Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to report on a 3-day classroom professional development study that integrated science and second-language learning for ten preservice teachers. The professional development was based on sociocultural theories of learning, language-acquisition theories, scientific inquiry methodologies, and professional development principles. The 3-day professional development included a morning session in a third-grade dual-language classroom where the university instructor first modeled a unit on luminous energy with the third graders. In the two subsequent mornings, the preservice teachers and the university instructor co-taught the third-grade students. In the afternoons, the preservice teachers participated in discussions and analyses of the instructional practices and learning opportunities third graders experienced. Preservice teachers also helped prepare the instructional materials that included the science inquiry projects for the next days’ lessons. The results of the questionnaires and interviews revealed that preservice teachers learned about accommodating their future instruction for bilingual learners and learned about light energy. It is concluded that professional development situated in both an elementary classroom and in a university classroom provides preservice teachers opportunities to learn about the complexity of curriculum integration of science and language acquisition with specific experiences for accommodating curricula to language learners.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Bilingual learners are students who are acquiring two languages academically in dual-language classrooms.
- 2.
English language learners, or ELLs, are students who are learning English. Their English proficiency is identified through formal assessments of their listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills.
References
Aronson, E., & Patnoe, S. (1997). The jigsaw classroom: Building cooperation in the classroom (2nd ed.). New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Boswell, D., & Wattman-Turner, M. (2012). Energy forms, transfer, and economics. Albuquerque: Project GLAD, Dual Language of New Mexico.
Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Cohen, E. G. (2014). Designing groupwork: Strategies for heterogeneous classrooms (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Educating teachers for the next century: Rethinking practice and policy. In G. A. Griffith (Ed.), The education of teachers: The ninety-eighth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 221–256). Chicago: University of Chicago.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). Developing professional development schools. In L. Darling Hammond (Ed.), Professional development schools: Schools for developing a profession (pp. 1–27). New York: Teachers College Press.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process (Rev. ed.). Boston: D. C. Heath.
Gándara, P., Maxwell-Jolly, J., & Driscoll, A. (2005). Listening to teachers of English language learners: A survey of California teachers’ challenges, experiences, and professional development needs. Santa Cruz: The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning.
Garcia, O., & Wei, L. (2013). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism, and education. New York: Palgrave Pidot.
Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247–273.
Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., Roy, P., & Zaidman, B. (1985). Oral interaction in cooperative learning groups: Speaking, listening, and the nature of statements made by high-, medium-, and low-achieving students. Journal of Psychology, 119, 303–321.
Krashen, S. (1988). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall International.
Lampert, M. (2003). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, O., & Luykx, A. (2006). Science education and student diversity: Synthesis and research agenda. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lingard, B., Hayes, D., & Mills, M. (2003). Teachers and productive pedagogies: Contextualising, conceptualizing, and utilising. Pedagogy, Culture, and Society, 11(3), 399–424.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (2004). National Science Teachers Association position statement. Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/docs/PositionStatement_ScientificInquiry.pdf/
Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States (NGSS). (2013). Next generation science standards. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog/18290/next-generation-science-standards-for-states-by-states/
Orange County Department of Education (OCDE). (2011). OCDE project GLAD: Guided language acquisition design. Retrieved from http://www.ocde.us/projectglad/Pages/default.aspx/
Pine, G. (2009). Teacher action research: Building knowledge democracies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Quinn, H., Lee, O., & Valdés, G. (2012). Language demands and opportunities in relation to next generation science standards for English language learners: What teachers need to know. Retrieved from http://ell.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/academic-papers/03-Quinn%20Lee%20Valdes%20Language%20and%20Opportunities%20in%20Science%20FINAL.pdf/
Scarcella, R. (2003). Academic English: A conceptual framework. Irvine: University of California Linguistic Minority Research Institute.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57(1), 1–22.
Swain, M., & Canale, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47.
Turkan, S., Oliveira, L., Lee, O., & Phelps, G. (2014). Proposing a knowledge base for teaching academic content to English language learners: Disciplinary linguistic knowledge. Teachers College Record, 116, 1–30.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1980). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Walqui, A., & van Lier, L. (2010). Scaffolding the academic success of adolescent English language learners: A pedagogy of promise. San Francisco: WestEd.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hernández, A.C. (2017). The Professional Development of Pre-service Teachers in an Integrated Science and Language Acquisition Curriculum with Third-Grade Students. In: Oliveira, A., Weinburgh, M. (eds) Science Teacher Preparation in Content-Based Second Language Acquisition. ASTE Series in Science Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43516-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43516-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43514-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43516-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)