刊讯｜SSCI 期刊 TESOL Quarterly 2021年第4期

TESOL QUARTERLY

Volume 55, Issue 4, December 2021

TESOL QUARTERLY（SSCI一区，2020 IF：3.692））2021年第4期共发文10篇，其中研究性论文7篇，简报2篇，约稿1篇。研究论文涉及高等教育中的英语使用、语言反应指令、美国新生入学准备、语言为中心的逻辑推理模式构建等。

目录

BRIEF RESEARCH REPORTS

■Engaging in Linguistically Responsive Instruction: Insights from a First-Year University Program for Emergent Multilingual Learners, by Sandra Zappa-Hollman, Joanne A. Fox, Pages 1081–1091.

■ Defining with Purpose: Connecting Lexicogrammatical Features to Textual Purpose in Authentic Undergraduate Texts, by Jennifer Walsh Marr, Sarah Lynch, Tanya Tervit, Pages 1092–1101.

INVITED TEACHING ISSUES

■ From Crisis to Opportunity: Turning Questions about “Plagiarism” into Conversations about Linguistically Responsive Pedagogy, by Zuzana Tomaš, Shawna Shapiro, Pages 1102–1113.

FULL-LENGTH ARTICLES

■ English Medium Instruction, English-Enhanced Instruction, or English without Instruction: The Affordances and Constraints of Linguistically Responsive Practices in the Higher Education Classroom, by Sin-Yi Chang, Pages 1114–1135.

■ “I must have taken a fake TOEFL!”: Rethinking Linguistically Responsive Instruction Through the Eyes of Chinese International Freshmen, by Qianqian Zhang-Wu, Maria Estela Brisk, Pages 1136–1161.

■ Linguistically Responsive Instruction in International Branch Campuses: Beliefs and Practices of Liberal Arts and STEM Instructors, by Sara Hillman, Pages 1162–1189.

■ Linguistically Responsive Instruction for Latinx Teacher Candidates: Surfacing Language Ideological Dilemmas, by Kristen Lindahl, Christian Fallas-Escobar, Kathryn I.Henderson, Pages 1190–1220.

■Linguistically Responsive Instruction in Corequisite Courses at Community Colleges, by Heather B.Finn, Sharon Avni, Pages 1221-1246.

■ Institutional and Faculty Readiness for Teaching Linguistically Diverse International Students in Educator Preparation Programs in U.S. Universities, by Laura Mahalingappa, Hayriye-Aydar, Nihat Polat, Pages 1247–1277.

■ Degrees of Reasoning: Student Uptake of a Language-Focused Approach to Scaffolding Patterns of Logical Reasoning in the Case Analysis Genre, by Thomas D. Mitchell, Silvia Pessoa, María Pía Gómez-Laich, Michael Maune, Pages 1278–1310.

摘要

Engaging in Linguistically Responsive Instruction: Insights from a First-Year University Program for Emergent Multilingual Learners

Sandra Zappa-Hollman, Joanne A. Fox, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Inreoduction The increased cultural and linguistic diversity of student populations across Anglophone post-secondary institutions has led to the development of curricular options designed to bolster these multilingual learners’ English language and academic skills (Arkoudis & Harris, 2019; Wingate, 2018). Universities across the globe have adopted models such as the pathway program that originated in Australia (Morgan, 2020) and which is also found across other geographical areas, including North America. Other models include foundational language and literacy courses that further develop emergent multilingual students’ (EMLs) proficiency and skills in preparation for their academic coursework (Marshall, 2019). Programing of this type aims to prepare EMLs to transition from high school to university studies. Although research has shown their general effectiveness in supporting students’ academic success, concerns have been raised about the positioning of EMLs as less capable (Marshall, 2019), particularly once they exit those programs to continue their degrees in their chosen fields of study. Another documented issue concerns the (self-reported) lack of preparation of subject instructors to properly support EMLs, together with an entrenched belief that supporting them is the responsibility of language specialists (Haan, Gallagher, & Varandani, 2017; Heringer, 2019; Hillman et al., this issue). How can these issues be addressed? As recent work has suggested, good teaching practices are not sufficient by themselves (de Jong & Harper, 2005; Gallagher & Haan, 2018). What is needed is a systematic, coordinated effort to design curricular models that embrace pedagogical approaches founded on principles and practices that promote culturally and linguistically responsive instruction (LRI) (Lucas & Villegas, 2011). Examples of such models are currently more common in K-12 contexts but less so in the tertiary sector, as has been noted (Harrison, 2020). Addressing this gap, in this article, we showcase a tertiary program-level example in the context of a large, research intensive Canadian university. We do so by drawing on our respective experiences and perspectives as academic leaders of our unit since 2014, the year it was created, hoping our insights may assist those interested in developing similar programs.

Defining with Purpose: Connecting Lexicogrammatical Features to Textual Purpose in Authentic Undergraduate Texts

Jennifer Walsh Marr, Sarah Lynch, Tanya Tervit, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Abstract This paper showcases the development of linguistically -responsive pedagogy in a first -year writing course to facilitate students’ recognition of the connection between discrete language features and purpose of definitions. Paraphrasing definitions was chosen as the first textual focus in response to disciplinary instructors’ anecdotes of students talking ‘around’ key terms rather than being precise, and in response to their role in establishing terms within larger texts. Acknowledging the benefit of seeing language as a system, we draw on the research and (simplified) metalanguage of Systemic Functional Linguistics (Derewianka, 2011; Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004; Martin & Rose, 2005). We introduce the foundational relationship between purpose and features, then use the teaching and learning cycle (Rothery, 1994) to scaffold students’ writing development through deconstruction and joint construction. Although definitions are quite specific, the process of determining their purpose, features and usage serves as a foundation for multilingual students’ knowledge and skills, enabling them to respond to the varied linguistic demands of discipline-specific post-secondary writing.

From Crisis to Opportunity: Turning Questions about “Plagiarism” into Conversations about Linguistically Responsive Pedagogy

Zuzana Tomaš, Eastern Michigan University, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States

Shawna Shapiro, Middlebury University, Burlington, Vermont, United States

Introduction As TESOL and writing specialists in the U.S. higher education context, we are often called upon to support faculty in their work with multilingual and/or international students. In these conversations, we work to promote strategies that not only make learning accessible but also treat linguistically diverse students as an asset. We see access and asset as the two core values underlying linguistically responsive pedagogy (LRI): If we focus on access but not asset, we may (inadvertently) promote a deficit orientation toward linguistic and cultural diversity (e.g., Canagarajah, 2002; García et al., 2017). However, if we focus only on asset, without giving consideration to access, students may not receive the instruction and other support necessary to achieve their goals in higher education and beyond (e.g., Shapiro, Farrelly, & Tomaš, 2014/2018; Shapiro et al., 2016). This access-asset framing has links to other frameworks in linguistics and writing studies, including translingual/translanguaging pedagogy (e.g., García et al., 2017; Horner & Tetrault, 2017), teaching for linguistic justice (e.g., Schreiber et. al, forthcoming) and culturally sustaining pedagogies (e.g., Paris & Alim, 2017).

English Medium Instruction, English-Enhanced Instruction, or English without Instruction: The Affordances and Constraints of Linguistically Responsive Practices in the Higher Education Classroom

Sin-Yi Chang, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

Abstract The promotion of English medium instruction (EMI) in higher education has been a widely adopted institutional response to the forces of globalization in the 21st century. However, while EMI has received much enthusiasm in policy discourse, little research has been conducted to explore whether it effectively addresses the new demands of an increasingly multilingual student body. To fill this gap, in this study I draw on extensive literature on linguistically responsive instruction (LRI) to examine: 1) the practices that are linguistically responsive in higher education EMI classrooms, and 2) the affordances and constraints of such practices. The data for this study – taken from a larger research project that looked into different instructional outcomes of EMI – show that approaches to LRI were manifested in three main ways: technical, facilitative, and sociocultural. To illustrate what these labels mean, a close-up look into three classroom profiles and interviews conducted with the lecturers of each of these classes are provided. Importantly, the multiple approaches to LRI pointed toward a common concern that centered on students’ English proficiency. While LRI may have helped resolve immediate comprehension issues and low participation in classroom interactions, the increased attention to language in content courses posed a potential threat to the teaching of the subject discipline. This study, therefore, argues that aside from equipping individual lecturers with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions to be linguistically responsive, introducing wider structural changes is also necessary so that different student needs (e.g., linguistic, cultural, academic) can be more sustainably supported.

“I must have taken a fake TOEFL!”: Rethinking Linguistically Responsive Instruction Through the Eyes of Chinese International Freshmen

Qianqian Zhang-Wu, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

Maria Estela Brisk, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusettes, United States

Abstract Although being able to meet the TOEFL requirement for college admission, Chinese international students often encounter linguistic challenges during their initial college experiences. Understanding such challenges set the foundation for implementing Linguistically Responsive Instruction (LRI) in higher education. Although well studied in K-12 settings, LRI remains under-researched in higher education. Furthermore, often designed based upon teachers’ experiences, little research examines LRI through the lenses of students. In this exploratory qualitative study, we adopt a student-centered approach to (re)imagine LRI in higher education based on the first-semester experiences of 12 Chinese international freshmen. Drawing upon semi-structured interviews, bilingual language logs, and WeChat observation, our study explores (1) What were Chinese international freshmen’s language and academic experiences during the first half of the semester? (2) What were their experiences throughout the rest of the semester and how do these experiences inform an LRI model to support multilingual students in higher education? The findings address participants’ challenges, coping strategies, and interactions within the university community and highlight the within-group variabilities among Chinese international students. This study emphasizes the need to understand multilingual international students’ experiences beyond their TOEFL scores, which paves way for rethinking LRI in higher education through the lenses of students.

Linguistically Responsive Instruction in International Branch Campuses: Beliefs and Practices of Liberal Arts and STEM Instructors

Sara Hillman, Texas A&M University at Qatar, Doha, Qatar

Abstract This study proposes employing linguistically responsive instruction (LRI) in transnational higher education such as international branch campuses (IBCs). It sheds light on the beliefs and practices of content instructors teaching in English-medium IBCs, in terms of supporting students’ academic language development. Previous studies have shown how content instructors, particularly in STEM fields, do not see teaching language as part of their role in the classroom and do not attach importance to it. However, students in IBC contexts often need more language support. 101 IBC instructors from various disciplines completed a survey regarding their beliefs about providing language support for students. A purposeful sampling of 6 engineering, science, and liberal arts instructors were also video-recorded teaching their classes and then interviewed about LRI practices using stimulated-recall techniques. Findings show that while STEM instructors tended to align less with LRI than liberal arts instructors on the surveys, they employed multiple LRI practices while observed teaching. The study shows the importance of going beyond just attitudinal surveys when it comes to understanding STEM instructors’ dispositions toward teaching language, and it is proposed that IBCs create dialogic, multidisciplinary faculty learning communities on academic language development and meaning making resources.

Linguistically Responsive Instruction for Latinx Teacher Candidates: Surfacing Language Ideological Dilemmas

Kristen Lindahl, Christian Fallas-Escobar, Kathryn I.Henderson, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, United States

Abstract This qualitative study explored Linguistically Responsive Instruction (LRI) for linguistically diverse Latinx preservice Teacher Candidates (TCs) at a tertiary institution in the southwest region of the United States. To provide an example of preparing TCs to engage in LRI by helping them reflect upon ideological orientations, we operationalized LRI as a series of three reflective tasks—language portraits, ideology trees, and utterance analysis—designed to pose linguistic ideological dilemmas (LIDs) for participants. Findings from multimodal thematic analysis suggest that during the study, engaging in LRI afforded teacher candidates space to explore tensions surrounding broader ideologies in circulation (ideological infrastructures), as well as personal ideological orientations towards themselves, their future learners, and society. These tensions generated dilemmas that caused participants to engage in language and ethnicity gatekeeping in ways that revealed the impact of institutionalized ideological stances toward linguistically and ethnically diverse speakers. Implications include (1) potential ways for faculty and students interested in LRI implementation to interrogate sociopolitical dimensions of language use across disciplines, (2) better understanding of whether and what type of ideological clarity may emerge from LRI in tertiary classrooms, and (3) how LRI might contribute to the disruption of less nuanced approaches to serving linguistically diverse learners in higher education.

Linguistically Responsive Instruction in Corequisite Courses at Community Colleges

Heather B.Finn, Sharon Avni, Borough of Manhattan Community College, CUNY, New York, United States

Abstract English Learners (ELs) attend community colleges at a greater rate than four-year schools, making community colleges primary sites of ESL education in American higher education. These institutions’ recent embrace of the corequisite structure – a pairing of a non-credit developmental course with a credit-bearing disciplinary content course in order to accelerate students’ progress in their coursework – has direct implications for ELs. As corequisites are enacted in a wide range of content areas, professors will need to attend to students’ language development in a wide range of disciplinary courses. This qualitative study applies Linguistically Responsive Instruction as a framework to understand corequisite instructors’ beliefs about students’ learning, knowledge of teaching language, and understanding of the broader contextual factors at community colleges, including institutional policies and definitions of students’ readiness and success. Drawing on ongoing interviews conducted with faculty members throughout one semester, it offers faculty members’ perspectives on the opportunities and challenges of teaching ELs in the corequisite structure and provides a framework for professional development and institutional support.

Institutional and Faculty Readiness for Teaching Linguistically Diverse International Students in Educator Preparation Programs in U.S. Universities

 Laura Mahalingappa, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas, United States

Hayriye-Aydar, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States

Nihat Polat, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas, United States

Abstract Despite the steadily increasing number of linguistically diverse international students (LDISs) in higher education in the U.S, many universities still mostly use curriculum and instruction that are based on monolingual norms (Ginther & Yan, 2018). Thus, the current system fails to accommodate the particular needs of LDISs, which, in addition to further developing their academic language proficiency, includes navigating multicultural perspectives and potentially unfamiliar instructional practices. To understand the current situation in this regard in order to provide evidence-based practical recommendations, a need for exploration of instructors’ and institutions’ readiness is warranted. To attend to this critical need, this study asks: What are the professional knowledge base and dispositions of faculty in educator preparation programs about linguistic and academic matters to meet the needs of LDISs? What pedagogical choices by faculty in educator preparation programs particularly address the linguistic and academic needs of LDISs? What institutional readiness-related affordances exist to support LDISs and faculty in participants’ experiences? Data sources include interviews and institutional documents. The findings indicate that faculty members acknowledge a lack of a) personal/professional knowledge and skills about linguistically and culturally responsive education, b) institutional readiness, and c) to some degree, ability to correctly identify instructional remedies (e.g., strategies) in addressing the needs of linguistically diverse students. Based on these findings, we offer recommendations for faculty in education programs as well as universities that serve international students.

Degrees of Reasoning: Student Uptake of a Language-Focused Approach to Scaffolding Patterns of Logical Reasoning in the Case Analysis Genre

Thomas D. Mitchell, Silvia Pessoa, María Pía Gómez-Laich, Michael Maune, Carnegie Mellon University, Doha, Qatar

Abstract This study reports on student writing outcomes from a two-year interdisciplinary collaboration between applied linguists (the authors) and an organizational behavior (OB) professor. We used an ethnographic language-focused approach to make explicit the linguistic features of the case analysis genre at an American university in the Middle East. We analyzed 33 student case analyses to examine how effectively students applied two heuristics from our scaffolding materials: the semantic wave heuristic for writing analytical paragraphs that move from abstract to concrete and back to abstract knowledge; and the I know, I see, I conclude heuristic for making explicit the logical connections between disciplinary knowledge and case information to produce conclusions. Students integrated the focal linguistic features with varying degrees of effectiveness. Most students met genre expectations by making abstract claims about the case at the beginning and at the end of their analysis paragraphs, integrating OB knowledge with information about the case, thus creating effective waves between disciplinary and case knowledge. However, our analysis reveals differences in the quality of students’ logical reasoning between high-, mid-, and low-rated texts. We discuss how these differences can inform linguistically responsive disciplinary writing instruction.

期刊简介

TESOL is a global association for English language teaching professionals headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, USA. TESOL encompasses a network of approximately 52,000 educators worldwide, consisting of more than 12,000 individual members and an additional 40,000 educators within the 100 plus TESOL affiliate associations. Representing a multifaceted academic discipline and profession, TESOL offers members serial publications, books, and electronic resources on current issues, ideas, and opportunities in the field of English language teaching. TESOL also conducts a variety of workshops and symposia, including an annual convention, regarded as the foremost professional development opportunity for English language educators worldwide. TESOL's mission is to develop and maintain professional expertise in English language teaching and learning for speakers of other languages worldwide.

官网地址：

www.tesol.org

本文来源：TESOL Quarterly官网

点击文末“阅读原文”可跳转

往期推荐

欢迎加入
“语言学心得交流分享群”“语言学考博/考研/保研交流群”请添加“心得君”入群请备注“学校+专业方向“

今日小编：秋实

  审     核：心得小蔓

转载&合作请联系

"心得君"

微信：xindejun_yyxxd

点击“阅读原文”可跳转下载