FRAME ANALYSIS OF MICROTEACHING IN A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE OF TEACHERS OF ENGLISH AS AN ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE IN SOUTHERN BRAZIL
The purpose of this study is to discuss the discourse practice of microteaching in a teaching community consisting mainly of students pursuing the teacher certification in English as an Additional Language in southern Brazil. The study relies on qualitative methods of data generation and analysis as well as on the framework of interactional sociolinguistics. Results suggest microteaching is a highly complex practice, with a recurring pattern. Additionally, they suggest that students who are considered successful in a microteaching session are those who produce such pattern in their micro-classes. We conclude by suggesting that informing participants about the expectations regarding the structure of microteaching before they engage in it is desirable.
Amobi, A. (2005). Preservice Teachers’ Reflectivity on the Sequence and Consequences of Teaching Actions in a Microteaching Experience. Teacher Education Quarterly 32(1), pp. 115–130. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ795309.pdf
Bateson, G. (1955). A theory of play and fantasy. Psychiatric Research Reports, 2, pp. 39–51. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13297882/
Bell, N. D. (2007). Microteaching: What is it that is going on here? Linguistics and Education, 18(1), pp. 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2007.04.002
Duranti, A.. (1997). Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge∕New York: Cambridge University Press.
Erickson, F.. (1990). Qualitative Methods . In: R. Linn; F. Erickson. Quantitative Methods Qualitative Methods (pp. 0-77). London: Macmillan.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: an essay on the organization of experience. New York: Harper.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Gumperz, J. (2005). Interactional sociolinguistics: A personal perspective. In: D. Schiffrin; D. Tannen; H. E. Hamilton. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 215-228). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.
Kim, E..(2006). Comparison of discourse markers used by English teachers in the pre- and in-service teacher training program. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea, 14(2), pp. 99-116. http://db.koreascholar.com/article?code=338022
Kirsch, W.; Sarmento, S. (2018) Workshops as an avenue of teacher development in a Language without Borders community in Southern Brazil. BRAZILIAN ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING JOURNAL, 9, pp. 115-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.15448/2178-3640.2018.1.30835
Ko, H. (2013). Overuse of the discourse filler “so” in micro-teaching talks by Koreans”. Language Research, 49(1), pp. 25-44. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0742051X9500037K
Mason, J. 2002. Qualitative researching. Second edition. London∕Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Metcalf, K. K; Hammer, M.; Kahlich, P.(1996). Alternatives To Field-Based Experiences the Comparative Effects of Oncampus Laboratories. Teacher Education, 12(3), pp. 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(95)00037-K
Ping, W. (2013). Micro-teaching : a powerful tool to embedding the English teacher certification testing in the development of English teaching methodologies. International Journal of English Language and Literature Studies, 2(3), pp. 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(95)00037-K
Ryoo, H. (2017). Discourse Analysis of Microteaching: Dynamic Identities and Situational Frames. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea, 25(2), pp. 165-195. http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/86509/1/2.%202223381.pdf
Saldaña, J. (2009) Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. London: Sage Publications.
Sarmento, S.; Kirsch, W. (2015) Inglês sem fronteiras: Uma mirada ao contexto de prática pelo prisma da formação de professores. Ilha Do Desterro 68(3), pp. 47-59. https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8026.2015v68n1p47
Slagoski, J.. D. (2007). Practicum: Microteaching for Non-Native Speaking Teacher Trainees. English Teacher Forum, 45(4), pp. 32–37. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1099409
Tannen, D.. (1979). What is in a Frame for Underlying Expectations. In: R. Freedle. (Ed.). New Direction in Discourse Processing (pp. 137-181). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Tannen, D. (2014). Socioloinguistics: Interactional Sociolinguistic. In W. J Frawley (Ed.). Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics (pp. 8-13). Oxford University Press.
Torga, M. (1986). L’universal, c’est le local moins les murs: Trás-os-Montes. Bordeaux: William Blake and Co.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice : learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.∕New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press.
Young, R. F. (2009). Discursive practice in language learning and teaching. Chichester ; Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
Young, R. F. (2010). Discursive Practice in Language Learning and Teaching. The Modern Language Journal, 94(4), pp. 683–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.08.006
Copyright (c) 2021 BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The submission of originals to BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal as the site of original publication.
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited.