Schlagworte
rozwijanie refleksji
przyszły nauczyciel języka obcego
Zitationsvorschlag
Abstract
Duo-ethnography is a research methodology, through which people of difference reconceptualise their histories of a particular phenomenon in juxtaposition with one another. Although initiated by researchers, duo- ethnographies can also be used as an innovative pedagogic tool that develops deep reflection in teacher candidates. After discussing the efficacy of duo-ethnography, a onesemester-long duo-ethnographic study is escribed, which was conducted by the author with six preservice English teachers. In the study, the participants worked in pairs (duo) and reflected on their own understandings of language teaching and learning (stage one), themselves as learners and future language teachers on the basis of the data from stage one (stage two), their conversational partners as learners and teachers on the basis of the data from stage one (stage three) and, finally, on the value of the duo-ethnographic project in language teacher preparation courses from their own perspective (stage four). The presentation ends with the author’s remarks about the project as a learning tool that undoubtedly encourages students to reflect but, on the other hand, has limitations that have to be acknowledged if duo- ethnography is employed as a pedagogic instrument in the classroom context.
Literaturhinweise
Banting, N. i Barret, J. 2017. „Right and wrong (and good enough): A duoethnography within graduate curriculum studies course”. (w:) Theorizing Curriculum Studies, Teacher Education and Research through Duoethnographic Pedagogy. (red. J. Norris i R. D. Sawyer). New York: Palgrave Macmillan, s. 39-62.
Baran-Łucarz, M. (red.) 2014. Refleksja w uczeniu się i nauczaniu języków obcych. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.
Bhabha, H. K. 1994. The Location of Culture. New York: Routledge.
Borg, S. 2006. Teacher Cognition and Language Education. London: Continuum.
Breault, R. 2015. „Dialogic life history in preservice teacher education”. (w:) Theorizing Curriculum Studies, Teacher Education and Research through Duoethnographic Pedagogy. (red. J. Norris i R. D. Sawyer), New York: Palgrave Macmillan, s. 63-84.
Brown, H. i Barrett, J. 2015. „Duoethnography as a pedagogical tool that encourages deep reflection”. (w:) Theorizing Curriculum Studies, Teacher Education and Research through Duoethnographic Pedagogy. (red. J. Norris i R. D. Sawyer). New York: Palgrave Macmillan, s. 85-111.
Bruner, J. S. 1960. The Process of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Bruner, J. S. 1966. Towards a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Chan, K. W. 2011. „Preservice teacher education students’ epistemological beliefs and conceptions about learning”. Instructional Science, 39: 87-108.
Dewey, J. 1910/1933. How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process. Lexington, MA: Heath.
Edge, J. 2011. The Reflexive Teacher Educator in TESOL. New York–London: Routledge.
Farrell, T. S. C. 2006. „‘The teacher is an octopus’: Uncovering preservice English teachers’ prior beliefs through metaphor analysis”. RELC, 37(2): 236-248.
Farrell, T. S. C. 2007. Reflective Language Teaching. From Research to Practice. London: Continuum.
Farrell, T. S. C. i Baecher, L. 2017. Reflecting on Critical Incidents in Language Education. London: Bloomsbury.
Fives, H., Lacatena, N. i Gerard, L. 2015. „Teachers’ beliefs about teaching (and learning)”. (w:) International Handbook of Research on Teachers’ Beliefs. (red. H. Fives i M. G. Gill), New York: Routledge, s. 249-265.
Gabryś-Barker, D. 2008. „The research orientation and preferences of pre-service EFL teachers”. (w:) Investigating English Language Learning and Teaching. (red. M. Pawlak). Poznań–Kalisz: Adam Mickiewicz University, s. 31-48.
Gabryś-Barker, D. 2012. Reflectivity in Pre-service Teacher Education. A Survey of Theory and Practice. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Graham, S., Santos, D. i Francis-Brophy, E. 2014. „Teacher beliefs about listening in a foreign language”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 40: 44-60.
Green, A. (red.) 2011. Becoming a Reflective English Teacher. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Li, L. 2017. Social interaction and teacher cognition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Löfström, E. i Poom-Valickis, K. 2013. „Beliefs about teaching: Persistent or malleable? A longitudinal study of prospective student teachers’ beliefs”. Teaching and Teacher Education, 35: 104-113.
Love, R. i Kiczkowiak, M. 2016. „Native-speakerism and the complexity of personal experience: A duoethnographic study”. Cogent Education, 3: 1-16.
Lund, D. A., Holmes, K., Hanson, A., Sitter, K., Scott, D. i Grain, K. 2017. „Exploring duoethnography in graduate research courses”. (w:) Theorizing Curriculum Studies, Teacher Education and Research through Duoethnographic Pedagogy. (red. J. Norris i R. D. Sawyer). New York: Palgrave Macmillan, s. 111-132.
Michońska-Stadnik, A. 2013. Teoretyczne i praktyczne podstawy weryfikacji wybranych teorii subiektywnych w kształceniu nauczycieli języków obcych. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.
Norris, J. i Bilash, O. 2016. „A journey toward mutualist teaching and learning: A collaborative reflective practice on community building and democratic classrooms”. (w:) Interdiscplinary Reflective Practice through Duoethnography. (red. R. D. Sawyer i J. Norris), New York: Palgrave Macmillan, s. 41-76.
Norris, J. i Sawyer, R. D. 2012. „Toward a dialogic methodology”. (w:) Duoethnography: Dialogic Methods for Social, Health, and Educational Research. (red. J. Norris, R. D. Sawyer i D. Lund). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press, s. 9-39.
Norris, J., Sawyer, R. D. i White, S. 2017. „Teaching through duoethnography in teacher education and graduate curriculum theory courses”. (w:) Theorizing Curriculum Studies, Teacher Education and Research through Duoethnographic Pedagogy. (red. J. Norris i R. D. Sawyer). New York: Palgrave Macmillan, s. 15-38.
Nusbaum, E. A. i Sitter, K. C. 2016. „Disrupting the Able-Bodied Normativity of Shared Power in the Duoethnographic Process: A Critical, Disability Studies Lens”. Critical Questions in Education (Special Issue), 7(3): 306-317.
Pinar, W. F. 2004. What is Curriculum Theory?. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pollard, A. 2005. Reflective Teaching. London: Continuum.
Razfar, A. 2012. „Narrating beliefs: A language ideologies approach to teacher beliefs”. Anthropology and Education, 43(1): 61-81.
Reinders, H. i Lazaro, N. 2011. „Beliefs, identity and motivation in implementing autonomy: The teacher’s perspective”. (w:) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning. (red. G. Murray i X. Gao). Bristol: Multilingual Matters, s. 125-144.
Sebok, S. S. i Woods, J. C. 2016. „Using duoethnography to cultivate an understanding of professionalism: Developing insights into theory, practice, and self through interdisciplinary conversations”. (w:) Interdiscplinary Reflective Practice through Duoethnography. (red. R. D. Sawyer i J. Norris). New York: Palgrave Macmillan, s. 165-182.
Werbińska, D. 2017. „Nauczyciel języka obcego” – propozycja programowa przedmiotu (na podstawie języka angielskiego). (w:) Nauczyciele języków obcych. (red. E. Andrzejewska i M. Wawrzyniak-Śliwska). Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, s. 133-152.
Lizenz
Copyright (c) 2019 Dorota Werbińska
Dieses Werk steht unter der Lizenz Creative Commons Namensnennung - Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 International.
Autoren:
Die Autoren der zur Veröffentlichung in der Zeitschrift Neofilolog angenommenen Texte sind verpflichtet, den Vertrag über die Erteilung einer kostenlosen Lizenz für die Werke mit der Verpflichtung zur Erteilung einer Sublizenz CC auszufüllen, zu unterzeichnen und an die Adresse der Redaktion zurückzusenden.
Gemäß Vertrag erteilen die Autoren auf die in der Zeitschrift Neofilolog veröffentlichten Texte der Adam-Mickiewicz-Universität in Poznań eine nicht exklusive und kostenlose Lizenz und erlauben die Verwendung der Sublizenz Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0).
Die Autoren behalten das Recht zur weiteren freien Verfügung über das Werk.
Benutzer:
Interessierte Onlinebenutzer dürfen die seit 2017 veröffentlichten Werke unter folgenden Bedingungen nutzen:
- Anerkennung der Urheberschaft - die Verpflichtung, zusammen mit dem verbreiteten Werk Informationen über die Urheberschaft, den Titel, die Quelle (Links zum Originalwerk, DOI) und die Lizenz selbst bereitzustellen;
- ohne Schaffung abgeleiteter Werke - das Werk muss in seiner ursprünglichen Form erhalten bleiben, ohne Zustimmung des Autors dürfen keine Studien, beispielsweise Übersetzungen, verbreitet werden.
Die Urheberrechte aller veröffentlichen Texte sind vorbehalten.
Sonstige:
Die Adam-Mickiewicz-Universität in Poznań behält das Recht auf die Zeitschrift als Gesamtheit (Layout, Grafik, Titel, Umschlagsprojekt, Logo usw.).