English language learners, and the perceived preparedness, self efficacy and knowledge of preservice teachers Aydin Durgunoglu, & Trudie Hughes University of Minnesota Duluth The composition of the student body in US schools is becoming much more diverse. More than half of US schools have students from many linguistic backgrounds in mainstream classrooms. We call these students “isolated ELLs”. Teachers in these classrooms shoulder the main responsibility for the teaching and learning of these students, including their language development. The focus of the current study is the self efficacy, preparation and competency of teachers regarding isolated ELLs. Two studies on preservice teachers’ Self-efficacy; Attitudes; Perceived Preparedness; Actual knowledge regarding the isolated English Language Learners (ELLs) in their general classrooms. Self efficacy predicts the amount of effort expended, persistence at the task, resilience when facing obstacles, and stress (Bandura, 1993, 2004). Hope: includes self-perceptions of the capacities to conceptualize goals, develop strategies to reach these goals and to maintain motivation for using these strategies (e.g., Snyder, 2002). Teacher self efficacy is related to student achievement (e.g., RAND Report: Armor, Conry-Osquera, Cox, King, McDonnell, Pascal, Pauly, Zellman, 1976; Tschannen-Moran, Woolfolk Hoy & Hoy, 1998). Self efficacy is related to preparation (e.g., Darling-Hammond, Chung and Frelow, 2002) Results INTRODUCTION Participants Sixty-two preservice teachers at a Midwestern University Had completed their coursework and diversity training Were currently doing their student teaching Materials 1) Knowledge test Eight terms to define (e.g., immersion, late exit, sheltered instruction..) Five short answer questions. Two questions about the demographics of ELL students. Three open-ended questions about assessment and teaching/learning strategies for ELL students in general classrooms. Each question worth 2 points, with partial credit possible. 2) Survey 27 statements 5-point Likert scale (1-strongly disagree 5=strongly agree) Based on the by Darling-Hammond, Chung & Frelow (2002) survey. Specifically addressing the teaching and learning of ELL students. Tapping into four constructs: (a) self efficacy and (b) perceived preparation regarding ELL students (c) attitudes towards ELL students in mainstream classrooms (d) attitudes towards parents of ELL students Example items from the survey Self efficacy (α =83) 1. If I try hard, I can get through to most of the ELL students. (RAND-2 item) 2. I am confident in my ability to teach all ELL students to high levels. Perceived preparation (α =.81) 1. I am prepared to tailor instructional and other services to the needs to ELL students. 2. I am knowledgeable of teaching strategies and instructional practices for ELL students that are developmentally appropriate. Attitude towards ELLs in the classroom (α =.79) 1. ELL students in the general education classroom setting slows down the progress of the other students in the class. 2. Inclusion of ELL students in general education classes is good in theory, but does not work in the real world. Attitude towards parents of ELLs (α=.68) 1. Immigrant parents do not try to learn English. 2. In order for ELLs to learn English, their parents should attempt to speak English. STUDY 1 The means and standard deviations on the survey and the knowledge test mean (sd)max Survey Attitude-students 2.25(.69)5 Attitude-parents2.52(.60)5 Perceived preparedness3.08(.69)5 Self-efficacy3.23(.57)5 Knowledgetest6.29(2.83)26 Multiple regression analyses Predicting knowledge score: Preparedness, self efficacy and attitudes towards entered into the equation Only significant predictor: Perceived preparedness (beta =.321), R 2= 10% of variance of the knowledge test. Predicting self efficacy score: Preparedness and attitudes towards students entered into the equation. Only significant predictor: Perceived preparedness (beta=.663), R 2 = 44% of the variance in self-efficacy scores STUDY 2 Objective To verify the knowledge test and self-reported efficacy and preparedness scores with behavioral observations. Participants Randomly selected preservice teachers who had isolated ELLs in their classrooms. Four Caucasian female pre-service teachers aged 20 – 28 (were also in Study 1). Student teaching in high schools (a paucity of research regarding ELLs in high schools). Methods Two separate observations of the teachers, one teacher in two different classrooms = 10 1-hour observations. Detailed filed notes and a a 61-item observation checklist to document the use (or non-use) of the types of strategies, content delivery methods, assessment procedures, language strategies incorporated in the lesson. References Armor, D., Conry-Oseguera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L., Pascal, A., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading program in selected Los Angeles Minority schools. Rand Institute report, R2007-LAUSD. Bandura, A. (1993) Perceived self efficacy in cognitive development and functioning Educational Psychologist, 28, Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory for personal and social change by enabling media In A. Singhal, M.J. Cody. E.M. Rogers & M. Sabido (Eds). Entertainment-Education and social change. (pp ). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Darling-Hammond, L., Chung, R., & Frelow, F. (2002). Variation in teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, No. 4, Snyder, C. R., Lopez, S. J., Shorey, H. S., Rand, K. L., & Feldman, D. B. (2003). Hope theory, measurements, and applications to school psychology. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), Across the 10 observations, three major themes : Benign neglect: An implicit understanding between the teacher and the ELL student to leave each other alone. Preservice teachers did not interact with the ELL students and the ELL students did not call attention to themselves. Peer support: Isolated ELLs were helped by their peers the most. Lack of mentoring: There was no mentoring by supervising teachers regarding the ELLs in the classroom. Qualitative results Conclusions The preservice teachers did not seem to be well prepared to interact with (isolated) ELLs likely to be in their future classrooms. This low level of preparedness was reflected in their self efficacy reports, knowledge and actual behavior in the classroom. Teachers’ self efficacy (via their perceived preparedness) is related to the classroom climate and outcomes. These results suggest that teacher education programs may need to ponder how new teachers are prepared to face the changing demographics in the US schools. Attitude- students Attitude- parents Perceived preparatio n Self-efficacyKnowledge Attitude- students *-.24 a a Attitude-parents Perceived preparation *.32* Self-efficacy1.0.26* Knowledge1.0