Early childhood educators’ competences for supporting children's academic language skills in Germany

Michel, Marije; Ofner, Daniela; Thomä, Dieter

doi:10.1080/09658416.2013.863896

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Among our sample, experience in providing language training varied between less than one year to more than six years. These differences in experience did, however, not statistically affect the planning abilities (see Michel et al 2014 for similar findings). One reason might be the unreliability of the self-assessed experience ratings due to varying definitions of language training.…”

Section: Summary and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

“…With a mean score of 59% (SD = 15) the performance on the SprachKoPF v06 subtest for knowledge of our fifteen early childhood educators was highly similar to that of the total sample of educators (N = 144, M = 56%, SD = 14) they were part of, one-sample t-test: t(14)= .771, p = .454 (Michel et al 2014). …”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Fifteen early childhood educators from different day-care centers in southern Germany who had already taken part in SprachKoPF v06 (Thoma & Tracy 2012) in an earlier study (Michel et al 2014) participated on a voluntary basis. Although we could not recruit a random sample, participants in the subsample were distributed over all levels of age, secondary education, professional experience and language-specific knowledge.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this sample the test had a mean itemto-total correlation of .22 (SD = .12) indicating a relatively low discriminatory power. Nevertheless, the test scores differentiate clearly between groups of educators with lower or higher secondary education, and between early childhood educators, their instructors, and participants from non-pedagogical professions (Michel et al 2014). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The most recent methodological approach towards language training competence are standardized tests for domain-specific knowledge and abilities (Hendler et al 2011, Michel et al 2014, Thoma and Tracy 2012. The rationale for developing such instruments is the assumption that specific linguistic and pedagogical knowledge is required to provide effective language training.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Early childhood educators’ knowledge and abilities in planning language learning environments

Ofner

Thomä

2014

European Journal of Applied Linguistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this explorative study we investigate (1) how early childhood educators differ in their planning of language training, and (2) if their planning abilities in the context of language training increase with their linguistic content knowledge. We interviewed fifteen early childhood educators from southern Germany on their planning and reflection practices in language training and videotaped them during a language training session to assess how systematic their planning activities were. We qualitatively analyzed the interviews and developed a detailed coding scheme that allowed us to create a planning score. We previously tested their knowledge about language, first and second language acquisition, assessment, and training with a standardized test for language training competence (SprachKoPF v06 ). In qualitative analyses we identified two types of early childhood educators: elaborate and restricted planners. Correlational analyses and group comparisons suggest that educators with more language-specific knowledge are more systematic and target-oriented when planning language learning environments.Zusammenfassung: In dieser explorativen Studie untersuchen wir (1) wie sich pädagogische Fachkräfte in ihrer Fähigkeit Sprachfördersituationen zu planen unterscheiden und (2) ob ein umfangreicheres Wissen über Sprache und Sprachförderung zu einer gezielteren und systematischeren Planung führt. Dafür haben wir fünfzehn pädagogische Fachkräfte leitfadengestützt zur Planung und Reflexion einer Sprachfördereinheit befragt und eine Sprachfördereinheit videografiert. Die Interviews wurden kriteriengeleitet qualitativ ausgewertet und über Kodierungen quantifiziert. Weiterhin haben wir mithilfe des standardisierten Tests SprachKoPF v06 das sprachförderrelevante Wissen der Probandinnen erhoben. In unseren qualitativen Analysen konnten wir zwei Typen von frühpädagogischen Fachkräften identifizieren: systematische Planer und eingeschränkte Planer. Korrelationsanalysen und Gruppenvergleiche deuten darauf hin, dass pädagogische Fachkräfte mit mehr sprachförderrelevantem Wissen ihre Sprachförderung systematischer und zielgerichteter planen.Resumen: En este estudio exploratorio investigamos (1) cómo se diferencia el personal pedagógico cualificado en la planificación de la formación lingüística, y (2) si el conocimiento más detallado sobre la lengua y el fomento de la lengua resulta en una planificación más específica y sistemática. Entrevistamos a quince pedagogos/as del sur de Alemania sobre sus prácticas de planificación y reflexión en su formación de idiomas, y los/las filmamos durante tal entrenamiento para determinar hasta qué punto sus actividadesde planificación eran sistemáticas. Analizamos cualitativamente las entrevistas y desarrollamos una codificación detallada para la evaluación. Además comprobamos el conocimiento relevante para la formación lingüística de los/las pedagogos/as con ayuda del test estandarizado SprachKoPF v06 . En nuestros análisis cualitativos identificamos dos tipos de pedagogos: el planificador sistemátic...

show abstract

Section: Summary and Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations