Investigating primary English immersion teachers in China: background, instructional contexts, professional development, and perceptions

This article was downloaded by: [The Aga Khan University]On: 18 October 2014, At: 03:58Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Asia-Pacific Journal of TeacherEducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/capj20

Investigating primary English immersionteachers in China: background,instructional contexts, professionaldevelopment, and perceptionsXiaomei Song a & Liying Cheng aa Queen's University , Kingston, CanadaPublished online: 12 Apr 2011.

To cite this article: Xiaomei Song & Liying Cheng (2011) Investigating primary English immersionteachers in China: background, instructional contexts, professional development, and perceptions,Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 39:2, 97-112

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2011.560647

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/capj20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2011.560647

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher EducationVol. 39, No. 2, May 2011, 97–112

Investigating primary English immersion teachers in China:background, instructional contexts, professional development, andperceptions

Xiaomei Song* and Liying Cheng

Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada

(Received 15 September 2009; final version received 1 November 2010)

Despite the fast growth of English immersion in China, only limited research has beenconducted regarding immersion teachers’ educational background, instructional con-texts, professional development, and their perceptions about English immersion. Thisstudy explored the above key issues from three primary immersion schools. Resultsindicated that the majority of immersion teachers in the study were women under theage of 30 with five or fewer years of teaching experience, and were typically teach-ing 50 students in each class with an average of 5.8 hours per week. Less than half ofthe participants had Bachelor’s degrees and above. The teachers reported using commu-nicative, interactive, and learner-centred approaches in their teaching, but they generallylacked opportunities to engage in authentic two-way interaction for professional devel-opment. In-service and ongoing program development was perceived as a critical areaof study if China’s immersion programs were to improve. Educational background andteacher characteristics together predicted 31.4% of teachers’ professional development.The study provided valuable implications for English immersion education in China.

Keywords: English immersion; primary immersion teachers; professional develop-ment; teacher education

Background and context

Since China opened itself to the world in the late 1970s, learning the English languagein schools has become recognised as essential, not least for access to worldwide scien-tific and technological advances (Adamson, 2007). Facility with English in China oftenresults in more lucrative work, faster promotion in business and government, and greateropportunity to compete for higher education. In the 2003 new English National CurriculumStandards (Ministry of Education, 2003), compulsory English instruction has been loweredfrom Junior Secondary 1 (Grade 7) to Grade 3 (children aged 9 or 10 years old) and Grade 1is recommended in the socio-economically developed areas. Of the many models, immer-sion is perhaps one of the most successful means by which to teach a second language.Among them, the Canadian immersion model is a method of foreign language instructionin which the foreign language is the major vehicle for content instruction and classroomcommunication (Lapkin, Swain, & Shapson, 1990). It enhances students in developingadditive bilingualism and provides students an opportunity to master a second languagejust as they once mastered their first by being absorbed in a language environment that

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

ISSN 1359-866X print/ISSN 1469-2945 online© 2011 Australian Teacher Education AssociationDOI: 10.1080/1359866X.2011.560647http://www.informaworld.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

98 X. Song and L. Cheng

promotes natural, meaningful communication. Research on the Canadian French immer-sion shows it to be an effective means of facilitating preschool and primary school students’language proficiency, literacy, and cognitive development, as well as academic performance(Bialystok, Luk, & Kwan, 2005). The Canadian immersion model has been adopted bymany countries, including China (e.g., DeCourcy, Warren, & Burston, 2002). Immersionprograms in China were first tested in the late 1990s in a few urban upper socio-economicareas for experimental purposes (Hu, 2007). With some exceptions (e.g., Chinese andmathematics), all subjects were taught primarily in English. Successes in these preliminaryefforts led to wholesale adoption of the model. With the central government’s support in thetwenty-first century, local provincial and municipal governments in many parts of Chinahave established immersion programs in public and private kindergartens, and primary andsecondary schools. Immersion programs can be found ‘almost everywhere, for all schoolsubjects, and at all levels of education’ (Hu, 2007, p. 99). Immersion programs enrol anincreasingly large number of students annually. For instance, immersion in Shanghai aloneinvolved 30,000 students in 2002, 45,000 in 2003, and 55,000 in 2004 (Hu, 2007).

And yet we know surprisingly little about immersion teachers themselves, althoughtheir role is vital to the success of any educational program. As the literature demonstrates,students’ academic performance and learning outcomes are inseparable from teachingpractices, teaching effectiveness, and high-quality professional development (e.g., Wallace,2009). The study, therefore, examined primary immersion teachers’ background, practices,professional development, and perceptions in three English immersion programs in China.

Guiding framework from previous studies

Lapkin et al. (1990) synthesised some essential issues contributing to the success of Frenchimmersion education in Canada: (a) product variables, including outcomes in second lan-guage (L2), first language (L1), subjects other than L2 and L1, and social psychologicalissues; (b) teaching/learning process variables such as teaching approaches and strategies;(c) mediating variables such as learner characteristics, teacher characteristics, and pro-gram type; and (d) teacher education. The following literature review documents researchprojects conducted in Canada and abroad, using the above framework as the basis for dis-cussion. Since the study explores immersion programs from teachers’ perspectives, thereview focuses on aspects which are closely related to immersion teachers’ background,practices, and beliefs.

Product variables

Numerous studies have demonstrated that immersion facilitates students’ learning out-comes including L2 proficiency, L1 literacy, academic performance in other subjects, andcognitive development. For example, Turnbull, Lapkin, and Hart (2001) conducted a studywith Grade 3 immersion students on provincial tests and concluded that ‘French immersiondoes not have a negative impact on students’ literacy and mathematics skills in English’(p. 24). Immersion programs are also thought to enhance positive attitudes toward L2 andthe equity of educational opportunities. In Canada, studies show that immersion programsinstil strong and enduring socio-cultural interests in francophone culture, and promote acommitment to a bilingual Canada (Goldberg & Noels, 2006). Besides, studies have indi-cated that immersion is generally a fair and effective form of second language educationfor classes with a broad diversity of learner characteristics, and from communities withvariable socio-economic backgrounds (i.e., Genesee, 1987).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education 99

However, there are problematic issues attendant with immersion education. One is therelatively high rate of student drop-out from immersion programs. Research suggests thatacademic and behavioural difficulties constitute one of the major factors predicting stu-dents’ transfer out of immersion programs (Obadia & Theriault, 1995). Further, thereremains an obstinate discrepancy in students’ proficiency levels between receptive andexpressive skills; for example, Genesee’s (1987) research shows French immersion stu-dents approaching virtually native levels of performance in the receptive skills of listeningand reading, but a significant lag behind francophone peers in the productive skills ofspeaking and writing. The improvement of immersion learners’ oral and written grammarhas been identified as a major priority by curriculum design and educators.

Teaching/learning process variables

Teaching/learning process variables describe relationships, such as teacher–student inter-active behaviours, in the context of approaches and strategies (Lapkin et al., 1990). Aprimary focus in immersion is ‘not the learning of a second language but rather the learn-ing of academic content through the medium of a second language’ (Safty, 1991, p. 478).Since school subjects are taught using L2 as the medium of instruction, content learningand language learning exist at the same time, with language learning occurring largelyas a by-product in the context of students’ interaction with meaningful subject matterwhen immersion teachers integrate language teaching with the regular content curricu-lum. Regarding teaching approaches, researchers and educators generally favour a balanceof analytical and experiential teaching, with the former focused on teaching knowledgeof language and with the latter operating holistically by embedding language in mean-ingful, contextualised ways that maximise language learning (Day & Shapson, 2001).The now broadly adopted learner-centred teaching practice encourages students to learncontent through language to explore their ideas and thoughts interactively (Lapkin et al.,1990). For instance, Lapkin, Swain, and Smith (2002) conducted a study with CanadianGrade 7 French immersion students and found that learners progressed in their correctuse of pronominal verbs in French through collaborative learning. A study conductedin Queensland, Australia, also indicated that cooperative learning may be a key part ofstudents’ learning processes in immersion (DeCourcy, 1995).

However, difficulties arise in the micro-context of immersion education – individualclassroom teaching. A qualitative study conducted with six Spanish immersion teachersexamines some of the challenges in immersion classroom teaching in the United States(Walker & Tedick, 2000). This study illustrates the more concrete complexities at the oper-ational level. The study’s conclusion suggests that there are significant questions remainingto be answered about how immersion and content can be seamlessly integrated in boththe larger curriculum and in daily lessons. As noted above, there remain some significantquestions about the complexity of orchestrating content through the target language in themicro-context of immersion education, and questions as well about the role of the teacherin this practice.

Mediating variables

L2 learning is influenced by such mediating variables as student characteristics, teachercharacteristics, and program types (Lapkin et al., 1990). Individual differences among stu-dents in L1 background, gender, anxiety, and motivation have distinct influence on L2

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


learning, as does the age of initial exposure to the L2; early is generally better than middleor late exposure (e.g., Lapkin, Hart, & Swain, 1991).

In particular, studies have consistently concluded that there are positive relation-ships between teacher characteristics (previous academic performance, content knowledge,teaching competence, years of teaching experience, and participation in professional devel-opment activities) and learning outcomes in school systems (e.g., Wallace, 2009). Forexample, Cirno, Pollard-Durodola, Foorman, Carlson, and Francis (2007) investigated rela-tionships among teacher characteristics, classroom instruction, and learning outcomes inSpanish-English bilingual kindergartens. They found that teacher quality, which includedfour primary domains (instructional strategies, classroom management and organisation,presentation of subject matter, and learning environment) correlated positively with studentengagement. Teacher oral language proficiency in both Spanish and English also predictedtheir students’ learning outcomes.

Teacher education

Teacher education consists of pre-service and in-service training, teacher qualification andcertification (Lapkin et al., 1990). Various teacher education programs are provided topre-service and in-service teachers to help them enhance and improve language abilities,pedagogical skills, and cultural knowledge. Previous studies describe the essential compo-nents of effective teacher education programs in immersion. For instance, Moeller’s (1989)survey investigating French student teachers’ professional training and experience sup-ported the proposal of a national French second language (FSL) teacher examination toinclude three components: language achievement/proficiency, teacher competencies suchas use of second language techniques and strategies, and internship.

Immersion teacher qualification and certification requirements vary from country tocountry, and within a country. Specialised pre-service training for immersion is not arequirement for teacher certification in the United States (Met & Lorenz, 1997) but inCanada, immersion teacher candidates have to complete teacher education programs spe-cialising in French, before obtaining teacher certification through the College of Teachers.Regardless, standards for FSL certification, including procedures, course credits, and com-petency requirements, vary from one province to another (Moeller, 1989). In China, teachereducation specialising in English is not required for teaching in immersion. Student teach-ers who receive pre-service teacher preparation from normal schools, normal colleges,and normal universities are automatically certified to be teachers in regular or immersionschools. These teacher education programs vary in length from two to four years. Theentrants range from junior high graduates (Grade 9) to senior high graduates (Grade 12)and BA or BS degrees are offered (Li, 1999). Graduates from non-normal schools, colleges,and universities may obtain teacher certification if they receive credits and pass exams oncourses such as ‘Foundation for Teaching’.

Research questions

In China, second language immersion in English, modelled after French immersion inCanada, has increasingly been adopted as one way to improve existing flaws in Englishlanguage education; millions of Chinese learners tend to lack communicative ability inEnglish after years of learning English in schools (Hu, 2007), despite the fact that Englishis one of the three core school subjects in the primary education system (the other two beingChinese and mathematics). Although there has been rapid growth in English immersionprograms in China, insufficient research has been conducted with English immersion

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


programs. Therefore, this study, as part of a larger project,1 was designed to examine pri-mary immersion teachers in English immersion programs. Based on the framework byLapkin et al. (1990) and the above literature review, the following research questions wereposited:

(1) What is the educational background (a variable of teacher education as definedin the framework) of primary immersion teachers in China?

(2) What are teacher and student characteristics (mediating variables as definedabove) within the English immersion program context in China?

(3) What are the teaching practices (teaching/learning processes variables as definedabove) of this group of primary immersion teachers?

(4) How does this group perceive its professional development (mediating variablesas defined above)?

(5) How does this group perceive immersion education in China (product variablesas defined above)?

(6) What are the relationships, if any, between educational background, teachercharacteristics, and their professional development?

Method

Instrument and data collection

The English Language Immersion Teachers’ Questionnaire was developed based on instru-ments previously developed from a variety of sources and research literature on immersionprograms and teacher professional development (Collins, Stead, & Woolfrey, 2004; Day &Shapson, 1996; Flewelling, 1995; Lapkin et al., 1990; Laplante, 1996; Walker & Tedick,2000). The questionnaire consisted of three major sections. There were a total of 26 closed-ended items, with some items asking for written comment. The first section gatheredimmersion teachers’ personal information, including their educational background. Thesecond section sought information about the instructional context (teacher characteristics,student characteristics, and teaching practices). The last section asked teachers about theirprofessional development and their perceptions about English immersion. The question-naire was designed in English, with keywords translated and defined in Chinese, and wasvetted by a small group of immersion teachers prior to the data collection. The question-naires were completed by primary immersion teachers in the schools where they taught andthen delivered to the research team.

Data analyses

To examine results of the first five research questions, descriptive statistical analysis wasconducted regarding educational background, teacher characteristics, student characteris-tics, teaching practices, professional development, and perceptions about immersion. Toaddress the last research question, regression analysis was performed to examine whetherthere were any relationships between teachers’ educational background, teacher character-istics, and their professional development – three key interrelated variables contributingto the effectiveness of teaching (Day & Shapson, 2001). Responses to closed-ended itemswere coded and analysed using SPSS 16. All written comments were content analysed byhand.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


Results

Description of participants

Forty-seven primary immersion teachers from three immersion programs/schools partic-ipated in the project. This included all immersion teachers from the three schools. Mostwere female (95.7%). Among the age groups specified in the questionnaire, there were 18immersion teachers aged from 20 to 25 (38.3%), 14 from 26 to 30 (29.8%), 13 from 31to 35 (27.7%), and two from 36 to 40 (4.3%). No one indicated age below 20, between41–45, 46–50, or over 50. Most had a teacher certificate (91.5%). Two teachers did nothave a certificate (4.3%) and another two said their certification was in process (4.3%).About 72.3% of respondents taught in Shanxi province and the rest of 27.7% taught inGuangdong province. Teaching immersion hours for the respondents ranged from 2 to 18hours per week, with a mean of 5.86 hours. The respondents had about 50 students onaverage in each class, with a minimum of 33 and maximum of 75 students.

Descriptive analyses

Educational background

Educational background was examined from four aspects: educational qualification, gen-eral education component, subject and linguistic knowledge, and immersion knowledge.Among the 45 teachers who responded, more than half had a certificate or diploma (53.2%),18 teachers had a Bachelor’s degree (38.3%) and two had a Master’s degree (4.3%). Basedon previous literature (Lapkin et al., 1990; Moeller, 1989), three major aspects are iden-tified in terms of specific educational training: general education component (foundation,methodology, and practicum), subject and linguistic knowledge (knowledge of subjectsto be taught and English linguistic competence), and immersion knowledge (Englishlanguage and culture and theories of second language learning). Accordingly, the ques-tionnaire items were designed to examine whether or not the immersion teachers receivedtraining in those three aspects. Regarding the general education component, 83% reportedthey received training in foundation for teaching, 70.2% in methodology of teaching, and61.7% in practicum. Regarding subject and linguistic knowledge, 89.4% reported theyreceived training in English linguistic competence and 55.3% in knowledge of subjectsto be taught. Regarding immersion knowledge, 72.3% received training in English lan-guage and culture and 42.6% in theories of second language learning. Only 10 immersionteachers received training in all of these (21.3%).

Teacher characteristics

Four questionnaire items examined teacher characteristics: years of teaching in schools,years of teaching in immersion, perceived language proficiency, and perceived teachingcompetence. Among the 47 respondents, about one-fifth (21.3%) had one to two years’teaching experience in schools, 38.3% three to five years, 36.8% six to nine years, and4.3% over 11 years. By contrast, about half of those responding (51.1%) specified one totwo years’ teaching in immersion, 29.8% three to five years, 10.6% six to ten years, and4.3% over 11 years. Compared with the 40.5% who had taught for six years or more inregular mainstream schools, only 14.9% respondents had six years or more of teachingexperience in immersion. Immersion teachers were also asked to rate their language profi-ciency and teaching competence based on a 5-point Likert scale from poor, average, good,very good, to excellent. Most respondents perceived their language proficiency and teach-ing competence as above average (80.9% and 74.4% respectively). No respondents rated

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


their English language proficiency as poor, but one respondent thought his/her teachingcompetence poor (2.1%).

Student characteristics

The majority of immersion teachers (76.1%) said that most immersion students in theirclassroom spoke Mandarin (Putonghua) as their first language, although some reportedtheir students spoke dialects of Chinese such as Cantonese (21.2%). Two immersion teach-ers had students speaking other minority languages. A large majority of the respondents’students started immersion education in Grade 1–2 (95.7%). About 68.1% of the teachersthought their students had above-average intelligence. Also about 38.3% of the teachersperceived that some of their students had learning difficulties. An equal number of immer-sion teachers (29.8%) thought they had gifted students and students with below-averageintelligence. About 6.4% of students were thought of as minority language students.About 29.8% of immersion students were reported to be from a lower socio-economicbackground.

Teaching practices

The questionnaire explored teaching practices from three facets: focus of lessons, teach-ing strategies, and teaching approaches. About 40.4% of the respondents said their lessonsfocused on linguistic content (listening, reading, speaking, and writing of English). About27.7% of the responding teachers focused on subject content (e.g. social sciences and sci-ences) and 23.4% focused on subject content with linguistic content. In teaching English,the most frequently used strategies were communicating in English (89.4%), followed bycreating interaction among students in the classroom (61.7%). Constant use and reuse ofrelevant vocabulary and structures were the least used strategies in teaching English (17%).Most teachers (55.3%) said they preferred both emphasising the appropriation of scientificknowledge, not only as content, but also as a process of inquiry, and using language as acognitive tool, and engaging texts in various modes. Very few teachers used the strategyof viewing the objects of study as constructed and problematic in nature (12.8%). Mostrespondents thought their approaches were communicative and experiential (70.2%) andstudent centred (63.8%). They least favoured strategies that were teacher centred (8.5%)and accommodated individual difference (8.5%).

Professional development

Three items examined immersion teachers’ professional development (PD): approachesto maintain and improve language skills and cultural knowledge, ways to participate inPD activities, and reasons for PD (see Table 1). Generally, immersion teachers engagedin a variety of approaches to maintain and improve their language skills and culturalknowledge. The most common approaches were English TV and radio (78.7%), prepar-ing lessons for teaching English (76.6%), and reading English magazines and newspapers(66%). Few teachers attended English cultural events and social activities (25.5%) or trav-elled in English regions (17%). When asked to specify the PD activities in which they hadparticipated, the immersion teachers primarily referred to teaching as a researcher in theclassroom (63.8%), implementation of new curriculum (55.3%), and collaborative plan-ning and teaching (53.2%). Few teachers indicated mini-courses, correspondence courses,or university courses (23.4%), or participation in a professional committee at the local,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


Table 1. Immersion teachers’ professional development.

Approaches to maintain English Reasons for PDSocial interaction 34% Teaching immersion English 63.8%English TV and radio 78.7% Teaching immersion subjects 57.4%Reading 66% Improving teaching strategies 74.5%Travel in English regions 17% Meeting individual student needs 21.3%Taking courses 51.1% Motivating immersion students 59.6%Preparing and teaching lessonsAttending conferencesWritingAttending cultural events

Participation in PDCollaborative planning and teachingPeer coaching and mentoringSelf-directed PDImplementation of new curriculumTeachers as researcherWorkshops and conferencesCoursesProfessional committeeOther

76.6%34%42.6%25.5%

53.2%29.8%38.3%55.3%63.8%27.7%23.4%17%4.3%

Integrating subject matter withlanguage development

Learning about assessment andevaluation

Learning about second languageacquisition

Learning about teacher developmentTeaching English cultureCommunicating with parentsClassroom managementImproving English language

proficiencyOther

36.2%

34%

31.9%

51.1%55.3%42.6%44.7%51.1%

6.1%

provincial or national level (17%). Motivation for PD was primarily classroom teachingrelated such as improving teaching strategies (74.5%) and teaching immersion Englishlanguage (63.8%). Few teachers reported meeting individual student needs (21.3%) andlearning about second language acquisition (31.9%) as their motivation for professionaldevelopment.

Perceptions about immersion

Teachers’ perceptions about immersion were examined from four aspects: perceivedoutcomes of immersion, major benefits for immersion students, major areas needingimprovement, and the major challenges associated with immersion teaching (see Table 2).When asked about their perceived outcomes of immersion, the respondents most oftenreferred to enhancing English learning (83%) and more frequent use of English in dailylife (72.3%). They perceived learning subjects other than English or Chinese as the leastintended outcome (14.9%). When asked about major benefits for immersion students,the respondents generally answered development of motivation in learning and inquir-ing (59.6%), and development of positive cross-cultural attitudes (48.9%). Developmentof preparation to enter international programs was considered the least possible benefit(21.3%).

Major areas which teachers felt immersion education needed to improve were in-service programs and ongoing professional development (68.1%) and teaching andlearning materials (57.4%). In contrast, only 6.4% of immersion teachers thought pre-service programs needed improvement. The most significant challenges in immersionteaching in China were indicated as teacher proficiency in English (55.3%), and balancebetween English and subject content learning (46.8%). The teachers felt the least challengewas assessment and evaluation (17%).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


Table 2. Perceptions about immersion.

Perceived outcomes of immersion Major areas needed to improveEnhancing English learningEnhancing Chinese learningEnhancing learning subject matterMore positive attitudes toward EnglishHigher motivationMore frequent use of English in daily life

Benefits for studentsDevelopment of bilingualismDevelopment of high self-esteemDevelopment of motivationDevelopment of preparation to enter

international programsDevelopment of positive cross-cultural

attitudesOther

83%21.3%14.9%36.2%61.7%72.3%

44.7%38.3%59.6%21.3%

48.9%

4.3%

Educational policy and curriculumdesign

Teaching and learning designInstructional approaches and

strategiesPre-service programsIn-service programsTeacher certification and

qualification

Major challengesTeacher proficiency in EnglishStudent proficiency in EnglishBalance between Chinese and

EnglishBalance between English and

subjectsCollaboration among teachers,

school administrators and parentsAssessment and evaluation

38.3%

57.4%27.7%

6.4%68.1%21.3%

55.3%25.5%25.5%

46.8%

34%

17%

Relationships between teachers’ educational background, teacher characteristics, andtheir professional development

Internal reliability by Cronbach’s alpha was first computed before conducting regres-sion analysis. Internal reliability examines the consistency with items that measure thesame general construct. Scores on similar items should be related (internally consistent),and scores for each item should also contribute some unique information. In the study,Cronbach’s alpha was conducted with three general constructs: educational background(four items), teacher characteristics (four items), and PD (three items). The results were.72, .82, and .89 respectively, all at the acceptable level. Then we combined item scoresunder each general construct together and created scores for the three general constructsfor subsequent regression analysis.

Assumptions for conducting regression analysis were examined which included linear-ity of relationships, homoscedasticity, and absence of outliers (Stevens, 2002). The resultsindicated no violation of those assumptions. Regression analysis using ‘enter’ was com-puted to examine whether there were any relationships between educational background,teacher characteristics, and their PD. Based on the previous research literature, such a rela-tionship has only been researched implicitly and separately (Day & Shapson, 1996). Then,stepwise regression was used more descriptively to explore individual items within theseconstructs once the predictive utility of the overall constructs was established. As discussedearlier, educational background was examined by four variables: educational qualification,general education component, subject and linguistic knowledge, and immersion knowl-edge. Teacher characteristics were examined by four variables: years of teaching in schools,years of teaching in immersion, perceived language proficiency, and perceived teachingcompetence. Three variables examined immersion teachers’ PD: primary approaches toenhance language skills and cultural knowledge, major participation in PD activities, andreasons for PD.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


Table 3. Regression analysis.

Method Predictors Beta t p

Model 1 Enter (Constant) −.681Educational background .291 2.088 .044Teacher characteristics .422 3.031 .004

Model 2 Stepwise (Constant) 4.199Perceived teaching

competence.401 2.834 .007

Subject and linguisticknowledge

.314 2.222 .033



General educationcomponent

.311 2.435 .020



Notes: Model 1 dependent variable: overall PD.Model 2 dependent variable: primary approaches to enhance language skills and cultural knowledge.Model 3 dependent variable: major participation in PD activities.Model 4 dependent variable: reasons for PD.

In total, four sets of regression analyses were conducted (see Table 3). First,regression analysis using ‘enter’ was performed to examine whether there were anyrelationships between the general constructs of educational background, teacher char-acteristics, and their PD. Using the combined scores for each of the general con-structs, it was found that educational background and teacher characteristics signifi-cantly predicted immersion teachers’ PD (F(2, 37) = 8.48, p = .001). Educationalbackground and teacher characteristics together predicted 31.4% of teachers’ profes-sional development. Therefore, the predictive utility of the overall constructs wasconfirmed.

Then, stepwise regression was computed descriptively and specifically to explorethe relationships between four variables of educational background and four variablesof teacher characteristics with each of three individual variables of PD. Using primaryapproaches to enhance language skills and cultural knowledge of PD as the dependentvariable, it was found that 29.2% of variance was predicted by the combination of per-ceived teaching competence as well as subject and linguistic knowledge (F(2, 36) = 7.14,p = .002). Teachers who perceived themselves with high teaching competence and whoreceived training in subject and linguistic knowledge were more likely to enhance theirlanguage skills and cultural knowledge. Using major participation in PD activities as thedependent variable, it was found that 65.5% of participation in PD activities was predictedby the combination of perceived teaching competence and the general education compo-nent (F(2, 36) = 13.16, p = .000). Those who perceived themselves with high teachingcompetence and who received training in the general education component were morelikely to participate in PD activities. Using reasons for PD as the dependent variable, itwas found that 14.9% was predicted by perceived teaching competence (F(1, 37) = 6.46,p = .015). Those who perceived themselves with high teaching competence seemed to havemore reasons for PD.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


Discussion

Not surprisingly, the study revealed that female teachers play a dominant role in primaryEnglish immersion education in China. A majority of immersion teachers were under30, and typically in the early stages of their teaching careers. Despite a majority havinga teacher certificate, many had limited educational qualifications and training; as noted,certification for specialised immersion teaching is not required in China. Prospective teach-ers who graduate from normal schools, colleges, and universities can become licensedprimary teachers automatically. Those who do not go through a teacher education pro-gram can become licensed by obtaining credits and passing exams on some requiredteacher certification courses. Compared to Canadian immersion teaching counterparts whohave completed postsecondary studies (including a four-year undergraduate and one-yearBEd), fewer than half of those teachers surveyed in our study had acquired a four-yearundergraduate education. In terms of educational training, only 21.3% obtained train-ing in all aspects for teaching in immersion. As Hu (2007) describes, most immersionteachers in China have been trained to be English teachers or subject teachers and they‘lack systematic training either in subject content or in English, let alone pedagogyof bilingual education’ (Hu, 2007, p. 101). Overall, immersion teachers in our studydid not have an extensive educational background. The result is consistent with whatwas claimed to be constraints in bilingual education in China (Feng & Wang, 2007;Hu, 2007).

Teaching experience in this group contrasts sharply with that of the immersion teach-ers in Canada (Wilton, Obadia, Roy, Saunders, & Tafler, 1984). The Chinese immersionteachers in our study had taught for a much shorter period of time compared to Canadianimmersion teachers in both regular and immersion programs. More than half of the teach-ers in China had taught immersion for only one or two years, while their counterpartsin Canada had a wide range of years’ experience in teaching immersion. Few Chineseimmersion teachers (15%) reported having taught immersion for more than five years. Therelative inexperience our respondents had in teaching immersion suggests that immersionin China is still in a developing stage, even though the participants in this study, non-nativeEnglish speakers, and new or newer teachers, largely perceived their language proficiencyand teaching competence to be above average.

The size of the immersion classes was fairly large (around 50 students), which is signif-icantly different compared with the classroom environment in Canada. On the other hand,these English immersion teachers reported teaching for an average of 5.86 hours per week,which is relatively low compared with school teachers in Canada (Day & Shapson, 1996).It should be noted that the large class size is not surprising for teachers (both immersionand non-immersion teachers) in China as regular classrooms can hold up to 80 students(Hu, 2007).

Immersion programs in this study cater to a predominantly native Mandarin-speakingstudent population. A majority of immersion students spoke Mandarin as their firstlanguage, and some were reported to also speak dialects such as Cantonese (21.2%).Students were reported to have a large variation in intelligence, academic learning, andsocio-economic status. Overall, student characteristics of this group reflect diversity ofsocio-economic status and intelligence in a comparatively linguistically homogeneouspopulation of the three Chinese schools.

Research in immersion has long advocated the learning of academic content throughthe immersion language rather than the simple development of a foreign language. Thoughnot a high percentage (23.4%), the study shows that immersion teachers have begun tointegrate content goals with language goals in their teaching, which is recommended in

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


the 2003 new English National Curriculum Standards (Ministry of Education, 2003). Theteaching practices of this group also reflect the requirements and recommendations of thenew National Curriculum Standards toward moving away from traditional teacher-centred,knowledge-transmitting, and grammar-based pedagogy (Cortazzi & Jin, 1996). Immersionteachers in this study focused on a communicative, interactive, and learner-centred teach-ing approach. When they taught English, they aimed for a more holistic approach byteaching the language in a meaningful and contextualised way. When they taught subjects,they emphasised learning as a process of inquiry, and used language as a cognitive tool.

However, after a period of teaching time, teachers’ L2 begins to deteriorate and theirvocabulary may be shaped by and limited to the curriculum and textbooks (Day & Shapson,1996). Therefore, it is important to conceptualise teacher development as a lifelong pro-cess. As the participants of this group were non-native English speakers, it is even moreimperative for them to utilise English in various contexts within the community for lan-guage enhancement and cultural acquisition. In the study, while immersion teachers usedvarious approaches to enhance their language skills and cultural knowledge, they generallylacked opportunities for authentic two-way interaction with native speakers. They seemedto be more engaged in one-way, non-authentic contexts, such as watching TV and listeningto the radio, preparing lessons, and reading books and newspapers. Whether they could notafford, or had limited opportunities for, more authentic contact within an L1 community isunknown.

The results of this survey indicate that the most frequently participated forms of PDwere teacher as a researcher, implementation of new curriculum, and collaborative plan-ning and teaching. The reason might be due to the implementation of the 2003 EnglishNational Curriculum Standards. Considering that China is a populous, multi-ethnic, andmulti-cultural nation with seriously uneven economic, social and educational development,the Standards recognise the diversity and complexity of curriculum implementation in theprocess of classroom learning and teaching (Zhu, 2007). Therefore, there are flexibilitiesin educational contents and objectives, teaching strategies, and textbooks and resources(Zhang & Adamson, 2007; Zhu, 2007). Through collaboration, teachers may achieve cur-riculum goals by using different textbooks and teaching strategies. On the other hand,immersion teachers had limited access to formal educational resources such as workshops,conferences, and courses.

The immersion teachers in the study perceived a variety of reasons for their PD.Improving teaching strategies and teaching immersion English were the most frequentlymentioned. The results indicate that the distinguishing characteristics of immersion peda-gogy need to be articulated more fully and explicitly. Although the new curriculum allowsmuch flexibility in teaching strategies, it offers little guidance on how experience andactivities can be chosen, interpreted, realised, connected, and expanded in practice. As therespondents were non-native English speakers with limited educational qualifications andtraining, there is much room for improvement for this group of primary immersion teachersin English language proficiency.

This group of teachers perceived English learning and more frequent use of English asthe major outcomes of an immersion program at the macro level. The immersion teachersin the study perceived that major benefits for immersion students were the developmentof motivation and positive cross-cultural attitudes in learning and inquiring. A discrepancyseems to exist between primary immersion teachers’ perceptions about the objectives at themacro (intended) and micro (enacted) level. Why and how such a gap exists is not clear. In-service programs and ongoing PD were considered to be the main areas which immersionprograms needed to improve, while the pre-service program was the least major challenge.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


This perception may rest on the fact that in-service training and ongoing PD provide muchmore specialised preparation than pre-service training does, to meet the unique challengesposed by immersion teaching (Fortune & Jorstad, 1996). English language proficiency wasa major challenge for immersion teaching at the micro level. Again, the results indicate thatteachers’ lack of competence is the major constraint in immersion in China that seriouslycompromises the quality of immersion education.

Previous literature indicated the importance of educational background and teachercharacteristics to professional development (Day & Shapson, 1996, 2001; Wallace, 2009).The results of our regression analysis provide support to the literature claiming that edu-cational background and teacher characteristics appear to be the significant indicatorsof immersion teachers’ professional development. Specifically, in this particular contextwith this group of immersion teachers, perceived teaching competence and subject andlinguistic knowledge significantly predicted the quantity of immersion teachers’ primaryapproaches to enhance skills and cultural knowledge; perceived teaching competence andgeneral education component significantly predicted their major participation in PD activ-ities; perceived teaching competence predicted their reason for PD. In other words, thehigher the teaching competence, the more these teachers received training in subject andlinguistic knowledge, the more likely they were involved in PD activities, and the morethey felt they had reason to professionally develop their skills. In short, perceived teachingcompetence seems to be a major factor determining immersion teachers’ PD. The researchliterature has documented well the relationship between competence and intrinsic moti-vation. By striving to seek knowledge and meet challenges, motivated teachers develop asense of competence in their abilities (Pintrich, 2003). This has implications for immersioneducation in China in that immersion teachers who picture themselves as more qualifiedand competent are more likely to be engaged in PD. Immersion teachers who receive train-ing on subject and linguistic knowledge are more likely to use approaches to enhancetheir language skills and cultural knowledge. Immersion teachers who receive training infoundation, methodology, and practicum are more likely to be engaged in PD activities.

Conclusion

Though still in its relatively early stages, English immersion programs in China recruitan increasing number of students every year and have the potential to impact on mil-lions of students within the Chinese contexts. This study examined English immersionprograms from the perspectives of teachers from three schools in China. Specifically, thestudy investigated educational background, teacher and student characteristics, teachingpractices, professional development, and their perceptions about immersion. This studyfurther investigated the relationship among the factors contributing to their continuousprofessional development.

The findings of this study thus provide implications for English immersion programsacross China as well as potential lessons that can be learned within Asian contexts wherecontent-based instruction in English becomes apparent. In addition, this study pointsout the urgent need for further engagement in a combination of pre-service education,in-service training and continuous professional development to improve teachers’ teach-ing competence so that they can meet the demand for high-quality English immersioneducation in China in the long term (Hu, 2007).

Although this study revealed some interesting findings, the non-probability, small-scale sampling, and a self-reported questionnaire study may limit the generalisation of theresults to other circumstances. Discrepancies might exist between what immersion teachers

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


perceived/reported they practised in this study and what they actually practised. To teachimmersion in a class of 50 students may also entail more teacher-centred teaching thanwhat our participants reported. Therefore, the use of multiple data collection for futureresearch is recommended in order to develop multifaceted insights that are broadly appli-cable and rich in observed detail. Adequate sample size and more open-ended questions inthe survey questionnaire, followed by in-depth interview data, would enhance the validityand depth of studies of this nature. Further, recent studies also showed a link between inter-cultural competence and teaching effectiveness (e.g., DeJaeghere & Cao, 2009), which wasnot examined in this study, but should be another area for future studies when investigatingimmersion teacher education in China.

Despite its shortcomings, the study provides empirical evidence about primary immer-sion teachers in China, and provides us with insights into one of the key important aspectsof immersion education – the teachers. After all, teachers play an essential role in thesuccess of immersion education.

AcknowledgementsThe authors acknowledge the grant support from the Social Sciences and Humanities ResearchCouncil of Canada and express sincere thanks to Professor Haiyan Qiang, South China NormalUniversity, and her team for their support with the data collection.

Note1. ‘Second language immersion and students’ academic success’ is a project funded by the

Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. This study involves multi-phaseddata collection including data on English language proficiency (L2), academic achievement inChinese (L1) and mathematics, cognitive reading measures as well as classroom observationdata from three schools in China. This study surveyed all the primary immersion teachers whowere teaching in the three schools.

Notes on contributorsXiaomei Song is a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Education, Queen’s University, Canada.Her primary research interests are test fairness, program evaluation, learner characteristics and testperformance, and teacher education.

Liying Cheng, PhD, is an Associate Professor and a Director of the Assessment and Evaluation Groupat the Faculty of Education, Queen’s University. She is also Yunshan Chair Professor, GuandongUniversity of Foreign Studies, China. Her primary research interests are the impact of large-scaletesting on instruction, the relationship between classroom assessment and instruction, and the aca-demic and professional acculturation of international and new immigrant students, workers, andprofessionals to Canada.

ReferencesAdamson, B. (2007). Depoliticisation in the English curriculum. In A. Feng (Ed.), Bilingual edu-

cation in China: Practices, policies, and concepts (pp. 34–48). Clevedon, UK: MultilingualMatters.

Bialystok, E., Luk, G., & Kwan, E. (2005). Bilingualism, biliteracy, and learning to read: Interactionsamong languages and writing systems. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9, 43–61.

Cirno, P.T., Pollard-Durodola, S.D., Foorman, B.R., Carlson, C.D., & Francis, D.J. (2007). Teachercharacteristics, classroom instruction, and student literacy and language outcomes in bilingualkindergartners. The Elementary School Journal, 107, 341–364.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


Collins, J., Stead, S., & Woolfrey, S. (2004). Rethinking teaching strategies for intensive French.Canadian Modern Language Review, 60, 355–372.

Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L. (1996). English teaching and learning in China. Language Teaching, 29,61–80.

Day, E.M., & Shapson, S. (1996). A national survey: French immersion teachers’ preparation andtheir professional development needs. In E.M. Day & S.M. Shapson (Eds.), Studies in ImmersionEducation (pp. 117–130). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Day, E.M., & Shapson, S. (2001). Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teachingin French immersion: An experimental study. Language Learning, 51, 47–80.

DeCourcy, M. (1995). French with a little help from their friends – Learning together in Australianlate immersion programs. Canadian Modern Language, 51, 537–554.

DeCourcy, M., Warren, J., & Burston, M. (2002). Children from diverse backgrounds in animmersion program. Language and Education, 16, 112–126.

DeJaeghere, J.G., & Cao, Y. (2009). Developing US teachers’ intercultural competence: Doesprofessional development matter? International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 33, 437–447.

Feng, Z., & Wang, J. (2007). Integrated English-A bilingual teaching model in Southern China. InA. Feng (Ed.), Bilingual education in China: Practices, policies, and concepts (pp. 147–165).Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Flewelling, J. (1995). Addressing the challenge for FSL teachers: How to maintain and improvelanguage, pedagogical skills and cultural knowledge. Canadian Modern Language Review, 52,22–33.

Fortune, T., & Jorstad, H. (1996). US immersion programs: A national survey. Foreign LanguageAnnals, 29, 163–190.

Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education.Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.

Goldberg, E., & Noels, K.A. (2006). Motivation, ethnic identity, and post-secondary education lan-guage choices of graduates of intensive French language programs. Canadian Modern LanguageReview, 62, 423–447.

Hu, G. (2007). The juggernaut of Chinese-English bilingual education. In A. Feng (Ed.), Bilingualeducation in China: Practices, policies, and concepts (pp. 94–126). Clevedon, UK: MultilingualMatters.

Lapkin, S., Hart, D., & Swain, M. (1991). Early and middle French immersion programs – French-language outcomes. Canadian Modern Language Review, 48, 11–40.

Lapkin, S., Swain, M., & Shapson, S. (1990). French immersion research agenda for the 90s.Canadian Modern Language Review, 46, 638–674.

Lapkin, S., Swain, M., & Smith, M. (2002). Reformulation and the learning of French pronominalverbs in a Canadian French immersion context. The Modern Language Journal, 86, 485–507.

Laplante, B. (1996). Teachers’ beliefs and instructional strategies in science: Pushing analysis further.Science Education, 81, 277–294.

Li, D. (1999). Modernization and teacher education in China. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15,179–192.

Met, M., & Lorenz, E. (1997). Lessons from US immersion programs: Two decades of experi-ence. In R.K. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education: International perspectives(pp. 243–264). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Ministry of Education. (2003). Quanrizhi yiwu jiayu putong gaoji zhongxue yingyu kecheng biaozhun[English curriculum standards for full-time compulsory education and senior secondary school].Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press.

Moeller, P. (1989). French student-teachers: Who knows how good they really are? Canadian ModernLanguage, 45, 445–456.

Obadia, A.A., & Theriault, C.M.L. (1995). Attrition in French immersion programs: Possiblesolutions (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED400674)

Pintrich, P.R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learningand teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 667–686.

Safty, A. (1991). French immersion in Canada: Theory and practice. International Review ofEducation, 37, 473–488.

Stevens, J.P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014


Turnbull, M., Lapkin, S., & Hart, D. (2001). Grade 3 immersion students’ performance in literacyand mathematics: Province-wide results from Ontario (1998–99). Canadian Modern LanguageReview, 58, 9–26.

Walker, C.L., & Tedick, D.J. (2000). The complexity of immersion education: Teachers address theissues. The Modern Language Review, 84, 5–27.

Wallace, M.R. (2009). Making sense of the links: Professional development, teacher practices, andstudent achievement. Teachers College Record, 111, 573–596.

Wilton, F., Obadia, A., Roy, R., Saunders, B., & Tafler, R. (1984). National study of French immer-sion teacher training and professional development. Ottawa: Canadian Association of ImmersionTeachers.

Zhang, E.Y., & Adamson, B. (2007). Implementing language policy: Lessons from primary schoolEnglish. In A. Feng (Ed.), Bilingual education in China: Practices, policies, and concepts (pp.166–181). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Zhu, M. (2007). Recent Chinese experiences in curriculum reform. Prospects: Quarterly Review ofComparative Education, 37, 223–235.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

The

Aga

Kha

n U

nive

rsity

] at

03:

58 1

8 O

ctob

er 2

014

Documents

Investigating primary English immersion teachers in China: background, instructional contexts, professional development, and perceptions