Читать книгу Classroom Discourse Competence - Группа авторов - Страница 6

Teacher education at university level, which is the initial phase of teacher professionalization in Germany, primarily focuses on teacher candidates’ acquisition of specialist knowledge and competences in the school subjects they are going to teach later on. With regard to teaching degree programs in modern foreign languages such as English, French, Italian or Spanish, it is especially within the domains of linguistics, literary, cultural and media studies as well as within the field of general pedagogy and education that professional content knowledge (Fachwissen) and pedagogical knowledge (pädagogisches Wissen), respectively, is acquired. Furthermore, in tailor-made specialist courses on foreign language teaching (e.g. TEFL courses), prospective teachers are expected to gain pedagogical content knowledge (fachdidaktisches Wissen) and develop expertise in various areas of language teaching such as lesson planning, practical implementations of CLT principles (like, for instance, student-activation, task-orientation or differentiation), course book analysis, methodological approaches to teaching literature, culture, grammar, vocabulary etc., to name but a few. While teacher education programs at universities prioritize TEFL students’ acquisition of professional knowledge in the domains mentioned above, a core component of language teacher professionalism has been (and mostly still is) largely neglected: classroom discourse competence (CDC). There are several reasons for this:

The past ten or fifteen years of research on foreign language teacher education in Germany have seen a remarkable increase in theoretical and empirical research activities with a strong focus on foreign language teachers’ professional knowledge. Researchers have been particularly interested in gaining deeper insights into the different types of knowledge (see above) that inform, determine or shape EFL teachers’ classroom actions and decision-making (e.g. Roters et al. 2011, Roters et al. 2013, Kirchhoff 2016). Roters et al. (2013), for instance, first specified the construct components of EFL teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge and, subsequently, operationalized this construct for the purpose of testing and evaluating (prospective) teachers’ knowledge in this particular domain. While researching and testing teachers’ professional knowledge is a challenging task in itself, theoretical modelling as well as the practical implementation and systematic assessment of teacher competences (such as CDC) presents even greater challenges to researchers and educators – considering the complexity of the construct ‘competence’ (e.g. Blömeke et al. 2015). Hence, for CDC to gain a more prominent role in EFL teacher education at university, a theoretical model is required which not only provides a structural framework for practical implementation at university level but also allows for operationalization in empirical research. With regard to foreign language teacher education in Germany, such a conceptual model or framework does however not yet exist.

Another reason for teachers’ classroom discourse competences to remain on the sidelines of scholarly interest certainly has to do with a number of already existing concepts (such as Johnson’s (1995) classroom communicative competence or Walsh’s (e.g. 2011) classroom interactional competence), which might give the impression that there is no need to further pursue this line of enquiry if it would perhaps only generate ‘more of the same’ (cf. Bresges et al. 2014: 9). Without a doubt, especially Walsh’s work from an Applied Linguistics-perspective has been a major contribution to this research area and scholarly discussion. It certainly also informs many of the chapters in this volume. However, Walsh’s conceptualization of CIC (classroom interactional competence) also has its limitations. First of all, it is the author himself who considers it to be of a “preliminary” (Walsh 2012: 1) and “initial” quality (Walsh 2012: 1 and 12, 2014: 5). Indeed, CIC is not a comprehensive competence model but rather describes a selection of “interactional strategies” (Walsh 2011: 177) which enable “teacher[s] and learner[s] […] to use interaction as a tool for mediating and assisting learning” (Walsh 2011: 158 and 165, 2012: 1 and 5, 2013: 46 and 51, 2014: 4, Walsh/Li 2016: 495, italics KT). Referring to both teachers and learners, CIC, hence, is not conceptualized as a professional competence of language teachers. “CIC,” Walsh explains, “focuses on the ways in which teachers’ and learners’ interactional decisions and subsequent actions enhance learning and learning opportunity.” (Walsh 2011: 165f.). In his work, the author analyzes “how teachers and learners display CIC” in authentic classroom data (ibid.: 166) and explores some possibilities of “how CIC can be developed in both teachers and learners” (ibid.: 177). Undeniably, this and other concepts are related to CDC in many ways and may also bear resemblance to it as far as terminology, or ‘labelling’, is concerned, but they do not exactly coincide with what CDC as a teacher competence refers to. It is in the nature of things that ‘preliminary’ work calls for further scholarly inquiry along these lines. Against this backdrop, the purpose of this volume, thus, is also to take into account existing concepts as well as the most recent developments in this field (e.g. Kuster et al. 2014, ECML 2019), in order to give further impetus to the scholarly discussion on classroom discourse and foreign language teacher education.

Finally, the neglect of classroom discourse competences in teacher education can also be ascribed to a structural problem of teaching degree programs at universities in Germany. University students of foreign languages, literatures and cultures are usually required to take Sprachpraxiskurse, i.e. foreign language classes on grammar, phonetics/phonology, oral presentation, academic writing etc. – regardless of whether they are enrolled in, for instance, North American Studies, Applied Linguistics or EFL teaching degree programs. Designed to increase students’ general and academic L2 proficiency, these courses do not only provide opportunities for acquiring linguistic knowledge about the target language system but also for improving foreign language skills through active language use and practice in academic contexts. However, specialized courses for teacher candidates are usually not part of these language proficiency programs. Thus, the underlying implication of this approach is either that teachers’ L2 use in classroom settings is devoid of any professional dimension; or, that professional L2 classroom discourse competence somehow automatically evolves from a synthesis of declarative knowledge and foreign language proficiency while teaching, and that it, therefore, does not require any systematic training. Whatever the underlying assumption may be, it is interesting that neither the current national standards of EFL teacher education in Germany (KMK 2019) nor existent models of EFL teachers’ professional competence (e.g. Roters et al. 2014) distinguish between general foreign language proficiency and teachers’ classroom discourse competence. Yet considering the deeper implications of foreign language teachers’ tasks, (verbal) actions and responsibilities in classroom discourse, it becomes apparent that a differentiation between L2 proficiency and CDC is indeed necessary. From a purely language-related point of view, it is a fallacy to assume that a high level of L2 proficiency alone would qualify teachers to master the multitude of diverse and complex discoursal tasks in foreign language classrooms effectively.

‘L2 classroom discourse competence’ has different theoretical underpinnings than ‘foreign language competence’, because – to put it simply – the former is a context-specific professional competence whereas the latter is not. Any conceptualization of CDC and its subcompetences, therefore, presupposes a more detailed description of the discoursal context in which this competence is required – in this case: the educational context of foreign language education which is commonly, although not exclusively, embedded in the physical space of a classroom. In other words: In order to conceptualize CDC, it has to be clear what in fact is actually meant by ‘classroom discourse’. This clarity, however, cannot be taken for granted because the term ‘classroom discourse’ itself is used quite heterogeneously. Thus, it seems not only important but also necessary to shed some light on the term’s meaning and use in the context of this volume.