University Faculty Beliefs About Emergent Multilinguals and Linguistically Responsive Instruction

Abstract

Internationalization trends worldwide have brought more multilingual students into English‐medium university classrooms in the United States and elsewhere. Faculty across the disciplines increasingly have the dual challenge of developing both content and advanced academic language. Ample precedent in P–12 education suggests developing instructors’ knowledge of (a) students as language learners, (b) instructional techniques grounded in second language acquisition theory, and (c) contextual factors necessary for helping instructors implement linguistically responsive instruction (LRI). This study probes the extent to which prior work transfers to the tertiary setting, focusing on participating faculty members’ beliefs about multilingual students, LRI, and context. The authors collected survey data from 197 faculty at a mid‐size comprehensive university in the midwestern United States and analyzed written comments provided by participants. They found that, on the whole, faculty participants displayed deficit views regarding students’ linguistic and academic abilities and questioned the appropriateness and feasibility of several of the LRI techniques. Many rejected the notion that language instruction was within the scope of their responsibilities and expressed a strong preference for support provided outside of class time. The authors discuss the results in terms of the notions of rigor, college readiness, and faculty development in LRI.

Faculty and international student perceptions of language performance and instructional support: A mismatch of expectations

“…The vast majority of students felt prepared, a marked contrast with faculty members’ assessment of the situation. This is consistent with previous literature reporting instructors’ negative views of multilingual students’ academic skills (Daniels, ; Gallagher & Haan, ; Haan et al., ; Washburn & Hargis, ).…”

“…The vast majority of students felt prepared, a marked contrast with faculty members' assessment of the situation. This is consistent with previous literature reporting instructors' negative views of multilingual students' academic skills (Daniels, 2013;Gallagher & Haan, 2018;Haan et al, 2017;Washburn & Hargis, 2017). F I G U R E 1 Percentage of respondents indicating students were prepared for academic language tasks 3.2 | Beliefs about student performance on specific language tasks When examining the data by task, a mismatch in perceptions is still apparent.…”

“…A small body of survey and interview-driven research highlights instructors' beliefs about students, teaching, and administrative decisions. A common theme across these studies (Daniels, 2013;Gallagher & Haan, 2018;Haan, Gallagher, & Varandani, 2017;Washburn & Hargis, 2017) is instructors' negative perceptions of students' academic skills. For example, a survey of 140 college instructors in Australia found negative perceptions of students' language abilities (Daniels, 2013), as did a survey of nearly 200 instructors from various academic units at a private university in the midwestern United States (Gallagher & Haan, 2018).…”

“…One common concern is that financial motivations are the driving consideration in international student admissions (Daniels, 2013;Ferris et al, 2015;Gallagher & Haan, 2018;Washburn & Hargis, 2017) rather than academic preparation. In some studies, faculty cite the lack of academic support for students outside the classroom and suggest that the university should provide such services (Ferris et al, 2015;Gallagher & Haan, 2018;Galloway & Jenkins, 2009). This belief in the value of extracurricular support is complementary to many instructors' resistance to changes in curriculum and instruction.…”

Teaching Writing for Academic Purposes to Multilingual Students: Instructional Approaches. JohnBitchener, NeomyStorch, RosemaryWette. New York: Routledge. 2017. xiii + 220pp. ISBN 978‐1‐138‐28421‐0

“…The need for training pre‐service and in‐service teachers to effectively deal with multi‐ethnical and multilingual students in diverse educational settings such as K‐12 and academic contexts has been highlighted by many researchers in the realm of multilingualism (Fillmore & Snow, ; De Jong & Harper, ; Lucas, ; Gallagher & Han, ). In their book, Bitchener, Storch, and Wette share the same concern regarding writing in English as a Second Language (ESL).…”