Show simple item record

dc.rights.licenseCC-BY-NC-ND
dc.contributor.advisorGraaff, H.C.J. de
dc.contributor.advisorHagar, T.J.
dc.contributor.authorAlberts, K.I.
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-25T18:00:29Z
dc.date.available2021-05-25T18:00:29Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.urihttps://studenttheses.uu.nl/handle/20.500.12932/39481
dc.description.abstractThe present study took place in the context of a national pilot study on bilingual primary education (BPE) in the Netherlands (Jenneskins et al., 2020). Interaction plays a crucial role in language acquisition; therefore, this study aimed to outline current practices by teachers and relate this to insights from earlier language acquisition research. Initiation-response-feedback (IRF) patterns were studied following distinctions set out by Wierenga (2014), and the teachers’ use of the students first language (L1) Dutch was studied. Data included classroom observations at four groep-5 teachers (students’ age 8-9) from four schools, which were transcribed and coded for analysis. Furthermore, interview data was used to interpret the data. Results indicate that the verbal dominance of teachers exceeded that of students, some teachers mostly asked closed/display questions, and others asked mostly open/reference questions. The types of questions were susceptible to change by context; most teachers asked significantly different questions in different lesson parts, and in a prescribed lesson format compared to the other observed lesson. All teachers used positive feedback more often than other types, and focused most of their feedback on content rather than language form. Two out of four teachers used Dutch during the lesson for didactic purposes, to correct students’ behaviour, and due to a limited proficiency in the target language. Native language of the teacher and school type did not influence the results, but views on language acquisition and limited proficiency in the target language seemed to explain some of the variation between teachers in the question types, feedback focus, and use of the L1. Therefore, the suggestion was made to adhere to a minimum proficiency level of CEFR-level B2 (Council of Europe, 2001) in English for teachers in this type of education, and to inform and train teachers based on insights from language acquisition research.
dc.description.sponsorshipUtrecht University
dc.format.extent957285
dc.format.extent957066
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen
dc.titleTeacher-Student Interaction in Bilingual Primary Education
dc.type.contentMaster Thesis
dc.rights.accessrightsOpen Access
dc.subject.keywordsbilingual primary education, foreign language education, content and language integrated learning (CLIL), interaction, IRF-sequence, verbal dominance, question, feedback, language choice, first language (L1), target language (TL)
dc.subject.courseuuEngelse taal en cultuur: educatie en communicatie


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record