that she suggested she could teach English to the other groups as well. She already had some experience in this as she supported Betty: “Sometimes I make [sic] lessons in the afternoon with Betty so that I can show her how it works, and she always said ‘Oh, you are so good at English you can do this’” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 223 “My opinion, I think for me it wouldn’t be a problem when I go once a week in every group and make a lesson - for me it wouldn’t be a problem” (Kathie, 28.03.17: Int. 30). 224 c) Kathie’s competences to create a powerful learning environment for language learning (focus: outcome) From the data it can be clearly seen that as a professional preschool teacher, Kathie possessed many of the competences that are considered to be basic to teaching English in preschool (→ chapter 5.8.2). Kathie demonstrated that she was well able to transfer the competences that she had developed to her English teaching after she had become familiar with the knowledge and skills of how to teach English to children. A positive and safe language learning environment As professional preschool teacher Kathie’s basic criteria when organising and teaching lessons in English were that the children enjoyed the lessons, that they were committed to what they were doing and that they were not overwhelmed by challenges when learning English. Based on these criteria she developed 298 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="298"?> 225 I said that the project was coming to an end, which prompted her to talk about the children’s English language competences and to say this comment. 226 Kathie was asked to comment on: When do you say these sentences like ‘go to the door’ or when do you speak spontaneously to the children? the competences to teach in a way that supported a positive and safe language learning environment. She respected the children’s individuality and their language learning processes and reacted accordingly: “… He learns with all the children. It’s the same like in German. He can’t say a word in German he always needs the whole group. That’s okay. It is good to see that he loves to join in and call out in English. I don’t look at him, I know he doesn’t like that” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 225 The participatory demonstration lesson showed Kathie how it was possible for the children to enjoy learning in an English lesson in a relaxed manner. She realised the importance of preparing the children’s pre-knowledge so that they would be able to take part and enjoy the lessons and she made sure that this was provided for. For example, singing the songs in free play that she wanted to introduce in the lessons so that the children would realise that they were already familiar with them. She was aware of the need to teach the children in a playful way and developed her task plans accordingly. Kathie also created a positive and safe learning environment by integrating rules, rituals and routines. She observed the children taking part in English easily in the routines that Marie (the previous preschool teacher) had established with them; she was aware of the way they contributed to the language learning environment when she integrated English using routines during the week (→ strategy # 2). She used them in her lessons as they were already part of the preschool timetable and provided a safe and reliable structure for the children. As the children were familiar with the routines, she could build on the topics the children knew and communicate spontaneously with them, which would otherwise have been challenging for them to do. This included the established rules in the coatroom (they must take off their slippers, put their shoes on and wear their hats and coats outside) or prompts to tidy up after free play or putting toys back to where they belong, for example: “… That is a routine for us now, every day. The children know what happens so I can speak freely. The same in the Garderobe” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30) (→ strategy # 2). 226 299 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="299"?> 227 Kathie said that the children enjoyed making English circle time in free play, which prompted her to say this comment. 228 Kathie was asked to comment on: Has the project helped you develop your ideas? 229 Examples of songs and rhymes (→ appendix 1: materials 4). Meaningful relevant tasks Kathie focused on these two criteria when she selected meaningful and relevant tasks: The children had to enjoy what they were doing and could only be interested and become involved in an activity if they were capable of doing it: “When children can do something, they do it over and over again, like puzzles. It is not interesting, if they can’t do it. They just leave it then” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 227 She found routines and games to be especially meaningful and relevant. Not only did the children enjoy them, but she could hand over the responsibility easily. She knew they would be able to attain the goals, for example completing a game or carrying out the routines (→ strategy # 1). Kathie was not in the habit of making her own materials, but because of the high-status storytelling had in her group she chose songs and turned them to stories by using props, knowing they would be meaningful and relevant to them (→ strategy # 1): “… My children love stories, so I make stories out of anything. My lessons always have stories” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 228 Kathie’s selected activities from the participatory demonstration lessons which were coherently connected to the themes that were currently addressed in preschool. New language that she integrated in her plans was introduced by adding chunks of language to rhymes and introducing new songs (→ Strategies # 1 & # 2); however, she did not concentrate on sequencing her tasks to develop their English knowledge further. Her task plans largely consolidated the pre-knowledge that the children had acquired (→ strategy 1). Interactional support Kathie organised parts of her morning routines as English tasks to give the children the opportunity to interact, for example the children chose each other one by one to line up at the door by using rhymes and songs that could be spontaneously adapted or by describing a child 229 (→strategy # 2). She had observed that her children were in the habit of communicating in English to each other in the established English routines and therefore she felt that these routines provided a good framework for the children participate. They provided 300 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="300"?> 230 Kathie was asked to comment on: How much English do you do during the week? rules and procedures that needed to be followed and themes that the children could develop further. For the same reason games were also supportive for her to encourage interaction between the children. She could step back and let the children take over. She knew what her children were capable of doing and believed that the only way to encourage children who were reluctant and shy to take part and use their English spontaneously was through providing the framework of routines and games. She was not demanding, instead she was ready to help them at any time, which promoted a supportive learning atmosphere for them to interact in. She supported the children further by including their phrases in her versions of the songs and rhymes when she chanted and sang them herself (→ strategy # 1 & # 2): “… I know they should speak and not just listen. Some of them are too shy to do it another way. They sing each other to the door and make up new things. … I help them and then add them to my list” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 230 Kathie could support the children well in their language development because she responded immediately giving them the chunks of language they needed to interact when they were lost for words. d) Kathie’s communicative English language competence Kathie was competent in her English language skills from the beginning of the project and was looking forward to the opportunity to speak English and to integrate it in her group. Although it was a new situation for her, she was not inhibited to speak English to the children at all and spoke with ease and naturally to them. The children in return also responded easily and naturally. The following conclusions can be drawn from the data in how far the language support that was provided by the teacher education (→ chapter 5.7.4) assisted Kathie in developing her communicative English language competence: 1. Using English as the common language between the teacher educator and the preschool teachers Kathie took advantage of the opportunity to practice her English with me and spoke English throughout the project, however when I corrected her during our conversations, she would repeat the word correctly, but then continue her mistake in further spontaneous conversations. Some phrases had become fossilized errors, for example using the word ‘funny’ instead of ‘fun’. 2. Attending the participatory demonstration lessons 301 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="301"?> Being a native speaker, I was able to create an authentic communicative situation to speak English in the participatory demonstration lessons, which Kathie used to help the situation to become authentic between her and the children. Whenever I went into her room, she would immediately switched to speaking English both to me and the children. 3. Collecting a repertoire of relevant chunks of English Kathie did not take advantage of collecting chunks of language. She spoke fluently and spontaneously with the children. For the chunks that were affected by fossilization, it would have been helpful to her if she had kept a repertoire. 4. Contacting the teacher educator for advice Kathie did not take advantage of this opportunity. She did not ask me any advice. 7.2.3.5 Summary of participating teachers’ developing English teaching competences as a social community of practice Chapter 7.2.3 has presented results of preschool teachers’ competence devel‐ opment in individual case-studies which were structured according to the purposes the teacher education pursued (→ chapter 5.8.2.1). This comprises the three skills of being able to create a positive and safe language learning environment for the children; of providing tasks that are meaningful to them and of integrating interactional support while teaching. This final chapter on teachers’ English competence development will review these competences and will present the outcomes of each individual case by providing a summary in grid format. Through this summative, structured survey of presenting each teacher’s development of her English teaching competences, similarities and differences of members of this community of practice can be identified. The teachers’ competences are summarized for each of the competence areas and are coded as follows: ✓ the teachers have developed the competence O the teachers have developed the competence to a certain extent X the teachers have not developed the competence 302 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="302"?> Three competence areas Teachers need to be able to … Nadia 1 Positive and safe language learning environment Integrate rules, rituals and routines (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ Nadia was well aware of their dif‐ fering levels of German compre‐ hension amongst her children and felt this would be an influence on developing a positive and safe language environment in English, consequently rituals and routines were fundamental to Nadia’s Eng‐ lish circle time to give the children a sense of security through being familiar with them. Treat the children as individuals and judge the situation from the children’s perspective so that they are able to react appropriately to their learning needs (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ She considered them individually in the lessons. When asking spe‐ cific children if they would like to have a turn, Nadia approached the children differently taking into account whether they were young, or shy. Nadia also judged the situation of how to integrate English from the children’s perspective by con‐ sidering their German competence level. She knew this had a great in‐ fluence on their well-being in pre‐ school and therefore would have to have an influence on their well-being when taking part in English. 2 Meaningful, relevant tasks Select and design tasks that are appropriate for their children (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 1.) ✓ Nadia selected games, routines and rituals from the participatory dem‐ onstration lesson that were tasks for the children that actively got the children involved to use their lan‐ guage in order to complete them. X Nadia did not make her own mate‐ rials. Set up tasks that support the chil‐ dren to contribute individually Select and design tasks which re‐ quire the children to use language as a means to attain a non-linguistic goal ✓ Nadia played team games with the children in which they all contrib‐ uted individually as team members to win the game. Nadia set up the situation that she organised her classroom manage‐ 303 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="303"?> (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 2.) ment through the routines that the children individually contributed to, to fulfil the task. ✓ Through playing guessing games, which they wanted to win and through routines in which they could contribute to classroom man‐ agement, Nadia did not focus on the language but on the task at hand. X Nadia did not design her own tasks. Develop children’s awareness of form by repeatedly exposing them to new forms through various tasks Integrate corrective feedback in an unobtrusive way so that children’s language development is supported (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 3.) ✓ Nadia used language in different parts of her morning routine to ex‐ pose the children to the language in various contexts and could vary the language as a result. ✓ Nadia was particular in speaking English correctly to the children. She repeated the chunks immedi‐ ately in the correct form in the participatory demonstration lessons. The children did not have to re‐ spond. Equally, she automatically corrected their German grammar. Select and design tasks that are coherently structured, that is the topic, the activities and the out‐ come (target task) are clearly con‐ nected and provide support (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 4.) ✓ In her main circle time for English Nadia built up her lesson on the theme that was being covered in preschool at the time. She chose the materials and procedures from the participatory demonstration lessons. To coherently connect her English during the week she planned for the target language to recur in other structured times during the week. X However, she did not design her own tasks with supplementary ma‐ terials. 3 Interactional support Encourage interaction between the children by creating a supportive learning atmosphere (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 4) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: expectations; flexibility) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: empathy) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: tolerance) O Nadia used the games and the rou‐ tines to motivate the children to interact verbally to each other. She created a supportive learning en‐ vironment in so far that her ex‐ pectations did not overwhelm the children, however she would have needed to diminish her support of the tasks for them to be more chal‐ lenging. 304 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="304"?> Take the children seriously by lis‐ tening to what they have to say and by respecting their ideas and opinions enthusiastically (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: enthusiasm) O Nadia listened to the children and took them seriously, however in her meticulous structured way, she was not flexible in her plans to changed them to accommodate the children’s ideas. If the children enjoyed a particular game, she in‐ cluded into it in her plans regularly. When the children made sugges‐ tions, she build it into her future plans that were not yet made. Hand over the autonomy by trusting the children to be able to do something meaningful with what the teacher has prepared (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: willingness) O Nadia needed to trust the younger children more to do the tasks on their own. She felt she had to help them speak and therefore tended to help the too much, which became a habit. Mediate, construct and negotiate meaning to support the children to perform tasks (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.1 mediation) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) O Nadia was particular in speaking correctly to the children and there‐ fore she had a repertoire of chunks of language that she could call on to assist the children to interact in English with each other. Nadia readily supported the chil‐ dren to do the tasks, however with the younger children she often ne‐ glected to observe when the chil‐ dren could perform the tasks them‐ selves, on their own. Encourage interaction between the children and with her by sup‐ porting them in producing output and expressing their meaning and intentions (through corrective feedback, pa‐ tient prompting etc.) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) ✓ Nadia integrated English into her timetable in a meticulously struc‐ tured way. Within this framework she could prompt the children to speak, using chunks of language that she knew were correct. In her calm way, she patiently prompted and gave corrective feed‐ back to the children. Give children individual attention through differentiation: whether they are classified as “weaker” chil‐ dren or “stronger” children (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.3 differentia‐ tion) X Nadia recognised the strong chil‐ dren, but she did not give them in‐ dividual attention although she felt it would be a good idea to speak to them spontaneously using teacher talk during the morning. Nadia defined weaker children as those who had not yet learnt German and the younger children 305 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="305"?> in the group. She did not give them extra attention, but instead gave them less attention with the idea they would be overwhelmed. Table 15: Nadia’s competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (→ chapter 5.8.2) Three competence areas Teachers need to be able to … Marie 1 Positive and safe language learning environment Integrate rules, rituals and routines (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ Marie established early in the project the use of routines to inte‐ grate English in her morning. They were so well established that the children began to say them auto‐ matically at the time of the rou‐ tines, without Marie’s prompt. Treat the children as individuals and judge the situation from the children’s perspective so that they are able to react appropriately to their learning needs (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ Marie treated her children as indi‐ viduals. She allowed them to follow their own pace in developing their English skills and to joining in the lesson whenever they were ready to do so. She never set them under pressure. Marie knew her children well and reacted accordingly to their needs: She felt she accommodated their needs by allowing her free play and her lessons to become restless to accommodate the dispositions of her lively boys. Because of her good rapport, the children quiet‐ ened down quickly when it was asked for. 2 Meaningful, relevant tasks Select and design tasks that are appropriate for their children (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 1.) ✓ For her circle times, Marie chose language games from the task plans which she knew the children en‐ joyed and could play independ‐ ently. She recognised their excitement as a quality and a potential to involve the children in tasks. 306 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="306"?> She selected routines that she es‐ tablished as part of her morning routine as meaningful and relevant tasks for the children and used them to manage the classroom in English. X Marie did not design her own tasks. Set up tasks that support the chil‐ dren to contribute individually Select and design tasks which re‐ quire the children to use language as a means to attain a non-linguistic goal (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 2.) ✓ Marie made a point of setting up a game in each circle time so that the children could join in and con‐ tribute to the lesson when they were ready to do so. Marie embedded English routines into her morning, which encour‐ aged the children to contribute individually to classroom manage‐ ment. ✓ Her routines were to assist in class‐ room management; therefore, they had nonlinguistic goals. She selected guessing games as the main part of her English circle time to focus on the enjoyment of playing a game together with the gaol of one of the teams winning. X Marie did not design her own tasks. Develop children’s awareness of form by repeatedly exposing them to new forms through various tasks Integrate corrective feedback in an unobtrusive way so that children’s language development is supported (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 3.) O Marie added new forms to her teacher talk and through repetition the children soon understood them. However, on the whole, Marie con‐ solidated the children’s language rather than deliberately developing it further. She used language in various contexts, but she did not consciously connect those contexts to support the children awareness of form. ✓ During the participatory demon‐ stration lessons, Marie corrected the children, saying their chunks in the right form. She did not expect an answer. In the lessons, she also corrected their German grammar without 307 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="307"?> any expectation of the children re‐ peating the correct forms to her. It seemed to be a natural process for her to correct the children unobtru‐ sively. Select and design tasks that are coherently structured, that is the topic, the activities and the out‐ come (target task) are clearly con‐ nected and provide support (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 4.) O When planning her circle times, Marie chose a game as the target task and build up a coherent struc‐ ture by selecting corresponding stories and song to go with the chosen game. However, her task plans were eclectic. She did not add her own input to them, but selected purely from the participatory demonstra‐ tion lessons. X She did not design her own tasks with supplementary materials. 3 Interactional support Encourage interaction between the children by creating a supportive learning atmosphere (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: expectations; flexibility) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: empathy) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: tolerance) O Marie used the games and the rou‐ tines to offer the children opportu‐ nities to interact verbally with each other. She did not expect all the children to join in when she played games in her circle time, because she recognised that they differed in their personalities and their levels of English. However, she focused only on con‐ solidating English, rather than ex‐ panding it further through follow up tasks that were challenging for the children. Take the children seriously by lis‐ tening to what they have to say and by respecting their ideas and opinions enthusiastically (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: enthusiasm) ✓ Marie remained flexible in her plans to be able to take her chil‐ dren seriously. They were allowed to spontaneously change her plans with their preferences. Hand over the autonomy by trusting the children to be able to do something meaningful with what the teacher has prepared (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: willingness) ✓ Marie handed over the authority easily to the children. She chose games, because she knew the chil‐ dren would be able to play them independently and established rou‐ tines with the idea that they would carry them out, not only inde‐ pendently but also automatically, 308 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="308"?> without the need to promote them to do so. She trusted the children completely to achieve the tasks on their own, because her concentration was on consolidating their language rather than offering challenging follow-up activities. Mediate, construct and negotiate meaning to support the children to perform tasks (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.1 mediation) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) ✓ Marie could confirm rules of games and prompt the children whenever they needed chunks that supported them to continue playing games. She could instantly help the chil‐ dren to carry out the routines if they needed her support. She could speak to the children spontaneously. She had an extensive repertoire of chunks which she knew well and could therefore access quickly and easily. Encourage interaction between the children and with her by sup‐ porting them in producing output and expressing their meaning and intentions (through corrective feedback, patient prompting etc.) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) ✓ Marie encouraged the children to play the games in free play. She sat next to them to assist them to play the game when they needed it and to help them to interact together. She supported them in her circle time, encouraging them to play the game independently. Marie prompted and gave correc‐ tive feedback to the children unob‐ trusively. Give children individual attention through differentiation: whether they are classified as “weaker” chil‐ dren or “stronger” children (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.3 differentia‐ tion) ✓ Marie learnt to see her children as individuals who all had potential to learn English. She observed when the younger children were ready to join in, and consciously made sure that she pro‐ vided the space for them to take part and contribute to the lesson. While giving the younger quieter children a chance to join in, Marie 309 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="309"?> made sure the older more confident children did not take over. Marie was aware that there were ‘stronger’ children in the group and therefore made a board like Betty to give these children opportunities to enjoy saying what they knew whenever they wanted to. Her at‐ tention on the ‘weaker children’ was to be aware when they were ready to join in so that she could encourage them to. Table 16: Marie’s competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (→ chapter 5.8.2) Three competence areas Teachers need to be able to … Betty 1 Positive and safe language learning environment Integrate rules, rituals and routines (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ Betty took the opportunity to use English in recurring situations in her classroom management, devel‐ oping them into English routines and using the routines of the partic‐ ipatory demonstration lesson in her circle time. Treat the children as individuals and judge the situation from the children’s perspective so that they are able to react appropriately to their learning needs (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ Betty acknowledged the heteroge‐ neity of her group and was aware of the children’s cognitive develop‐ ment. She treated her children as individuals. She observed what in‐ terested them and what motivated them to take part in English, and re‐ acted accordingly. She recognised that some children needed more time to start speaking and with this in mind she had no intention of putting pressure on these children. 310 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="310"?> 2 Meaningful, relevant tasks Select and design tasks that are appropriate for their children (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 1.) ✓ Betty was able to select activities from the task plans that would appeal to the children to the ex‐ tent that they would use them in‐ dependently in free play. She could judge whether the children would be able to do the tasks and activities on their own, using their English knowledge, with little assistance required from her. O Betty developed the task of making picture boards, which proved to be meaningful relevant tasks, but as a rule Betty did not design language learning tasks. Set up tasks that support the chil‐ dren to contribute individually Select and design tasks which re‐ quire the children to use language as a means to attain a non-linguistic goal (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 2.) ✓ Through her learner centred way of teaching Betty encouraged the children to make decisions to en‐ gage in English. The children felt comfortable to make suggestions and to add to her plans. The enthusiasm of the children was Betty’s top priority and therefore she associated learning English with using the language to do fun activities. She selected tasks based on achieving the task by using the language, such as playing games. Betty was aware that GSL was taught under language learning pressure and criticised this. ✓ X Although Betty made some of her own materials, as a rule she did not design language tasks. Develop children’s awareness of form by repeatedly exposing them to new forms through various tasks Integrate corrective feedback in an unobtrusive way so that children’s language development is supported (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 3.) X Betty did not expose the children to chunks of language in a structured way to help awareness of form. She focused on chunks that were relevant to supporting her class‐ room management routines. X Betty’s language skills were too low to be able to give corrective feedback. Select and design tasks that are coherently structured, that is the topic, the activities and the out‐ come (target task) are clearly con‐ nected and provide support X Betty did not use her circle time to give complete lessons (that is designing task plans and teaching them). She used parts of her circle 311 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="311"?> (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 4.) time to integrate routines and activ‐ ities from my task plans only. 3 Interactional support Encourage interaction between the children by creating a supportive learning atmosphere (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: expectations; flexibility) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: empathy) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: tolerance) ✓ Betty trusted the children to or‐ ganise themselves to interact using the little English that they had. Her impetus to encourage interaction came from her fascination in their ability and enthusiasm to interact in English and to talk about it with each other. Betty set up situations in free play to encourage the chil‐ dren to interact together by playing games, looking at English books or developing fantasy role-plays, for example. Take the children seriously by lis‐ tening to what they have to say and by respecting their ideas and opinions enthusiastically (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: enthusiasm) ✓ Betty stimulated the children’s en‐ thusiasm by listening to them speak English and through her enthusi‐ astic reactions to their developing English competences and their ideas. Hand over the autonomy by trusting the children to be able to do something meaningful with what the teacher has prepared (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: willingness) ✓ Through her observation of the children’s capability to use their English, her learner-centred ap‐ proach to teaching and her knowl‐ edge of appropriate activities, Betty encouraged the children to do tasks and activities independently from her, having confidence in their ability. She took on the role of pro‐ viding support if required. Mediate, construct and negotiate meaning to support the children to perform tasks (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.1 mediation) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) O Betty could respond to the children and help them in the games that were supplied in the resource ma‐ terials, because she knew them well and had learnt relevant chunks of language that she needed to explain the games and play them. However, due to the fact that she could not use the language spontaneously, her support was limited to those games. Encourage interaction between the children and with her by sup‐ porting them in producing output and expressing their meaning and intentions (through corrective feedback, pa‐ tient prompting etc.) X Betty could only use the pre-learnt relevant chunks of language that she had learnt for her classroom management routines. She could not speak fluently or spontane‐ ously. She was therefore not able to support the children spontaneously 312 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="312"?> (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) to produce language to speak to each other or to her. Give children individual attention through differentiation: whether they are classified as “weaker” chil‐ dren or “stronger” children (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.3 differentia‐ tion) X Betty was able to control children from dominating activities and could encourage “stronger” and “weaker” children to play English games together. However, because her spoken competence was low, she could not give the “weaker” children extra support in language learning or support the “stronger” children to advance further. Table 17: Betty: competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (based on → chapter 5.8.2) Three competence areas Teachers need to be able to… Kathie 1 Positive and safe language learning environment Integrate rules, rituals and routines (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ Kathie followed through the rou‐ tines that were already well estab‐ lished by the previous teacher, ob‐ serving the positive safe learning environment that they created. Strategically she added English routines where she knew the chil‐ dren would understand her from the context. Treat the children as individuals and judge the situation from the children’s perspective so that they are able to react appropriately to their learning needs (→ chapter 5.8.2.1) ✓ Kathie respected the children’s individuality and reacted accord‐ ingly. Through observing the chil‐ dren she judged their learning sit‐ uation and consequently planned so that she could maximise the pos‐ itive and safe language learning environment. 313 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="313"?> 2 Meaningful, relevant tasks Select and design tasks that are appropriate for their children (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 1.) ✓ It was an important to Kathie that the children enjoyed the tasks. She noticed what the children ‘loved’ (a descriptive word she uses a lot) and knew what they were capable of and therefore was able to select activities that resulted in a mean‐ ingful relevant task plans. O She developed stories from songs, and collected / made props to sup‐ port herself and the children to tell the stories. Otherwise she did not design language learning tasks. X Although Kathie made some of her own materials, she did not design language tasks. Set up tasks that support the chil‐ dren to contribute individually Select and design tasks which re‐ quire the children to use language as a means to attain a non-linguistic goal (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 2.) ✓ Kathie turned parts of her morning routine into English tasks to create opportunities for the children to in‐ teract in English with each other to contribute individually achieving the task (e.g., lining themselves up at the door) ✓ She used language games in her lessons which the children could play independently, only with her encouragement and supervision if necessary. X Although Kathie made her some of her own materials, she did not design language tasks. Develop children’s awareness of form by repeatedly exposing them to new forms through various tasks Integrate corrective feedback in an unobtrusive way so that children’s language development is supported (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 3.) ✓ Kathie used teacher talk in her les‐ sons and in her routines varying her language to expand the child‐ ren’s repertoire of chunks. She changed the theme of games to other theme. ✓ Kathie corrected what the children said in the participatory demonstra‐ tion lessons. She did not expect them to respond. The lesson simply con‐ tinued. Select and design tasks that are coherently structured, that is the topic, the activities and the out‐ O Kathie selected activities for her task plans from the task plans of the participatory demonstration lessons. 314 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="314"?> come (target task) are clearly con‐ nected and provide support (→ chapter 5.8.2.2: task feature 4.) Her task plans were coherently structured in so far that she strictly followed the theme that was cur‐ rently the focus in preschool at that moment in time; however, because her task plans were built up largely on a selection of activities from the provided task plans, she mostly consolidated the children’s English. She did not structure a sequence with the focus of increasing their knowledge. 3 Interactional support Encourage interaction between the children by creating a supportive learning atmosphere (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: expectations; flexibility) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: empathy) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: tolerance) ✓ Kathie created a supportive learning atmosphere through her English routines, because she knew some children were shy and she believed they would speak with the support of routines that were based on rhymes and songs. She did not put pressure on her children. She helped them when they needed it. Take the children seriously by lis‐ tening to what they have to say and by respecting their ideas and opinions enthusiastically (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: enthusiasm) ✓ Kathie encouraged them to have their own ideas and respected them when the created them, for example she accepted their variations in the songs and included them in her versions when she led the songs and rhymes. Hand over the autonomy by trusting the children to be able to do something meaningful with what the teacher has prepared (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: willingness) ✓ Kathie focused on activities that she knew the children could do on their own. She observed that they were able to follow through routines and play games without her and provided opportunities ac‐ cordingly to support the children further in their independence. Mediate, construct and negotiate meaning to support the children to perform tasks (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.1 mediation) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) ✓ Kathie expected to help the chil‐ dren to interact together and was ready to give them chunks of lan‐ guage to support them to perform any particular task at hand. Encourage interaction between the children and with her by sup‐ porting them in producing output and expressing their meaning and intentions ✓ Kathie set up opportunities in which she could supervise to help the children interact and prompt them. She was also in the habit of corrective feedback in a subtle patient way. She did not interrupt 315 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="315"?> 231 Each day a child is chosen to be the leader of the group for the morning: the train driver. (through corrective feedback, pa‐ tient prompting etc.) (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.2 construction and negotiation of meaning) the children thinking. She did not insist on them acknowledging the correction. Give children individual attention through differentiation: whether they are classified as “weaker” chil‐ dren or “stronger” children (→ chapter 5.8.2.3: 3.3 differentia‐ tion) O Kathie chose the ‘stronger’ children for tasks such as choosing and de‐ scribing a train-driver for the day. 231 She also chose them first to play games or answer her so that the ‘weaker’ ones could observe and take part when they were ready to do so. She did not set up extra support systems for the younger children. Table 18: Kathie’s competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learn-ing’ (→chapter 5.8.2) 7.2.4 The teachers’ reflective practice as a social community of practice: a summary Describing the initial situation at the participating preschool: The participants began the teacher education project as professionally experienced preschool teachers with well settled attitudes, ideas and beliefs about teaching (→ chapter 6.2.4). They had already established a rapport with their children and routines within their classroom management and were in the professional habit of reflecting on various situations by observing their children’s well-being and their reactions to their daily plans (→ chapter 6.2.3). Drawing the consequences for the set-up of the teacher education: To use their knowledge and skills for their professional development in the field of teaching English, the preschool teachers needed to engage in reflective practice throughout their learning process. To support preschool teachers’ reflective practice the teacher education model had to be designed in a way that would comply with the preschool teachers’ regular work with their own groups and would need to offer reflective approaches that encourage the teachers to reflect in-action and on-action (→ chapter 5.4.3). This involved interviews, which also served the dual purpose of data collection for my research, materials development and journal writing (→ chapter 5.7.5.). The requirement to integrate 316 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="316"?> 232 I started to talk to Nadia about her reflecting on her teaching, which prompted her to say this comment. opportunities to develop teachers’ reflective practice resulted in the following research questions which will be addressed in this chapter: Resulting research questions: Were the teachers able to reflect on their English teaching? In what way did the design of the teacher education model support the teachers in this process? Did the teachers become involved in their professional development by making use of the reflective tools that the teacher education provided? Teachers’ development that related to the competence areas that were presented in the previous chapters was presented in case studies, which first documented their individual developments and then provided a summary of the developments that could be generalised for participating teachers’ development as a group. In the case of presenting results of the preschool teachers’ developing reflective competences, I will deviate from this procedure and describe their developments only by referring to their progress as a group. The outcome was that they could not establish integrating reflection as a regular routine despite various support measures, which the teacher education model had provided. The reasons why this did not come about will be analysed in the next chapter. The reflection that took place throughout the project was very much focused on the actual implementation of English in preschool teachers’ groups and on the children’s reactions and learning capacity, rather than on the way children’s responses related to the quality of preschool teachers’ actual teaching. One reason why this capacity could not be developed stems from their established habit of focusing on observing the children’s reactions only: if the children seemed to enjoy an activity and were involved, teachers continued with it as children’s involvement in the activities they offered was what was important to them. Intrigued by the potential of the project (→ chapter 7.2.1 and 7.2.2), the teachers were focused more on the situation that was developing as seen from the perspective of the children rather than the ways in which this development depended on their teaching in that situation. In other words: they found it difficult to draw cause-effect relationships between their teaching and the ways their children responded to it: Nadia had a concept of starting the reflective process, however she did not develop the process of reflecting on her teaching, but instead felt that documenting her experiences was the equivalent. “Was funktioniert gut, was nicht so gut klappt - und dann ein bisschen reflektieren darauf. Wie kann man das dann weiterentwickelt, oder? ” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 232 317 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="317"?> 233 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you think writing things down like anecdotes could be helpful to reflect? What helps you to reflect? 234 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you feel about your teaching during this time? This question refers to the period of time when she took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). 235 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you feel about your teaching? 236 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you think you will be able to give complete lessons - to sequence tasks one day? “Ich reflektiere schon aber nicht in der herkömmlichen Weise, sondern mehr wirklich kurz und mit mind-map: also, nicht so traditionell wie früher wo du seitenlang geschrieben hast. Ich meine, mehr die Praxis was man so macht. Und wie die Betty auch sagt, man sieht dann wirklich, man hat schon viel Erfahrung und man sieht auch viel” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 233 An added complication that hindered Nadia from reflecting on her practice was her preoccupation with the contextual constraints, which also involved the working conditions at her preschool (→ chapter 3) as the following quote demonstrates: “… Die Sache an sich genieße ich schon. Nur müssen die Rahmenbedingungen einfach passen. Wir reden wieder über die Rahmenbedingungen” (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 234 She did not focus on her teaching when I addressed it specifically in the interviews, but instead turned her attention repeatedly to the unfavourable working conditions, thereby not being able to think past the fact that she strongly felt that there had to be a native speaker to support English teaching in preschool. As a result, she was only able to reply in a superficial way to my questions on the quality of her teaching. “I’ve learnt so, so, so many things and - Ich könnte es mir ohne native speaker nicht so gut vorstellen” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 235 Nadia: That’s the point. I think it is very important to have a native speaker. TE: But do you think that you could also teach yourself ? Nadia: Ich könnte, weil ich so viele Anregungen habe und immer sicherer werde. (Nadia, 22.10.15 int. 10) 236 Marie also tended to be vague about her observations and was inconsistent in her reflection throughout. She was completely noncommittal in what she said and responded unclearly, as the following quote demonstrates: in answer to my question in what way she had benefited from the teacher education project she simply said that she thought she had gained new ideas but could not explicitly say what exactly she had learnt. She observed the children and was amazed that 318 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="318"?> 237 “Marie was asked to comment on: Do you feel you have benefited from the project? 238 Betty was talking about materials for free play. She thought it would be good to have an English cupboard with even more materials in it for the children to choose from. This prompted her to say this comment. 239 Betty said that she was only enthusiastic about something when the children were, which prompted her to say this comment. they understand her when she would read a story to them, that the children learnt through repetition, but whatever she did observe, she did not relate it to her teaching: “Ich denke schon, dass ich profitiert habe von dem Projekt. … Ich war auch motiviert, weil ich so viele neue Ideen gekriegt habe, wie zum Beispiel was ich umsetzen kann, weil ich hatte mir in Englisch nie vorstellen können, wie lernen die Kinder. Zum Beispiel, ich mache ein Kinderbuch [when she says ‘make’ she actually means: uses a children’s book in her group] wo die Kinder das so dann mitkriegen, so richtig. Ich habe mir gedacht, ‘So, das ist ein bisschen schwer’. Und ich finde die Wiederholungen - die vielen - die waren total gut, weil ohne die viele Wiederholen wäre’s nie so hängen geblieben” (Marie, 22.07.16: int. 23). 237 Betty closely followed her children’s reactions. She knew how to trigger the children’s curiosity and motivation but made no reference to the ways her actual teaching might contribute to their reactions or involvement: “… Sie wollen ja sehen was ich tue: was mache ich jetzt? Ich hole mir was, dann sind alle da. Wenn ich sagen würde, was sie machen sollen, dass sie alle herkommen sollen, … geht das nicht” (Betty 07.06.17: int. 33; → chapter 7.2.3.3; personal strategy # 1)). 238 She adjusted her plans according to the children’s reactions, to the extent that she would abandon her original plans completely if she saw that the children were not interested and consequently not involved. She did not reflect on the fact that the children’s involvement resulted from what she did as a teacher and that she is the one who needs to sustain their interest: “Wir fangen mal an. Wir beobachten die Kinder. Es gehört eigentlich zu meiner Arbeit. … Wir beginnen mit der Arbeit und wenn [wir] jetzt zwischendurch aber bemerken, die Kinder interessiert das nicht mehr, dann ist die Vorbereitung umsonst, dann schwenken wir um auf das Thema, das die Kinder interessiert” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 239 319 7.2 Presenting case study results related to the purposes of the teacher education <?page no="319"?> 240 The content of a Reflexionsmappe was the development of the children. The teachers observed the children, assessing their social skills, motor skills and language skills. 241 Betty was talking about how her scepticism had changed to support the project, which prompted her to say this comment. 242 Kathie was asked to comment on: Do you feel you have benefited from the project? 243 I said to Nadia that Bianca had talked to me about their thoughts towards the meeting we had the week before about doing classroom action research, which prompted her to say this comment. 244 I said to Betty that Bianca had talked to me about their thoughts towards the meeting we had the week before about doing classroom action research, which prompted her to say this comment. “In meiner Arbeit brauche ich nur die Kinder anschauen. Ich brauch nicht in meine Reflexionsmappe 240 schauen. Ich brauche das nie aufschreiben eigentlich” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 241 Kathie was very confident in herself and her abilities. She felt she was teaching well because her children were enjoying English and learning. She did not reflect on her own teaching qualities in detail but on what activities worked with the children, such as the established routines and the games: “I have really enjoyed the project, Now I can teach, I can teach all the groups. I’ve said that before. You know I wasn’t allowed to teach at my other kindergarten. I know so much now. I love the routines and the games, as you know. The children learn so easily. I’m proud that I can now teach English” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 242 I organised a theory session at the beginning of the last semester to encourage the teachers to focus more on their teaching by suggesting that they carry out a personal classroom action research to look at their own teaching closely through cause and effect. They had practical experience in teaching English and were familiar with the concept of action research as the research project followed an action research approach; nevertheless, Bianca (the head of the preschool) called me into her office to tell me that the teachers were overextended by the idea. I asked the teachers about the situation and they confirmed this: Die Betty hat vom Verständnis her es nachher gesagt, ‘Was hat die Kirsten uns gesagt? ’ Es war zu viel für sie. … Am nächsten Tag haben wir erst [uns gefragt], ‘Was hat uns die Kirsten alles gesagt? ’ Da sind wir erst darauf gekommen was alles los war, also dass es viel war” (Nadia, 10.03.17: int. 29). 243 “Ja, ich war überfordert, ja überfordert. Ich kann keine Stunden halten in dem klassischen Sinn. Es ist nicht meine Art zu planen. Ich mache Englisch spontan und stattdessen schnapp ich mir jede Möglichkeit Englisch zu machen. So geht das bei mir (Betty, 09.03.17: int. 28). 244 320 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="320"?> 245 Nadia took part in a course for teaching German as a second language. From participating teachers’ quotes it is apparent that reflecting on their practice of teaching English had not developed in a way that the teacher education project had intended. The final chapter will summarize the reasons in more detail and will draw conclusions as to what support would need to be provided at various levels for the habit of reflecting practice to develop. 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model It has been the focus of this study to develop a teacher education model, which would support teachers to teach English in preschool. Two general questions resulted from this overall purpose: 1. Would the teacher education model be effective for the selected sample of participating preschool teachers? 2. Would experiences be potentially transferable to educating teachers in other preschool contexts? This chapter will evaluate each of the components of the model and discuss in what way they contributed to participating teachers’ development and supported the purposes that the teacher education model intended to fulfil. Question two will be addressed in the concluding final chapter 8.2 of this study. From reflecting on the contextual constraints in chapter 3 it was to be expected that preschool teachers would need first-hand experiential knowledge which they could immediately work with to support their own teaching. Therefore, I had decided to organise the education project in situ (→ chapter 5.4). This was effective for various reasons that will be analysed in this chapter. Preschool teachers’ previous experiences with language teacher education (for example teaching GSL) was based on simulations, that is, they encountered new approaches only through role-playing scenes from the classroom. They clearly felt that this simulated approach would not qualify as an appropriate alternative to the in situ experience that the project for teaching English had provided, as the following quote illustrates: “… Es werden [in dem anderen Kurs] 245 Materialien vorgestellt. Manche Sachen kriegt man auch als Kopie-Vorlage und bei den anderen wird halt gesagt wie man es bestellen, oder wo man es bekommen kann. … Bei dir ist es natürlich praktischer, weil du es direkt mit den Kindern machst. Dann kann man gleich spüren: funktioniert das mit 321 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="321"?> 246 Nadia was asked to comment on: You told me you did a course for language development. Can you tell me about it? den Kindern oder nicht? Also es ist eigentlich besser man sieht den Vortragenden mit Kindern im Prozess, weil dann kann man sich das viel besser merken und man spürt das funktioniert oder nicht. Da kriegst du es vorgestellt. Und so, wenn man sieht wie das eingeführt wird und gemacht wird, ist es natürlich besser. Wir haben das selber als Erwachsene nachgespielt, aber das ist auch nicht das Gleiche. Mit Kindern ist es einfach anders. Also wir haben die Spiele schon auch ausprobiert in dem Seminar, aber wenn man sieht, wie man das mit Kindern macht und wie er das einführt, ist es schon besser. … Es wäre nicht zu tragisch welche Kinder. Natürlich weiß man schon wie manche Kinder reagieren werden oder wer mehr anspricht auf Sprache oder so. Das weiß man, aber im Prinzip muss es nicht die eigene Gruppe sein” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 246 A reduced format of simulating experiences in teacher education is obviously not appropriate to capture the complexity of what teachers need to be able to do to manage the process of teaching preschool children a new language. In the following, it will be evaluated in what way the individual components of the teacher education model organised in situ contributed to teachers’ development. 7.3.1 Participatory demonstration lessons The preschool teachers attended participatory demonstration lessons once a week which were taught by the teacher educator to their individual groups of children. The teachers observed the teaching process in action and took an active part in these lessons to teach the children (→ chapter 5.7.1). Experiential knowledge gained through the participatory demonstration lessons proved to be essential for teachers be able to re-assess their initially often negative attitudes towards introducing another language (→ chapter 7.2.1). It also stimulated their motivation to become involved in the teacher education initiative (→ chapter 7.2.2). It was through this new perspective on the situation that the teachers could concentrate on their English teaching. They needed to see the teaching in action to be convinced that teaching English actually worked for the children. Their initial reluctant attitudes required the credibility of the in situ experiences. Despite their general knowledge of didactics and methodology from their general preschool education, they could not imagine how to go about it (→ chapter 6.2.4): 322 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="322"?> 247 Nadia was asked to comment on: Before the project, did you integrate English into your group? Did you do English with the children? She sang some songs and taught some word, but she did not teach systematically using sequencing and did not know how to (→ chapter 6.2.4.2), which prompted her to say this comment. 248 Marie was asked to comment on: Can you imagine teaching complete lessons? 249 Nadia was comparing English in the routine and the lessons and was talking about the content of the lessons, which prompted her to say this comment. 250 Marie was asked to comment on: Can you imagine taking over the project one day? 251 Kathie was asked to comment on: What have you learnt from the project? “We look and learn from you and we practice with the children and we learn and watch you. Und wenn man Fragen hat, then we say, ‘Ah, can we make a meeting? I have some questions’” (Nadia, 26.03.15: int. 2). 247 “I can imagine doing it now that I have seen it from you. But without you demon‐ strating it; when you don’t show me how to do it, then I can’t do it” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 248 Through the task plans that were provided the teachers could see the impact that the selected activities and resource materials had on their children. They could assess the actual teaching situation for themselves and the learning situation for their children, rather than be required to predict the ways in which the teaching would transfer from one educational context to another. They paid attention to what their children were capable of doing, what interested them and how they reacted to materials and activities. Subsequently they could assess the appropriateness and potential of sequencing task plans, which in turn supported them to make decisions on their further planning of English lessons. The participatory demonstration lessons offered predictable situations that provided a secure environment for them to experiment in which also applied to the children: “Das ist ideal. Sie [the children] kennen sich aus, sie wissen was kommt, aber es kommt halt wieder etwas: ein neues Thema und dann ist es immer so schön anschaulich mit dem Material, und das ist immer so super” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 249 “I need input and ideas to see how to do it with the kids and get experience in it: what is good, what is not so good for the kids [and] what is too much” (Marie, 23.10.15: int. 11). 250 “At the beginning the lessons were very easy for the children then it got a little bit difficult, but always I can say, ‘Okay, the children have learnt from them’. They were not so difficult that I can say it was too much for them” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 251 As the teachers saw the immediate outcomes and what was required to achieve them, the lessons proved to give them a sense of confidence in their teaching. 323 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="323"?> 252 ‘What is Missing? ’ (→ appendix 1: materials 3 f). 253 A memory Game of remembering the three cards they are given from the book, ‘The Hungry Caterpillar’, by Eric Carle that are turned over in front of them. When the book is read, they remember which food cards they have and can give them to the caterpillar. 254 Tania is Betty’s assistant. 255 I commented that games were good to learn phrases and vocabulary, which prompted Betty to say this comment. 256 Nadia was asked to comment on: Is it easier to speak English with the children now? After saying, “Schon,” it led her to talk about preparing language for her lessons. We continued the conversation by talking about examples of teacher talk, which prompted her to say this comment. 257 Nadia was asked to comment on: Have you found it easy or difficult to continue English on your own during the week? They trusted themselves to put English teaching instantly to practice. Through participating in the demonstration lessons and taking notes of the activities that they observed, teachers’ inhibitions to become involved in a practical way could be overcome: “‘What is missing’ 252 genau, das habe ich mir auch schon aufgeschrieben. Ja, ‘What is missing’, das spielen sie sehr gerne. Wir machen das Spiel immer wo jedes Kind drei verschiedene Früchte bekommt. 253 Und sie wissen immer was der Nachbar hat. Wir staunen, Tania 254 und ich - was die Kinder alles wissen” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 255 “Ich habe mir mit dem Handy dieses Lied aufgenommen vom Elefanten. Das geht super und man kann es dann im Nachhinein eben noch einmal hören, auch wenn es aufgeschrieben ist. Es ist sowieso wegen der Melodie ganz gut, wenn man es aufgenommen hat” (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 256 In order to involve the preschool teachers from the start in the teaching process they were given the written task plans with selected language prior to the lesson. This proved to be helpful, because they were not pre-occupied with writing extensive notes on the activities and language use but could focus on observing the process of teaching. Consequently, they could focus on the process of teaching and would just need to take notes every now and again: “For me es ist wirklich eine große Hilfe - help that you write these lessons in such a way. So, I can concentrate on you, show it to the children and I can make notes. This is a good idea” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 257 The teachers willingly took part in the lessons. They all took over the action songs and reading out the stories. The games and the routines in the lessons were more challenging because they involved spontaneous dialogue; Betty therefore had a problem here (→ chapter 7.2.3.3). As the lessons involved routines and rituals and were sequenced, the children were not overextended 324 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="324"?> 258 The boy said the rhyme ‘Round and Round the World’ (→ appendix 1: materials 2b-5). 259 We had a meeting to discuss materials and the lessons for the following semester. Betty and 260 Examples of routines and rituals (→ appendix 1: materials 2). 261 Nadia was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 262 Betty was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 263 Marie was asked to comment on: What has helped you to teach English? 264 Kathie was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most during the project to teach English? and were attentive. They automatically gave their attention to the teachers and concentrated in these lessons, which in turn offered a secure framework for the teachers to work in: “Sie haben super mitgemacht. Manche Kinder, eben die Großen, die können es schon alleine. Und den jüngeren [Kindern] oder die halt mehr Hilfe brauchen, [muss man helfen]. Ich war ganz überrascht, weil ich es anders gemeint habe und der hat ihn dann alleine gesagt, den Spruch” 258 (Nadia, 22.07.16: int. 22). 259 When the teachers were asked what had helped them to teach English, they confirmed that the lessons proved to be an appropriate hands-on method to support them to develop their English teaching competences: “Dein Vorbild, einfach du als Role-Model, dass man weiß wie man das einführt und wie man das umsetzt. Und das Material: ein Material für verschiedene Spiele, dass die Kinder so anspricht und einfach so multifunktional einsetzbar ist. Und dann eben die Stundenbilder - dass man auch was Schriftliches hat wo man nachschauen kann, und eben diese Rituale, die du auch hast, ‘Weather Witch’ and ‘Round and Round the World’ 260 - diese Kontinuität, das ist auch super” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 261 “Am meisten hat mir geholfen deine Art wie du es vorgemacht hast. Also ich war begeistert, von wie du Lieder eingeführt hast, wie du das mit [Materialien machst], alles was du aufgelegt hast. Super” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 262 “Es war ein Vorteil, dass ich gesehen hatte wie du es machst und dann mache ich es so nach, wie du es gemacht hast, so einzelne Teile von der Stunde. Also die Sicherheit habe ich von dir schon gebraucht, dass ich von dir es erst sehe” (Marie, 22.07.16: Int. 24). 263 “You. You make [sic] the English lessons so well. I’ve learnt so much. The children learn” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 264 In conclusion, it can be said that the participatory demonstration lessons were essential to give the preschool teachers the opportunities to observe the teacher educator in the role of a visiting teacher to demonstrate good practice. This 325 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="325"?> result corresponds with experiences of teacher development study projects done in other contexts which will be referred to in the conclusion (→ chapter 8). 7.3.2 Teaching the children cooperatively Teaching the children cooperatively entails the teacher educator and the pre‐ school teachers sharing the common goal of teaching the children English. Logistically it was done by teaching the children together in the participating demonstration lessons (→ chapter 5.7.1) and by the preschool teachers con‐ tinuing during the week independently in their circle times and in the other routines of their morning. The component of teaching cooperatively served multiple purposes (→ chapter 5.7.2). They will be addressed and be evaluated in this chapter and related to the following intended purposes: 1. Enabling the implementation of the English teacher education in this context 2. Sustaining the motivation to teach English through the children’s positive response and progress in English 3. Establishing a sense of community as English teachers from the beginning 1. Enabling the implementation of English teacher education to take place in the preschool context The challenging working conditions of the preschool teachers resulted in the design of a support structure which would address constraints constructively. The concept of the teacher educator in the role of a visiting teacher who is teaching the children cooperatively with the preschool teachers proved to be one important component in the teacher education model. It got the project going, preschool teachers developed positive attitudes towards introducing English (→ chapter 7.2.1) and the children could acquire first competences in English that the teachers then could build on and work with to sustain momentum and motivation (→ point 3 in this chapter). It also contributed significantly to the logistics of carrying out the project as it was through the teacher educator’s regular presence in an allocated and fixed time slot that a reliable structure to work in during the week was provided for teachers to include English further: 326 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="326"?> 265 Betty was commenting that the children looked forward to English and to me coming on Tuesdays, which prompted her to say this comment. 266 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you feel about your teaching? Nadia first said she had learnt a lot, but immediately turned her attention to the teaching circumstances. 267 Betty talked about the children’s initiative to use the resource materials to speak English to each other, which prompted her to say this comment. “Wir haben eine Tabelle hinten. Montag ist Ausflug-Tag, Dienstag ist Kirsten-Tag, weil am Dienstag einfach immer Englisch ist. Das wissen die Kinder. Zweiter Tag in der Woche ist Englisch. Sie freuen sich darauf und es ist gut” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 265 “Das Regelmäßige: du kommst jeden Dienstag und man hat dann neuen Anreiz. Einmal wird daran erinnert. I remember - Ah, English I have to repeat and make it [sic], because there's so much input, other input” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 266 2. Sustaining motivation to teach English through the children’s positive response and progress in English As could be seen, there are number of features that contribute to the challenge of teaching and learning English in the preschool context: both the preschool teachers and the preschool children have only little experience and knowledge - if any at all - in the field of teaching respectively learning English and the children participating in a group are heterogeneous and vary considerably in terms of age and experience with English. It would therefore be essential to sustain teachers’ motivation. By teaching cooperatively, the teacher educator stimulated the children’s enthusiasm and supported them to develop their English for the preschool teachers to build on to support their own independent teaching during the week. This strategy proved to be effective in keeping the learning momentum going for both the preschool teachers in their teaching and the children in their language learning. The children enjoyed using their English comfortably during the week and often initiated English language teaching phases through their enthusiasm for the new language, which in turn motivated the teachers to continue their teaching processes. The success of their children’s reactions and observable competence development provided a powerful incentive for teachers to continue: “Die Kinder fangen an und ziehen mich mit. Sie sitzen da und fragen, ‘What is your favourite colour? ’ Auch das haben wir, glaube ich, oft gesagt: Lieblingsfarbe. Das können sie. … Das machen sie so beim Rollenspiel. Da fragen sie das nächste Kind, ‘What’s your favourite colour? ’ Ich bin immer überwältigt” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 267 327 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="327"?> 268 Nadia was asked to comment on: At this stage how do you feel about the project and your participation? 269 Before we sat down to talk, Marie said this comment. 270 Betty was talking about picture cards of fruit that were hanging on one of the English picture boards that decorated her room. 271 Betty was talking about the children enthusiasm to learn English, which prompted her to say this comment. “I learn too, not just the children, I learn too” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 268 “It was great today, because the Vorschulkinder, they know a lot, because of last time and today - and after your lesson I did something with unhealthy and healthy [food] and they knew it” (Marie, 10.11.15: int. 14). 269 The preschool teachers were further supported as the children associated me, a native-speaking English teacher, with their English learning experience. It was through this that I became what qualifies as an authentic audience for the children that the teachers could use as support to motivate and encourage the children throughout the week: “Ich habe die 270 aufgehängt gehabt, ‘Am Dienstag zeigen wir es der Kirsten’, haben sie gleich gesagt. Ja, die werden dann nächste Woche und dann übernächste Woche sofort [zu dir] sagen, ‘Wir haben was Neues aufgehängt’. Sie finden es toll” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 271 The preschool teachers supported my teaching as much as I supported theirs. They consolidated the children’s English during the week to the extent that the children had a solid foundation that they used to participate in the ensuing par‐ ticipating demonstration lessons. This created the dynamic learning atmosphere that proved to be conducive for us all to work in. Without repeated exposure, children cannot build up a solid foundation for the visiting teacher to build on the next week. This confirms results yielded from analysing teacher development processes in other contexts that exposure to only one lesson a week is not enough for the children to systematically learn and for the teacher to be able to teach English effectively (Genesee, 1987; Johnson & Swan 1997; cited in Legutke at al., 2009, p. 139). Through our cooperative teaching, the teachers could observe the children learning and saw the children’s ability to create their own productive dynamic learning atmosphere through re-calling and sharing their knowledge. The teachers became aware that active participation of the children is vital not only for each child’s individual learning processes, but also for the learning process of the group as a whole. They realised that the younger children learnt English from the older children through watching the older ones in action and being 328 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="328"?> 272 Nadia was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning, especially those who don’t speak German? 273 Betty was asked to comment on: From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning, especially those who don’t yet speak German? engaged in the lesson as a result. They needed to teach their own groups over a period of time so that they could be convinced that even little children actually do learn from their peers. They could observe in what way the younger children developed to become the knowledgeable ones who then became the role models for the new young children joining the group. They witnessed how the new children could be stimulated and be involved in the lesson with the help of the older children. Peer learning of children was something that they would otherwise not have considered to be credible: “… Die Großen sind natürlich tiefer [she means they have gained more knowledge]. Die kennen das schon, die wollen zeigen was sie können, und die Kleinen, sie saugen halt noch auf ” (Nadia, 25.09.17: int. 32). 272 “Alle Kinder und die Neuen, die dazu gekommen sind, die haben natürlich von den Großen [gelernt]. Und die sind fantastisch dieses Jahr. Weil Robin ist zwei Jahre dabei, oder Daut und Emil und wir sehen was die können. Die anderen schnappen es auf. … wenn die Großen schon etwas können, das schnappen die [ Jungen] auf. Sie lernen durch Zuhören. Genauso wie die durch Beobachten lernen: die macht das so, also mach ich das auch so und probiere es aus” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 273 3. Establishing a sense of community as English teachers from the beginning The concept of teaching the children cooperatively included the dimension of creating a sense of community as English teachers from the beginning. The preschool teachers already had established a good rapport with each other and worked well as a team, for example when they developed educational concepts for their children they worked together on the ideas. Therefore, I hoped that the teachers would recognise their participation in the teacher education project as part of their already established sense of community, building on it further to enable the inclusion of English as the new project to benefit from it. It could not be taken for granted that this would happen, because introducing foreign languages in state preschools is not included in the BildungsRahmenPlan in Austria (Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur 2009a; 2009b) but is instead seen as an extra activity with no support provided from the state government. To support this sense of community in their roles as English teachers I stimulated the process at the very beginning of the project in the trial phase when we all worked intensively on the first theme of ‘Farm Animals’ which 329 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="329"?> 274 Gut Aiderbichl, Salzburg, is a private farm to take care of old animals, (Gnadenhof), which is open to the public. 275 (https: / / dictionary.cambridge.org, 21.10.2019) 276 Betty said that while German is taught in small groups, English is part of the circle time and it works and the children enjoy it, which prompt her to say this comment. 277 Tanja is Betty’s assistant. 278 In free play the children were playing the English game, ‘The Animal Farm’ (→ appendix 1: materials 3b), which prompted this dialogue between Betty and Tania. concluded with the preschool teachers going on an excursion to ‘Gut Aiderbichl’, a nearby farm, 274 that involved the entire preschool. The teachers reported that the children immediately started to name the animals in English. It was a positive learning experience for both the children and their teachers which resulted in an inspiring teaching environment for them to work in. By starting the teacher education by providing this kind of rich outdoor learning experience for all, participating teachers were supported to identify themselves as a professional learning community, which from then on included their professional ideas of self as English teachers. This outdoor experience, together with preparing it over several weeks, qualified as a form of team building, generally defined as “the process of encouraging members of a group to work well together, for example by having them take part in activities or games” 275 - here with the focus on teaching English. The teachers had already decided that they wanted to teach the children during the week, two lessons before the excursion took place, because they felt that the support structure that was provided would support them to be able to do it: “Wir möchten es als Jahresthema gerne haben. Morgen haben wir eine Besprechung. Wir hoffen wir kriegen es durch bei Bianca. Weil was du hier morgens machst, möchten wir die ganze Woche weiterführen” (Betty, 05.05.15: int. 6). 276 The initial team building experience at the farm contributed to establish teachers as a group of prospective English preschool teachers. The day after the excursion, the teachers commented enthusiastically about the outcome of the initiative and decided that they could indeed become an English class together. Betty: Wir haben ja gestern Gut Aiderbichl besucht und die [Kinder] haben alle nur die Tiere auf Englisch genannt. Tania: 277 Kinder von anderen [Kindergärten] haben gesagt, ‘Was sprechen Sie denn da’. Betty: Nur alles auf Englisch. Alle Tiere, pig und cow usw. Tania: Wir werden eine Englischklasse werden, gel? [looking at Betty laughing]. (Betty, 19.05.15: int. 7) 278 330 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="330"?> 279 Periodically the preschool turns into a coffee shop for parents and friends, where the children can demonstrate what they can do. 280 Nadia was asked to comment on: What are the advantages of having the project for the entire kindergarten and not just for one or two groups? 281 ‘Head and Shoulders’ (→ appendix 1: materials 4d). 282 Betty was talking generally about the children concentrating and learning. 283 Betty was talking about the books she read to the children, which prompted her to say this comment. The idea of establishing a professional community of practice was further promoted by the possibility of including English in their extra-curricular events that the preschool offered, such as their summer shows and their ‘Elterncafé’: 279 “… Wie wir es immer hatten, bei Festen oder so, dass man diese Schwerpunkte auch wirklich in die Festgestaltungen einbauen kann und diese Englisch-Themen aufgreift; das kann man machen, wenn der gesamte Kindergarten mitmacht” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 280 “Wir haben jetzt ein Elterncafé. Da machen wir verschiedene Tänze und machen ‘Kopf und Schulter’ und das habe ich in Englisch mitgebracht [she refers to the book ‘The Wheels on The Bus’] und die Tanja hat etwas gebracht: ein englisches Lied. Das lernen wir alle jetzt. … Aber ich glaube wir machen im Endeffekt ‘Head and Shoulders’. Ich denke mir das kommt besser an. Wir wollen jetzt den Eltern vorführen: wir können noch etwas Englisches. Wir müssen noch entscheiden. Aber ich glaube dieses ‘Head and Shoulders’ 281 werden wir eher machen” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 282 As all the teacher staff took part in the project, all the children had English pre-knowledge which meant that topics that had been covered in the lessons could be resumed and integrated in other preschool activities (such as playing outside, or events organised for parents and friends) which contributed to more language exposure and practice. The teachers, for example, could teach English with confidence to the children individually from any group when the groups merged as one group late morning and, in the afternoons, when some of the children were still at the preschool while the other children had already been picked up. As is shown here, it proved to be an additional benefit that teaching English was perfectly compatible with other regular preschool routines and activities: “Am Nachmittag, wenn die Kinder lesen wollen, sind unsere meist schon weg. Zum Beispiel Naima oben [from Kathie’s group], mit der lese ich jeden Nachmittag, wenn ich da bin ‘Froggy’. Wir müssen es eigentlich bald auswendig können. Sie weiß schon genau was kommt, wenn ich die Seite umblättere. Also, mit der lese ich zum Beispiel immer, weil sie immer da ist” (Betty, 24.01.17: int. 27). 283 331 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="331"?> 284 She was talking about what the children do and changed the conversation to her Tuesday afternoon when she always integrates English. 285 Betty was asked to comment on: What are the advantages of having the project for the entire kindergarten and not just for one or two groups? 286 Betty was asked to comment on: Would you prepare compete lessons like this again? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). Betty had just commented that she is not the one to plan lesson, but instead the one to respond spontaneously to what the children want to do, which prompted her to say this comment. She is referring to the activity of dressing snowmen while sing the song that is connected to the activity (→ appendix 1: materials 3d). 287 Betty was asked to comment on: Are you managing to bring it into your routine? “Dienstagnachmittags, das ist gruppenübergreifend Englisch. Dienstag nachmittags sind sie noch voll von dem was sie am Morgen gehört haben …” (Betty, 09.03.17: int. 28). 284 “Ich finde es ganz wichtig in allen Gruppen, weil am Nachmittag die Kinder zusam‐ mengelegt sind, so wie heute. Heute bin ich die Letzte, die Dienst hat und habe Kinder aus allen Gruppen, und es ist faszinierend was ich sehe, hier im Englischen. Ich habe es schon öfters erzählt, wie ich der Naima vorlesen muss zwischen vier und fünf, und es geht nicht, wenn nicht alle Kinder Englisch haben. Es ist auch interessant zu sehen, dass Kinder ganz unterschiedlich auf die anderen Gruppen reagieren. Jeder macht das Englisch anders. Jeder macht nicht die gleichen Redewendungen wie ich. Zum Beispiel wenn wir uns an der Türe anstellen [und sagen], ‘Hold hands,’ und wenn ich andere Kinder mitnehme, das kommt manchmal vor, dann schauen sie mich an, ‘Was sagt sie denn da,’ Oder unsere Kinder, wenn sie sehen wie die Kathie oben das ganz anders macht im Morgenkreis. Es ist für die Kinder faszinierend. Diese Vielfalt. Ich finde es schon wichtig, wenn alle Kinder mitmachen. Ich habe von allen drei Gruppen die Kinder da” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 285 “Schneemänner haben wir nachgemacht. Das fanden sie alle toll. Alle Kinder aus allen Gruppen haben das bei mir gespielt mit den großen Schneemännern” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 286 Through teaching the children cooperatively, the preschool teachers gained experiential knowledge which established a common basis for discussions. As the rapport between them was excellent, it contributed to the cooperative climate for their exchange of thoughts and ideas: “… Sie wollen dieses englische Wort sprechen und ich sag es auf Deutsch, dann lernen sie das Deutsch automatisch. Es ist einfach so. Es ist wirklich so. Alle anderen Kollegen sind jetzt wirklich auch der Meinung. Sie lernen das Deutsch über das Englisch” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 287 332 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="332"?> 288 Nadia was asked to comment on: What are the advantages of having the project for the entire kindergarten and not just for one or two groups? 289 She is referring to Betty’s English wall (→ chapter 7.2.3.3) 290 She was talking about the children who knew the English words covering healthy or unhealthy food in the morning, which prompted her to say this comment. 291 Kathie was not part of the project the year before. 292 I wanted to sing ‘I Like the Flowers’. She had already sung it, which prompted her to say this comment. 293 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you think writing things down like anecodates could be helpful to reflect? 294 I said to Nadia that Bianca had talked to me about their thoughts towards the meeting we had the week before about doing classroom action research, which prompted her to say this comment. “Ich denke mir, wenn zum Beispiel der gesamte Kindergarten mitmacht, dass unter den Kollegen der Austausch stattfindet, das sind die Erfahrungen. Betty ist innovativ. Sie probierte etwas Neues aus: hat es funktioniert? Kann ich das auch machen oder so? Also der Austausch ist super. Dann eben diese gegenseitigen Anregungen. Wenn jemand etwas spielt irgendwie, was wir sehen oder eben ein neues Buch, dass wir das immer austauschen” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 288 “I want to make a Wand 289 like Betty, because I like it how the kids stand in front of it and point to the pictures and say them. … I’m curious how the kids es annehmen” (Marie, 10.11.15: int. 14). 290 “I looked at Nadia’s folder from last year. 291 She always has it on her Regal and I can always look at it” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 292 “Wie wir herausgefunden haben, dieses Kalenderblatt von der Betty, das ist ganz kurz. Das ist super. Das kann man wirklich umsetzen” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32) 293 The sense of community that they developed in their English teaching supported them to develop confidence and to clarify issues by discussing them with each other as a team. When introducing them to the concept of classroom action research (CAR) for example, they were not sure what it entailed and immediately talked about it with each other: “Die Betty hat vom Verständnis her es nachher gesagt, ‘Was hat die Kirsten uns gesagt? ’ Es war zu viel für sie. … Am nächsten Tag haben wir erst [uns gefragt], ‘Was hat uns die Kirsten alles gesagt? ’ Da sind wir erst darauf gekommen was alles los war, also dass es viel war” (Nadia, 10.03.17: int. 29). 294 As there was a close collegial relationship between the teachers, there were no inhibitions to openly admit what they were still unable to do and to help each other: 333 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="333"?> 295 A picture book: ‘Froggy Goes to Bed’, by Jonathan London. 296 As soon as she saw me in the morning, she told me that she had bought the picture book. 297 A picture book: ‘Froggy Goes to School’, by Jonathan London. 298 Betty said that the children love repetition and that she read books over and over again, which prompted her to say this comment. 299 Kathie said that she really enjoys doing English, which prompted her to say this sentence. “Ich habe ein neues Buch gekauft, ‘Froggy goes to bed’. 295 Marie hat es schon genau übersetzt” (Betty, 08.03.16: int. 17). 296 “Froggy lieben sie zum Beispiel, dieser Frosch. Ich würde jetzt gerne ‘Froggy Goes to School’ 297 machen, mit den Großen. Marie muss es mir genau übersetzen. Ich möchte es genau haben, das kann ich nicht” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 298 “Sometimes I make [sic] lessons in the afternoon with Betty so that I can show her how it works” (Kathie, 28.03.17: int. 30). 299 The component of teaching the children cooperatively confirmed existing teacher development research findings which could prove that “overcoming profes‐ sional isolation is of benefit not just to the individual teachers concerned, but to the entire context in which they teach” ( Johnston, 2009, p. 241). It supported the teachers to develop their own teaching and contributed to the integration of English in the daily life and routines of the preschool naturally. It proved to be essential to the social cohesion of the teacher development project. 7.3.3 Independent practical work The preschool teachers were responsible to integrate English in their routines during the week. Using approaches that were appropriate for their age group, they had complete authority over when and how they would integrate English. Using circle time for the participatory demonstration lessons and the teacher educator taking part in free play with the children were potential support structures for the teachers to include English in their daily routines. This chapter will first review the contribution of these support structures and will then give an overview of the independent practical work of the preschool teachers by describing their preferred choice of individual strategies to implement English. Providing support by using circle time for the participatory demonstration lessons Support aimed to achieve two purposes: the first related to teaching the teachers by demonstrating good practice through a positive role model who is teaching their children. The teachers were therefore given the opportunity to learn to 334 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="334"?> 300 Before the interview started Betty told me that the children were enthusiastic to sing songs and use their English, which prompted her to say this comment. 301 ‘Round and Round the World’: A rhyme to choose a child (→ appendix 1: materials 2b-5). 302 Nadia’s group soon had a bear that was also called Nunus. Each English lesson a child looked after their bear. 303 Nunus was given to one of the children each lesson so that s/ he could look after him (Nunus → appendix 1: materials 1). 304 We had a meeting to discuss materials and the lessons for the following semester. Betty and Nadia were talking about the rhymes as a valuable contribution to integrating English into their groups. teach English by being exposed to practical experiences, which enabled them to observe the ways in which their own children responded. This purpose proved to be essential. They consequently developed genuine and credible first insights of the effects that teaching English had on their groups, which influenced their outlook on teaching English generally (→ chapters 7.2.1, 7.2.2 & 7.3.1). The second purpose was to assist the teachers to integrate English systematically in their routines by familiarizing the children with themes and target language as well as procedures and rituals in English. This purpose proved to be most effective in supporting the teachers in their independent practical work. The children were focused during lessons, giving their attention to English, which provided the foundation that the teachers could consolidate and build on in their own routines as has been demonstrated in the previous chapter. Through the children’s developing skills and the established routines, the teachers were able to integrate English with ease in their own circle time and during their daily routine: “… Tanya hat heute Farben gemacht mit Rasseln. Dann habe ich gesagt, ‘Tanya, jetzt muss du es auch noch in Englisch machen’, und dann haben die Kinder sofort Englisch gehört. Ja, ‘Yellow, blue, green’ und einfach nur so und kaum andere Gedanken, nur Englisch” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 300 “Wir singen den ‘Begrüßungssong’, ‘Good Morning’, und dann tat wirklich ein Kind ‘Round and Round the World’ 301 um Nunus 302 zu dem Kind hin zu bringen 303 und dann machen wir das Wetter [Routine]. Dann ist es ein bisschen wie ein Startritual. Das ist so gut eingeführt” (Nadia, 22.07.16: int. 22). 304 “Dilan is very quiet when we talk [sic] German but when we talk [sic] English together she can say many words. In English, they are used to calling out. They are showing the 335 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="335"?> 305 Before this comment she told me an anecdote about the children making their own circle time and said that the children enjoy learning English because it is taught in a playful way, which prompted her to say this comment. 306 Betty said that the children play English games in free play, which prompted her to say this comment. English they know, perhaps they don’t always show their German” (Kathie, 08.06.17: int. 34). 305 Providing support by the teacher educator taking part in free play The concept of the teacher educator being actively involved in free play proved to be ideal to demonstrate how English can be integrated outside of the structured circle time. The children became familiar with the games and books on an individual basis and reacted to my spontaneous teacher talk in a natural way. The teachers could observe how the children were able to understand me by using the contextual clues and how they were able to respond spontaneously. For example, when I would ask them: do you want to play a game with me? They immediately would run off to get an English game. Betty especially was supported here, because she relied on free play for her spontaneous approach that the children were accustomed to (→ chapter 7.2.3.3): “Sie holen sich das Spiel da, finden sich zusammen und spielen es. Und dann kann man noch hören was sie dann spielen. Es ist so schön, wenn man dann zuhören kann” (Betty, 09.03.17: int. 28). 306 The preschool teachers managed to integrate English easily in their routines and in doing so set different priorities and integrated routines in varying degrees, depending on their personalities and preferences. Nadia used parts of the participatory demonstration lessons to integrate English in the structured parts of the morning routine, such as her circle times, gym and at snack-time (→ chapters 7.2.3.1). Marie integrated parts of the participatory demonstration lessons in her circle times and used free play (→ chapter 7.2.3.2). Betty chose to integrate English in the daily life of preschool, using message-orientated-communication and in free play where she encouraged the children to take the English materials to play with. She used her circle time mainly to sing the songs and to read the stories (→ chapter 7.2.3.3). Kathie designed task plans, based on the participatory demonstration lessons, using her circle time to give complete lessons and she integrated English during her daily routine (→ chapter 7.2.3.4). Their chosen strategies were completely in line with what they felt they were able to do at the time and were appropriate for their groups and their context. Children were able to contribute to a dynamic learning atmosphere through their consolidated 336 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="336"?> 307 Betty talked about the development of various children and said they all know the English that we are doing, which prompted her to say this comment. 308 Nadia was asked to comment on: How do you feel about doing compete lessons? pre-knowledge. This would not have been possible if the children had not been given the opportunity to consolidate and build on their already acquired skills. Children who want to call out and show what they know is exactly what creates the atmosphere that sustains the excitement, the enthusiasm and consequently the learning processes for both the children and the teachers: “Die wollen alle was sagen. Die wissen es sehr genau. Die sitzen da dann nachher am Tisch und dann wird gespielt. … Nicht nur die Vorschulkinder können es in den Stunden, die mittleren Kinder, die können es jetzt auch schon, die nicht so lange Englisch gemacht haben. … Jetzt wollen die alle unbedingt sagen, ‘Ich kann das, ich kann das. Ich will das jetzt auch sagen’. Du musst jetzt wissen, dass sie das jetzt können. Das wollen sie jetzt beweisen. Ich weiß, dass sie das können, aber du weiß das nicht, denken sie und wollen es zeigen. Und daher rufen sie ständig hinein” (Betty, 24.05.16: int. 21). 307 As the preschool teachers had the opportunity to integrate English independ‐ ently at various times in the routine and in varying degrees of intensity throughout the week, it is not surprising that they chose to integrate parts of lessons in their routine rather than using circle time exclusively to develop and teach a complete English task plan (with the exception of Kathie). This would have been more demanding and time consuming in an already fully committed timetable. Of course, it would have intensified teachers’ practical teaching experiences which Nadia clearly demonstrated through her feedback. She had learnt that to actually design a task plan in English and to carry it out, independent of the teacher educator’s examples, one has to dedicate concentrated time to planning it and to consider the language for the lesson in advance. She emphasized that if her context provided more space for her to focus on English, she would love to do it. But considering the packed preschool timetable she could not focus on designing lesson plans: “Man muss sich schon noch einmal damit auseinandersetzen. Also, man schüttelt es nicht so einfach aus dem Ärmel wie ein deutsches Angebot, sage ich jetzt einmal so, sondern, ich habe mich schon hingesetzt und geschaut, ‘Mmm, okay, das könnte gehen, das mach ich jetzt so,’ und ich hab auch überlegt, ‘Weiß ich noch wie man es ausspricht und Fragen wiederholt und so? ’ Aber doch, es hat geklappt” (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 308 337 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="337"?> 309 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you feel your approach and your general feeling towards English is different now? How do you feel about your teaching during this time? This question refers to the period of time when she took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). “Es war schon spannend für mich so eine Einheit von vorne bis hinten mit den Kindern zu gestalten. Das schon, und ich habe es wirklich so gemacht, wie ich halt in Deutsch ein Bildungsangebot sehe. Dann habe ich es in der englischen Sprache gemacht so gut ich halt konnte. Aber es ist schon interessant es wirklich durchzutesten. Es hat funktioniert. … Wenn ich mehr Zeit hätte und nicht an so viele anderen Dinge denken müsste - gerne, wirklich gerne. Aber so ist es für mich wirklich noch zusätzlich das Sahnehäubchen, das ich noch vorbereiten muss für mich, aber wenn ich irgendetwas anderes streichen kann und mich auf das fokussiere, dann gerne. Aber es ist einfach momentan so viel an Input, dass es schwierig ist, aber die Sache an sich genieße ich schon. Nur müssen die Rahmenbedingungen einfach passen. Wir reden wieder über die Rahmenbedingungen” (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 309 Although Nadia’s reflection demonstrates that teachers’ involvement depends to a large extent on the space their context provides for their professional development, the teachers were able to integrate English in a way that they felt was compatible with their other preschool tasks. 7.3.4 Supporting communicative English language competence The teacher education study has described the features of preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence that they would need to develop to be able to integrate English in their groups (→ chapters 4.3.1 & 5.8.2.3) and it has outlined the support structure that the teacher education would need to provide for the teachers to be able to acquire it (→ chapter 5.7.4). Although language support was integrated in the teacher education throughout the duration of project and gave the teachers a sense of security to use the language, the component was not successful in raising the level of the teachers’ personal language competence which would be ideal for authentic communication and confident teaching autonomy. For individual teachers’ detailed description of their language competence development, I refer to chapter 7.2.3, which describes to what extent individual teachers took advantage of the four opportunities that were provided for them to develop their speaking skills. In this chapter the four opportunities to support the teachers’ language will be addressed and their contribution to the teacher education model will be reviewed. 338 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="338"?> 1. Using English as the common means of communication between the teacher educator, the preschool teachers and the children I routinely spoke English to the teachers throughout the project and responded consistently in English when they spoke German to me. I accepted their mixed codes when they talked to me as a support strategy for them. Their receptive competences were at a high level as they could all understand me well. Nadia and Marie spoke English to me easily and enjoyed the opportunity to practise. However, they lapsed into speaking German to me quite frequently. They were not overly confident in their speaking skills and as the mornings in preschools are busy and noisy and involve many interruptions by the children, the situation is not ideal to focus on speaking the foreign language. It can be said that these circumstances for mutual conversation in English were not conducive for the teachers to take full advantage of the opportunity to improve their language level. It was a different situation during the interviews at the beginning of the project, when they spoke mostly English to me, but as the project went on, they spoke more and more German. This could be because they often spoke German to me in the mornings and may have therefore established the habit of doing so. Betty did not speak English to me, because her speaking skills were very low. Kathie on the other hand felt confident and spoke English to me at all times. She was the only one who consistently took advantage of this offer to practise speaking English. All in all, it can be said that most of the participating teachers did not use this support regularly for the reasons that have been given here. 2. Attending participatory demonstration lessons The participatory demonstration lessons proved to support preschool teachers’ speaking skills best. They all took an active part in the demonstration lessons. Nadia, Marie and Kathie all took advantage of the opportunity to speak English freely to the children in authentic situations that had been established by the teacher educator. It was valuable to them that the language planned for in the participatory demonstration lessons was written down so that they could refer to it if necessary when they planned to integrate English in their circle time or in their daily routine: “Wenn du es aufgeschrieben hast ist es gut, es ist auch dieses chitchat: es ist super, weil es bei den Stundenbildern dasteht, dieser teacher talk. Das passt super. Weil da habe ich mich auch orientiert. Ich schaue nach, wenn manche Wörter zu bestimmten Stunden mir nicht eingefallen sind. Ich finde es sehr gut. Spezielle Fragen oder spezielle Wörter, 339 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="339"?> 310 Teachers’ classroom language was categorised in teacher talk and chitchat (→ chapter 5.7.4). 311 Nadia was asked to comment on: Is it easier to speak English with the children now? After saying, “Schon,” it led her to talk about preparing the language for her lessons. We continued the conversation by talking about examples of teacher talk, which prompted her to say this comment. 312 Nadia was asked to comment on: Can you imagine taking over the project one day? After confirming that she could, she was concerned about her communicative English language competence, which prompted her to say this comment. dass die da oben so schön zusammengefasst sind, das finde ich praktisch” 310 (Nadia, 18.03.16: int. 19). 311 3. Collecting a repertoire of relevant chunks of English It was the responsibility of the preschool teachers to keep a repertoire of chunks of language that they could fall back on and practise to support their independent work. All the teachers, except for Kathie, made use of this support and collected a repertoire of chunks. Betty was especially dependent on hers as it formed the basis of her spoken language. They all appreciated the chunks from the task plans as they were aware of their role as language models and built on these for their classroom management and routines: “It is a great help when you write these phrases these important phrases down, because we can look them up [and think], ‘I’m right, okay’ … This is a große Hilfe, wenn man nachschauen kann. Habe ich recht? Ich denke eben, wenn man so redet oder [oder] mal was falsch sagt, dann fällt es den Kindern nicht auf, aber wenn ich dann immer falsch wiederhole wäre das schon ein Problem” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 312 4. Contacting the teacher educator for advice Teachers were given the opportunity to contact me through email and mobile telephone, but they preferred to wait until we met face-to-face at the preschool of the day of the participatory demonstration lesson. They took advantage of the offer to ask me for advice, explanations, clarification and consolidation of language issues. Mostly they asked me for correct relevant classroom chunks of language, to check what they had written down, to discuss variations with them and to pronounce words carefully for them to practise. They did not take on my suggestion to use online dictionaries that provide the pronunciation of words or illustrate colloquial language use in chunks. This may be because finding out about single words and their pronunciation only covered an aspect of their language-related questions. They also may have felt that it was easier simply to discuss all their language-related questions at once, rather than looking up part 340 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="340"?> 313 We were talking about chunks of language for teacher talk, which prompted her to say this comment. 314 Betty told me that they were adding continually to their English board and that she had added to her teacher talk, which prompted her to say this comment. 315 Marie said this at the end of the interview. of their list at home. Instead, they took notes on any chunks and questions on a piece of paper and pinned them on their classroom boards. As contacting the teacher educator for advice was a supportive component of the teacher education, it was convenient for them to use it and it can be presumed that they were following the agreement at the beginning of the project that no extra work would be required out of the preschool working hours: “Ich hoffe wir sagen alles richtig. Aber meistens frage ich dann nach. Ich habe schon einen Zettel, was spricht man wie aus” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 313 “… Aber es muss immer etwas dazu kommen und sie fragen mich Sachen und ich denke, oh, sofort Kirsten fragen, das weiß ich nicht. Immer wieder kommt etwas” (Betty, 13.10.15: Int. 9). 314 Marie: Is it possible about the 20 th. of November to do something about the [sic] teeth [and on] vegetables, like carrots. Maybe we could also do something with that. Is it okay when I write you a list, so that we can put it together? TE: Yes, you write me a list of all the phrases you want in the lesson. I can correct them or translate them. Marie: That would be good. Okay fine, thank you. (Marie 23.10.15: int. 11) 315 After Marie had finished the list, we corrected it together in free play. To conclude it can be said that the teachers who were not confident in their English-speaking skills at the beginning of the project, did not noticeably improved their competence level by the end of the project, despite the support that had been provided for them. Nadia’s and Marie’s low confidence levels in English resulted in their apprehension to give complete lesson (lessons involving a comprehensive task plan) (→ chapters 7.2.3.1 & 7.2.3.2) Betty’s low English competence level in her speaking skills was an issue for her which she often referred to as an inhibiting aspect for her teaching right up until the end of the project (→ chapter 7.2.3.3). Kathie on the other hand was competent in her English-speaking skills from the beginning and did not have a problem to prepare task plans to give complete lessons (→ chapter 7.2.3.4). Needless to say, a solid communicative English language competence provides the foundation for teachers to be able to teach well and to continue independ‐ ently of a teacher educator’s support. Research has provided clear evidence that language competence is a crucial factor for developing confidence in 341 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="341"?> communicative language teaching, regardless of the context (Medgyes 2001). As my case study demonstrated, it was not possible to improve preschool teachers’ existing communicative language competence through the support that was provided within the time frame that was allocated to the project. A fixed contact time through providing an office hour when I would be reliably available may have encouraged more contact outside of preschool hours. However, it would be vital to accommodate the possibility for the teachers to be given extra time to attend language lessons to develop their language competences further. 7.3.5 Reflective approaches for professional development The teacher education model included a number of ways for teachers to reflect on their professional development. They included materials development, journal writing, individual personal interviews and relevant theory. As has been demonstrated, reflection on the quality of one’s teaching has developed to become a central and meanwhile firmly established part of the learning to teach process for various reasons (→ chapter 5.7.5). Chapter 7.3.5 will evaluate the effects that this component of the teacher education had on participating preschool teachers in my study. 7.3.5.1 Materials development Materials development is an effective way of helping teachers to understand the principles of language learning by relating theories to learning materials. Through developing materials for their groups of learners, it was expected that preschool teachers would experience the ways in which theoretical principles may be transferred to teaching materials, which support English competence development through tasks that addresses their particular learners’ needs. The teachers were asked to evaluate the materials for their appropriateness, but it was their decision if they would engage in producing materials themselves or if they would choose to rely on the resources that I had provided. As a first step, preschool teachers could observe the ways in which the materials that I had produced were used in the participatory demonstration lessons, how they related to the task plan and in what ways the children responded to the prompts that the materials triggered. Prior to each lesson the teachers received the particular task plan and after the lessons they were given corresponding materials so that they could reflect on the ways they wanted to use and to expand the materials for themselves. Through this process the teachers were to (a) evaluate the quality of the materials as teaching tools (that is, did they support teachers in learning how to integrate tasks) and (b) to reflect 342 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="342"?> 316 Examples of routines using rhymes and songs (→ appendix 1: materials 2). 317 Nadia was asked to comment on: What has helped you the most to teach English? 318 Every lesson a large piece of material is put on the floor to represent grass, snow, a rainy day for example. This sets the context of the story or the role-play that is the focus of the task. 319 Betty and Nadia were talking about the ease in which English was being integrated into their preschool, which prompted Betty to say this comment. on the appropriateness of the materials for their groups (that is, did they support their children to learn English). The participatory demonstration lessons proved to be valuable for the pre‐ school teachers to observe the appropriateness of the materials in action. They were aware as preschool teachers that teaching the children effectively depended on the quality of the teaching resources. They were familiar with relevant theory (how children learn languages, the communicative language classroom and task-based language learning) and corresponding materials for language learning that were used as examples in theory sessions. Although they were used to observing the ways in which their children responded to materials, it was only occasionally that they reflected on the quality of materials by relating them to relevant theory. They were aware, however, of the role of materials that support children’s language learning as the following examples demonstrate: Nadia reflected on the role of materials to establish a framework of rituals and repetition, which allowed new input to be offered without burdening the children so that they could learn: “… Diese Rituale, die du auch hast, ‘Weather Witch’ and ‘Round and Round the World’ 316 - diese Kontinuität, das ist auch super, weil wenn man jeden Tag, also jede Einheit irgendein anderes als Ritual hat, das wäre ein Überforderung. Und wenn ein Rahmen da ist und Wiederholung und man baut vielleicht in den Wiederholungen wieder was Neues ein, das ist für unsere Kinder ideal so” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 317 Betty recognised that using materials to teach in a playful way through stimulating the children’s’ fantasy worlds engaged the children during lessons and therefore they learnt through their enthusiasm: “Wenn dieses Tuch auf dem Boden 318 liegt, dann ist es auch ihre Fantasiewelt. Das macht schon etwas aus. In Deutschförderung haben wir das nicht. Das ist nicht so interessant. Die lernen dann nichts” (Betty, 22.07.16: int. 23). 319 The teachers noticed the ways in which the diversity of the materials provided ample choices for the different needs of the children and they identified the 343 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="343"?> 320 Nadia was asked to comment on: Has the project helped you to develop your own ideas? 321 Betty was asked to comment on: Would you prepare compete lessons like this again? This question refers to the lessons in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). various ways in which the simplest of objects could be used to simulate child-appropriate contexts of language use for the children: “Vom Material her finde ich es gut, dass es so variabel ist. Man kann für Kinder die weniger brauchen, das ein bisschen leichter gestalten. Das finde ich wirklich gut, dass es universell einsetzbar ist. Und wirklich, diese Anregungen, was man eben mit einfachen Stofftieren so alles machen kann. Man vergisst oft, dass man die einfachsten Sachen einfach mehr einbaut. Man glaubt, man braucht dieses Material und dieses, dabei reichen auch wirklich einfache Dinge. So etwas muss man sich bewusst machen” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 320 While they could evaluate the role of the diversity of materials for children’s needs, they were not able to develop the reflective habit of observing critically (that means, by integrating relevant theory) exactly in what way the materials supported the children in their language learning process. They evaluated the appropriateness of the materials for themselves and for the children through observing the children’s reactions and focused on their enthusiasm and resulting committed participation as signs of learning and accordingly chose which materials they considered appropriate to support their own teaching. For integrating English during the week, the teachers mainly used the mate‐ rials that I provided. They designed some supplementary materials themselves but creating and experimenting with their own materials did not happen on a regular basis. Time pressure was a contributing factor. The teachers were aware of the time they would need to invest in preparing materials but felt they did not have the space to do so: “Wir müssen uns auch so wahnsinnig vorbereiten wie du. Du machst auch eine Wahnsinns Vorbereitung. Die könnte ich nicht immer machen” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 321 Although I was aware of the fact that through my provision of appropriate materials, I would diminish their incentive to make their own, I expected them to brainstorm generally on the task plans with me for the last year of the project, to suggest changes and any ideas they had to contribute to the task plans. But as they were satisfied with the lessons, they invested little thought in the process to evaluate them beyond the point of generally recognising them as being appropriate. I would have needed to guide them to explicitly relate practice 344 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="344"?> 322 The teachers were asked to comment on: I’d like to brainstorm with you on ideas for next year. Have you got any ideas for further developments? What should we change, what should we keep? What do you think? materials to resulting children’s language learning processes, in other words, to support them to draw conclusions on the cause - effect relationship of learning materials and resulting children’s learning. 322 More space for this to happen would need to be provided, for example by integrating a workshop situation where we could develop and reflect on the purposes of materials together in our group. Developing new teaching ideas and tasks and materials for new topics that the children would be interested in would have involved extra time so that teachers could build on their knowledge which was based on the materials that I had produced. They could then develop ideas cooperatively, structure them in task plans and produce related materials to go with new themes which could then be reflected on for their contribution to children’s learning process. As it was, the process of materials development for reflection did not become an established part of the project. 7.3.5.2 Journal writing Writing the journal served two purposes: for participating preschool teachers it was intended to be used as a reflective tool (→ chapter 5.7.5.2) and for the researcher the data would be useful as evidence on the effects the teacher education had on teachers’ development. Teachers were informed about this dual purpose of their journals. I explained that the journal would help them to reflect on their professional development if they wrote down their thoughts about their teaching, reflecting on what worked well or what did not work and why they thought this was the case. I also clarified the learning potential of writing down anecdotes or critical incidents as these would provide helpful insights in their learning process. They were informed that their journal entries would also be used so that I could evaluate the feasibility of integrating English in their context and that it was important to keep a record on the way they integrated English during the week both for their own development and for my understanding of the teacher learning process. In what way the preschool teachers would develop their journals, what time they wanted to invest in writing them and how meaningful writing would be to them was ultimately a matter of their individual choice, motivation and ability. Although the preschool teachers were willing to keep a journal, they did not give personal priority or significant status to the journals. They mainly documented when they integrated English in their groups for me, but they did not always remember to do this. They sometimes simply forgot to record what 345 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="345"?> 323 Betty was asked to comment on: Have you found it easy or difficult to continue English on your own during the week in the preschool routine? 324 Nadia was asked to comment on: I wanted to ask you how you are going with your journal and writing down your thoughts. 325 I talked about the journal, telling her that it was not only for data collection for the children’s contact time, but also for them to think about their teaching, to write down their thoughts and ideas and what they could do with the materials. they had done. Why they forgot is quite understandable in this context as it is not always possible to take notes immediately after a lesson for lack of any break in between the different activities the preschool timetable involves. Focusing on the children and the routine in any part of daily life in preschool is obviously teachers’ priority and taking notes later in the day is not necessarily reliable: “Alles was Freude macht ist nicht schwierig, aber die erste Zeit als die neuen Kinder da waren haben wir weniger gemacht - aber wir schreiben es auf in unserem Kalender - mehr oder wenigernicht immer. Manchmal vergesse ich es. Aber wir können nicht immer gleich aufschreiben Wir stehen an der Tür und zählen mal eben auf Englisch und dann vergessen wir es dann aufzuschreiben” (Betty, 23.10.15: int. 12). 323 The preschool teachers were also responsible for writing official reports on a regular basis to document the children’s development in their German speaking skills and their general development, which required extra time and mental energy. This obviously influenced their willingness to write a journal related to reflecting on their experiences with introducing English for themselves as Nadia’s example shows: “I write down what I do and the lessons you do. I collect the games and the materials and finger games. More I cannot do because we have so much to write and do. I will try to do it” (Nadia, 13.10.15: int. 8). 324 “What I do, I write it down - irgend ein Spiel oder Lied. I write the date and what I’ve done. I try it, but it is so hard to. It’s very hard for us. We have to write such reports; (reports about the children, motor skills, their language development and social development). It’s a lot” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 325 “Wir müssen die BESK Sprachstandsfeststellung [Beobachtungsbogen zur Erfassung der Sprachkompetenz - Deutsch als Zweitsprache] machen. Früher mussten wir es einmal im Jahr machen und jetzt müssen wir es schon zweimal machen. Und du musst immer diese Tabellen ausfühlen und eben auch Sprachbeispiele von den Kindern sollen dabei sein. Es ist zusätzlich. Dann sitzt man zuhause stundenlang. Also es ist eine Arbeit die praktisch dazu kommt. Du musst das andere genauso machen, 346 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="346"?> 326 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you think writing things down like anecdotes could be helpful to reflect? What helps you to reflect? She said that does not write thoughts down in detail, which prompted her to say this comment. 327 Betty was asked to comment on: How are you? It was the first lesson after the period of time when they took over the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). She said the children asked where I was during her lessons, which prompted her to say this comment. bewältigen und dann noch zusätzlich machen und das ist einfach schwierig” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 326 Their busy context put them under time-pressure, which added to the fact that journal writing could not be successfully integrated in the teacher development project as Betty indicates: “Wenn du kommst denken die Kinder, ‘Hat sie was Neues dabei? ’ Wir haben nur Altes wiederholt und das war nichts. Also, was sagt uns das? Na, interessant - reflektieren. Ich muss es auch für mich noch aufschreiben in meine Beobachtungen. Habe ich noch nicht getan, weil wir einfach nur Stress hatten” (Betty, 08.03.16: int. 17). 327 When I was reviewing the situation in the course of the project I wondered if journal writing was appropriate given the contextual constraints. To force teachers to write journals for self-reflection for their professional development was not an option; therefore, my encouragement for them to do so remained low-key. I realised early on in the project that they were doing their best to record when and in what ways they integrated English during the week, which required only little thought and was not time consuming. Although the process of observing and reflecting was part of their professional daily lives with the children, the teachers were not in the routine of reflecting on their professional idea of self, of focusing on themselves as developing teacher personalities. With this in mind, I felt that journal writing for reflection could simply not be attained under the circumstances. A further aspect to be considered was that the initial motivation to develop professionally does not necessarily evolve from an intrinsic personal dedication or impetus to experiment with implementing yet another project in their preschools. It may also develop from an external incentive, such as working towards an additional formal qualification or writing a publication to share your knowledge with a wider community, neither of which were part of this project. This is what Nadia refers to in her comment: she documents what she does, but she does not necessarily reflect. She also seems to associate reflection with the often-expansive types of reflections that she was required to do during her initial education and has developed a habit of process reflection in note-form that is more compatible with her work: 347 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="347"?> 328 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you think writing things down like anecdotes could be helpful to reflect? What helps you to reflect? “Ich reflektiere schon aber nicht in der herkömmlichen Weise, sondern mehr wirklich kurz und mit mind-map: also, nicht so traditionell wie früher wo du seitenlang geschrieben hast. Ich meine, mehr die Praxis was man so macht. Und wie die Betty auch sagt, man sieht dann wirklich, man hat schon viel Erfahrung und man sieht auch viel. Ja? Ich dokumentiere das wirklich anders, wirklich auch von der Struktur her, mit Tabellen, wirklich knapp, präzise. Wenn du das für eine Arbeit brauchst oder für ein Projekt, dass man abgeben muss, natürlich macht man es dann. … Oder eben, wenn man ein Projekt beendet, das man dann für sich reflektiert. Passt das schon? Würde ich es anders machen? Würde ich was Neues machen? Würde ich es wiederholen? oder wie auch immer. Wie gesagt es kommt immer darauf an: für was brauche ich es? Brauch ich es für eine Doktorarbeit oder für ein Portfolio was ich für einen Lehrgang abgeben muss oder für mich oder für die Arbeitsdokumentation. Also, generell finde ich es gut wenn man sich ein paar Gedanken macht” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 328 It may have been an option to ask teachers to try to reflect by using a pre-structured feedback sheet with categories which related to areas of their professional development where they could then respond to statements first by ticking the degree to which they felt they had developed on a Likert scale and then briefly commenting in note-form the reasons why they felt they did or did not develop. But to be able to encourage the teachers to reflect through the process of journal writing the preschool teachers would have needed a regular fixed point in time during which they could focus on their professional development. This could be organised in the form of a team meeting where preschool teachers’ experiences would be discussed, reflected and emerging issues could be clarified - through support from their colleagues, the teacher educator or recommended literature. 7.3.5.3 Individual personal interviews The personal interviews served the purpose to support the preschool teachers to reflect through dialogue. They included spontaneous conversations that took place during the mornings of the participatory demonstration lessons and in organised meetings and personal one to one interviews. They proved to be an important element to support teachers’ reflection because an allocated time in which the teachers could focus on the project was provided. As a result, they were able to give their undivided attention to discussing the project, clarifying issues, sharing their experiences, telling anecdotes and expressing their opinions. The preschool teachers were given the questions a week before 348 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="348"?> 329 Nadia said she did not have time to write down her thoughts, which prompted her to say this comment. 330 Betty commented that she had written down how she integrated English in the period of time when the teachers took full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). I responded saying that it would be good if she reflected on her teaching, which prompted her to say this comment. 331 Betty said that she was only enthusiastic about something when the children were, which prompted her to say this comment. the interviews, in order to give them time to reflect on them before the interview took place. They saw the relevance of reflecting on their experiences, as Nadia and Betty show in their comments below: “… Mit den Fragen habe ich mich hingesetzt und sie durchgeschaut. Man braucht dann wirklich so ein Innehalten, mal schauen, nachdenken, überlegen, ‘Ah, okay’. Also man nimmt sich wirklich Zeit und überlegt, komplett zu diesen Fragen. Insofern hat es so seinen Sinn. Wie gesagt, eben dem Anlass entsprechend, wie umfangsreich halt man das macht. Und ich denke so, wenn man das in Interviews macht, da kommt man auch auf andere Fragen noch. Was auch interessant und spannend ist. Man ist nicht so fixiert auf einen Fragenkatalog” (Nadia, 29.05.17: int. 32). 329 “Das Reflektieren ist das Interessanteste. Ich will wissen, bringt meine Arbeit was, mache ich es richtig, kommt’s bei den Kindern an, nützt es überhaupt, was ich tue - wie kann ich es verbessern. Ja, Stillstand ist nichts für mich, also ich will auch weitergehen. Und wenn wir etwas anfangen, dann machen wir das auch richtig; also, sonst lassen wir es” (Betty, 21.03.16: int. 20). 330 Nevertheless, reflecting in what ways their teaching contributed to what the children were able to do, seemed to be challenging. It was their habit to observe the children’s reactions and consequently either to continue with an activity because the children were involved or to modify or change what they were doing if they saw that the children no longer took an active part. Betty represents the group with her comments here: “Wir fangen mal an. Wir beobachten die Kinder. Es gehört eigentlich zu meiner Arbeit. … Wir beginnen mit der Arbeit und wenn [wir] jetzt zwischendurch aber bemerken, die Kinder interessiert das nicht mehr, dann ist die Vorbereitung umsonst, dann schwenken wir um auf das Thema, das die Kinder interessiert” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 331 349 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="349"?> 332 The content of a Reflexionsmappe was the development of the children. The teachers observed the children, assessing their social skills, motor skills and language skills. 333 Betty said that her scepticism had changed to supporting the project, which prompted her to say this comment. 334 Betty told me her principles of following the children’s interests, which prompted her to say this comment. “In meiner Arbeit brauche ich nur die Kinder anschauen. Ich brauch nicht in meine Reflexionsmappe 332 schauen. Ich brauche das nie aufschreiben eigentlich” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 333 “Wenn sie es aber mögen, singen wir, bis sie nicht mehr mögen. Das ist doch was wir gelernt haben - auf die Kinder zu reagieren” (Betty, 21.05.15: int. 5). 334 The teachers’ established practice of judging if an activity was appropriate from the children’s involvement supported preschool teachers to be able to re-assess their initial attitudes and their motivation to become involved in the process of teaching English to preschool children (→ chapters 7.2.1 & 7.2.2). The personal interviews were organised once a semester. It may have supported teachers to establish new reflective habits by offering interview sessions on a regular basis. A further option might have been to direct their focus explicitly on the cause-effect relationships between their teaching and the children’s reactions. 7.3.5.4 Integrating relevant theory One of the premises which my teacher education study was also built on is what Zein and Garton (2019) called the “inseparable relationship between theory and practice” (p. 6; chapter headline). All chapters in their volume point to the pedagogy of teacher education that develops alignment between practice and theory … through a provision of a variety of learning experiences that stimulate introspection, collaboration, awareness-raising and learning from experiences. In other words, the shared principle underpinning the chapters in their survey on early language learning and teacher education was to encourage teaches to find the linkage between the intangible concepts and principles examined in the literature and the context of their classroom through cooperative participation. (Zein, 2019, p. 7; referring to Kitchen & Petrarca, 2016; Korthagen, 2016) This principle of organising teacher learning as reflective practice resulted in integrating relevant theory in various ways in my project. It was through the participatory demonstration lessons, that the teachers were supported to integrate relevant theory by observing the teaching process in practice, which was based on a particular type of activities that qualified as tasks 350 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="350"?> 335 Nadia is referring to sequencing tasks with a balance between task demands and support (→ chapter 5.8.2.2). 336 I was discussing games in relation to building up the task plans using sequencing so that the children would be able to play the games. 337 We were discussing the concept of the communicative language classroom and the teacher talk. only if they were designed according to defined theoretical categories, which were explained by the teacher educator (→ chapter 5.8). Integrating theory was either organised in scheduled theory sessions that focused on aspects of the task plans of the demonstration lessons, or when an issue in the process of teaching emerged that required clarification. Theory was integrated to clarify teachers’ practical concerns rather than providing it top-down and independently of practical concerns (→ chapter 5.7.5.4): “Ich finde die Theorie gut, dass wir die Hintergründe wissen, wie diese Sequenzen. 335 Das sollten wir so auch auf Deutsch machen” (Nadia, 12.01.16: int. 15). 336 “Ich finde die Technik immer gut - diese Kommunikationstechnik. Das ist auch ideal für mich (she is referring to teacher talk). Und wie man das in der Sandwich Technik sagt. Das ist eigentlich auch nicht so bewusst, aber wenn man das sieht, [denkt man], ‘Ah, das ist ein guter Grund - Englisch, Deutsch, Englisch, dann hören sie Englisch als letztes’. Aber, ich weiß wir sollen es nicht so oft benützen” (Betty, 12.01.16: int.16). 337 From the beginning in the trial phase, the teachers took part in the participatory demonstration lessons, joining in the activities and contributing to the classroom management in English. Integrating theory in connection with teaching practice stimulated teachers’ self-reflection. For example, when Betty heard that by providing immediate translation of chunks for the children (the so-called ‘sandwich technique’) would not support the children to engage actively in understanding, she reflected critically her previous practice and became aware of her routine of frequently translating chunks while teaching the children. By relating it to her experience and changing her practice accordingly, she could realise that monolingual English language routines would work in practice, because the children could infer meaning easily from the context: “Ich möchte es mir vornehmen, dass ich es nicht auf Deutsch sage. Ja, Übersetzung gehört in der Regel nicht dazu. Wenn wir nach draußen gehen, im Morgenkreis sitzen, auch dann verstehen sie aus dem Zusammenhang. … Ich muss mich zusam‐ mennehmen, dass ich es nicht auf Deutsch sage. Ich bin da gefährdet. Ich sage es auf Deutsch. Ich bin immer diejenige die es auf Englisch sagt und dann übersetzt und 351 7.3 Evaluating the components of the teacher education model <?page no="351"?> 338 I explained that through translating words the children would not be encouraged to think for themselves and referred to research presented by Cameron (2001: 85). 339 We were discussing the concept of the communicative language classroom and the teacher talk. gerade das ist leichter für die Kinder andersherum, dass ich es nur auf Englisch sage” (Betty, 12.01.16: int. 16). 338 When reflecting on teacher talk, Nadia related research on appropriate teacher talk to her practice of prompting the children. She analysed the quality of her prompts and was well aware that the children would benefit if she considered effective prompting more: “Das ist eben immer das Schwierige. Ich muss dann darauf schauen, dass ich darüber nachdenke was ich sage” (Nadia, 12.01.16: int. 15). 339 Nevertheless, despite their understanding of the relevance of theory to design and reflect on tasks for their practice, they did not develop the reflective habit of consciously relating theory to their own practice. As has been said above, ideally integrating a workshop situation in which language materials would be developed and reflected collaboratively or analysing sequences of critical incidents of video-recorded lessons to trigger reflection, would have supported preschool teachers to reflect on their practice more systematically and consistently. 352 7 Presenting case study results <?page no="352"?> 8 Conclusions and Perspectives The study addressed an issue that relates to the reported gap between the undisputed demand of early language provision and the lack of qualified teachers in the relatively young domain of early foreign language education. It focused on the preschool sector and empirically researched the potential to educate pedagogically experienced preschool teachers in-service to teach English to all the children in the inclusive multilingual state preschool. Given the lack of empirical studies in early foreign language teacher education, the research was conducted in a multiple case study format. It was situated at a preschool, which qualified as a case that was representative of this early education context, both as regards the qualification of preschool teachers in-service and the backgrounds of the children. In other words, a preschool could be identified through a questionnaire survey conducted at the beginning of the study which was representative of a sample case that was in no way privileged as regards extra provision of teaching staff or English being exclusively offered for a particular group of children only. As the published knowledge that is based on empirical evidence on early language teacher education is minimal, a case study approach “that considers unique localities in their diverse schooling contexts” (Zein, 2019, p. 5) was considered to be appropriate and is - according to the two recent compilations on early language teacher education (Zein & Garton, 2019; Wilden & Porsch, 2017) - the dominant research design in this field at the moment. The literature research comprised an analysis of required teachers’ compe‐ tences and provided a survey of results that research on professional language teacher education has yielded. On this basis a teacher education model was designed which seemed to be appropriate for the research context: it considered both the existing knowledge base on language teacher education and at the same time tailored its components to meet the particular needs of the context in question, the preschool. From this analysis it became obvious that only through an approach of participatory action research both the needs of research and teachers participating in the study could be aligned. Results were documented in a multiple case study format that considered a macro level (an analysis of the teacher development context that featured the situation of teaching English in all multilingual inclusive state preschools in the Salzburg and profile of the selected representative sample preschool), a meso level (all the participating preschool teachers of this sample preschool that would qualify as a social <?page no="353"?> community of practice) and a micro level (profiles and developments of all the individual preschool teachers of the sample preschool who jointly participated in the study). In presenting the results of the teacher education research in the previous chapter, both the process and the outcome of the research were documented: teachers’ competence development during the process was represented in individual teacher portraits that traced their particular developments on the micro level of the case study. Each individual case concluded with a summary in grid format to be able to provide a summative survey of teachers’ competence development. Individual preschool teachers’ developments were yet again summarized for each of the competences that were focused on in the teacher development study. They related to the teachers’ attitudes to introduce English into the preschool, their motivation to become involved in the process of teaching English to preschool children, their developing English teaching competences and their reflective practice. A summary of experiences that participating teachers shared was required to be able to present results for the meso level of the case study. The same procedure was followed when it was evaluated in what ways the specific components of the teacher education model had contributed to preschool teachers’ developments. This final chapter discusses the overall result of the study and relates findings to available relevant research results of studies conducted in other language teacher development contexts. It is structured as follows: 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model: Is the teacher education model effective for my sample case? 8.2 Transfer potential of the teacher education model to qualify in-service pre‐ school teachers: Is the teacher education model potentially transferrable to other in-service preschool education contexts? What adaptations would be required? 8.3 Reflection of the research design of the study and suggestions for further research: Was the design of participatory action research and presentation of results as a multiple case study appropriate? What further research is required? 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model Discussion of results initially requires a brief reminder of the considerable con‐ textual constraints and lack of institutional support that pervaded perspectives 354 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="354"?> of participating preschool teachers on the teacher education project. It had strongly affected the design of the teacher education set-up, which would need to be compatible with participating preschool teachers’ workload and resulting lack of adequate space to become involved in implementing English at their workplace so that the minimal institutional support could be compensated. Needless to say, the context is always a defining factor of what can (or cannot) be achieved through teacher education but in the case of educating in-service preschool teachers to be able to offer English for all the children as a permanent curricular component in the preschool timetable, it proved to be extremely challenging for the participating teachers who were involved. Outcomes of the teacher education study can only be fully understood and discussed with this background in mind (→ macro level case study). Not very surprisingly, the issue of lack of available space and time to develop pervades preschool teachers’ comments throughout: according to the questionnaire survey the majority of teachers (76.9%) felt that the general situation in preschool and the logistics of running the morning were seen as the major constraints for them to teach English. About a quarter of the teachers (23.1%) felt that these contextual factors were not the prevailing reason for them to have decided against offering English in their preschool (→statistical data 21). It therefore qualifies as a first general success, which could be documented through my study that despite these unfavourable contextual conditions English could actually be established as a regular curricular component at the sample preschool after the teacher education project had finished. The participating teachers had become convinced through the enthusiasm and the language progress of the children, which they observed as first-hand experience in the course of the project, that it was a project worthy of their commitment and of benefit to include permanently in their preschool programme. Contextual constraints that could be identified related to various levels that are briefly recaptured here will be readdressed in the next chapter 8.2: Preschool teacher education (pre-service): preschool teachers in the region are not qualified academically at universities for their careers and as a result, they cannot build on basic competences in the fields that were relevant for the project which are preschool teachers’ English language competence, classroom research and reflection competences. The framework for preschool teachers’ professional development in-service is also limited: professional development in reflective practice is not considered to be an integral part of their teaching practice and as a result there is no provision and space for in-service teacher development in this dimension of teaching. Their workload is considerable, and their timetable is packed. English as a foreign language is not included in the latest preschool 355 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model <?page no="355"?> curriculum, despite the European Commission’s recommendations to integrate English in preschool. Preschools have no autonomy to provide a language profile (for example through the availability of a pool of extra lessons, staff or funding) and instead depend on the readiness of preschool heads to support a project at the individual preschool. Preschool staff is allocated regionally to state preschools by the Personalamt des Magistrats Stadt Salzburg and it is not in the authority of the heads of the preschools to increase their staff members to be able to meet new educational challenges or to introduce innovations such as English in their preschool. As teachers’ comments have demonstrated they felt that provision of staff at their preschool is already tightly calculated. Nevertheless, according to the questionnaire analysis over half of the pre‐ school teachers (57.5%) believed that they would benefit from teaching English in preschool. The majority of the teachers during their education (76 %) had not been offered a course in foreign language teaching. Of the 24 % who had been offered an optional course, the majority (92.9%) had taken the opportunity to participate. This indicates that teachers would readily take part in foreign language teaching if appropriate space and support were provided. Due to the lack of these provisions, the majority of the in-service preschool teachers who had decided that they would not be prepared to teach English gave the contextual constraints as their reason. This lack of contextual support pervades research studies on teacher devel‐ opment that were conducted in other contexts. Two examples illustrate the situation: referring to Nunan, Benitt notes on the potential of primary and preschool teachers’ involvement in action research that: research has shown that it is most beneficial if carried out collaboratively and if the results are shared within the wider community of practice (cf. Nunan, 2006). However, the cooperation with others is not always possible in everyday teaching practice as most teachers are very busy. (Benitt, 2017, p. 131) And Müller-Hartmann, Schocker and Pant conducted a questionnaire survey amongst participants of a long-term teacher development project for EFL teachers to find out from the perspectives of participating teachers what pre‐ requisites would need to be required to promote innovations at their preschools. All the participants unanimously agreed that contextual constraints were the main reason for them not to become more involved, even though this group of teachers had been granted a reduction of their workload (two lessons) and they could attend seven central three-day workshops to develop tasks for their classrooms and share experiences: 356 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="356"?> Alle Lehrer/ innen thematisieren die unterrichtlichen Rahmenbedingungen, die ihnen ein konsequentes Arbeiten mit Kompetenz entwickelnden Lernaufgaben erschweren: … die Arbeitsbelastung ist [auch] durch das hohe Stundendeputat enorm und läßt wenig Raum für ein kreatives Experimentieren; der schulische Kontext unterstützt Innovationen nicht hinreichend. (Müller-Hartmann et al., 2013, p. 189) Throughout my study, participants commented on this lack of available time to develop professionally as being one of the salient issues in preschool teacher education. The ensuing discussion of results therefore needs to be understood keeping the constraining contextual conditions in mind. Although I was aware from the beginning that the starting conditions to educate teachers within their practice were not ideal, I was motivated to embark on the teacher education research project through my own experiential knowledge of implementing English in preschools, through teachers’ general belief that they would benefit from teaching English and through the fact that the majority of teachers (82.3%) believed that children benefit from learning a foreign language. But for the project to be successful I was well aware that I would need to provide ample support structures for teachers in order for them to actively engage in the project and to benefit from it personally. With these introductory remarks in mind, this chapter will discuss if the teacher education model proved to be effective for my sample case. To do so it will summarize the evaluation of the components, which I had integrated in the set-up of my teacher education as support. a) Organising teacher education in situ Organising teacher education in situ within the individual preschool teacher’s groups of children proved to be fundamental to support preschool teachers’ competence development. Evaluation of components from participating teach‐ ers’ perspectives confirmed that in situ education supported them to be able to develop their teaching competences, because it was situated in a context that was familiar to them which consequently provided the confidence and trust for teachers to put English to practice. Further components referred to the role of participatory demonstration lesson, teaching the children cooperatively and independent practical work. All three components closely relate to the role relationship of teacher educator and preschool teachers, which will be discussed at the end of this paragraph. Participatory demonstration lessons proved to be essential for teachers to be able to re-assess their initially often negative attitudes related to introducing yet another language for the children to learn. It stimulated their motivation to become involved in the teacher education project, because they experienced 357 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model <?page no="357"?> that the activities provided through task plans had a positive impact on their children’s competence development. They could evaluate the appropriateness and potential of sequenced task plans that were provided in written form with selected language prior to the lessons. This allowed them to take an active part during lessons and to focus on observing the process of teaching, particularly the mediating interactive strategies that the teacher educator used to support children’s language development. As a result of participating in the demonstration lessons, they gained the knowledge and skills required to give them the confidence to teach. There is agreement in all available reports on professional teacher development that learning through an expert teacher model who demonstrates good practice contributes to teachers’ competence development. Fullan (1993) who outlined what would be required so that teachers could actually become change agents at their schools found that: the main reason for the failure of teacher programmes is that their programmes are based on extremely vague conceptions. Having an ideology is not the same as having conceptions and ideas of what should be done and how it should be done. (p. 109) The same conclusion was drawn by one of the most prolific language teacher educators in the field, Karen Johnson, who summarized her extensive, long-term experience with second language teacher development as follows: They [participating language teachers] described feeling powerless to alter their instructional practices because they had few, if any, alternative images of teachers and teaching to act as a model of action. … These pre-service teachers clearly … lacked sufficient exposure to and an understanding of alternative instructional practices or alternatives images of teachers. … It will require access to and successful encounters with alternative models of second language teaching and alternative images of second language teachers. … Teachers’ beliefs can shift … but they must have something to shift to. ( Johnson, 1994, pp. 449 - 451) The component of teaching the children cooperatively exceeds preschool teachers ‘just’ actively observing an expert teacher model. It provided regular exposure and a repetitive structure to support teachers to integrate English in their daily routines, made teacher - teacher educator collaboration in the process of learning to teach available and sustained teachers’ motivation to integrate English through the children’s positive response and progress in the language. Benitt (2017) also highlights the benefits of collaboration “as long as the collaboration is characterized by a balanced power relationship and mutual support” (p. 131; cf. Bevins & Price, 2014; Ulvik, 2014). I am aware that this qualifies as a powerful - if rather privileged - individualized support structure 358 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="358"?> that cannot simply be transferred to a model of teacher education that intends to qualify large group numbers. Therefore, options concerning this procedure will be discussed in the following chapter 8.2. Because of the support that was provided through both participatory dem‐ onstration lessons and teaching the children co-operatively, all the preschool teachers managed to continue to integrate English in their independent practical work throughout the week. They set different priorities and incorporated routines in varying degrees, depending on their personalities, preferences in their teaching styles and competences. Their chosen strategies were completely in line with what they felt they were able to do at the time and what seemed appropriate for their groups. The English language skills that the teacher educator had supported the children to developed during the participatory demonstration lessons provided a basis for the teachers to continue. As my case study demonstrated, the English target language competence of preschool teachers varied widely from one who relied completely on the lan‐ guage content of the demonstration lesson to one who was confidentially fluent. Given the circumstances, it was not possible to improve preschool teachers’ existing language competence, although comprehensive language support was provided within the time frame that was allocated to the project. The language support involved using English as the common means of communication between the teacher educator, the preschool teachers and the children, thereby providing active participation of preschool teachers in the demonstration lessons, building up a repertoire of relevant chunks of English throughout and offering contact time with the teacher educator for language advice. As a result, preschool teachers relied on relevant chunks, which they had learnt by heart and used to manage their classrooms, but they were largely not able to use English spontaneously and flexibly in new situations that had not been modelled before. Preschool teachers were well aware that to be able to teach English confidently they would need to qualify as a credible authentic communication partner for the children. The relevance of a solid target language competence for teachers that teach a foreign language to young learners has been confirmed by numerous recent learning to teach studies. Research conducted in bilingual preschool contexts, for example, conclude: “Frühe Lerner [zeigen] gewöhnlich nur dann größere Fortschritte beim Erlernen einer neuen Sprache …, wenn sie ihren sprachlichen Input vornehmlich von solchen Personen erhalten, die selbst über eine hohe Kompetenz in der L2 verfügen” (Piske, 2016, p. 7; referring to various research studies on early foreign and second language learning, including his own research). Benitt (2015, 2016, 2017) identified a number of relevant dimensions of teacher learning in her study on preand primary school 359 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model <?page no="359"?> EFL teacher development that included teachers’ language competence. She found that: especially the affective dimension and the concept of professional confidence, i.e., the teachers’ perception of their language proficiency, their pedagogical and meth‐ odological competencies as well as their theoretical knowledge (cf. Benitt, 2016) seem to play a central role for their professional development. (Benitt, 2017, p. 130) Wilden and Porsch (2017) referring to Enever (2014, p. 20) who surveyed early foreign language education in seven European countries note that “in three out of four cases, there was evidence of teacher anxiety in relation to language competency” (p. 13). But as regards the evidence on primary FL teachers’ target language competency they conclude that it is “sketchy at best” (p. 13). Although preschool language tasks appear to be simple and often repetitive, this does not mean that basic English only would suffice: while routine activities posed no problem for the preschool teachers managing spontaneous interaction proved to be too demanding for most of them b) Integrating reflective approaches and relevant theory It has been one of the central concerns of the study that experiential learning in classrooms would stimulate the process of abstracting general principles from reflecting on a specific experience in a particular context of practice and ideally to establish the principle of reflective practice as a professional habit of participating preschool teachers in the process. Various tools for reflection were therefore integrated in the teacher education model: materials development, journal writing, individual personal interviews and relevant theory. But these tools were largely not made use of by the teachers, with the exception of the individual personal interviews, for various reasons that will be discussed in the following. Materials development hardly happened and if it did teachers reflected only occasionally on the quality of materials in relation to relevant theory. They were aware of the role of materials in supporting children’s language learning as they could evaluate the importance of the diversity of materials to meet children’s needs. But they did not develop the reflective habit of observing critically, that means, informed by integrating relevant theory, exactly in what ways the materials supported their children’s language learning process. To make this happen I would have needed to guide them explicitly to relate practice materials to resulting children’s language learning processes. In other words, I would need to support them to draw conclusions on the cause - effect relationship of the children working with materials and their resulting language learning by asking them, for instance, to analyse examples of learner discourse that the 360 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="360"?> materials stimulated. But for this to happen more space in the timetable would have to be provided, for example by integrating a workshop situation in the teacher education where we could have developed and reflected the purposes of materials together in our group. Developing teaching ideas, tasks and materials collaboratively for new topics to be covered would have depended on provision of more time: to build on the knowledge they had developed by reflecting on the materials that I had previously produced and provided for them as models to learn and reflect on. As it was, the process of materials development for reflection could not be integrated as an established part of the project. The same applies for journal writing, which was intended as a tool for reflection. Under the circumstances that we were working in (lack of any break in between the different activities the preschool timetable involves, the already existing workload with preschool related paperwork and no extra time available to engage with journal writing) it could simply not be achieved. Together with reflection based on materials development, the space to collaboratively exchange reflections, draw conclusions and develop ideas - all of which would be required to become more engaged in the process of reflecting practice - was therefore missing. The individual personal interviews proved to be the only effective means of providing support for encouraging the teachers to reflect: allocated regular time slots were arranged in which the teachers could focus on reflecting on their development in the project. This had been agreed on at the beginning of the project as I relied on this data for my research. As a result, teachers were able to give their undivided attention to discussing the project, to clarify issues, share their experiences, report critical incidents and anecdotes from their classrooms and express their opinions. The interview format was also supportive: it was interactive in nature, which supported clarification of issues and ultimately contributed to teachers’ re-assessment of their attitudes regarding introducing an additional language and to their motivation to become involved in the project to teach English. Although Dausend’s suggestion (2017) that “development of a teacher attitude has to include a confrontation with and reflection of the general attitudes, prejudices, and anxieties a person has” (p. 117) could be integrated during interviews, it entailed only little self-reflection which related to the quality of the preschool teachers’ actual teaching. Interviews triggered their awareness of the central role of the teacher, but they exclusively focused on their children (their motivation, their competence development, their involvement). They did not manage to self-reflect on their role as English teachers and the effect of the quality of their teaching on the children. In other words, they did not manage to change perspectives from focusing on the children to 361 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model <?page no="361"?> focusing on themselves. Reasons for the failure to establish reflective practice as a professional competence probably stems from their professional idea of self as preschool teachers whose focus it is, as they voiced it, to follow the child. It was not part of their established habit to reflect on their role as English teachers, that is, reflect on the quality of their tasks or their interactive strategies and relate these to the learning outcome of the children. For this to take place more guidance (for example by focusing prompts that would direct teachers’ attention explicitly to cause-effect relationships between their teaching and the children’s language output) and space would have been required so that reflection could have developed as a new professional habit. Finally, integrating relevant theory to support their awareness raising of cause-and-effect relationships between teaching and learning could also be established only partially. The teachers had become aware of the theoretical principles on which the lessons were based, which were put to practice by a credible expert model teacher, but they could not relate theoretical reasoning to their own teaching strategies throughout. What they had become aware of was why certain routines were in/ appropriate which they reflected and related to theory. But apart from this aspect and despite their general agreement that theoretical knowledge is relevant to design and to reflect on the appropriacy of tasks for their learners’ language development, they did not develop the reflective habit of relating theory to their practice. As has been said above, integrating a workshop situation in which language materials would be devel‐ oped and reflected collaboratively or in which sequences of critical incidents of video-recorded lessons that trigger reflection would be integrated may have supported preschool teachers to reflect on their practice more systematically and consistently. Guidance and space are required if teachers’ reflective practice is to be developed in a sustained way which is a recurrent outcome of teacher education research studies. In the course of the long-term task development project previously mentioned (Müller-Hartmann et al., 2013, pp. 190,191) par‐ ticipating secondary teachers could make use of the support structure which was provided by a number of three-day workshop sessions that were integrated in the teacher education project where practice experiences could be shared, reflected and developed. The studies that are documented in the recent volume on international early language teacher education research “demonstrate that the work of early language learning teacher education … [needs to go] well beyond the transmission of teaching techniques” (Zein, 2019, p. 6). Referring to Loughran et al. (2016, p. 416), the editors note that: teacher education should be ‘an educative process that develops thoughtful, informed and highly able professionals’ who demonstrate ‘willingness to reframe, reconsider, 362 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="362"?> contextualise and problematize their practice rather than seek to mimic or replicate the practices of those they observed through their experiences in teacher education’. (p. 6) This takes time to develop. From recent surveys on early language teacher education, it seems that integrating theory seems to be an issue to date: Dausend (2017) in her review of empirical research on primary EFL teacher education in Germany identified a gap between explicit knowledge (knowing ‘what’) and implicit knowledge (knowing ‘how’) that is documented in studies on the cognitive development of teacher students. She refers to a study conducted by Bartels (2006) whose main findings show “that there is a discrepancy between knowing and acting because transferring explicit knowledge from teacher training programmes into foreign language teaching seems to be difficult”also because of the documented “cognitive overload [that] is central for the learning of a teacher” (Dausend, 2017, p. 115). She concludes that: teacher education ought to cater for a suitable cognitive workload that focuses not only on explicit knowledge about language and language learning, but also on implicit knowledge about how to teach languages … [and suggests that] ideas have to be developed for transferring explicit into implicit knowledge and proper actions in the foreign language classroom. (Dausend 2017, pp. 115-116) Although my teacher education project explicitly integrated theoretical knowl‐ edge on demand, that is, if it was required to understand why a classroom strategy would potentially support children’s learning, preschool teachers did not manage to reflect on their actions by explicitly referring to the relevant theory. A further reason why the idea of developing teachers’ reflected practice largely failed may relate to where preschool teachers put their general focus in the project: it had been one of the primary goals of the teacher educator to model child-appropriate English lessons and in doing so demonstrate to teachers in a credible way that the children would benefit from learning English. As preschool teachers would be able to experience their children’s enthusiasm and progress, they would as a result develop positive attitudes towards introducing another language in preschool and consequently support the project. But as it evolved observing their children’s progress developed to be their prevalent focus as the individual case studies have demonstrated. They did not turn their attention primarily to the strategies the teacher educator employed and related these to their children’s progress, which is illustrated in the following diagram (→ diagram 11). They also did not abstract general theoretical principles from the practical experience they had participated in. 363 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model <?page no="363"?> Figure 33: Diagram 11: Preschool teachers’ focus vs. teacher educator’s focus in the project Another reason for the lack of the preschool teachers’ developing reflective practice may also be teacher learners’ unwillingness to invest time in an activity that does not reveal obvious value at the time (Moon, 1999, p. 89). A final aspect to consider in the discussion of what contributed to the effectiveness of the teacher education project that is closely connected with all three of the components, which have been discussed here, relates to the complex roles of the teacher educator. It comprises a number of competences that have emerged in the course of the project. To begin with, s/ he needs to be a credible preschool teacher role model who is able to demonstrate good practice. This is particularly relevant if language teachers are being educated for this early language learning level as they cannot draw on any images of teaching from their own language learning experiences. Teaching young children involves a completely different approach from teaching languages at the secondary or the tertiary level. It involves being both a convincing English teacher who is able to put language learning approaches (here: the task approach) into practice so that children participate enthusiastically and develop their English language competence. S/ he also needs to be an expert in child pedagogy so that s/ he can establish a good rapport with the children in this process. Various learning to teach studies agree that “role-modelling is known to be highly effective in changing people’s attitudes and outlook” (Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014, p. 62). The following quote of one of the participating preschool teachers represents their view on the importance of a positive teacher role model which had been an integral part of the teacher education project: “Es hat mir Spaß gemacht, weil ich so viel gelernt habe. Weil es zum ersten Mal war, dass ich es erlebt habe, dass jemand in den Kindergarten kommt und Englisch macht, dass man so spielerisch eine Sprache lernen kann. Das ist nicht so in Deutsch‐ 364 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="364"?> 1 Betty was asked to comment on: What have you learnt from the project? förderung. Deshalb war ich zunächst so skeptisch, weil ich unsere Kinder kenne: wir strengen uns so an, dass sie Deutsch sprechen können und jetzt machen wir auch noch Englisch (she is referring to her initial reluctance to introduce English). Aber es hat funktioniert. Aber es war auch deine Art es weiter zu geben” (Betty, 07.06.17: int. 33). 1 However, preschool teachers’ positive perception of the role of the teacher educator as a credible role model also resulted in a dilemma. On the one hand modelling involved task planning, putting the task to practice and managing the resulting process in practice. This included supporting children’s English competence development, motivating and involving them, using appropriate classroom target language, teaching strategies and establishing a credible rap‐ port with children. As many of the activities in preschool are routined, modelling an expert teacher to begin with would qualify as a legitimate transition phase, which was also much acknowledged by preschool teachers. On the other hand, reflecting on the data, it appeared that it may have also been a somewhat daunting experience for participating preschool teachers as they felt that this expert model could not realistically be attained, given preschool teachers’ moderate target language competence. It had been intended that the preschool teachers would not become dependent on the teacher educator. This would be provided by preschool teachers being actively involved in the teaching from the beginning so that they could gradually develop their competences and become more and more confident in teaching English and as a result would develop to become independent of the teacher educator’s support. Although English could be established as a regular curricular component at the participating pre‐ school after the teacher education project had finished, participating preschool teachers’ independence on the whole did not develop from the project. They very much continued to rely on materials, tasks and routines they had acquired from the teacher educator. Reasons have been repeatedly addressed throughout my study and included the lack of space and experience for reflection and preschool teachers’ target language competence, which largely did not support the independence required to develop into autonomous preschool English teachers. Two concluding thoughts on the evaluation of the effectiveness of the teacher education model: recently published early language teacher education studies highlight the integral role of mentoring and supervision in teacher education [and] … show how teacher professional learning can be made manifest through professional 365 8.1 Effectiveness of the teacher education model <?page no="365"?> learning communities that create a continuum from the voices of teachers and teacher educators and the collaborative work between them. (Zein, 2019, p. 8) Collaboration of preschool English teachers and teacher educator during the project succeeded only when fixed time slots could be organised for this to happen, for example during participatory demonstration lessons or during the individual preschool teacher - teacher educator interviews and meetings. Apart from these situations, the idea of organising teacher learning through professional learning communities could not be satisfactorily established for lack of time and space. A second thought relates to the idea of teachers as re‐ searchers that has been suggested as an appropriate way to integrate theory and practice and to develop attitudes of reflected experience, life-long learning and professional development (vgl. Schocker-v. Ditfurth, 2001) which is an approach to teacher education that has been confirmed by recent publications in the field: “Der in Praxisphasen beobachtete und selbstgehaltene Unterricht erlaubt den Aufbau einer forschenden Haltung und legt das Fundament reflektierten Erfahrungslernens, wenn er entsprechend diskursiv-dialogisch bearbeitet wird” (Legutke, 2018, p. 105). Within the limiting contextual framework this obvious purpose could not be attained in this in-service preschool teacher education project. The concluding reflection on the effectiveness of the preschool teacher education project in the previous chapter has revealed a basic mismatch between contextual affordances (the preschool teachers’ motivation and readiness to include English in their preschool and to develop professionally) and contextual constraints in various areas. If early language education were supported by a preschool education policy that would overcome the current language education focus on only offering German as a second language, implementing English would be attainable as my research has demonstrated. Teacher education potentially could contribute to teachers becoming agents of educational change, despite unfavourable contextual conditions. This area of teachers as change agents has been explored by Rixon (2017) for the field of early EFL education. After having researched features of early English teacher education in various contexts she concludes: “To succeed in helping to embed a new policy in school and classroom practice, teacher education needs to succeed in four main areas: 1. To inform teachers of the nature of and rationale for the innovation 2. To convince them that it is worthwhile and good for children’s learning 3. To give concrete examples and plans for trying out the innovation 4. To support and enable teachers who are taking their first steps with the innovation” (Rixon 2017: 90). 366 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="366"?> These features correspond to the components my teacher education project considered. But it would require adapting some of the principal ways of working that proved to be effective for my sample preschool if large numbers of preschool teachers needed to be qualified to teach English. As it was, my teacher education project was organised as a small-scale case study that nevertheless yielded important insights into what would be required to support preschool teachers’ development. Therefore, experiences from this case study can be used as a blueprint if the teacher education model needed to suit provision of professional education to larger numbers of participants. Ideas related to this issue of transfer requirements will be outlined in the following chapter. 8.2 Transfer potential of the teacher education model to qualify preschool teachers in-service a) Minimum standards for professional in-service teacher education in preschools: contextual prerequisites of education policy and teacher education Available recent research studies on learning to teach English to young learners correspond with the results of the teacher education study that has been presented here in that the “most notable issues include language policy …, contextual challenges …, teachers’ research engagement … and teachers’ target language proficiency” (Van Canh, 2019, p. 41). As regards Austrian’s language policy, the situation in preschools is directly affected by the reluctance to introduce foreign languages into state preschools. As a result, English in state preschools is considered to be an extra-curricular activity with no support provided from the state government. At the same time, it would need to provide space for professional development at preschools by reducing preschool teachers’ teaching commitment, for example. Otherwise, there is the danger of teachers just developing the competence of modelling the practice of an expert teacher educator with not enough space to integrate reflection which would be required for teachers to develop as independent professionals. The lack of required extra staffing and space to develop in the context of preschools contributes to the contextual challenges that I have reported above. This situation is further aggravated by preschool teachers’ pre-service education that results in teachers’ inexperience with basic research competences and lack of sufficient target language proficiency, both issues that have also been reported in international learning to teach studies. Preschool teachers’ initial education would need an academic profile that included the competences of reflective practice, of basic classroom research competences and of a solid target language 367 8.2 Transfer potential of the teacher education model <?page no="367"?> competence (Level B2) which is indispensable for teachers to be able to continue and to develop independently of an expert model teacher educator. b) Provision of teacher education programmes for large numbers of teachers The teacher education model that was developed to meet the needs of the current preschool context was based on a comprehensive support structure that was provided for a small number of participating preschool teachers. Transfer would require adaptations to the existing model if it were to be used to qualify large numbers of participants. Ways to economize the support structure I provided would need to be considered while at the same time keeping up the principles that I based my education on. These involved the inseparable relationship between theory and practice and addressing the complexities and social perspectives of teaching. This could involve: - virtualizing teacher learning to some extent (see for examples the doc‐ umentation of the set-up and results of a blended-learning teacher edu‐ cation course for early language learning in Landesstiftung Baden-Würt‐ temberg et al., 2008); - integrating practice experiences through the provision of direct and mediated reflection of practice situations through an approach of action research (conducted directly and collaboratively in teachers’ classrooms and at their preschools) and mediated reflection of preschool scenes documented in a comprehensive video data bank that illustrates relevant theory through good practice classroom learning examples on film (Land‐ esstiftung Baden-Württemberg et al., 2008; for further ideas on ways to in‐ tegrate practice experiences see Legutke & Schart, 2016, p. 33 ff.; Schocker, 2016, pp. 602-606).Through my previous developmental work this video data bank is already available: it was developed for master students who qualify to become preschool teachers through the E-LINGO course. As it is available online and offered in English throughout it could be also used for preschool teacher education courses which are organised elsewhere. The evaluation of the components of my teacher education project proved that participatory demonstration lessons offered in situ obviously are a powerful way to be able to see the effects on participating teachers’ own groups of children. However, reflecting on mediated experiences that are supported by contextual information that includes the children’s and their teachers’ backgrounds would also be a way to offer credible experiences of “images of teachers and teaching to act as a model of action” ( Johnson, 1994, p. 449). Without doubt integrating practice experiences is the pillar for preschool teachers’ development as the approach to teaching 368 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="368"?> languages deviates significantly from the experiences and resulting images of teaching which preschool teachers have encountered at the secondary or tertiary level. Two studies that have researched dimensions of language teacher development for young learners (they focused on the development of team competences and teaching competences through an approach of action research) were able to demonstrate that the aspired competences could be achieved even if teacher learning was organised as blended learning and practice experiences were mediated (Benitt, 2015; Zibelius, 2015; for further evidence on the potential of integrating video documentations of classroom learning for language teacher development see Schocker-v. Ditfurth, 2002; Legutke & Schocker-von Ditfurth, 2007; Landesstiftung Baden-Württemberg et al., 2008; Mühlhausen 2012); - fieldtrips to multilingual preschools for demonstration lessons of ‘good practice’ so that teachers could develop clear conceptions of how theo‐ retical concepts may relate to the complexities of different contexts of practice; - independent practical work would naturally happen in the preschool of the participating in-service teachers. Here they have the opportunity to experiment and to develop their own styles and strategies to implement English in their groups that suit them the best within their timetable and context. Through this they would ultimately acquire autonomy over their teaching. It would provide the opportunity to organise a buddy system that could be arranged as co-operating tandems or tridems for the teachers to exchange experiences and ideas and to mutually reflect on their teaching in virtual teams (Landesstiftung Baden-Württemberg et al., 2008). This would require time to be allocated to teachers who are involved in this process; - as regards developing teachers’ language competence there is explicit evidence that “by analysing video extracts from their own and their colleagues’ classrooms, the teachers … [are] able to develop greater awareness of their own and their peers’ language use” (Garton, 2019, p. 269). A tool that can easily be integrated in online or blended-learning teacher education projects but as has been demonstrated, needs to be based on a sound target language level. Again, this chapter will close by referring to the international situation of preschool language teacher education to which results of my studies relate. Garton (p. 272) concludes in her chapter on the present and future of early language learning teacher education: “While the current state of the field gives some room for optimism, there is still much work to be done”. The new research 369 8.2 Transfer potential of the teacher education model <?page no="369"?> questions arising from their volume are “the lack of space on general primary teacher education programmes for languages” (p. 272.) and what Garton calls perhaps the biggest challenge of teacher education … of English … is equality of access. … Research into how and in what forms teacher education can reach a much wider audience of language teachers … remains on the research agenda for the future. (p. 272) Through the two studies that evaluated the effects of blended-learning teacher education using the E-LINGO sample it could be confirmed that the aspired aims can be achieved. But unless foreign language education for the preschool becomes a priority in Austrian education policy and is not only an option with no funding and official support, there is no prospect that teacher education programs can be established on a large scale as has been outlined above. Nevertheless, the preschool teacher education study presented here is a first step in the right direction that will hopefully encourage similar projects to be developed in other contexts so that the little knowledge we have on preschool language teacher education will gradually expand. 8.3 Reflection of the research design of the study and suggestions for further research As has been outlined in the introduction, research on professional teacher development processes that considers practice experiences has - despite meri‐ torious studies - not yet developed to be an established research focus in the area of language teaching and learning even though it has recently been more consciously perceived through research (Klippel, 2016; Schocker, 2016). The situation is even more severe in the field of early language teacher education as two recently published compilations on early language teacher education research have confirmed (Zein & Garton, 2019; Wilden & Porsch, 2017). In many contexts the traditional institutional divide between practice and theory, in other words, between those who teach and those who research teaching is still established practice, despite the sociocultural turn in language acquisition research, which aspires to overcome the divide of the contexts of language teaching and learning at schools and researching the process at academic institutions. Researchers have argued to take an ecological perspective of inquiry in teacher education over to decades ago (Wideen et. al., 1998) and recommended approaches of case-study research that is cooperative in nature and informed by multiple perspectives (Schocker, 2016, p. 605). 370 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="370"?> The study that has been presented here subscribes to this view of inquiry and bridges the gap for the field of early language teacher education for preschools. It organised teacher education as participatory action research - an approach that has been confirmed to align teachers’ and teacher education researchers’ needs. In sum, it can be said, that this general research approach demonstrated its appropriateness as regards the call for “congruency between teacher education content and teachers’ needs. Content congruency is the single determining factor in the transformation of teachers’ professional knowledge and skills, increased understanding of their professional roles and improved teaching effi‐ cacy” (Zein, 2019, p. 8-9) as Zein and Garton conclude after their comprehensive review of existing studies on early language teacher development. According to their review, “current teacher education programmes worldwide … provide no references to the specific needs of early language learning teachers” (p. 8). The format of presenting results in a multiple case study format also proved to be appropriate as a number of contextual levels had to be considered for the study to come about and for it to yield valid results. It was intended that results were representative both for the participating teachers and group of children of the sample case and that results could be generalised for the situation in Austrian state preschools. Results of the study therefore go well beyond the particular sample case that was presented here. This directly relates to the issue of the sampling strategy for case study research. While recent studies have tended to subscribe to a single case study format only, that is, studies selected one teacher “who appeared to be represen‐ tative to the population of [in this case study] Vietnamese primary school teachers of English working in state-owned schools … [as] representing a typical case” (Van Canh, 2019, p. 41), the sampling strategy of the study presented here identified a sample preschool which represented both the population of children and the qualification of preschool teachers at a regular multilingual inclusive preschool today. This is unfortunately not established standard practice in learning to teach research. Although the “inherent complexity and situatedness of teacher learning” is generally agreed on in research, the “literature review, reveals the need to have more in-depth qualitative studies … [that capture] the complexity of teacher learning” (Van Canh, 2019, p. 43). My sample size represented what Dörnyei (2007, p. 152) referring to Duff (2006) described as “fairly typical” as most of the multiple case studies are conducted with 4 - 6 participants in one or more sites initially with 3 - 4 cases remaining as there is usually attrition among the participants. In chapter 2.1, when discussing research on early language teaching, I quoted Legutke et. al. (2009) who more than a decade ago urgently called for early language teaching research that 371 8.3 Reflection of the research design of the study and suggestions for further research <?page no="371"?> would represent “multi-lingual groups of children … [with] diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds” (p. 141). The multiple case study presented here qualifies for this and results therefore have a distinct transfer value to other current preschool contexts. As regards future research directions, I would suggest some areas that would benefit from further investigation. As has become obvious throughout the study, there is a general lack of research in the field of early FL learning and early FL teacher education both nationally and internationally. “We know too little about effective pedagogies for teaching YLs, particularly in classrooms. … We would also like to see more research into teacher education in teaching English to YLs” (Copland & Garton, 2014, p. 228). Suggestions made for future research on primary EFL teacher education identified “salient research gaps in the field” ((Wilden & Porsch, 2017, p. 19). Their suggestions that relate to the primary context may also be transferred to preschool teacher education. They note “the urgent need to increasingly investigate actual classroom practices in early FL education”, in other words, “the aspect of effectiveness of classroom practice” (p. 19; italics in original), “to explore the particular demands on the teacher in the primary FL classroom which then ought to be considered in teacher education” and “how teachers can be enabled to implement the teaching approaches which have been identified as ‘good’ or ‘effective’ primary FL teaching approach” (p. 20; italics in original). As teachers seem to find it difficult to implement educational innovations, … further research is needed to explore how such innovations in the EFL classroom can be implemented in a way that teachers actually believe in them and are motivated to incorporate them in their own teaching practices. In this context the significance of teacher beliefs was raised which have been identified as a major factor in teachers’ classroom practices in any school subject. (pp. 20-21; italics in original) Some of the themes that have not been covered in early language teacher education as yet were addressed in my study. Others are identical to the still unresolved issues that emerged in my study. They include “long standing issues in policies on teacher education, shifting pedagogies and the role of collaboration” (Zein, 2019, p. 13). Some final words All in all, early language learning teacher education is broad in scope and wide in implementation, but it is still under-theorised. … The time has come for teacher educators and early language teachers to walk together on this journey of teacher education as we enter a new era of early language learning” (Zein, 2019, p. 13; 372 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="372"?> 2 Nadia was asked to comment on: Do you know about ‘Kindergarten means English’? It was an initiative of the city of Salzburg to integrate English in preschool. final word to the introductory chapter of their volume on international research and practice on early language learning and teacher education). The study that was presented here did connect teacher education and early language teachers in an attempt to identify and to develop the competences required to teach English to all the children in the regular inclusive multilingual state preschool. Despite preschool teachers’ lack of acknowledgement and appreciation for their work all the teachers of the selected sample preschool committed themselves full heartedly to the project. It was a huge step for them to change their attitudes of German first to begin with and then - despite lack of contextual support - to continue integrating English in their preschool (if at varying competence levels) after the project had ended. Their main incentive was that they observe the enthusiasm and successes of the children. Therefore, although the focus of my study was on teacher education, it also proved that offering English in preschool for all the children is a rewarding curricular component worthy of inclusion at this early learning level. What would be required is more research that systematically focuses on children’s language competence development because the study has tentatively confirmed that it is both doable under regular contextual conditions and desirable for the children. I would like to conclude with a participating preschool teacher’s voice that relates to the previous attempt by Stadt Salzburg to introduce an in-service English teacher training project in all state preschools which failed to become a reality as no support structure whatsoever was provided. The only provision for teachers willing to introduce English were seminars on the methodology of teaching English in preschool which I offered for the Salzburger Verwaltungsaka‐ demie-Zentrum für Kindergartenpädagogik (ZEKIP). Apart from these seminars, preschool teachers were left to their own devices as to if, when, how and to what extent they implement English in their preschools: “They want to have some kind of project, but I think it’s not realistic to say, ‘Okay, we have this project and I make it on my own. It sounds good when you say: ‘Ah, ‘Kindergarten means English’, yes’. But there are no Rahmenbedingungen … [and] we have not the time. … And you cannot do it on your own - allein. Es geht einfach nicht” (Nadia, 22.10.15: int. 10). 2 This preschool teacher’s perspective on the situation is in line with the estimate of the European Commission regarding the situation in pre-primary foreign language teacher education: 373 8.3 Reflection of the research design of the study and suggestions for further research <?page no="373"?> Exact data on language teachers in pre-primary schools are not available. Foreign language teaching could be carried out by pre-primary school teachers with a certain level of the language, however, not necessarily defined and required by regulations. Or the language may be taught by native speakers - teachers, native speakers (but not with teachers´ qualifications), students of the language at teacher training colleges, language teachers from primary schools etc. At the moment there is no legislation which would set minimum requirements for people providing foreign language lessons at pre-primary level, therefore their qualifications vary. (European Commission, 2011b, p. 32) Unless Austria’s education policy clearly commits itself to establish English in their preschool curricula (for reasons discussed in chapter 2) there is no hope for quality preschool English teacher education being offered for teachers interested to specialize in the field in a professional way. As there is the intention to establish a preschool teacher education at tertiary level in the years to come, further development in EFL research for preschool level might be encouraged. Until then research will stay dependent on the good will and dedication of a few enthusiastic preschool teachers. Garton (2019) in their final chapter that pre‐ sented results on international research and practice in early language teacher education concludes that the studies “indicate that, for teachers at least, whether they are preor in-service, their professional development remains problematic” for various reasons: “YL English language teacher education is often inadequate in preparing teachers for the realities of the primary classroom” (p. 265), many teachers are not trained to teach English at all or training is “very theoretical with little input on how to put it into practice” or “trainers themselves may not have a deep understanding of the approach and especially how it can be used in a YL context” (p. 266). This teacher education project has considered all of these “problematic” issues and demonstrated that they can be overcome. I hope to have made a contribution to the knowledge base in the field of early language teacher education and that further research in this field is going to enable a new generation of preschool teachers to develop themselves professionally to expert English foreign language teachers who meet the needs of a multilingual world. 374 8 Conclusions and Perspectives <?page no="374"?> Bibliography Abendroth-Timmer, Dagmar (2011). Reflexive Lehrerbildung: Konzepte und Perspek‐ tiven für den Einsatz von Unterrichtssimulation und Videographie in der fremdspra‐ chendidaktischen Ausbildung. Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung, 22(1), 3-41. htt ps: / / www.dgff.de/ assets/ Uploads/ ausgaben-zff/ ZFF-1-2011-Abendroth-Timmer.pdf Abendroth-Timmer, Dagmar (2017). Reflexive Lehrerbildung und Lehrerforschung in der Fremdsprachendidaktik: Ein Modell zur Definition und Rahmung von Reflexion. Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung, 28(1), 101-126. https: / / www.dgff.de/ assets/ Up loads/ ausgaben-zff/ ZFF-1-2017-Abendroth-Timmer.pdf Allwright, Dick & Hanks, Judith (2009). The developing language learner. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Altrichter, Herbert & Posch, Peter (2007). Lehrerinnen und Lehrer erforschen ihren Unterricht. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. Altrichter, Herbert; Feldman, Allan; Posch, Peter & Somekh, Bridget (2008). Teachers investigate their work: An introduction to action research across the professions (2nd ed). New York: Routledge. Appel, Joachim (1995). Diary of a language teacher. Oxford: Heinemann. Appel, Joachim (2000). Erfahrungswissen und Fremdsprachendidaktik. Munich: Langen‐ scheidt-Longman. Asher, James (2012). Learning another language through actions. California: Sky Oaks Productions, incorporated. Athanases, Steven Z. & Brice-Heath, Shirley (1995). Ethnography in the study of the teaching and learning of English: Research in the Teaching of English, 29(3), 263-287. https: / / www.researchgate.net/ publication/ 265596961 Bailey, Kathleen M. (2006). Language teacher supervision: A case-based approach. Cam‐ bridge: Cambridge University Press. Bartels, Nathaniel (2006). The construct of cognition in language teacher education and development: Dissertation: Gießen: Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen. http: / / geb.uni-g iessen.de/ geb/ volltexte/ 2007/ 4589/ pdf/ BartelsNathaniel-2007-01-19.pdf Barucki, Heidi; Bliesener, Ulrich; Börner, Otfried; Böttger, Heiner; Hoffmann, Ingrid-Bar‐ bara; Kierepka, Adelheid; Kronisch, Inge; Legutke, Michael; Lohmann, Christa; Müller, Tanja & Schlüter, Norbert (Eds.). (2015). Do you speak English? Der Lernstand im Englischunterricht am Ende von Klasse 4: Ergebnisse der BIG-Studie. Munich: Domino. https: / / www.researchgate.net/ publication/ 281441958_Der_Lernstand_im_E nglischunterricht_am_Ende_von_Klasse_4_Ergebnisse_der_BIG-Studie <?page no="375"?> Benitt, Nora (2015). Becoming a (better) teacher. A case study on classroom action research as an instrument for professional development in foreign language teacher education. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Benitt, Nora (2016). It’s not as academic and impossible as it seems to be - Aktions‐ forschung and berfliches Selbstvertrauen in der fremdsprachen Lehrerbildung. In Michael Legutke & Michael Schart (Eds.), Fremdsprachendidaktikische Professionsfor‐ schung: Brennpunkt Lehrerbildung (pp. 269-290). Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Benitt, Nora (2017). Primary EFL teachers as researchers. In Eva Wilden & Raphaela Porsch (Eds.), The professional development of primary EFL teachers: National and international research (pp. 129-140). Münster & New York: Waxmann. Bevins, Stuart & Price, Gareth (2014). Collaboration between academics and teachers: A complex relationship. Educational Action Research, 22(2), 270-284. https: / / doi.org/ 1 0.1080/ 09650792.2013.869181 Birsak de Jersey, Kirsten (2016). Tasks and materials for preschool English: Twelve multi‐ media units for the E-LINGO Platform. Freiburg: Pädagogische Hochschule Freiburg. Blondin, Christiane; Candelier, Michel; Edelenbos, Peter; Johnstone, Richard; Ku‐ banek-German, Angelika & Taeschner, Traute (1998). Fremdsprachen für die Kinder Europas: Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen der Forschung. Berlin: Cornelsen. Blommaert, Jan (2010). The sociolinguistics of globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Boeckmann, Klaus-Börge; Lins, Sabine; Orlovsky, Sarah & Wondraczek, Ines (2011). Mehrsprachigkeit in den Kindergärten. Methodisches Handbuch für die Sprachenvermit‐ tlung. St. Pölten: Amt der Niederösterreichischen Landesregierung, Abteilung Kinder‐ gärten. https: / / www.noe.gv.at/ noe/ Kindergaerten-Schulen/ Methodisches_Handbuch .pdf Borg, Michael (2004). Key concepts in ELT: The apprenticeship of observation. ELT Journal, 58(3), 274-276. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1093/ elt/ 58.3.274. Boud, David (Ed.). (1981). Developing student autonomy in learning. London: Kogan Page. Bradley, Jana (1993). Methodological issues and practices in qualitative research. Sym‐ posium on Qualitative Research: Theory, Methods, and Applications. The library quarterly: Information, community, policy, 63(4), 431-449. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1086/ 6026 20. Breen Michael (1989). The evaluation cycle for language learning tasks. In Robert Keith Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 187-206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Breen, Michael (2009). Learner contribution to task-design. In Kris Van den Branden; Martin Bygate & John M. Norris (Eds.), Task-based language teaching: A reader (pp. 333-356). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 376 Bibliography <?page no="376"?> Breen, Michael P. & Mann, Sarah J. (1997). Shooting arrows at the sun: Perspectives on a pedagogy for autonomy. In Phil Benson & Peter Voller (Eds.), Autonomy and independence in language learning (pp. 132-149). New York: Longman. Bromley, Dennis B. (1986). The case-study method in psychology and related disciplines. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Brown, James, Dean (2009). Open-response items in questionnaires. In Juanita Heigham; Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical intro‐ duction (pp. 200-219). Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Brumfit, Christopher & Johnson, Keith (1979). The communicative approach to language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burgess, Robert G. (1984). In the field. London: Allen & Unwin. Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur (2008). Bundesländerübergreifender BildungsRahmenPlan für Elementare Bildungseinrichtungen in Österreich: Entwurf. Wien: Ämter der Landesregierungen der österreichischen Bundesländer, Magistrat der Stadt Wien, BMUKK. Charlotte Bühler Institut. Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur (2009a). Bundesländerü‐ bergreifender BildungsRahmenPlan für Elementare Bildungseinrichtungen in Ös‐ terreich: Endfassung. Wien: Ämter der Landesregierungen der österreichi‐ schen Bundesländer, Magistrat der Stadt Wien, BMUKK. Charlotte Bühler Institut. http: / / www.charlotte-buehler-institut.at/ wp-content/ pdf-files/ Bundesländ erübergreifender%20BildungsRahmenPlan%20für%20elementare%20Bildungseinricht ungen%20in%20Österreich.pdf Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur (2009b). Bildungsplan-Anteil zur sprachlichen Förderung in Elementaren Bildungseinrichtungen. In Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur (2009a). Bundesländerübergreifender BildungsRah‐ menPlan für Elementare Bildungseinrichtungen in Österreich. Wien: Ämter der Land‐ esregierungen der österreichischen Bundesländer, Magistrat der Stadt Wien, BMUKK. Charlotte Bühler Institut. http: / / www.charlotte-buehler-institut.at/ wp-content/ pdf-fi les/ bildungsplananteilsprache.pdf Burns Anne (1999). Collaborative action research for English language teachers. Cam‐ bridge: Cambridge University Press. Burns Anne (2007). Action research: Contributions and future directions in ELT. In Jim Cummins & Chris Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching: part 1 (pp. 987-1002). New York: Springer. Burns Anne (2009). Action research. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker, (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 112-134). Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Burns Anne (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching. New York: Routledge. 377 Bibliography <?page no="377"?> Burns, Anne; Freeman, Donald & Edwards, Emily (2015). Theorizing and studying the language-teaching mind: Mapping research on language teacher cognition. The Modern Language Journal, 99(3), 585-601. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1111/ modl.12245. Burns, Anne & Richards, Jack C. (2009). Second language teaching education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burton, Jill (2009). Reflective Practice. In Anne Burns & Jack C. Richards (Eds.), Second language teaching education (pp. 298-307). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Burt, Matina K. & Dulay, Heidi C. (1977). Remarks on creativity in language acquisition. In Matina K. Burt; Heidi C. Dulay & Mary Finocchiaro (Eds.), Viewpoints on English as a second language (pp. 95-126). New York: Regents. Burwitz-Melzer, Eva; Riemer, Claudia & Schmelter, Lars (Eds.). (2018). Rolle und Profes‐ sionalität von Fremdsprachenlehrpersonen. Arbeitspapiere der 38. Frühjahrskonferenz zur Erforschung des Fremdsprachenunterrichts. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Butzkamm, Wolfgang (2008). Wie Kinder Sprechen Lernen: Kindliche Entwicklung und die Sprachlichkeit des Menschen (3rd ed.). Tübingen: Narr/ Francke/ Attempto. Butzkamm Wolfgang & Dodson, C. J. (1980). The teaching of communication: From theory to practice. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 18(4), 289-309. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1515/ iral.1980.18.1-4.289 Bygate, Martin; Skehan, Peter & Swain, Merrill (Eds.). (2001). Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing. London & New York: Taylor and Francis. Calderhead, James (1987). Exploring teachers’ thinking. London: Cassell. Cameron, Lynne (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carless, David, R. (2002). Implementing task-based learning with young learners. ELT Journal, 56(4), 389-396. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1093/ elt/ 56.4.389 Carless, David. R. (2003). Factors in the implementation of task-based teaching in primary schools. System, 31(4), 485-500. http: / / dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.system.2003.03.002 Carless, David, R. (2004). Issues in teachers’ reinterpretation of a task-based innovation in primary schools. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 639-662. https: / / doi.org/ 10.2307/ 3588283 Carr, Wilfred & Kemmis, Stephan (1986). Becoming critical: Knowing through action research. London: The Falmer Press. Carter, Ronald & Nunan, David (Eds.). (2001). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Caspari, Daniela (2014). Was in den Köpfen von Fremdsprachenlehrer(inne)n vorgeht, und wie wir versuchen, es herauszufinden. Eine Übersicht über Forschungsarbeiten zu subjektiven Sichtweisen von Fremdsprachenlehrkräften (2000-2013). Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, 43(1), 20-35. 378 Bibliography <?page no="378"?> Caspari, Daniela (2016). Prototypische designs. In Daniela Caspari; Friederike Klippel; Michael Legutke & Karen Schramm (Eds.), Forschungsmethoden in der Fremdsprachen‐ didaktik: Ein Handbuch (pp. 67-78). Tübingen: Narr/ Francke/ Attempto. Caspari, Daniela; Klippel, Friederike; Legutke, Michael & Schramm, Karen (Eds.). (2016). Forschungsmethoden in der Fremdsprachendidaktik. Ein Handbuch. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Clandinin, Jean (1986). Classroom Practice: Teacher images in action. London: The Falmer Press. Copland, Fiona & Garton, Sue (2014). Key themes and future directions in teaching English to young learners: Introduction to the special issue. English Language Teaching Journal, 68(3), 223-230. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1093/ elt/ ccu030. Council of Europe (2000). Language passport. European language portfolio. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Strasbourg: Modern Language Division. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https: / / rm.coe.int/ 16802fc1bf Council of Europe (2008a). Language education policy profile: Country report Austria. Language and language education policies in Austria. Vienna: Bundesministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, Bundesministerium für Wissenschaft und Forschung, Österreichisches Sprachen-Kompetenz-Zentrum. https: / / rm.coe.int/ language-educati on-policy-profile-austria-country-report/ 16807b3b47 Council of Europe (2008b). Language education policy profile, Austria. Vienna: Ministry of Education, the Arts and Culture and Ministerium of Science and Research (Bundes‐ ministerium für Unterricht, Kunst und Kultur, Bundesministerium für Wissenschaft und Forschung). http: / / www.oesz.at/ download/ spol/ LeppProfil_Final.pdf Cowie, Neil (2009). Observation. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Qualita‐ tive research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 165-181). Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Croker, Robert (2009). An introduction to qualitative research. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 3-24). Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Cummins, Jim (2018). Foreword. In Christine Hélot; Carolien Frijns; Koen Van Gorp & Sven Sierens (Eds.), Language awareness in multilingual classrooms in Europe: From theory to practice (pp. V - IX). Boston & Berlin: De Gruyter. Cummins, Jim & Davison, Chris (Eds.). (2007). International handbook of English language teaching: Part 1. New York: Springer. Curtain, Helena & Pesola, Carol Ann (1988). Language and children: Making the match. New York: Addison-Wesley. 379 Bibliography <?page no="379"?> Curtain, Helena & Pesola, Carol Ann (1994). Language and children: Making the match. New York: Addison-Wesley. Dausend, Henriette (2017). Theory and practice in primary English teacher education. A review of empirical research until 2015. In Eva Wilden & Raphaela Porsch (Eds.), The professional development of primary EFL teachers: National and international research (pp. 109-125). Münster & New York: Waxmann. Denzin, Norman K. (1978). The research act (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Denzin, Norman K. & Lincoln, Yvonna, S. (Eds.). (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. (3rd ed.). California: SAGE. Devlieger, Mieke & Goosens, Greet (2007). An assessment tool for the evaluation of teacher practice in powerful task-based language learning environments. In Kris Van den Branden; Koen Van Gorp & Machteld Verhelst (Eds.), Tasks in action: Task-based language education from a classroom-based perspective (pp. 92-130). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars. Diaz-Maggioli, Gabriel H. (2003). Professional development for language teachers. Uruguay: National Administration of Public Education. https: / / www.unitus.org/ FUL L/ 0303diaz.pdf Dörnyei, Zoltán (2002). The motivational basis of language tasks. In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning (pp.137-158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Dörnyei, Zoltán (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dörnyei, Zoltán & Murphey, Tim (2003). Group dynamics in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dörnyei, Zoltán & Ushioda, Ema (2011). Teaching and researching motivation (2nd ed.). Harlow: Pearson. Dörnyei, Zoltán & Kubanyiova, Magdalena (2014). Motivating learners, motivating teachers: Building vision in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Doyé, Peter & Lüttge, Dieter (1975). Der Braunschweiger Schulversuch. Frühbeginn des Englischunterrichts (FEU). In Niedersächsisches Kultusministerium (Ed.). Schul‐ versuche und Schulreform 8. Englisch im Primar - Bereich (pp. 113-146). Hannover: Schroedel. Doyé, Peter & Lüttge, Dieter (Eds.). (1977). Untersuchungen zum Englischunterricht in der Grundschule.Bericht uber das Braunschweiger Forschungsprojekt: Fruhbeginn des Englischunterrichts (FEU). Braunschweig: Westermann. 380 Bibliography <?page no="380"?> Dresing, Thorsten; Pehl, Thorsten & Schmieder, Christian (2015). Manual (on) transcrip‐ tion. transcription conventions, software guides and practical hints for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Marburg: Eigenverlag. Dreßler, Constanze (2012). Aufgabenbasiertes Arbeiten: Fertigkeiten Integrieren. In Heiner Böttger (Ed.), Englisch Didaktik für die Grundschule (pp. 227-236). Berlin: Cornelsen. Duff, Patricia (2006). Beyond generalizability: Contextualization, complexity, and credi‐ bility in applied linguistics research. In Micheline Chalhoub-Deville; Carol A. Chapelle & Patricia Duff (Eds.), Inference and generalizability in applied linguistics: Multiple perspectives (pp. 65-95). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Duff, Patricia (2008). Case study research in applied linguistics. Mahawh, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Early, Diane M; Maxwell, Kelly L; Burchinal, Margaret; Alva, Soumya; Bender, Randall H; Bryant, Donna; Cai, Karin; Clifford Richard M; , Ebanks, Caroline; Griffin, James A; Henry, Gary T; Howes, Carollee; Iriondo-Perez, Jeniffer; Jeon, Hyun-Joo; Mashburn, Andrew J; Peisner-Feinberg, Ellen; Pianta, Robert C; Vandergrift, Nathan & Zill, Nich‐ olas (2007). Teachers’ education, classroom quality, and young children’s academic skills: Results from seven studies of preschool programs. Child Development, 78(2), 558-580. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1111/ j.1467-8624.2007.01014.x Eckerth, Johannes (2008). Learners’ perceptions of task-based interactions. Presentation at 42nd Annual TESOL Convention, 2nd - 5th April, Conference Handout. New York. Edelenbos, Peter; Johnstone, Richard & Kubanek, Angelika (2006). The main pedagogical principles underlying the teaching of languages to very young learners. Languages for the children of Europe. Published Research, Good Practice & Main Principles. Final Report of the EAC 89/ 04, Lot 1 study, European Commission. https: / / ec.europa.eu/ assets/ eac / languages/ policy/ language-policy/ documents/ young_en.pdf Edge, Julian (1992). Cooperative development: Professional self-development through coop‐ eration with colleagues. Harlow/ Essex: Longman. Edge, Julian (Ed.). (2000). Action research. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Publications. Edge, Julian & Richards, Keith (Eds.). (1993). Teachers develop teachers research: Papers on classroom research and teacher development. Oxford: Heinemann. Egan, Kieren & Nadaner, Dan (1988). Imagination and education. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Ellis, Gail (2014). ‘Young learners’: clarifying our terms. English language teaching journal, 68(1), 75-78. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1093/ elt/ cct062. Ellis, Rod (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Elsner, Daniela (2010). Englisch in der Grundschule unterrichten. Grundlagen, Methoden, Praxisbeispiele. München: Oldenburg. 381 Bibliography <?page no="381"?> Enever, Janet (2014). Primary English teacher education in Europe. English Language Teaching Journal, 68(3), 231-242. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1093/ elt/ cct079 Enever, Janet; Moon, Jayne & Uma Raman (Eds.). (2009). Young learner English language policy and implementation: International perspectives. Reading: Garner Education. European Commission, Directorate-General for Education and Culture (2004). Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity: An action plan 2004-2006. Luxembourg: European Communities. http: / / www.saaic.sk/ eu-label/ doc/ 2004-06_en.pdf European Commission (2006). Europeans and Their Languages: Special Eurobarometer 243. Summary. Brussels: European Commission. http: / / ec.europa.eu/ commfrontoffic e/ publicopinion/ archives/ ebs/ ebs_243_sum_en.pdf European Commission (2011a). Commission staff working paper: European strategic framework for education and training. Language learning at pre-primary school level: Making it efficient and sustainable. A policy handbook. Brussels: European Commis‐ sion. http: / / ec.europa.eu/ assets/ eac/ languages/ policy/ language-policy/ documents/ ea rly-language-learning-handbook_en.pdf European Commission (2011b) Country summaries. Link in European Commission (2011a). Commission staff working paper: European strategic framework for ed‐ ucation and training. Language learning at pre-primary school level: Making it efficient and sustainable. A policy handbook. Brussels: European Commis‐ sion. https: / / ec.europa.eu/ assets/ eac/ languages/ policy/ language-policy/ documents/ e llphb-summaries_en.pdf European Commission/ EACEA/ Eurydice (2017). Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. http: / / www.eurydice.si/ publikacije/ Key-Data-on-Teaching-Languages-at-Sch ool-in-Europe-2017-EN.pdf ? _t=1554834232 European Commission (2018) Commission staff working document: Accompanying the document proposal for a council recommendation on a comprehensive approach to the teaching and learning of languages. Brussels: Publications Office of the European Union. https: / / www.parlament.gv.at/ PAKT/ EU/ XXVI/ EU/ 02/ 26/ EU_22657 / imfname_10811501.pdf European Union (2009) Notices from European Union institutions and bodies. Council conclusions of 12 May 2009 on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training (‘ET 2020’). http: / / eur-lex.europa.eu/ LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.d o? uri=OJ: C: 2009: 119: 0002: 0010: en: PDF European Union (2019). Council recommendation of 22 May 2019 on a comprehensive approach to the teaching and learning of languages. Official Journal of the Euro‐ pean Union C 189/ 15, 5.6.2019. C: \Users\keskin.NFA\Desktop\18500_Birsak de Jersey\t ent\EN\TXT\? uri=CELEX: 32019H0605(02)https: / / eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/ EN / TXT/ ? uri=CELEX: 32019H0605(02) 382 Bibliography <?page no="382"?> Flick, Uwe (2004). Triangulation in qualitative research. In Uwe Flick; Ernst von Kardorff & Ines Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 178-183). London: SAGE. Flick, Uwe (Ed.). (2014). The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis. London: SAGE. Flores, Maria Assuncao (2016). Teacher education curriculum. In John Loughran & Mary Lynn Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (pp. 187-230). Singapore: Springer. Freeman, Donald (1990). Intervening in practice teaching. In Jack C. Richards & David Nunan (Eds.), Second language teaching education (pp. 103-117). Cambridge: Cam‐ bridge University Press. Freeman, Donald (2001), Second language teacher education. In Ronald Carter & David Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 72-79). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Freeman, Donald (2009). The scope of second language teacher education. In Anne Burns & Jack C. Richards (Eds.), Second language teaching education (pp. 11-19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Freeman, Donald & Johnson Karen E (1998). Reconceptualizating the knowledge-base of language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly, 32(3), 397-417. https: / / doi.org/ 10.2307/ 3588114. Fullan, Michael (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: The Falmer Press. Gass, Susan, M. & Selinker, Larry (2001). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. Mahwah, New Jersey: Erlbaum. Gabel, Petra (1997). Lehren und Lernen im Fachpraktikum Englisch: Wunsch und Wirklich‐ keit. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Garton, Sue (2019). Early language learning teacher education: Present and future. In Subhan Zein & Sue Garton (Eds.), Early language learning and teacher education (pp. 265-276). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Geertz, Clifford (1973). Myth, symbol and culture. New York: Norton. Genesee, Fred (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Cambridge, Mass: Newbury House. Gerngroß, Günter & Puchta, Herbert (2001). Hip, hip hooray. Innsbruck: Hebling. Giroux, Henry, A. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals: Towards a critical pedagogy of learning. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey. Glatthorn, Allan (1987). Cooperative professional development: Peer centred options for teacher growth. Educational Leadership, 45(3), 31-35. http: / / www.ascd.org/ ASCD/ pdf / journals/ ed_lead/ el_198711_glatthorn.pdf Gogolin, Ingrid (1994). Der Monolinguale Habitus der Multilingualen Schule. Münster & New York: Waxmann. 383 Bibliography <?page no="383"?> Gombos, Georg (2003). Bildungschance frühkindliche Mehrsprachigkeit. Frühkindlicher Sprachenerwerb durch mehrsprachige Kindergärten. In Allan James (Ed.), Vielerlei Zungen. Mehrsprachigkeit + Spracherwerb + Pädagogik + Psychologie + Literatur + Medien (pp. 49-85). Klagenfurt, Celovec: Drava. Goodenough, Ward H. (1957). Cultural anthropology and linguistics. In Paul Garvin (Ed.), Report of the seventh annual round table meeting on linguistics and language study (pp. 167-173). Georgetown. Georgetown University Press. https: / / repository.library.georg etown.edu/ bitstream/ handle/ 10822/ 555451/ GURT_1956.pdf ? sequence=1 Goodwin, Anne L. (2010). Globalization and the preparation of quality teachers: Re‐ thinking knowledge domains for teaching. Teaching Education, 21(1), 19-32. https: / / d oi.org/ 10.1080/ 10476210903466901. Groot-Wilken, Bernd & Husfeldt, Vera (2013). Die Testinstrumente und -Verfahren des EVENING-Projekts. Eine Empirische Betrachtungsweise. In Otfried Börner; Gaby Engel & Bernd Groot-Wilken (Eds.), Hörverstehen, Lesenverstehen, Sprechen: Diagnose und Förderung von sprachlichen Kompetenzen im Englischunterricht der Primarstufe (pp. 121-140). New York: Waxmann. Guba, Egon G. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Education, Communication and Technology Journal, 29, 75-91. Guilloteaux, Marie J & Dörnyei Zoltán (2008). Motivating Language Learners: A class‐ room-oriented investigation of effects of motivational strategies on student motiva‐ tion. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 55-77. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1002/ j.1545-7249.2008.tb00207.x Günther, Britta & Günther, Herbert (2007). Erstsprache Zweitsprache Fremdsprache: Eine Einführung. Weinheim/ Basal: Beltz. Hammersley, Martyn (1992). What’s wrong with ethnography? Methodological explora‐ tions. London: Routledge. Handal, Gunnar & Lauvas, Per (1987). Promoting reflective teaching: Supervision in action. Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University Education Enterprises Limited. Hartmann, Waltraud & Stoll, Martina (1996). Mehr Qualität für Kinder: Qualitätsstandards und Zukunftsperspektiven für den Kindergarten. Band 1 der Schriftreihe des Charlotte Bühler-Instituts. Wien: ÖBV Pädagogische GmbH. Hatami, Sarvenaz (2014). Teaching Formulaic Sequences in the ESL Classroom. TESOL Journal, 6(1), 112-129. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1002/ tesj.143. Hattie, John (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London/ New York: Routledge. Hattie, John (2011). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. London/ New York: Routledge. Heigham, Juanita & Croker Robert A. (Eds.). (2009). Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction. Hampshire & New York: Palgrave: Macmillan. 384 Bibliography <?page no="384"?> Hélot, Christine; Frijns, Carolien; Van Gorp, Koen & Sierens, Sven (Eds.). (2018). Language awareness in multilingual classrooms in Europe: From theory to practice. Boston & Berlin: De Gruyter. Hélot, Christine; Frijns, Carolien; Van Gorp, Koen & Sierens, Sven (2018). Introduction: Towards critical multilingual language awareness for 21st century schools. In Chris‐ tine Hélot; Carolien Frijns; Koen Van Gorp & Sven Sierens (Eds.), Language Awareness in Multilingual Classrooms in Europe: From theory to practice (pp. 1-20). Boston/ Berlin: De Gruyter. Helfrich, Heinrich (1995). Evaluation des Modellversuchs Integrierte Fremdsprachenar‐ beit an Grundschulen in Rheinland-Pfalz. In Staatliches Institut für Lehrerfort- und -weiterbildung des Landes Rheinland-Pfalz (Ed.). (2011). Entwicklung und Erprobung eines didaktischen Konzepts zur Fremdsprachenarbeit in der Grundschule. Integrierte Fremd - sprachenarbeit in der Grundschule. Ein Modellversuch des Bundes und des Landes Rheinland-Pfalz (unter Beteiligung des Saarlandes) (pp. 97-122). Speyer: Staat‐ liches Institut für Lehrerfort- und -weiterbildung. Hood, Michael (2009). Case study. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Quali‐ tative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 66-90). Houndmills: Palgrave/ Macmillan. Hymes, Dell H. (1971). On Communicative Competence. In J.B. Pride & Janet. Holmes (Eds.). (1972). Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings (pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth: Pen‐ guin. Ivankova, Hataliya, V. & Creswell, John, W. (2009). Mixed methods. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 135-161). Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Johnson, Karen E. (1994). The emerging beliefs and instructional practices of preservice English as a second language teachers. Teaching & Teacher Education 10(4), 439-452. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1016/ 0742-051X(94)90024-8 Johnson, Karen E. (1996). The Role of Theory in L2 Teacher Education. TESOL Quartely, 30(4), 765-771. https: / / doi.org/ 10.2307/ 3587933 Johnson, Karen E. (1999). Understanding language teaching: Reasoning in action. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Johnson, Karen E. (2009). Trends in second language teacher education. In Anne Burns & Jack C. Richards (Eds.), Second language teaching education (pp. 20-29). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnson, Karen E. (2015). Reclaiming the relevance of L2 teacher education. The Modern Language Journal 99(3), 515-528. https: / / www.jstor.org/ stable/ 43651981 Johnson, Karen E. & Golombek, Paula R. (2002). Teachers’ narrative inquiry: As profes‐ sional development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 385 Bibliography <?page no="385"?> Johnson, Karen E. & Golombek, Paula R. (Eds.). (2011). Research on second language teacher education: A sociocultural perspective on professional development. Oxon & New York: Taylor & Francis. Johnson, Robert Burke & Christensen, Larry B. (2004). Education research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Johnson Robert Keith (Ed.). (1989). The second language curriculum. Cambridge: Cam‐ bridge University Press. Johnson, Robert Keith & Swain, Merrill (1997). Immersion education: International per‐ spectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Johnston, Bill (2009). Collaborative teacher development. In Anne Burns & Jack C. Richards (Eds.), Second language teaching education (pp. 241-249). Cambridge: Cam‐ bridge University Press. Johnstone, Richard (2009). An early start: What are the key conditions for generalized success? In Janet Enever; Jayne Moon & Uma Raman (Eds.), Young learner English language policy and implementation: International perspectives (pp. 31-41). Reading: Garner Education. Kahl, Peter Werner & Knebler, Ulrike (1996). Englisch in der Grundschule − und Dann? Evaluation des Hamburger Schulversuchs Englisch ab Klasse 3. Berlin: Cornelsen. Keeton, Morris T. & Tate, Pamela J. (Eds.). (1978). Learning by experience - what, why, how. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kelle, Udo & Kluge, Susann (2010). Vom Einzelfall zum Typus. Fallvergleich und Fallkon‐ trastierung in der qualitativen Sozialforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwis‐ senschaften. Kitchen, Julian & Petrarca, Diana (2016). Approaches to teacher education. In John Loughran & Mary Lyn Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (pp. 137-186). Singapore: Springer. Klippel, Friederike (Ed.). (2016). Teaching languages - Sprachen lehren. Münster: Wax‐ mann. Knapp, Werner; Kucharz, Diemut & Gasteiger-Klicpera, Barbara (2010). Sprache fördern im Kindergarten- Umsetzung wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse in die Praxis. Weinheim & Basel: Beltz. Kohonen, Viljo (2001). Towards experiential foreign language education. In Christopher Cadlin, N. (general Ed.); Vljo Kohonen; Riitta Jaatinen; Pauli Kaikkonen & Jorma Lehtovaara (Eds.). Experiential learning in Foreign Language Education. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Kolb, Annika (2008). Task-Based Language Learning: Impulse für den Fremdsprachenun‐ terricht der Grundschule. In Heiner Böttger (Ed.), Fortschritte im frühen Fremdspra‐ chenlernen. Ausgewählte Tagungsbeiträge (pp. 61-69). München: Domino. 386 Bibliography <?page no="386"?> Korthagen, Fred, A. D. (2016). The pedagogy of teacher education. In John Loughran & Mary Lyn Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (pp. 311-346). Singapore: Springer. Krashen, Stephan D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Krznaric, Roman (2014). Empathy: Why it matters, and how to get it. New York: A Penguin Random House Company. Kubanek-German, Angelika (2003). Kindgemäßer Fremdsprachenunterricht: Band 2 Di‐ daktik der Gegenwart. Münster, Deutschland: Waxmann. Kubanyiova Magdalena (2012). Teacher development in action: Understanding language teachers’ conceptual change. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Kumaravadivelu, Balasubramanian (2007). Learner perception of learning tasks. In Kris Van den Branden; Koen Van Gorp & Machteld Verhelst (Eds.), Tasks in action: Task-based language education from a classroom-based perspective (pp. 7-31). New‐ castle, UK: Cambridge Scholars. Kvale, Steinar (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. 2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Landesstiftung Baden-Württemberg; Legutke, Michael & Schocker-v. Ditfurth, Marita (Eds.). (2008). E-LINGO. Didaktik des frühen Fremdsprachenlernens. Erfahrungen mit Blended Learning in einem Masterstudiengang. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Lave, Jean & Wenger, Etienne (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participa‐ tion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Legutke, Michael (2018). Die Bedeutung des Lehrens beim Lernen von Fremdsprachen. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer; Claudia Riemer & Lars Schmelter (Eds.), Rolle und Professio‐ nalität von Fremdsprachenlehrpersonen. Arbeitspapiere der 38. Frühjahrskonferenz zur Erforschung des Fremdsprachenunterrichts (pp. 98-108). Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Legutke, Michael & Lortz, Wiltrud (Eds.). (2002). Englisch ab Klasse 1. Das hessische Merry-Go-Round-Projekt. Berlin: Cornelsen. Legutke, Michael; Müller-Hartmann, Andrea & Schocker-v. Ditfurth, Marita (2009). Teaching English in the primary school. Stuttgart: Klett. Legutke, Michael & Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (Eds.). (2003). Kommunikativer Fremd‐ sprachenunterricht: Rückblick nach vorn. Tübinger: Gunter Narr. Legutke, Michael & Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (2007). Praxiserfahrungen in der Lehrerausbildung. Der Masterstudiengang‚ E-Lingo - Didaktik des frühen Fremdspra‐ chenlernens. In Heiner Böttger (Ed.), Fortschritte im frühen Fremdsprachenlernen. Ausgewählte Tagungsbeiträge Nürnberg 2007 (pp. 359-366). München: Domino. Legutke, Michael & Schart, Michael (2016). Fremdsprachliche Lehrerbildungsforschung: Bilanz und Perspektiven. In Michael K. Legutke & Michael Schart (Eds.), Fremdspra‐ 387 Bibliography <?page no="387"?> chendidaktische Professionsforschung: Brennpunkt Lehrerbildung (pp. 9-46). Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Lewis, Michael (2012). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Hampshire: Cengage Learning EMEA. Lightbown, Patsy M. & Spada, Nina (2013). How languages are learned (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lincoln, Yvonna S. & Guba, Egon G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. California: SAGE. Littlewood, William (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Logan, Gordan G. (1988). Towards an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95(4), 492-527. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1037/ 0033-295X.95.4.492 Lortie, Dan C. (1975). School teacher. A sociological study. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. Loughran, John & Hamilton, Mary Lynn (2016). International handbook of teacher education. Volume 1. Singapore: Springer. Loughran, John; Keast, Stephen & Cooper, Rebecca. (2016). Pedagogical reasoning in teacher education. In John Loughran & Mary Lyn Hamiltion (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (pp. 387-421). Singapore: Springer. McIntyre, Alice (2008). Participatory action research: Qualitative research methods. Series 52. London: SAGE. McKay, Sandra, Lee (2009). Introspective Techniques. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 220-241). Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. McTaggart, Robin (Ed.). (1997). Participatory Action research: International contexts and consequences. Albany: State University of New York. Medgyes, Peter. (1994). The non-native teacher. London: Macmillan. Medgyes, Péter (2001). When the teacher is a non-native speaker. In Marianne Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 429-443). Boston: Heinle & Heinle. Mishan, Freda & Timmis, Ivor (2015). Materials development for TESOL. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd. Moon, Jennifer A. (Ed.). (1999). Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice. London: Kogan Page. Moon, Jennifer (2006). A handbook of reflective practice and professional development (2nd ed.). London & New York: Routledge. Mühlhausen, Ulf (2012). Mit multimedialen Unterrichtsdokumenten und Eigenvideos dem Theorie-Praxis-Dilemma der Lehrerbildung entgegenwirken. In Gabriele Blell & Christian Lütge (Eds.), Fremdsprachendidaktik und Lehrerbildung. Konzepte, Impulse und Perspektiven (pp. 156-170). Münster: LIT Verlag. 388 Bibliography <?page no="388"?> Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (2009). Introduction to English language teaching. Stuttgart: Klett Lerntraining. Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (2011). Teaching English: Task-supported language learning. Paderborn, Germany: Ferdinand Schöningh GmbH & Co. KG. Müller-Hartmann, Andreas; Schocker, Marita & Pant, Hans Anand (Eds.). (2013). Kom‐ petenzentwicklung in der Sek. I. Lernaufgaben Englisch aus der Praxis. Mit zahlreichen Unterrichtsvideos und Materialien mit 3 DVDs. Braunschweig: Bildungshaus. Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker, Marita (2016a). Aufgabenorientierung. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer; Grit Mehlhorn; Claudia Riemer; Karl-Richard Bausch & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.), Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 325-330). Tübingen: Francke. Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker, Marita (2016b). Let’s Chunk It! Der Fremdspra‐ chliche Unterricht Englisch, 50(140), 2-8. Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker, Marita (2018a). The challenge of integrating a focus on form within tasks. Findings from a classroom research project in secondary EFL classrooms. In Virginia Samuda; Kris Van den Branden & Martin Bygate (Eds.), TBLT as researched pedagogy (pp. 97-129). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker, Marita (2018b). The challenge of thinking task-based teaching from the learners’ perspectives - developing teaching compe‐ tences through an action research approach to teacher education. In Mohammad Javad Ahmadian & María del Pilar García Mayo (Eds.), Recent perspectives on task-based language learning and teaching. Reihe: Ulrike Jessner & Claire Kramsch (Eds.), Trends in Applied Linguistics, Volume 27 (pp. 216-233). Boston & Berlin: De Gruyter. Nattinger, James, R. & De Carrico, Jeanette, S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nikolov, Marianne (2000). Issues in research into early second language acquisition. In Jayne Moon & Marianne Nikolov (Eds.), Research into teaching English to young learners: International perspectives (pp. 21-48). Pécs: University Press Pécs. Nikolov, Marianne (2016). Assessing young learners of English: Global and local perspec‐ tives. Switzerland: Springer International. Nikolov, Marianne & Mihaljevic Djigunovic, Jelena (2019). Teaching young language learners. In Xuesong Gao (Ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching, Volume 2 (pp. 577-599). Cham: Springer. Nunan David (2004). Task-based language teaching: A comprehensive revised edition of designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nunan, David (2006). Action research and professional growth. Talk at the 1st JALT Joint Tokyo Conference: Action Research - Influencing Classroom Practice, 22nd October. Tokyo. 389 Bibliography <?page no="389"?> Nunan, David & Bailey, Kathleen, M. (2009). Exploring second language classroom research: A comprehensive guide. Boston, MA: Heinle. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments. First results from TALIS. Teaching and learning international survey. OECD. http: / / www.oecd.org/ education/ school/ 4302360 6.pdf Oomen-Welke, Ingelore (2016). Formen von Zwei- und Mehrsprachigkeit im Elementar- und Primarschulalter. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer; Grit Mehlhorn; Claudia Riemer; Karl-Ri‐ chard Bausch & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.), Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht, 6. Auflage (pp.290-295). Francke: Tübingen. O‘Reilly, Karen (2005). Ethnographic methods. Oxon: Routledge. O’Reilly, Karen (2009). Key concepts in ethnography. London: SAGE. Pinter, Annamaria (2006). Teaching young language learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pinter, Annamaria (2011). Children learning second languages. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Piske, Thorsten (2017). The earlier, the better? Some critical remarks on current EFL teaching to young learners and their implications for foreign language teacher education. In Eva Wilden & Raphaela Porsch (Eds.), The professional development of primary EFL teachers: National and international research (pp. 45-57). Münster & New York: Waxman. Piske, Thorsten; Jansen, Silke & Young-Scholten, Martha (2016). Bilinguale Programme in Kindertageseinrichtungen: Umsetzungsbeispiele und Forschungsergebnisse. Tüblingen: Narr/ Francke/ Attempto. Poehner, Priya (2011). Teacher learning through critical friends groups: Recontextual‐ izing professional development in a K-5 school. In Karen E Johnson & Paula R. Golombek (Eds.), Research on second language teacher education: A sociocultural perspective on professional development (pp. 189-203). Oxon & New York: Taylor & Francis. Ponterotto, Joseph G. (2006). Brief notes on the origins, evolution, and meaning of the qualitative research concept thick description. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 538-549. https: / / nsuworks.nova.edu/ tqr/ vol11/ iss3/ 6 Raith, Thomas (2017). Positionspapier der Landesfachschaft Englisch BW zur Effi‐ zienz frühen Fremdsprachenlernens: Eine Bestandsaufnahme. Freiburg: Pädagogische Hochschule Freiburg. https: / / www.ph-freiburg.de/ fileadmin/ dateien/ zentral/ aktuell/ positionspapier_lafa.pdf Rallis Sharon, F. & Rossman, Gretchen, B. (2009). Ethics and trustworthiness. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 263-287). Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 390 Bibliography <?page no="390"?> Rapley, Tim (2014). Sampling strategies in qualitative research. In Uwe Flick (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 49-63) London: SAGE. Richards, Jack C. & Farrell, Thomas S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press. Richards, Jack C. & Nunan, David (1990). Second language teaching education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richards, Jack C & Rodgers, Theodore S. (2001). Approach and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richards, Keith (2009). Interviews. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.), Qual‐ itative research in applied linguistics: A practical introduction (pp. 182-199). Hampshire & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Rixon, Shelagh (2017). The role of early language learning teacher education in turning policy into practice. In Eva Wilden & Raphaela Porsch (Eds.), The professional development of primary EFL teachers: National and international research (pp. 79-94). Münster & New York: Waxmann. Roters, Bianca & Trautmann, Matthias (2014). Professionalität von Fremdsprachenleh‐ renden. Theoretische Zugänge und empirische Befunde. Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, 43(1), 51-65. Rustemeyer, Ruth (1992). Praktisch-methodische Schritte der Inhaltsanalyse. Eine Einfüh‐ rung am Beispiel der Analyse von Interviewtexten. Münster: Aschendorff. Sambanis, Michaela (2016). Sprachen lernen und Lehrern im Elementarbereich: Curricu‐ lare Dimension. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer; Grit Mehlhorn; Claudia Riemer; Karl-Richard Bausch & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.), Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht, 6. Auflage (pp. 172-177). Tübingen: Francke. Samuda, Virginia & Bygate, Martin (2008). Tasks in second language learning. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Samuda, Virginia; Bygate, Martin & Van den Branden, Kris (Eds.). (2018). TBLT as a researched pedagogy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Savoie-Zajc, Lorraine & Descamps-Bednarz, Nadine (2007). Action research and collabo‐ rative research: Their specific contributions to professional development. Educational Action Research, 15(4), 577-596. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1080/ 09650790701664013 Schädlich, Birgit (2014). The language teacher. In Christiane Fäcke (Ed.), Manual of language acquisition (pp. 274-290). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. Schädlich, Birgit (2015). Fachpraktika im Master of Education Französisch aus der Perspektive der Studierenden: Ein Beitrag zur Entwicklung reflexiver Handlungskom‐ petenz? . Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung, 26(2), 255-285. https: / / www.dgff.de/ assets/ Uploads/ ausgaben-zff/ ZFF-2-2015-Schaedlich.pdf Schart, Michael (2014). Die Lehrerrolle in der fremdsprachendidaktischen Forschung: Konzeptionen, Ergebnisse, Konsequenzen. Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen, 43(1), 391 Bibliography <?page no="391"?> 36-50. http: / / forschung.id-keio.org/ wp-content/ uploads/ 2017/ 08/ Schart-2014-FLuL.p df Schmitt, Norbert (Ed.). (2004). Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Schmitt, Norbert & Carter, Ronald (2004). Formulaic sequences in action: An introduction. In Schmitt, Norbert (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 1-22). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Schmitt, Norbert; Grandage, Sarah & Adolphs, Svenja (2004). Are corpus-derived recur‐ rent clusters psycholinguistically valid? In Norbert Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 127-151). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benja‐ mins. Schneider, Stefan (2003). Frühkindliche Mehrsprachigkeit aus sprachwissenschaftlicher Sicht. In James, Allan (Ed.), Vielerlei Zungen. Mehrsprachigkeit + Spracherwerb + Pädagogik + Psychologie + Literatur + Medien (pp.11-48). Klagenfurt & Celovec: Drava. Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (1992). Neue praxis- und teilnehmerorientierte Fortbil‐ dungskonzepte für den kommunikativen Fremdsprachenunterricht: Dokumentation und Evaluation ausgewählter Projekte. Dissertation. Freiburg: Pädagogische Hochschule Freiburg. Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (2001). Forschendes Lernen in der fremdsprachlichen Leh‐ rerbildung: Grundlagen, Erfahrungen, Perspektiven. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (2002). Unterricht verstehen. Erfahrungswissen reflektieren und den eigenen Unterricht weiterentwickeln. Medienpaket zur Förderung reflektierter Unterrichtspraxis. München: Goethe Institut & Inter Nationes. Schocker-von Ditfurth, Marita (2008). Berufsqualifikation im Blended-Learning Format: Der Masterstudiengang E-LINGO. In Landesstiftung Baden-Württemberg; Michael K. Legutke & Marita Schocker-von Ditfurth (Eds.), E-LINGO - Didaktik des frühen Fremdsprachenlernens. Erfahrungen und Ergebnisse mit Blended Learning in einem Masterstudiengang (pp. 3-36). Tübingen: Gunter Narr. Schocker, Marita (2015). Auf die richtigen Aufgaben kommt es an! Kriterien für die Auswahl und Entwicklung von Lernaufgaben. Take off! Englisch für die Grundschule, 3, 48-49. Braunschweig: Bildungshaus Schulbuchverlage. Schocker, Marita (2016). Praxisphasen in der Ausbildung von Sprachlehrenden. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer; Grit Mehlhorn; Claudia Riemer; Karl-Richard Bausch & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.), Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht, 6. Auflage (pp. 602-606). Tübingen: Francke. Schön, Donald A. (1978). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. California: Jossey-Bass. Schön, Donald A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Basic Books Inc. 392 Bibliography <?page no="392"?> Schotte-Grebenstein, Evelin (2006). Vermittelter Fremdsprachenerwerb im Elementarber‐ eich: Englisch als 1. Fremdsprache im Kindergarten. Würzburg, Germany: Ergon. Searle, John (1967). Human communication theory and the philosophy of language: Some remarks. In Frank Dance (Ed.), Human communication theory (pp. 116-129). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Seifert, Heidi (2016). Früher Fremdsprachenerwerb im Elementarbereich: Eine empirische Videostudie zu Erzieherin-Kind-Interaktionen in einer deutsch-englischen Krippenein‐ richtung. Tübingen: Narr/ Franke/ Attempto. Shulman, Lee (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. https: / / doi.org/ 10.3102/ 0013189X015002004 Silverman, David (2013). Doing qualitative research. (4th ed.). London: SAGE. Singh, Gurmit & Richards, Jack C. (2006). Teaching and learning in the language teacher education course room: A critical sociocultural perspective. RELC Journal, SAGE, 37(2), 149-175. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1177/ 0033688206067426 Singleton, David (2014). Apt to change: The problematic of language awareness and language aptitude in age-related research. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 557-571. https: / / doi.org/ 10.14746/ ssllt.2014.4.3.9 Skehan, Peter (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford Univer‐ sity Press. Stake, Robert, S. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna, S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 443-465). California: SAGE. Steinlen, Anja, K & Rohde, Andreas (2013). Mehrsprachigkeit in Bilingualen Kindertages‐ stätten und Schulen: Voraussetungen - Methoden - Erfolge. Berlin: Dohrmann. Steinlein, Anja & Piske, Thorsten (Eds.). (2016). Bilinguale Programme in Kindertagesein‐ richtungen. Umsetzungsbeispiele und Forschungsergebnisse. Tübingen: Narr/ Francke/ Attempto. Stern, Ingrid (1994). Fremdsprachen im Kindergarten: Modelle, Ziele, Bedingungen. In Annemarie Peltzer-Karpf & Astrid Neumann (Eds.), Fremdsprachen für Kinder? Retzhof Schriften: Gesellschaft Wissenschaft 19, 17-23. Teichmann, Klaus & Werlen, Erika (2007). Schlussbericht der Wissenschaftlichen Beglei‐ tung WiBe der Pilotphase Fremdsprache in der Grundschule: Zielsprache Englisch und Zielsprache Französisch (Kurzfassung). Baden-Württemberg: Ministerium für Kultus, Jugend und Sport. https: / / www.km-bw.de/ site/ pbs-bw/ get/ documents/ KULTUS.Dac hmandant/ KULTUS/ kultusportal-bw/ zzz_pdf/ Internentfassung.pdf Terhart, Ewald (2011). Lehrerberuf und Professionalität. Gewandeltes Begriffsver‐ ständnis - neue Herausforderungen. In Werner Helsper & Rudolf Tippelt (Eds.), Pädagogische Professionalität. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 57, Beiheft, 202-224. 393 Bibliography <?page no="393"?> Pädagogische Professionalität. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik, 57. Weinheim u.a.: Beltz, pp. 202-224. Terhart, Ewald (2014). Die Hattie-Studie in der Diskussion. Probleme sichtbar machen. Seelze: Klett. Tomasello, Michael (2009). The usage-based theory of language acquisition. In Edith L. Bavin (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of child language (pp. 69-88). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tomlinson, Brian (1998). Materials development in language teaching. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Tomlinson, Brian (2001). Materials development. In Ronald Carter & David Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 66-71). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tracy, Rosemarie (2008). Wie Kinder Sprachen lernen. Und wie wir sie dabei unterstützen können, 2. Auflage. Tübingen: Francke. Tripp, David (2012). Critical incidents in teaching: Developing professional judgement (classic ed.). London: Routledge. Tsui, Amy B.M. (2003). Understanding expertise in teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ulvik, Marit (2014). Student-teachers doing action research in their practicum: Why and how? Educational Action Research, 22(4), 1-16. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1080/ 09650792.2014. 918901 Urban, Mathias; Vandenbroeck, Michel; Lazzari, Arianna; Peeters, Jan & Van Laere, Katrien. (2011). Competence requirements for early childhood education and care. Final report. London, Ghent: UEL and UGent. Urban, Mathias; Van Laere, Katrien; Lazzari, Arianna & Peeters, Jan (2012). Towards competent systems in early childhood education and care: Implications for policy and practice. European Journal of Education, Research, Development and Policy 47(4), 508-526. http: / / dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/ ejed.12010 Van Avermaelet, Piet; Colpin, Marleen; Van Gorp, Koen; Bogaert Nora & Van den Branden, Kris (2006). The role of the teacher in task-based language teaching. In Kris Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 175-196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van Avermaet, Piet & Gysen Sara (2006). From needs to tasks: Language learning needs in a task-based approach. In Kris Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 17-46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van Canh, Le (2019). Unpacking the complexity of learning to teach English to young learners: A narrative inquiry. In Subhan Zein & Sue Garton (Eds.), Early language learning and teacher education: International research and practice (pp. 41-58). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 394 Bibliography <?page no="394"?> Van den Branden, Kris (Ed.). (2006). Task-based language education: From theory to practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van den Branden, Kris (2006). Introduction: Task-based language teaching in a nutshell. In Kris Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-Based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 1-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Van den Branden, Kris; Van Gorp, Koen & Verhelst, Machteld (Eds.). (2007). Tasks in action: Task-based language education from a classroom-based perspective. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars. Vandenbroeck, Michel; Lenaerts, Karolien & Beblavý, Miroslav (2018). Benefits of early childhood education and care and the conditions of obtaining them. European Expert Network on Economics of Education Analytical Report No. 32, January 2018, Prepared for the European Commission. https: / / op.europa.eu/ en/ publication-detail/ -/ publicati on/ 14194adc-fc04-11e7-b8f5-01aa75ed71a1/ language-en Van Lier, Leo (2005). Case Study. In Eli Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second lan‐ guage teaching and learning (pp. 195-208). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Verhelst, Machteld (2006). A Box full of feelings: Promoting infants’ second language acquisition all day long. In Kris Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 197-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Verheyden, Lieve & Verhelst, Machteld (2007). Opportunities for task-based language teaching in kindergarten. In Kris Van den Branden; Koen Van Gorp & Machteld Verhelst (Eds.), Tasks in action: Task-based language education from a classroom-based perspective (pp. 285-309). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars. Vygotsky, Lev Semenovich (1998). Thought and language. Cambridge: MA: MIT Press. Wallace, Michael J. (1991). Training foreign language teachers: A reflective approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wallace Michael, J. (1998). Action research for language teachers. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Widdowson, Henry (1979). Exploration in applied linguistics (pp. 251-264). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widdowson, Henry, G. (1987). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wideen, Marvin; Mayer-Smith, Jolie & Moon, Barbara (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 130-178. Wilden, Eva & Porsch, Raphaela (Eds.). (2017). The professional development of primary EFL teachers: National and international research. Münster & New York: Waxmann. Willis, Jane & Dave, Willis (1996). Challenge and change in language teaching. Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann. 395 Bibliography <?page no="395"?> Wright, Tony (2010). Second language teacher education: Review of recent research on practice. State-of-the-art article. Language Teaching, 43(3), 259-296. https: / / doi.org/ 10 .1017/ S0261444810000030 Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Zein, Subhan (2019). Introduction to early language learning and teacher education: International research and practice. In Subhan Zein & Sue Garton (Eds.), Early language learning and teacher education: International research and practice (pp. 1-16). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Zein, Subhan & Garton, Sue (Eds.). (2019). Early Language Learning and Teacher Educa‐ tion. International Research and Practice. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Zibelius, Marja (2015). Cooperative learning in virtual space: A critical look at new ways of foreign language teacher education. Tübingen: Gunter Narr. 396 Bibliography <?page no="396"?> Appendix Appendix 1: Materials Materials and activities the preschool teachers refer to in the interview data are: 1. Nunus, the bear 2. Routines 3. Games 4. Songs and rhymes The preschool teachers referred to the following examples of materials and activities in the interview data. They will be described in the following to contextualise the teaching materials and activities that the teachers refer to. The general purpose of preschool materials and activities has been described in chapter 5.8.2 (Defining an understanding of tasks that is appropriate for the preschool context). 1. Nunus, the bear Hand puppets and soft toys have developed to be an established medium in early language teaching and learning contexts and meanwhile their advantages as well as the challenges involved in using them have received appropriate attention in the methodology literature (Legutke et al. 2009: 100 - 103). In the classroom they are credible representatives of a speaker of the target language (that do not know any other language) and they are endowed with a life history and characteristics that support the children to identify with them. Their basic task is to function as communication partners that model dialogue or mediate the language and they help to create a safe and positive learning atmosphere. During the participatory demonstration lessons, I have used Nunus, a classic soft large teddy bear (size: 75 cm.) that has been accompanying me to my English courses over the past 20 years and has proven to be a reliable and important pedagogic tool for both preand primary school teaching. Nunus, by his cuddly nature and the loving treatment through the teacher to him, gives the children a sense of security. For the children he is a real participant in class, a credible part of their fantasy worlds. Through his size and the possibility to place him in an upright sitting position on his own chair or on the floor in the circle he can be included easily as a participating member of the group and in the <?page no="397"?> classroom set up. Nunus normally takes a position in the circle next to a chosen child and functions as quiet but attentive interlocutor. By talking to Nunus I can speak fluently while the children listen to me without feeling that they need to understand everything that I’m saying as this might cause them to feel insecure. To emphasize his participation in the lesson I make him “real” through addressing him directly and treating him as one of the children. He joins us in the circle, he listens to the stories and he takes part in the games. The children identify with him and support him if they think Nunus is in need of some support: they help Nunus to have his turn, they make sure he has the things or cards he needs or they help him answer questions, for example. Some of the children who are quite shy to join in lose their inhibitions as a result and forget they are speaking English when they are put in the role to help Nunus to answer the questions. As his character is established during lesson time as a friendly classmate, he is also a favourite playmate in free play when I am there. If the children decide to set up one of the activities from the English lessons Nunus would often be addressed with the learned English chunks as the language is associated with him. He then turns into a credible communication partner in their role plays during which the children revise the language they have acquired before and this way practice English quite naturally in a playful way. 2. Routines Establishing familiar routines in the preschool classroom is essential both for classroom management and to support language learning. The following examples have been repeatedly used in the participatory demonstration lessons. 2a) ‘Weather Witch’ as tuning-in for the English lesson Figure 34: ‘Weather Witch’ as tuning-in for the English lesson 398 Appendix <?page no="398"?> The ‘Weather Witch’ is part of the English lesson routine in which the children help the witch make the weather soup of the day. This means that the weather of that day comes into the soup (for example the sun, clouds, rain and wind). The purpose of the weather witch is to use a familiar routine, which will stimulate the children to actively use their language at the beginning of the lesson to break down any barriers to talk so that they may readily participate using language during the lesson. The children sing the weather song and then they put up their hands to describe something about the weather (e.g., whether they like the weather, if they feel cold or just to say that it is sunny) or say what they would like to put into the weather witch’s soup that matches the weather on that particular day. The weather routine is appropriate for the lessons because the lessons are planned in accordance with the weather of the day. Song: ‘What’s the Weather Like Today’ Figure 35: Song: What’s the Weather Like Today 2b) Routines to choose children for classroom management All of the following routines support the teacher to hand over the autonomy to the children, so that they can sing the songs, chant the rhymes and say the descriptions to get organised. 2b-1) One and two and three and four, Anna goes to the door The teacher sings the song and names a child who then stands up and lines up at the door. The children have to listen well, because the teacher may tell them to skip, dance or twirl (or use any other movement) to go to the door. The children can then take over the routine of singing the song and telling each other who is next and what they have to do. The one who is named continues the process. 399 Appendix 1: Materials <?page no="399"?> 1 The ‘train driver’ represents the child who is chosen for the day to lead the group when they go from one room to the other and is the train driver of the day. Song: ‘One and Two and Three and Four’ Figure 36: Song: One and Two and Three and Four 2b-2) Using a guessing game to choose a train driver 1 All the children stand up. The teacher describes one particular child. All the children who do not match the description sit down until only one child is left standing. S/ he is then the train driver. The teacher may say my train driver today has blond hair. My train driver today is not a girl. My train driver today has blue slippers. An alternative is that the children may be given animal cards. The teacher describes the particular animal that she has in mind. 2b-3) Calling out colours to go to the coatroom The teacher calls out one colour at a time. If children have that colour on they are allowed to get up and go to the coatroom to get dressed to go outside. The teacher may say all the children with orange on go to the coatroom. Only few children usually have orange on. If the teacher is in a hurry, she may say all the children with blue on go and put your shoes on (most children have blue on). 2b-4) Two rhymes for making the circle at circle time: One, two, three, I want Anna next to me On my right the chair is free; I want Anna next to me When making the circle at circle time the children say who they want next to them. One child says the rhyme and the chosen child then sits down next to him/ her and continues. He says the rhyme to choose the next child to sit down 400 Appendix <?page no="400"?> in the circle and the process continues until all the children are sitting in the circle. The girls choose a boy and the boys choose a girl. 2b-5) Round and Round the World I Go, Where I Stop Nobody Knows One child or the teacher stands in the middle of the circle and covers her/ his eyes and turns around on the spot while chanting the rhyme. When s/ he stops s/ he is pointing to one child and opens her / his eyes. That is the chosen child. In this project the rhyme was said to choose the child who would look after Nunus for the lesson. 3. Games Games qualify as meaningful activities for the children that they quite naturally play. The following examples were developed for the preschool classroom and used during the participatory demonstration lessons. 3a) ‘King and Queen Game’: a task that requires dialogue to attain it ‘King and Queen Game’ is a guessing game, which involves a dialogue between two teams in the classroom. Alternatively, two children can play the game together in free play. They want to find out what the other team has taken on their picnic. Figure 37: King and Queen Game The language required to attain the task are the following chunks that support the children in the dialogue: Do you have …? Yes, I do. No, I don’t Have you got …? Yes, I have. No, I haven’t. Do you like …? Yes, I do. No, I don’t The word-field is about different foods that the children may choose depending on what their favourite foods are. The game is played in two teams. One team represents the king and one team represents the queen. There are two ways of forming teams for the game: the teacher makes up a team on her own and the children make up the other team (as in the picture above); or the children make 401 Appendix 1: Materials <?page no="401"?> up the two teams, which gives the teacher the opportunity to step back and hand over the autonomy to the children and to only assist when or if necessary. The teams take it in turns to ask each other questions in order to find out what the other team has taken on their picnic. The task is to guess everything that is on the other plate first. The team who guesses first is the one that wins. Each team has a set of cut-out foods to choose from for their picnic. In the picture above a child is in the process of putting food on the magnet board plate so that the teacher does not see it. The teacher is covering her eyes. The teacher has her own covered plate for the food that she chooses. After the food is chosen the other cut-out food cards that are not used are removed so nobody can see them. Each team also has a set of food cards set out in front of them to help them remember all the food. They turn the cards over one by one as they say them. The other team has to remove the food from their plate if the other team has guessed the right one. 3b) ‘The Animal Farm’: a task that requires dialogue to attain it ‘The Animal Farm’ is a guessing game, which involves a dialogue between two teams in the classroom or two children can play the game together in free play. They need to find out which animals are on the other farm. This game has the same rules as ‘The Kind and Queen Game’. The only difference is that the children are guessing what is on the other farm rather than what the team has taken on their picnic (→ see ‘King and Queen Game’ above for rules). 3c) ‘The Rainbow Game’: A tasks that requires dialogue to attain it ‘The Rainbow Game’ is a racing game in the gym, which involves a dialogue between team members. The teams aim to make their rainbow first. Figure 38: The Rainbow Game The language required to attain the task are the following chunks that support the children in the dialogue: Is it red? No, it isn’t. Yes, it is? The word-field is about colours. 402 Appendix <?page no="402"?> The game can be played with two or more teams. As a pre-task it can be played with the group as one team, which is shown in the photo above. The teacher is sitting at the side. She has already handed over the autonomy to the children, which means that they are ready to play the game in teams together. It is based on the rainbow song (below). Figure 39: Song: The rainbow song The goal of the game is to find the colours in the right order so that a rainbow can be built. The teams line up at one end of the room where coloured cards are set out on the floor forming a rainbow that is in the order of the colours sung in the song so that they can refer to it to make their own. On the other side of the room each team has another set of coloured cards turned over so that they cannot see the colours. The first team members run (or use any other movement, e.g., they skip or jump) to their set of cards at the other end of the room. They go behind the colour cards and pick one card up without looking at it and show it to their team, asking the question: Is it red? ” because red is the first colour in the song for the rainbow. The team either answers: Yes, it is, in which case the card is brought back, and the first rainbow colour is placed next to the team, or: No, it isn’t in which case the card is returned back over on the floor. That team member runs back to the team and the next team member runs to their cards and the process is repeated to find the next colour. This process continues until one team has completed their rainbow. The game can be continued until all the teams have their rainbow next to them. 3d) ‘Snowman Song’: a task that requires comprehension to attain it In order for the songs to serve more than only the process of imitation, the teacher needs to present them in a meaningful way, by putting them into context and setting them into a sequence. The children’s task is to demonstrate understanding by dressing the snowmen when they sing the chunks in the song. When they hear their piece of clothing, they put it on the snowman. 403 Appendix 1: Materials <?page no="403"?> Figure 40: Snowman Song The language required to understand particular chunks in the song and to dress the snowmen are: I put on my scarf / hat / gloves. Take off his scarf / hat / gloves. Song: ‘I’m a Little Snowman’ The teacher first sings the song slowly and clearly to the children while she dresses herself with a scarf, hat and gloves. This way she models the task and supports the children to understand various clothes items by demonstrating them. She then hands out one piece of clothing to each child deliberately using various phrases for the children to hear repeatedly: I’ll give you a scarf to put on the snowman, a red scarf. Here is a scarf for you to put on him, a blue scarf. She also uses the extension strategy of scarf, then red scarf, then long red scarf to make understanding more and more challenging by moving from simple to more complex language input. Tapping her head, she says, Remember what you have? You have the red scarf and you have the blue one, okay? Remember! Remember becomes teacher talk for future lessons: Ah, he needs to put on warm gloves, here are some gloves for you, green gloves. Remember. It is important that the children remember, because when they sing the song again they undress the snow man and take off the pieces of clothing. 404 Appendix <?page no="404"?> Figure 41: Song: I’m a Little Snowman After handing out the clothes, the teacher starts singing the song. The children listen and when their piece of clothing is said they help a snowman to get dressed. The teacher sings the chunks repeatedly while she watches the children to give them time and to see if they help each other (peer support) or whether she need to step in herself to help them, but verbally. She speaks to the children in between singing the song, saying chunks like: Look, that snowman still needs a scarf. He is cold. He needs to put on some gloves. Can you give him your gloves? She then sings the chunk again and moves on, continuing to the next chunk in the song. After the snowmen are dressed the children can pick up the clothes to dress them again. The teacher tells the children to undress the snowmen: Take off all the scarves. Let’s undress the snowmen. Who had a scarf ? Can you please undress the snowman? Go and get the scarf. Take it off. Take of the scarfs and the gloves. The song is sung again, but this time the teacher encourages the children to sing with her. 3e) ‘Hiding the Animals’: an activity to encourage discourse between the teacher and the children ‘Hiding the Animals’ is a memory activity, in which the children hide the animals under coloured material and remember where they are so that they can find them later. 405 Appendix 1: Materials <?page no="405"?> Figure 42: Hiding the Animals The language required to support the children to engage in discourse involve the following chunks: Where do you want to hide it? What animal do you have / have you got? You could hide it over there in front of Anna, under the blue materials … The word-fields are animals and colours. The teacher has animal cards that the children draw one by one to hide the particular animal on that card. The child looks at the card and tells everybody what s/ he has. S/ he then finds the animal and chooses a piece of coloured material to put it under somewhere on the green grass. The teacher may ask: Which colour material would you like? Where are you going to hide it, what about under the red material in front of Sarah? This stimulates discourse with the child and offers chunks for the children to repeat later when the teacher asks where the animals are. As the animals are hidden one by one the teacher prompts the children to remember where they are by asking questions regularly. She may ask: Who can remember what animal Anna hid? Who knows where it is? The children may answer: Under the blue one. The teacher then confirms that the children have to remember where the animals are: Yes, remember, we have to remember and Sarah’s, where is Sarah’s? The children should not stand up but answer. The teacher may need to answer her own questions at the beginning to give the children an idea what they can say. She may say: It is in front of Anna, isn’t it? It’s under the green material. It’s over there. After all the animals are hidden the teacher then asks the children one by one where the animals are, and they use their memories to answer: Where is the rabbit? Where did Anna hide her rabbit? What did Sarah hide? Where could it be? The child who is asked 406 Appendix <?page no="406"?> answers her. If it is right, she is allowed to go and get it. If it is wrong, she is allowed to guess again, and the other children are allowed to help. 3f) ‘What is missing? ’: a game to learn and consolidate word-fields ‘What is missing’ is a game to encourage the children to say vocabulary of a particular word-field, in this case the word-field covers farm animals. The children look and remember what is on the tray so that when the teacher or one of the children takes an animal away, they can answer the question: What is missing? Figure 43: What is missing? Either the teacher or the children take it in turns to take an animal of the tray and ask: What is missing? The language aims involve the chunk: What is missing? The word-field covers farm animals. The animals are put on the tray using a story (→ see below) and are then covered with a piece of material so that the teacher or a child can take out an animal without anybody seeing it and say: What is missing? They take the animal with the material so that they can keep the animal wrapped up in it. The children can then start to look and see what is missing. Before starting the game, the teacher takes the farm animals out of a bag one by one. As she puts them on the tray, she creates a story to support the children to remember the different animals as she goes along. For example, in the photo above, the cow is always trying to hear what the pig is whispering to the horse. The dog and the cat are best friends and fox is always whistling and looking over to rabbit who is scared of him. 407 Appendix 1: Materials <?page no="407"?> It is important that the game is introduced with a story, because not only do stories arouse the children’s curiosity to become involved, but they also create meaningful contexts that in this case connects the animals. This provides the children with a network that supports them to remember the animals. This way also valuable time and attention is not taken away from English by the children trying to remember which animals were on the farm in the first place. 4. Songs and rhymes The potential of short poetic and rhythmic texts for early language learning as in songs or rhymes has been amply described (Legutke et al. 2009: 79). The teachers referred to the following examples that were used during the participatory demonstration lessons. 4a) Song: ‘I Like to Eat, Eat, Eat Apples and Bananas’ Figure 44: Song: I Like to Eat, Eat, Eat Apples and Bananas 408 Appendix <?page no="408"?> 4b) Song: ‘We’re Going Up’ Figure 45: Song: We’re Going Up 4c) Song: ‘Little Peter Rabbit’ Figure 46: Song: Little Peter Rabbit 409 Appendix 1: Materials <?page no="409"?> 4d) Song: ‘Head and Shoulders’ Figure 47: Song: Head and Shoulders 4e) An elephant song: ‘Willoughby, Wallaby Woo’ Figure 48: Song: Willoughby, Wallaby Woo 4f) Rhyme: Up, Down, Turn Around Up down turn around, Up down touch the ground, Up down clap, clap, clap, Up down tap, tap, tap, Up down stop. 4g) Rhyme: ‘Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear’ 410 Appendix <?page no="410"?> 2 For a survey of the data related to the research questions and general description of the interview type see chapter 6.3.2. Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear turn around. Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear touch the ground. Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear stand on your toes. Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear touch your nose. Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear stand on your head Teddy Bear, Teddy Bear go to bed. 4h) Rhyme: “Who Stole the Cookies from the Cookie Jar? Who stole the cookies from the cookie jar? Mary stole the cookies from the cookie jar? Who me? Yes, you! Not me. Then who? Ann stole the cookies from the cookie jar. Appendix 2: Interview Guidelines Guiding interview questions with the participating preschool teachers that appear in table 12 (→ chapter 6.3.2) 2 The questions that are listed in the following, guided the interviews with the preschool teachers. They were not necessarily all asked in each of the interviews as some of the preschool teachers commented on their opinions, observations and teaching experiences without being prompted because it was their concern to reflect on their development whenever they considered it appropriate. The questions were not necessarily formulated exactly in the same way in each interview as they are listed here. For reasons of validity, the exact formulations are indicated with each data example in the footnotes in the body of the text, and they are contextualised so that readers can see each time what triggered teachers’ responses. Depending on the discussions that arose during the interviews, questions were also added to be responsive and support teachers’ reflections. The spontaneous conversations that took place during the morning 411 Appendix 2: Interview Guidelines <?page no="411"?> of the participatory demonstration lessons are not listed here but as with all the other questions their context is described in the corresponding footnotes in the body of the text. Interview 2 (Nadia 26.03.15) - interview 3 (Marie 27.03.15) - interview 5 (Betty 21.05.15) - interview 25 (Kathie 21.10.16) Three of these interviews took place during the period of time when the teachers were still in the process of deciding whether they would take part and commit themselves to the teacher education project (interviews 2,3 and 5). Kathie’s interview (interview 25) took place a year before the project came to an end, for the reason that she took over Marie’s position. It was planned to establish the teachers’ initial attitudes towards introducing English in their groups, their English teaching experience and their communicative English language competence: How do you judge learning a foreign language in preschool from the perspective of the children? Rather as an advantage or a disadvantage? There are a number of personal everyday opinions you come across about intro‐ ducing English in preschool. What is your attitude in the matter? - Children should learn German first. - Introducing English in preschool is a benefit for other languages as well, including German. - An additional language would burden many children, because preschool life is challenging enough for them. Before the project, did you integrate English in your group? Do you feel confident to speak English? Interview 10 (Nadia 22.10.15) - interview 11 (Marie 23.10.15) - interview 12 (Betty 23.10.15) - Interview 30 (Kathie 28.03.17) Three of these interviews took place after the trial period when the project started in the new school year (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 2). Kathie’s interview took place during the last year of the project, for the reasons that she took over Marie’s position. It was planned in order to discuss their participation in the project, to view their children’s well-being and to discuss their approach to integrate English in their groups and how they felt about their teaching: What was your attitude and what are your thoughts towards the project now? 412 Appendix <?page no="412"?> Are you managing to bring it in your routine? Have you found it easy or difficult to continue English on your own during the week? How do you integrate English in your routine? What suits you the best and why? Looking at the situation now after the trial period, how would you judge the potential of learning English in your group? At this stage how do you feel about the project and your participation? How do you feel about your teaching? Do you think you will be able to develop ideas and sequencing one day? Can you imagine taking over the project one day? Interview 15 (Nadia 12.01.16) - interview 16 (Betty 12.01.16) These interviews took place during a meeting towards the end of the first semester after the trial phase. It was planned to revise and discuss relevant theory. There were no questions to guide the interview. The topics covered dimensions of the communicative language classroom using teacher talk and discussing the concept of messageand medium-orientated communication (→ chapter 5.7.4) and of sequencing tasks (→ chapter 5.8.2.2). They were already familiar with the theory because I had made a point of familiarising them with relevant theory on the mornings of the participatory demonstration lessons and through discussion of the principles of the task plans. Interview 18 (Marie 17.03.16) - interview 19 (Nadia 18.03.16) - interview 20 (Betty 21.03.16) These interviews took place after the period of time when the teachers had taken over the full responsibility for implementing the project (→ chapter 6.3.1: cycle 3). It was planned in order to discuss their teaching experiences during this time. Has your approach changed in integrating English? How do you feel about your teaching during this time? Let’s talk about the lessons you gave. How do you feel about doing complete lessons? Is it easier to speak English with the children now? Interview 22 (Nadia 22.07.16) - Interview 23 (Betty 22.07.16) These interviews took place during a meeting at the end of the first school year (for clarity → chapter 6.3.1; figure 31). It was planned in order to review 413 Appendix 2: Interview Guidelines <?page no="413"?> the materials and task plans of the year and to discuss ideas together for the following year as well as share experiences and opinions. I’d like to brainstorm with you on ideas for next year. Have you got any ideas for further developments? How would you add to the lessons or change them? What should we change, what should we keep? What do you think? Interview 28 (Betty 09.03.17) - interview 29 (Nadia 10.03.17) These short interviews took place after a theory session the week before that focused on encouraging the teachers to engage in classroom action research to help them reflect on their teaching. The meeting was planned because the head of the preschool told me that the teachers felt they were overextended by the idea and therefore I wanted to clarify the situation. There were no questions to guide this interview. Interview 24 (Marie 22.07.16) Interview 34 (Nadia 29.05.17) - interview 35 (Betty 07.06.17) - interview 36 (Kathie 08.06.17) Three of these interviews took place at the end of the project (interviews 34, 35 and 36). Marie’s interview (interview 24) took place a year before the project finished as she left the preschool at that time. The interviews were planned to discuss the merits of the project, to review preschool teachers’ confidence and competences to integrate English in their groups and to establish whether they were planning to continue the project. Are you going to continue the project after it officially ends? How do you feel about your teaching? What have you learnt from the project? Do you feel you have benefited from the project? What has helped you the most to teach English? Has the project helped you to develop your own ideas? What has motivated you during the project? From your experience, what is your opinion about the new children doing English from the beginning, especially those who don’t speak German? (this was an issue at the beginning of the project) 414 Appendix <?page no="414"?> What are the advantages of having the project for the entire kindergarten and not just for one or two groups? 415 Appendix 2: Interview Guidelines <?page no="415"?> Appendix 3: Questionnaire Figure 49: Questionnaire: Page 1 416 Appendix <?page no="416"?> Figure 50: Questionnaire: Page 2 417 Appendix 3: Questionnaire <?page no="417"?> Figure 51: Questionnaire: Page 3 418 Appendix <?page no="418"?> Figure 52: Questionnaire: Page 4 419 Appendix 3: Questionnaire <?page no="420"?> List of Figures Figure 1: Diagram 1: Multiple case study design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Figure 2: Statistical data 1: The number of groups in state preschools 43 Figure 3: Statistical data 2: The number of children in state preschool groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Figure 4: Statistical data 3: The number of children learning GSL in state preschool groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Figure 5: Statistical data 4: The percentage of children learning GSL in state preschools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Figure 6: Statistical data 5: Staff teaching GSL in state preschools . . 46 Figure 7: Statistical data 6: An expert GSL teacher comes to the preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Figure 8: Statistical data 7: English offered in Salzburg state preschools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Figure 9: Statistical data 8: Preschool teachers offering English regularly to their groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Figure 10: Statistical data 9: Visiting teachers offering English regularly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Figure 11: Statistical data 10: A foreign language in preschool: an advantage or a disadvantage for the child? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Figure 12: Statistical data 11: Comment on the public opinion “Children should learn German first before English is introduced” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Figure 13: Statistical data 12: Comment on the public opinion “Introducing English in preschool is an asset also for other languages, including German” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Figure 14: Statistical data 13: Comment on the public opinion “An additional language in the preschool would burden children because preschool life is challenging enough for them” . . . 56 Figure 15: Statistical data 14: Comment on the public opinion “Children learn a language in a playful way” . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Figure 16: Statistical data 15 Introducing English in preschool from the teachers’ perspective: a benefit or a burden? . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 Figure 17: Statistical data 16: Teachers offering English in their preschools themselves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 <?page no="421"?> Figure 18: Statistical data 17: Course on ‘English in preschool’ offered to teachers during their preservice teacher education . . . . . 62 Figure 19: Statistical data 18: Teachers taking part in the English course when offered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Figure 20: Statistical data 19: Teachers’ communicative English language competence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Figure 21: Statistical data 20: Teachers’ disposition to teach English if support was provided . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Figure 22: Statistical data 21: Logistical problems accommodating English in the state preschool context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Figure 23: Diagram 2: Multiple case study design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Figure 24: Diagram 3: ‘Reflective Practice Model of Professional Development’ (Wallace 1991: 49) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Figure 25: Diagram 4: Preschool English teacher education model through participatory action research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 Figure 26: Diagram 5: ‘Reflective Practice Model of Professional Development’ (Wallace 1991: 49) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 Figure 27: Diagram 6: The role of the teacher educator in the English preschool teacher education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 Figure 28: Diagram 7: ‘Powerful learning environments for language learning’ (Van den Branden et al. 2006: 199; 2007: 97) . . . . . 136 Figure 29: Diagram 8: Multiple case study design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Figure 30: Diagram 9: The cycles of the research project . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Figure 31: Timeline of the cycles in the preschool year . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196 Figure 32: Diagram 10: The cycles of the research project (→ presented in chapter 6.3.1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220 Figure 33: Diagram 11: Preschool teachers’ focus vs. teacher educator’s focus in the project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364 422 List of Figures <?page no="422"?> List of Tables Table 1: A survey of the research questions and related chapters of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Table 2: An example of a rotation system to accommodate the participatory demonstration lessons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 Table 3: An example of a standard structure of a morning routine in preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Table 4: Structure of preschool task plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Table 5: The constellation of a group in preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Table 6: The different levels of the children’s English experiences . . . . 167 Table 7: An example of a standard structure of a morning routine in preschool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Table 8: An example of a rotation system to accommodate the participatory demonstration lessons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Table 9: Descriptors of preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence levels based on teachers’ self-assessment 174 Table 10: Descriptors of preschool teachers’ communicative English language competence levels based on teacher educator’s observations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Table 11: Descriptors of competence levels grouped in high - medium - low . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176 Table 12: A survey of the research questions and related chapters of the study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200 Table 13: Description of the data sources used for the profiles of the teachers and for presenting results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 Table 14: Structure of preschool teachers’ competences needed to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (→ chapter 5.8.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212 Table 15: Nadia’s competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (→ chapter 5.8.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 Table 16: Marie’s competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (→ chapter 5.8.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306 Table 17: Betty: competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learning’ (based on → chapter 5.8.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310 Table 18: Kathie’s competences to create a ‘powerful environment for language learn-ing’ (→chapter 5.8.2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313 <?page no="423"?> Giessener Beiträge zur Fremdsprachendidak�k The study addresses the question of how preschool teachers who work in regular state inclusive preschools can be qualified to teach English as a foreign language. Through the longitudinal case study, which followed the principles of participatory ac�on research, substantial insights were gained which can be transferred to other pre-primary contexts. ISBN 978-3-8233-8500-4
