University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

(USC Thesis Other)

Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 1
SUPPORT FOR ENGLISH LEARNERS: AN EXAMINATION OF THE IMPACT OF
TEACHER EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON TEACHER
EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION

by

Marianne Geronimo

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2015

Copyright 2015 Marianne Geronimo
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 2
Dedication

This study is dedicated to my mom and dad
who have been my models of faith, humility, selflessness, and love.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 3
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, all glory to God for guiding me down a path that I could not see. This
journey will forever be my life’s testimony.
My heartfelt appreciation goes to my dissertation chair, Dr. Sylvia Rousseau. You taught
me to trust the process and to see beyond the challenge. I could not have done this without you.
A million times – thank you!
To my dissertation committee members, Dr. Paula Carbone and Dr. Eugenia Mora-
Flores: Your expertise and recommendations helped steer me in the right direction. Thank you
so much for your support.
To the four teachers who volunteered their time for this study: Thank you for opening
your classroom doors to me. Your willingness to share your practice demonstrates your
commitment to improving education for all students.
To the Cohort of 2012, especially those who have become lifelong friends: I am so happy
to have shared this experience with all of you. Fight on!
To my past and present students: You have been my greatest teachers.
To the Arroyo Vista Charter School faculty and staff: You set the bar high. Working
alongside each of you has been a blessing. Thank you, thank you, thank you for cheering me on
along the way.
To my past and present grade-level teams: You get me. When I laughed, you laughed.
When I cried, you cried. Thank you for being a constant source of support.
To the many friends - old and new - who encouraged me as I pursued this dream: Your
words and your love are carved into my heart. Earning this degree was a collective effort – it
belongs to you, too.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 4

To the entire Geronimo family: Your prayers carried me. I have the deepest appreciation
and love for all of you.
To Marc, Myra, Mel, and Aries: Your unspoken words were the loudest. You didn’t
need to say it for me to know. Thank you.
To Mom and Dad: I am who I am because of you. Thank you for putting structures into
place early on to ensure that my life would become what it is today. I have never been happier.
To Nico, Emma, Avery, and Landon: My hope is that, as you journey through school,
you will be in the presence of teachers who care about you as much as I do. I love you so much,
kiddos.
Finally, to Papa: You made such a lasting impression on my life. In my heart, I know

you were with me through every step of this process. Thank you for igniting my love for

teaching so many years ago.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 5
Table of Contents
Dedication 2
Acknowledgements 3
List of Tables 7
List of Figures 8
Abstract 9
Chapter One: Overview of the Study 10
Background 10
Statement of the Problem 12
Purpose of the Study 14
Significance of the Study 15
Limitations 15
Delimitations 15
Definition of Terms 16
Organization of the Study 16
Chapter Two: Literature Review 18
English Learners 18
The Role of Language 19
Standardized Language 19
Academic Language 20
First and Second Language Acquisition 21
English Language Development and Acquisition Policies 22
No Child Left behind Act of 2001 23
Proposition 227 25
Reclassification 27
Instructional Strategies 28
Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English 28
English Language Development 29
Instructional Models 30
Structured English Immersion 31
Mainstream Program with English Language Development 31
Two-way Dual Immersion 31
Alternative Bilingual Program 32
Teacher Preparation 33
Teacher Education Programs 34
Professional Development 36
Self-Efficacy 38
Beliefs and Attitudes 40
Cultural Mismatch 41
Conclusion 41
Chapter Three: Methods 43
Research Design 43
Research Questions 43
Sample 44
Participant Selection 44
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 6
Site Selection 45
Data Collection 46
Interview Protocol 47
Observation Protocol 48
Data Analysis 49
Validity and Reliability 50
Chapter Four: Results 51
Participants 52
Findings 55
Teacher Education Program 55
Professional Development 59
Teacher Efficacy 65
Classroom Practice 74
Conclusion 81
Research Questions 1 and 2 82
Research Question 3 83
Research Question 4 84
Chapter Five: Discussion 86
Discussion of Findings 87
Implications for Practice 90
Recommendations for Practice 93
Teacher Education Programs 93
Professional Development 93
Recommendations for Future Research 94
Conclusions 95
References 97
Appendix A: Self-Efficay Survey 105
Appendix B: Interview Protocol 106
Appendix C: ELD/SDAIE Observation Checklist 108

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 7
List of Tables
Table 1: Instructional Models 30
Table 2: Matrix of Protocols to Research Questions 52
Table 3: Description of Participants 53
Table 4: Matrix of Interview Questions to Research Questions 54
Table 5: Teacher Education Program Coursework and Fieldwork Ratings 55
Table 6: Professional Development Core Features Ratings 59
Table 7: Efficacy Matrix 65
Table 8: Results of Self-Efficacy Survey 66
Table 9: Matrix of ELD/SDAIE Categories and Key Elements of Effective Teaching 74

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 8
List of Figures
Figure 1: Top Ten Spoken Languages in English Learner Students’ Homes 110
Figure 2: ELD vs. SDAIE – What’s the Difference? 111
Figure 3: Desimone’s Framework of Effective Professional Development 112
Figure 4: Bandura’s Model of Self-Efficacy 113

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 9
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of teacher education and
professional development on teachers’ perceptions of efficacy with providing effective English
language instructional support to English learners. Using Bandura’s (1997) self-efficacy theory,
this study also analyzed the relationship between perceptions of efficacy and observable
classroom practices.
A qualitative methods approach was used for this study. Data about pre-service and in-
service teacher preparation, perceptions of efficacy, and classroom practice were collected using
surveys, interviews, and observations. The data revealed that teachers’ perceptions of efficacy
were increased when there were opportunities for active learning and collaboration during their
teacher education programs and professional development experiences. In addition, a constant
shift in focus with how to best support English learners limited the impact that teacher education
programs and professional development had on teacher efficacy. Finally, the teacher with more
intensive language acquisition and development training (i.e., Dual Immersion teacher) was more
readily positioned to implement learned research-based instructional practices than those
teachers who did not have the same training.
The results of this study led to the following implications for practice. First, in order to
increase teacher efficacy, teacher education and professional development must provide pre-
service and in-service teachers with opportunities to actively engage in their learning as well as
collaborate with their colleagues. Second, teachers must increase their knowledge of educational
linguistics and effective English language instructional strategies to support the English learners
in their classrooms.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 10
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
America’s student population is changing. Immigration trends are contributing to the
growing diversity found in our nation’s public schools (Center for Public Education, 2012). As
diversity increases, so do the variations in traditions, values, and languages that appear in the
classroom. English learners (EL), comprised of students from different cultural backgrounds,
represent just one of the many subgroups that has seen a rise in its population. English learners
are those students who report having a primary language other than English and who are
identified as limited-English proficient as determined by state approved assessments (California
Department of Education, 2014). According to the National Center for Education Statistics
(2013), there are approximately 4.7 million English learners enrolled in U.S. schools. This
number indicates a 51% population increase in the last 30 years (National Clearinghouse for
English Language Acquisition, 2011). The unexpected growth in English learner students across
the nation has found many states unprepared to provide them with the appropriate English
language development (ELD) support in the classroom (Flynn & Miller, 2008).
Background
In U.S. schools, where English is the primary language of instruction, meeting the needs
of students who are limited-English proficient poses a challenge. Rumberger and Gandara
(2004) suggest that ELs have had minimal access to well-prepared teachers, appropriate curricula
and resources, and supplemental support services. Moreover, they are often faced with learning
conditions that are not conducive to meeting high academic standards. It is not surprising, then,
that ELs are likely to trail behind their English-proficient peers in several academic areas, such
as language arts and math (Abedi & Gandara, 2006). Year after year, the National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP) reveals that EL achievement is significantly lower than the
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 11
achievement of English-proficient students. The 2012 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) report
shows that 78% of the general population of students in grades 2-8 scored proficient or advanced
on the English Language Arts (ELA) portion of the California Standards Test (CST), while only
61% of the English learner population scored proficient or advanced. The report also shows that
80% of the general population in grades 2-8 scored proficient or advanced in math, while only
65% of English learners scored proficient or advanced. While this discrepancy in achievement is
not a new development, it has been amplified in the last ten years with the pressure of meeting
AYP goals set forth by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). This pressure has
created an urgency to identify the factors affecting EL achievement and to develop instructional
practices to meet their needs.
If the expectation across U.S. schools is for all students to be proficient in the language of
the classroom in order to access the content of the curriculum, then English learners are
fundamentally disadvantaged. Vygotsky’s (1987) social constructivist theory posits that learning
is a collaborative effort that involves key members of society, including individuals found within
school systems, the community, and families. Each of these members plays a part in the process
of constructing language (Au, 1998). As a result, the language that ELs develop is dependent
upon the social interactions they have within their families and community. Given this
circumstance, many variations of the English language have been developed, which has made
English-language instruction a complex task. Hudley and Mallinson (2011) use the term
standardized English to refer to the variation of English that is valued in formal educational
settings. The authors argue that the standardized variety does not possess linguistic
characteristics that make it superior to other forms; rather, it reflects the grammar and
conventions that those in social, economic, and political power prefer and most commonly use.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 12
Teachers are tasked with understanding the nuances of standardized English and developing
classroom practices to support all students as they move toward proficiency in it. Standardized
English is the basis for Academic English. Academic English refers to the language students
must know in order to access content in all curricular areas (Short & Echevarria, 2005). The
responsibility of ensuring that all students have competency in both standardized and academic
English rests primarily on the teacher.
Statement of the Problem
Studies show that English learners encounter a number of challenges when entering
school. Some of the challenges that have emerged through research include: low levels of family
involvement (Abedi & Gandara, 2006; Chen, Kyle, & McIntyre, 2008; Rumberger & Gandara,
2004 Yoon, 2008;); restrictive federal and state policies (Balderrama, 2001; Gandara & Baca,
2008;); and underprepared teachers (Abedi & Gandara, 2006; Cadiero-Kaplan & Rodriguez,
2008; Chen, Kyle, & McIntyre, 2008; Gersten, 1999; Janzen, 2008; Rumberger & Gandara,
2004; Yoon, 2008). While these factors are arguably equally significant, it is the issue of teacher
preparedness that deserves the most attention. Balderrama (2001) asserts that, family and
socioeconomic status aside, teachers have the greatest influence on student achievement.
Given that teachers play a significant role in students’ success, it is important to
understand the factors that drive teachers’ effort. According to Bandura (1997), individuals are
more likely to put effort into performing a task if they believe they will be successful. An
individual’s perception of his or her ability to be successful on a task is referred to as self-
efficacy. Studies have shown that teachers with high levels of self-efficacy put more effort into
implementing classroom practices that foster student achievement than teachers with low levels
(Guo, Connor, Yang, Roehrig, & Morrison, 2012; Huangfu, 2012; Tschannen-Moran & Johnson,
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 13
2010). The sources that lead to the development of efficacy are mastery experiences, vicarious
experiences, physiological states, and verbal persuasions (Bandura, 1997). For teachers, these
sources are mainly experienced in their teacher education programs and professional
development.
Research on the preparation of teachers to teach English learners has revealed that neither
pre-service nor in-service training has equipped teachers with the skills needed to effectively
support the ELs in their classrooms (Abedi & Gandara, 2006; Cadiero-Kaplan & Rodriguez,
2008; Gersten, 1999;). Sleeter (2001) argues that pre-service teachers leave their teacher
education programs feeling unprepared to teach ELs. The coursework they receive in language
instruction is minimal. Lim, Maxwell, Able-Boone, and Zimmer (2009) investigated the
characteristics of teacher education programs that prepare its teacher candidates to work with
culturally and linguistically diverse students. The researchers found that coursework on
linguistic diversity varied across states and depended significantly on context. Lucas and
Villegas (2010) state that linguistic responsiveness calls for an understanding of the structure of
the English language and the process of second language learning. Given the intricacies of both,
pre-service preparation is the ideal time to set the stage. Armed with a solid foundation, teachers
can begin to deepen their understanding of working with English learners by linking what they
learned in their teacher education programs to the professional development they may receive in
the field, if any (Lucas & Villegas, 2010).
Gersten (1999) discussed the need for ongoing professional development in English
Language Development (ELD) instruction. As it is, ELD instruction only accounts for 10% of
all professional development opportunities offered to teachers (Gandara & Rumberger, 2003).
Given the number of students with language needs in each classroom, this percentage seems low.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 14
If the objective of American schools is to provide high quality education to all students, then
meeting the needs of English learners is of utmost importance, especially in states like California
and Texas where ELs comprise at least 10% of their student population (Haycock, 1998).
Moreover, only 53% of English learners are placed in classrooms with teachers who have been
trained in ELD instruction. Without the appropriate language instruction, English learners are
denied equal access to educational opportunities. According to the American Civil Liberties
Union (2013), this gap in their educational experiences causes them to fall far below grade level
and serves as an impetus for dropping out of school.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to understand how teacher education programs and
professional development have impacted teachers’ perceptions of their efficacy in implementing
English language development instruction and how different levels of efficacy have influenced
teachers’ classroom practices. As a result, the following research questions were developed:
(1) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from their teacher
education programs for teaching English learners?
(2) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from
professional development for teaching English learners?
(3) To what degree do teachers believe the knowledge and skills gained from their
teacher education programs and professional development contribute to their efficacy in
English language instruction?
(4) What is the relationship between perceived teacher efficacy and observable classroom
practices used to support English learners?

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 15
Significance of the Study
Demographers suggest that English learners will make up 40% of the U.S. population by
the year 2030. The U.S. school system can prepare for this growth by training teachers to be
responsive to the needs of ELs and ensuring that appropriate support structures are present in all
classrooms. This preparation has the potential to create educational opportunities for English
learners that have historically only been accessible to their English-proficient peers. Moreover,
adequately supporting ELs can impact their future success, namely college admission and career
development. Through deeper examination of teacher education curricula and professional
development opportunities that are intended to foster English language development, teacher
educators can begin to evaluate their methods for supporting pre-service and in-service teachers.
An understanding of what ELs need is necessary on all fronts. Holding teachers and teacher
educators accountable for the roles they play in this endeavor makes providing equitable
educational opportunities for English learners and their English-proficient peers possible.

Limitations
Limitations to this study were considered during data collection. One limitation is that
the participants who participated in the interviews may not have responded to the interview
questions truthfully. Another limitation is that the researcher’s presence may have affected the
participants’ behavior during classroom observations. The final limitation is that the participants
may have inaccurately rated their perceived levels of efficacy on the survey.
Delimitations
The delimitations of this study are found in the selection of participants and setting. The
teachers included in the study were fourth and sixth grade teachers. The data is not generalizable
and may not be representative of all teachers. In addition, the study focused primarily on
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 16
perceived efficacy in relation to English learners rather than perceived efficacy with all students.
Finally, the data collected for this study was limited to one specific school district in the
southwestern United States.
Definition of Terms
Academic English (or Academic Language). Language proficiency needed to access academic
content in the classroom (used interchangeably with standardized English).
Dual Immersion. An instructional program that enrolls native English speakers and native
speakers of the partner language (i.e., Spanish).
English language development (ELD). Instruction provided to English learners that is intended to
help them learn and acquire English while accessing academic content.
Opportunity Gap. Societal challenges that have that limited the opportunities for academic
success for students from diverse cultural groups.
Self-Efficacy. One’s belief in his or her ability to succeed in specific situations.
Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE). Method of teaching students in
English in such a manner that they gain skills in both the subject matter and in using English.
Standardized English. Variation of English that is commonly used and valued in U.S. classrooms
(used interchangeably with academic English).
Organization of the Study
The present study is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 provides the background and
rationale for the study. It also includes background information, the study’s significance,
research questions, limitation, delimitations, and definitions of relevant terms. Chapter 2
provides a synthesis of past research that has been done on this topic. Chapter 3 discusses the
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 17
methodology used to conduct the study. Chapter 4 analyzes the data collected and presented
significant findings. Chapter 5 presents conclusions and offers suggestions for future research.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 18
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
The purpose of this study was to examine the ways in which teacher education programs
and professional development experiences have contributed to teacher efficacy in providing
English language development instruction to English learners (EL). The study also analyzed the
ways in which perceptions of efficacy influenced classroom practice. The review of the
literature is divided into the following sections: (1) English Learners, (2) The Role of Language,
(3) English Language Development Policies, (4) Instructional Strategies, (5) Instructional
Models, (6) Teacher Preparation, and (7) Teacher Efficacy.
English Learners
The population of English learners in the United States is growing. According to the
National Center for Education Statistics (2013), there are approximately 4.7 million ELs in the
public school system. They come from all over the world and bring approximately 150 different
home or first languages to the classroom. The most common of all the home languages among
English learners in U.S. schools is Spanish (Top ten home languages in U.S. schools; See Figure
1). In the state of California, Spanish accounts for 84% of English learners’ home languages,
with Vietnamese being the second highest at 2% (California Department of Education, 2014).
Based on recent data trends, the number of English learners as well as the variety of home
languages will continue to grow.
The results of a study done by Abedi (2002) showed that English-proficient students
outperformed ELs in all academic areas, especially in reading, where language demands are
high. According to the 2012 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) report, 78% of the general
population of students in grades 2 through 8 scored proficient or advanced on the English
Language Arts (ELA) portion of the California Standards Test (CST), while only 61% of the
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 19
English learner population scored proficient or advanced. The report also shows that 80% of the
general population scored proficient or advanced in math, while only 65% of English learners
scored proficient or advanced. Educators have taken notice of this gap in performance and are
searching for ways to address it.
According to the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (2013), the rate at
which teachers are being prepared to work with ELs is inconsistent with the rate at which the EL
population is increasing. As a result, English learners are being placed in mainstream
classrooms with teachers who are expected to facilitate English language development (ELD)
whether or not they have had sufficient training. The expectation for teachers is that they will
provide the necessary support to ensure that all students have equal access to the content of the
curriculum, regardless of English language proficiency. The expectation for students is that they
will access the academic content using the accepted language of the classroom,
Standardized/Academic English. In many cases, teachers are unprepared to provide that support,
resulting in their students’ inability to access the academic content (Hudley & Mallinson, 2011).
The Role of Language
Language is a hot topic in American education. With the constant flow of immigrants to
the U.S., the number of home languages being brought into American classrooms is growing.
With the diversity of languages found in the classroom, using a standardized form of language to
mediate access to the curriculum is not only helpful – it is necessary.
Standardized Language
According to Wiley and Lukes (1996), a privileged language becomes a form of social
capital, and those who are proficient in it have more access to educational and economic
opportunities than those who are not. Thus, educators are charged with the task of ensuring that
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 20
ELs develop this language to have opportunities to learn that are comparable to those of their
non-EL peers. Standard English has long been considered the most acceptable form of English
by American society. This notion implies that there is just one correct form of the language;
however, Hudley and Mallinson (2011) suggest that social, political, and cultural norms
influence the type of language that is accepted in specific contexts. Thus, several forms of the
same language must exist. The term standardized English has been developed as a way to
acknowledge that multiple variations of the same language exist in different contexts. In the
American classroom, standardized English has become the privileged language. It is valued in
the classroom because it allows for clarity of communication regardless of students’ language
backgrounds.
Language is linked to the interactions of people within social and cultural contexts and
cannot be viewed as a simple set of rules (Chappell & Moore, 2012; Wiley & Lukes, 1996;
Hudley & Mallinson, 2011). What emerges as standardized language depends on the
circumstances of given contexts. It is formed when people communicate with one another for
specific purposes. Chappell and Moore (2012) highlight that language choice is based on the
current cultural and social context that a speaker or writer is in. For example, children learn that
there is a difference between the social language they use on the playground and the academic
language they are expected to use in the classroom.
Academic Language
Academic language (or Academic English) is a specialized form of language. It
encourages a complex way of thinking – one that is different from what is found in informal
social settings (Nagy & Townsend, 2012). It is what allows students to access the content of the
curriculum, thus having major implications for English learners (Short & Echevarria, 2005).
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 21
Different content areas function under language registers that have specific academic language
associated with them. For example, during mathematics instruction, students are required to use
and understand the appropriate mathematical language to participate in discourse about given
topics (e.g., ratios). Guerrero (2004) suggests that internalized experiences (i.e., knowledge of
the world) mediate language acquisition. He argues that native English speakers possess a
greater collection of these experiences than their EL counterparts, allowing them to make sense
of decontextualized and cognitively demanding academic language at a more rapid pace.
Furthermore, native English speakers are more readily positioned than ELs to form mental
images associated with academic language, making the language more accessible to them.
English learners need more time and instructional support than non-ELs to acquire the same level
of academic language proficiency because English learners are learning content and language
concurrently (Guerrero, 2004). Although teachers are responsible for structuring and providing
the appropriate support to ELs to make this possible, policies and mandates have complicated the
way language instruction occurs in the classroom.
First and Second Language Acquisition
Research indicates that students who have developed a strong foundation in their first
language (L1) are more likely to be successful in acquiring a second language (L2) than those
students who have not fully mastered their L1 (Rolstad, Mahoney, & Glass, 2005; Clark, 2000;
Nation, 2003). Explicitly teaching the linguistic structures of both a student’s L1 and the
expected academic L2 (i.e., English) allows for parallels to be drawn between the two forms of
language. Tong et al. (2008) refer to this phenomenon as cross-linguistic transfer, whereby the
L1 enables the acquisition of the L2. By approaching English-language instruction in this way, it
is possible for teachers to help ELs acquire the standardized language of the classroom as well as
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 22
the academic language of content areas while still validating their home languages (N. LeMoine,
personal communication, March 31, 2014). This approach shows students that their L1 has
important foundational structures that they can use to develop English. In addition, the L1 is
treated as something to be maintained and valued rather than lost or changed. Guerrero (2004)
posits English learners’ levels of proficiency in their first language impacts second-language
acquisition. Possessing a higher degree of proficiency in a first language increases the efficiency
of acquiring a second language because of the associations that are constantly being made
between the two.
English Language Development and Acquisition Policies
Several policies affecting English learners have arisen in the last half-century.
Historically, English learners’ access to language has been limited. It was not until suits were
filed against educational institutions that this changed. One such suit was Lau v Nichols in 1974.
In this civil rights case, non-English speaking Chinese students sued the San Francisco Unified
School District for not providing them with supplemental English-language support. These
students alleged that they were being denied of their Fourteenth Amendment rights. The
Supreme Court ruled in favor of the students, resulting in the development of different English
language instructional models. The ruling made it clear that school districts would be required to
provide English learners with special services so that they could have equal access to educational
opportunities.
Educational policies affecting second language development and acquisition have made
the job of teaching English learners complex (Balderamma, 2001; Gandara & Baca, 2008;
Menken, 2010; Painter & Flores, 2013). Federal and state reforms have been passed without
regard to how they impact one another. Consequently, many of the instructional decisions made
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 23
in the classroom have been indirectly influenced by the passage of these reforms (Gutierrez,
Asato, Pacheco, Moll, Olson, Horng, Ruiz, Garcia, & McCarty, 2002). The No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), Proposition 227, and current Reclassification policies have each
influenced the educational experience of English learner students in that they have placed added
pressure and restrictions on the teachers who are expected to support them. Standardized testing
accountability, restricted use of native languages, and the stress of timely reclassification have
turned linguistically responsive instruction into rote teaching and learning.
The Tenth Amendment limits federal role in education. As a result, educational policies
are largely decided on state and local levels. Federal involvement in education was first seen in
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which has been reauthorized as the No
Child Left behind Act of 2001. The expectations and restrictions of policies such as NCLB do
not align with what research has shown to be the most effective way to promote academic
success and second language development.
No Child Left behind Act of 2001
No Child Left Behind, in conjunction with a series of state mandates, has created an
educational terrain that has been difficult for teachers of English learners to navigate. NCLB has
increased the accountability of schools and school districts by placing a huge emphasis on
proficiency targets. It states that all students, regardless of their first language, must demonstrate
proficiency in English language arts and math as measured by standardized assessments
(Solorzano, 2008; Gandara & Baca, 2008; Tsang, Katz, & Stack, 2008). The enactment of
NCLB called for a disaggregation of assessment results for historically low-achieving students
(Linn, 2005; Samson & Collins, 2012; Rumberger & Gandara, 2009). This practice led to ELs
experiencing both positive and negative consequences.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 24
The publication of these data benefited English learners because schools could now
monitor the progress of subgroups of students that had previously gone unnoticed. This
awareness led educators to focus on meeting the needs of ELs in order to narrow any opportunity
gaps. This goal, however, has not gone without its challenges. Although NCLB was finally able
to highlight the achievement of English learners, it did not consider the impact its increased
accountability would have on schools and its teachers, nor did it consider the type of supports the
students would need. In this sense, English learners were harmed by NCLB. English learners
are expected to attain proficiency at the same rate as native-English speakers in order for schools
to demonstrate adequate yearly progress (Rumberger & Gandara, 2009). If AYP goals are not
met, schools could face sanctions. In the most severe cases, schools could lose accreditation or
be completely taken over by the state (Fetler, 2008).
To avoid such penalties, teachers are shifting their focus from research- and evidence-
based instructional practices to teaching to the test (Gandara & Baca, 2008). They are less likely
to adapt their instruction based on specific EL needs and more likely to stick superficially to the
mandated English language development curriculum (Balderrama, 2001). This way of teaching
has major implications for English learners. Stetcher and Kirby (2004) describe a phenomenon
known as narrowing the curriculum where the amount of time spent on test-specific content is
disproportionately high when compared to the time spent on other content. As a result,
opportunities for ELs to have meaningful language and literacy instruction are limited.
Tsang, Katz, and Stack (2008) studied the language demands of standardized assessments
and the effects they had on the achievement of English learners. They found that the results of
assessments written in English did not accurately reflect what ELs knew. State assessments that
are used to satisfy NCLB requirements are linguistically complex. Given that English learners
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 25
are still learning the language they are being tested in, they are not performing as well on these
assessments as their English-proficient peers (Menken, 2010). It is even more difficult for ELs
in states that have specific mandates with regard to the type of instructional programs they are
required to participate in. One such mandate is Proposition 227 in the state of California.
Proposition 227
The originator of Proposition 227, Senator Ron Unz, argued that the low 5% annual
reclassification rate of English learners resulted from the inability of bilingual programs to
support ELs’ English language development (Grissom, 2004). As a result, he believed that
bilingual education should be eliminated. The passage of Proposition 227 limits access to
bilingual programs where English learners could receive instruction in their native languages
(Gandara & Rumberger, 2009; Balderrama, 2001). In addition, the mandate recommends a
structured English immersion (SEI) approach whereby instruction is provided in English and
activities are designed specifically to support students who are learning the language. All subject
matter is taught in English and students are required to read and write in English only (Lillie,
Markos, Arias, & Wiley, 2012). Tong et al. (2008) explain that in the SEI model, the goal is to
facilitate English language acquisition as quickly as possible by using English as the primary
language of instruction. Proponents of the SEI model believe that immersion in English is the
most efficient way to help ELs gain access to, and participate in, educational opportunities that
are available to their English-proficient peers. With the SEI approach, the expectation is that
limited English proficient students are reclassified as fluent English proficient (R-FEP) after only
a year (Gandara, 2000). The criteria for determining reclassification eligibility include teacher
evaluation, performance on standardized basic skills and English language proficiency
assessments, and parent input.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 26
Proposition 227 requires that classroom instruction is delivered through the
overwhelming use of the English language; however, it does not set clear parameters for the term
overwhelming. Teachers became confused after the Proposition 227 was passed. They did not
know if it was legal to use the resources and methods they had used before its passage (Gutierrez
et al., 2002). Gandara (2000) found that teachers of English learners are afraid of suffering
consequences for misapplying the law. Teachers are aware of the restriction from using a
student’s native language as a means to deliver focused content instruction and facilitate English
acquisition, but they lack sufficient training and knowledge of other methods of support
(Balderamma, 2001). Through interviews, Balderamma (2001) found that teachers are hesitant to
use their students’ first language as a way to support the development of a second language for
fear of being fired. Proposition 227 has standardized teachers’ roles in the classroom. Teachers
have become compliant even when they are aware they are not meeting the needs of their
English learner students. The risk of facing sanctions has caused teachers, even those in
bilingual classrooms, to shift their focus from literacy instruction to direct language instruction.
According to Painter and Flores (2013), courses designed for English learners now focus
primarily on using rote skills to acquire English rather than developing complex reasoning skills
through content. A study done by Araujo (2002) found that balanced literacy instruction
supports English learners’ literacy development. Focusing on isolated language instruction is in
direct contrast to this approach.
Moreover, Proposition 227 created an urgent demand for teachers who were certified to
teach ELs (Gandara, 2000). As a result, a large number of teachers received certification
without having a solid knowledge base about English learners or a sufficient skillset to support
them in the classroom. This lack of understanding has major implications for the reclassification
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 27
process. Subjective teacher evaluations play a role in reclassifying students from their limited-
English proficient status (LEP) to fluent-English proficient (R-FEP). Teachers are more likely to
recommend reclassification for those students who score high on tests rather than those students
who have actually attained English proficiency (Robinson, 2011). The task of determining the
point at which ELs have attained English proficiency is challenging. Bailey and Butler (2003)
provide a comprehensive framework for operationalizing language proficiency. They state that
content standards, English language development standards, teacher expectations for language
use, and the language demands of the classroom and assessments are all factors in measuring
language proficiency.
Reclassification
Multiple criteria are used to determine when an English learner student is ready to be
reclassified (Robinson, 2011; Grissom, 2004). In California, for example, the criteria include
English language proficiency based on the California English Language Development Test
(CELDT), academic proficiency on the California Standards Test (CST), teacher evaluation, and
parent opinion. Using multiple criteria is thought to be a safeguard against reclassifying students
too soon (Grissom, 2004). While demonstrating proficiency on tests is necessary for
reclassification, the decision ultimately rests on teachers’ professional judgment (Saunders &
Marcelletti, 2013). When considering the number of teachers who are underprepared to teach
English learners, professional judgment becomes questionable. The results of a survey given to
graduates of a California State University teacher education program showed that teachers feel
“somewhat prepared” or “not prepared at all” to teach English learners (Gandara, Rumberger,
Maxwell-Jolly, & Callahan, 2003). If this is true, then it could be argued that their ability to
judge EL progress is limited, which could result in ELs’ untimely reclassification.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 28
Reclassification results in a change of instructional setting (Robinson, 2011). The
achievement of English learners could suffer if they are reclassified prematurely and placed in
settings that no longer provide English language development support (Painter & Flores, 2013;
Samson & Collins, 2012). Achievement could also suffer if English learners are not reclassified
when they are ready because they would continue to receive systematic language instruction
instead of instruction on academic content. Painter and Flores (2013) conducted a study that
examined the differences in achievement between ELs who were reclassified at some point in
their educational careers and those who were not. The findings show that R-FEP students
performed better on standardized assessments than students who remained ELs throughout high
school. For example, 37.7% of R-FEP students passed the California High School Exit
Examination (CAHSEE) versus just 5.9% of English learners. Their performance could be
attributed to language proficiency as well as the conditions provided in their instructional
settings after reclassification, which focuses on content-area instruction rather than English
language development. Circumstances such as this highlight the lack of knowledge that teachers
have to accurately assess ELs’ levels of language proficiency. Cases exist where ELs
demonstrate proficiency in oral language, but only have a 40% chance of being reclassified
within ten years because their academic proficiency is insufficient (Gandara & Rumberger,
2009). There is a mismatch between their competency in oral communication and their ability to
read and write proficiently.
Instructional Strategies
Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English
Specially designed academic instruction in English (SDAIE) strategies are used to
support for ELs. SDAIE focuses on designing instruction for ELs in order for them to access
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 29
core content areas, such as science or social studies. The premise of utilizing SDAIE strategies
is that ELs will acquire proficiency in English while learning content and developing their
higher-level thinking and literacy skills (Gibbons, 2003). Genzuk (2011) refers to SDAIE as a
means to teach content through the use of comprehensible language. Additionally, Genzuk
(2011) states that SDAIE assists ELs in developing content knowledge and mediates English-
language acquisition. There is a long list of SDAIE strategies that have proven to be effective
when providing content area instruction to ELs. These strategies include the use of visuals,
realia, gestures and manipulatives. Providing cooperative learning experiences, limiting the use
of idioms, and activating prior knowledge are also SDAIE-based instructional practices that
support English learners (Gibbons, 2003).
English Language Development
The purpose of ELD is to provide ELs with systematic instruction in linguistic and
communicative structures based on their ELD levels (Gibbons, 2003). ELD blocks are
structured to provide English learners with instruction that is appropriate for their current levels
of English proficiency. The state of California developed a set of ELD standards in listening,
speaking, reading, and writing that are meant to serve as benchmarks for ELs as they move
toward proficiency in the English language arts standards (Shin, 2004). Genzuk (2011) states
that ELD and SDAIE differ in that language is taught through content during ELD and content is
taught with the use of comprehensible language with SDAIE (Comparison of ELD and SDAIE;
See Figure 2). Like SDAIE, effective ELD strategies include using visuals and realia, building
background knowledge, and contextualizing concepts during instruction (Gibbons, 2003).

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 30
Instructional Models
There are a variety of instructional programs designed to facilitate English learners’
development of standard academic English. Some instructional programs focus on the rapid
transition from a student’s native language to English, while others strive to maintain the L1 as
the student develops proficiency in English. Genzuk (2011) points out that the way specific
programs are used in classrooms depends on the context and demographics of the school and
district. For the purposes of this study, four programs will be explored: (1) Structured English
Immersion, (2) Mainstream with English Language Development, (3) Two-way Dual Immersion,
and (4) Alternative Bilingual Programs. Placement in these programs is dependent upon the
student’s performance on the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) as well
as parental requests.
Table 1
Instructional Models
CELDT Level Parent Request
or Waiver
Permitted
Language of
Instruction
Language Proficiency
of Students
Structured
English
Immersion
Beginning
Early
Intermediate
Intermediate
Yes English English Learners
Mainstream
with English
Language
Development
Early Advanced
Advanced
Yes English English Learners
Two-way Dual
Immersion
All Levels Yes English
Spanish
English Learners
English Proficient
Alternative
Bilingual
Programs
All Levels Yes Spanish
English
English Learners

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 31
Structured English Immersion
Students who score at the beginning, early intermediate, and intermediate levels on the
CELDT are placed in classrooms that follow the Structured English Immersion (SEI)
instructional model. SEI teachers provide instruction primarily in English, but the use of the
student’s native language is permitted to provide clarification during content-area instruction.
All instructional materials are presented in English and students in SEI programs learn to read
and write in English only (Lillie, Markos, Arias, and Wiley, 2012). According to Reese,
Goldenberg, and Saunders (2006), the program’s goal is twofold: English language acquisition
and academic achievement in English. The use of SDAIE and ELD strategies is present in SEI
classrooms.
Mainstream Program with English Language Development
Students who perform at the early advanced or advanced levels on the CELDT are placed
in mainstream classrooms. English learners may also be placed in mainstream classrooms
through parental request even if they have not met the program criteria assessed through the
CEDLT. In mainstream classrooms, instruction is provided in English only. Unlike SEI
programs, teachers following the mainstream program do not use the student’s L1 as a means of
support. The goal of this instructional model is the quick reclassification of students from
limited English-proficient to fluent English-proficient. In mainstream classrooms, English
language development (ELD) is taught daily.
Two-way Dual Immersion
Two-way Dual Language Immersion programs (called here Dual Immersion or DI) were
developed on the basis that students in the same classroom who have different language
backgrounds could become bilingual as well as biliterate. In this type of program, language
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 32
majority (i.e., English-proficient) students and language minority (i.e., English learner) students
work together to attain proficiency in all academic content areas in both languages. The pairing
of ELs and English-proficient students in DI classrooms allows them to serve as language
resources for one another (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008). ELs support English-proficient students
as they acquire the minority language while English-proficient students support ELs as they
acquire English. Studies on Dual Immersion programs have revealed that DI students maintain a
high degree of academic achievement while simultaneously acquiring two languages (Christian,
1996; Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008). These studies support the notion that using a student’s native
language does not impede the acquisition of an L2 as it was once previously believed. Krashen
(1999) asserts that the stronger a student is in his native language, the more proficient he will be
in the new language.
Alternative Bilingual Program
Participation in an alternative bilingual program requires a parental exception waiver. In
this program, the L1 is viewed as a primary means of support. Students in bilingual education
classrooms possess the same linguistic background and receive content-area instruction in their
native language for the first few years. Afterwards, instruction is provided in English as a way to
prepare the students to succeed in mainstream English-only classrooms (Tong, Lara-Alecio, Irby,
Mathes, and Kwok, 2008). Instructional materials are provided in both the students’ L1 and L2.
The program’s goals are to promote English language acquisition and high academic
achievement, while fostering positive self-image and valuing the home language. As with the
SEI and mainstream models, ELD and SDAIE strategies are offered as additional means of
support.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 33
Although the alternative bilingual model appears to be an effective way to acquire
English while maintaining the L1, some factors have prevented it from being successful. Studies
reviewed by Garcia (1986) showed that while the intent of bilingual education is to provide
instruction in the students’ native language prior to providing instruction in English, many
transitional bilingual education teachers actually spend more time with the latter. Conger (2010)
attributes this reliance on English as the primary mode of instruction to the lack of resources and
limited proficiency that teachers may have in the students’ native languages. In addition, the
results of Conger’s (2010) study show that the percentage of English learner students enrolled in
bilingual programs who remain ELs in subsequent years is significantly higher than those
students who receive English language development services through English as a Second
Language (ESL) pullout services. Given this result, it is clear that the bilingual educational
model has not been any more effective in transitioning ELs to English than other approaches, nor
has it been able to satisfy its objective of providing students with an equal amount of instruction
in both English and their native languages. He emphasizes that the problem is not in the
bilingual education itself, rather the problem lies in the way in which schools fail to implement
bilingual education properly. It could be argued that this is a result of teachers’ lack of
knowledge and skills to work with English learners.
Teacher Preparation
A review of literature has been overwhelmingly consistent in highlighting teachers’ lack
of preparation in supporting English learners (Athanases, Wahleitner, & Bennett, 2012; Cadiero-
Kaplan & Rodriguez, 2008; Lucas & Villegas, 2010). Researchers have addressed the
deficiencies in teacher education programs and professional development opportunities that are
intended to prepare teachers to serve the needs of diverse learners (Wong Fillmore and Snow,
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 34
2000 & Desimone, 2009). Teachers of English learners have acknowledged the need for
increased expertise in the area of English language development, regardless of the English
language instructional program they are using (Gandara et al., 2003).
Teacher Education Programs
The teacher education curricula at different institutions are comprised of coursework
focusing on content pedagogy, methodology, and practicum experience. Missing from this list is
coursework that focuses on linguistics (Cadiero-Kaplan & Rodriguez, 2008; Chappell & Moore,
2012). With the rapid growth of English learners in American classrooms, Wong Fillmore and
Snow (2000) make the case for providing teachers with rigorous preparation in educational
linguistics. Educational linguistics refers to language learning and language use. The
researchers argue that a solid foundation in educational linguistics would enhance teachers’
overall literacy skills instruction as well as provide a foundation for teaching English learners. A
study done by Lucas and Villegas (2010) determined that teachers must also be well versed in
the process of second language learning. One rationale for gaining knowledge about linguistic
structures and second language learning is that it allows teachers to pinpoint the source of
common L2 errors that their language learner students make. By accurately identifying the
source of such errors, teachers are better prepared to make sound instructional decisions.
Hutchinson and Hadjioannou’s (2011) review of the literature also showed that in order for
teachers to effectively instruct English learners, not only should they have an understanding
about second language development, they should also be aware of the impact of the L1 on L2
learning. Newer teachers appear to have more
Chappell and Moore (2012) note that pre-service teachers’ knowledge of linguistics is
often limited to their own experiences as students in the classroom. Dan Lortie’s (1975) theory of
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 35
the apprenticeship of observation is a phenomenon in which a student spends thousands of hours
in direct contact with classroom teachers. According to this theory, pre-service teachers’ beliefs
about language learning are influenced by their own K-12 experiences as language learner
students (Peacock, 2001). They receive minimal, if any, direct instruction later in their
educational careers (i.e., teacher education programs) with regard to the intricacies of linguistics
and how it should be applied to teaching. Individuals have a wide range of K-12 and higher
education experiences with regard to language acquisition. This range contributes to the lack of
consistency among educators about how to effectively support their English learner students.
The way teacher education programs choose to offer courses related to English learners
depends on contextual factors. One of these factors includes the availability of faculty who
possess knowledge of English-language instruction. Without the expertise of faculty members,
teacher education programs often embed instruction for ELs within their core curriculum rather
than providing a course focused primarily on English-language instruction (Lucas & Villegas,
2010). Moreover, efforts made by teacher education programs to prepare their pre-service
teachers to work with diverse learners have included fostering social justice and offering courses
in culturally competent pedagogy. In addition, a number of teacher education programs structure
their curriculum around an inclusion model. The inclusion model integrates the topic of
diversity within the curriculum and practicum components of their program (Commins &
Miramontes, 2006; Gay, 1997). These efforts, however, have been met with challenges, such as
minimal opportunities to work specifically with English learners in field placements and little
time to critically reflect on inherent cultural biases. As a result, it has been difficult to identify a
model of teacher education that is effective in preparing its pre-service teachers for the language
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 36
diversity they will encounter once they enter the classroom (Athanases, Wahleitner, & Bennett,
2012).
Teachers who received their credential after the year 2005 should have received EL
training to maintain compliance with SB 2042, which states that all teachers must hold a valid
Clear California Teaching credential to provide classroom instruction. In order to receive the
clear credential, teachers were required to take courses focused on ELs as part of their
coursework. Those teachers who received their credentials before 2005 may not have received
any specialized EL training during their coursework. The lack of pre-service training makes
professional development for English learners even more important.
Professional Development
Due to the growing number of English learners, mainstream classroom teachers cannot
pass on the primary responsibility of instructing them to language specialists, such as ESL
teachers (Hutchinson & Hadjioannou, 2011). Bunch, Kibler, and Pimentel (2013) assert that
teaching ELs is everyone’s responsibility. Moreover, with limited funding available at both the
state and federal levels, hiring additional ESL or bilingual teachers is unrealistic. In-service
training, or professional development (PD), for teachers is a more reasonable solution to this
issue of preparing teachers to effectively support English learners (Karabenick & Noda, 2010).
Often times, however, the focus of PD is on what needs to be taught rather than how to teach it.
An inadvertent consequence of only preparing teachers with the what can be seen in the
inconsistencies of program implementation for English learners.
Mainstream classroom teachers acknowledge that they are not prepared to teach
linguistically and culturally diverse students (Lee & Maerten-Rivera, 2012). Minimal support
has been offered to them despite this growing concern. Only 10% of all professional
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 37
development opportunities address EL needs (Gandara & Rumberger, 2003). In addition, about
50% of teachers who have English learners in their classrooms have had little to no professional
development in English language instruction (Chen et al., 2008). Wiley (1996) states that many
teachers do not have any specialized training other than their on-the-job experience. As a result,
ELs do not receive the support they need to access the content of the curriculum or to become
proficient in academic English. Sustained professional development that focuses on teachers’
greatest areas of need can increase their effectiveness in the classroom (Lucas & Villegas, 2010;
Echeverria, Richards-Tutor, Chinn, & Ratleff, 2011; Cadiero-Kaplan & Rodriguez, 2008). In the
case of supporting English learners, teachers need to become more knowledgeable about
language development theory and pedagogy as well as deepen their understanding of the cultural
differences that exist among their students. Moreover, professional development designed to
teach decision-making and thinking skills have been shown to have more long-term effects on
classroom practices than professional development designed to teach a set of activities
(McIntyre, Kyle, Chen, Munoz, and Beldon, 2010). Arming teachers with the skills to make
instructional decisions to meet the needs of their students can have more of an impact than
simply handing them a list of activities to use with their students.
A study done by Karabenick and Noda (2010) demonstrated a need to incorporate second
language acquisition theory into professional development programs. The teachers they
surveyed expressed little understanding of the way a first language (L1) could be used to foster
the development of a second language (L2). In addition, Tasan (2001) suggested that providing
diversity training through professional development could have a positive effect on teacher
efficacy. Teachers are the driving force behind ELs’ educational experiences. Giving them
flexibility with educational policies and equipping them with the appropriate knowledge and
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 38
skills to foster English language development can increase their self-efficacy. As Huangfu
(2012) found, teachers with greater self-efficacy are more likely to put effort into individualizing
instruction for their students – a practice that students with diverse linguistic backgrounds that
differ significantly from English need.
Effective Professional Development. Desimone (2009) developed a systematic way to
evaluate the effectiveness of professional development experiences. Based on her research, the
principal features of effective PD are content focus, active learning, duration, coherence, and
collective participation. For PD to produce meaningful results, these five features should be
present. Content focus refers to what the PD is intended to teach. Active learning is the
opportunity for PD participants to be actively engaged in the experience. Duration is the PD’s
frequency and length of time. Coherence is the way in which the focus of the PD is aligned to
the participants’ beliefs as well as the school, district, and state expectations. Finally, collective
participation is the ability for PD participants to collaborate as they acquire new learning through
PD. Desimone (2009) argues that there is a positive correlation between effective professional
development and student learning (Desimone’s conceptual framework for studying the effects of
professional development; See Figure 3).
Self-Efficacy
Bandura (1997) asserted that individuals who believe they can be successful in
performing certain tasks put more effort into doing so than those who do not. The belief about
one’s ability to succeed is referred to as self-efficacy. Bandura’s (1997) self-efficacy theory
states that efficacy development is influenced by four factors: mastery experiences, vicarious
experiences, verbal persuasion, and physiological states. Mastery experiences are those
experiences in which individuals have encountered success. Vicarious experiences occur
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 39
through observing more experienced others model certain actions. Verbal persuasion consists of
positive feedback from those seen as more knowledgeable. Physiological states are the emotions
that are elicited by an experience. One or more of these sources impacts efficacy expectations,
which ultimately influences an individual’s performance (Bandura’s model of self-efficacy; See
Figure 4).
According to Bandura’s (1997) model, teachers with high levels of efficacy are more
likely to put time into preparing for instruction and are less likely to give up if tasks become too
difficult or do not produce the desired results (Tschannen-Moran & Johnson, 2010). Efficacy
increases when an individual experiences success. Efficacy is strengthened when this success
occurs repeatedly (Tuchman & Isaacs, 2011). Huangfu (2012) conducted a study to look at the
relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and their motivational teaching behavior. The
results of the study showed that teachers with high self-efficacy were more likely to individualize
their instruction, adapt their teaching practices, and implement strategies that would help them
attain their goals. Another study done by Guo, Connor, Yang, Roehrig, and Morrison (2012)
showed that there is a link between efficacy and positive student outcomes. They determined
that teacher efficacy influences classroom practices, such as responsiveness, which, in turn,
impact student achievement. Tschannen-Moran and Johnson (2010) reported that of the four
sources of self-efficacy development, the source with the greatest influence on self-efficacy was
mastery experience. In mastery experience, teachers need to have foundational skills of the
content they are teaching so that they can practice them in the classroom. Research shows that
teachers of English learners lack foundational knowledge of second language acquisition
(Hutchinson & Hadjioannou, 2011). Many teachers do not understand the theories behind
language development, nor do they fully comprehend the process by which L1 facilitates the
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 40
development of the L2. In addition, many teachers have little training in the pedagogical
practices that support language development. Following Bandura’s (1997) notion of self-
efficacy, this inadequacy in pre-service and in-service teacher training could potentially produce
low levels of efficacy among teachers of English learners. Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory
(SCT) states that efficacy beliefs are transferrable between what an individual perceives in
similar situations (Tuchman & Isaacs, 2011). Teachers who experience success in their student
teaching experiences transfer that feeling of mastery into their first few years of teaching.
Beliefs and Attitudes
Karabenick and Noda (2010) conducted a study to examine the beliefs and attitudes
teachers in a Detroit school district had toward English learners. They found that teachers
possessed high efficacy in teaching most general education students, but low efficacy in teaching
their English learner population. Their responses showed that they were unsure about how to
approach second language acquisition, which affected the perceptions they carried about their
own abilities. Yough (2008) asserts that knowledge and confidence are related. Teachers with
more knowledge about how to instruct English learners will generally have higher levels of
efficacy when doing so. This has major implications for how teacher education programs should
design courses in second language acquisition theory and pedagogy as well as how districts
provide continued support through in-service training.
The beliefs and attitudes teachers have toward EL students greatly influences the
educational opportunities they create for them (English, 2009). Molle (2003) makes the point
that challenging deficit views of English learners during professional development helps teachers
transform their perspectives. It allows them to shift from seeing ELs as disadvantaged learners
to students who are adding on to what they already know. It also allows them to take ownership
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 41
of their responsibility as teachers to provide appropriate language learning supports for ELs in
the classroom.
Cultural Mismatch
With the changing demographics of the student population, there appears to be a growing
mismatch between the backgrounds of students and teachers. According to the National Center
for Education Information (2011), the teacher workforce is made up of predominately White,
middle-class females. Students of color make up about 40% of the student population, while
teachers of color only make up 17% of the teacher population (CAEP, 2013). To respond to this
issue, advocates for school reform have put effort into recruiting more teachers of color to create
a more diverse teaching pool (Tasan, 2001). Settlage, Southerland, Smith, and Ceglie (2009)
contend that teachers with cultural and linguistic backgrounds similar to their students could,
theoretically, serve them more effectively. They propose that shared backgrounds make it easier
for teachers and students to relate. Tasan (2001) argues that there has been little research done
that examines the relationship between cultural background and teacher efficacy with English
learners; however, she does suggest that teacher efficacy is not fixed and could be strengthened
through pre-service preparation and professional development.
Conclusion
English learners come from a variety of linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Within this
subgroup of students exists a range of strengths, experiences, and knowledge. The unfortunate
reality is that English learners in U.S. schools are in a situation where they must become
proficient in the language of the classroom (i.e., academic English) in order to achieve academic
success and gain educational opportunities that are equitable to their English-proficient peers.
Teachers are charged with ensuring that their students’ individual needs, regardless of language
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 42
proficiency, are met. Appropriate preparation through teacher education and professional
development can increase teachers’ knowledge and skills for teaching diverse students (Wong
Fillmore & Snow, 2000; Karabenick & Noda, 2010). An increase in knowledge and skills has
the potential to increase teacher efficacy (Tasan, 2001). As research has shown, perceptions of
efficacy influence the amount of effort teachers will put into serving their students’ needs
(Bandura, 1997 & Tschannen-Moran & Johnson, 2010).

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 43
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
The purpose of this study was to understand how teacher education programs and
professional development contributed to teachers’ perceptions of their efficacy in providing
English language development support to English learners. The study also investigated the
relationship between perceived levels of efficacy and observable classroom practice. A review
of the literature shows that teacher education programs and professional development play
significant roles in shaping teachers’ perceptions of efficacy. The literature also shows that
varying levels of efficacy influence teachers’ classroom practice. This chapter provides a
description of the methodology for this study.
Research Design
Qualitative research is concerned with understanding the way people view the world and
how they make meaning of their experiences (Merriam, 2009). When deciding on the most
appropriate design, the researcher concluded that qualitative methods would provide the richest
body of data. Maxwell (2013) emphasizes that qualitative methods focus on rich descriptions.
While numbers had the potential to provide information about the range of efficacy levels the
participants possessed, they could not give information about why efficacy levels varied among
teachers. Thus, using qualitative versus quantitative methods deepened the researcher’s
understanding about the reasons behind teachers’ thoughts and actions.
Research Questions
A critical component of this study was to understand why teachers thought and behaved
as they did. Maxwell (2013) emphasizes that unobservable phenomena are just as significant
and valuable to qualitative studies as observable phenomena. The research questions focused on
understanding the minds of teachers. Three of the four research questions aimed to make sense
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 44
of teachers’ feelings and beliefs about their efficacy and how their levels of efficacy impacted
the support they provided for their English learner students. The rationale behind the
development of the fourth research question was to observe how levels of efficacy translated into
teachers’ observable classroom practices. The research questions for this study were:
(1) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from their teacher
education programs for teaching English learners?
(2) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from
professional development for teaching English learners?
(3) To what degree do teachers believe the knowledge and skills gained from their
teacher education programs and professional development contribute to their efficacy in
English language instruction?
(4) What is the relationship between perceived teacher efficacy and observable classroom
practices used to support English learners?
Sample
Participant Selection
A self-efficacy survey was distributed to ten upper grade teachers in the same district.
Eight out of the ten surveys were returned to the researcher. From the eight returned surveys, the
researcher asked the four teachers who rated their perceptions of efficacy the highest to be
participants in this study. The selected participants were one fourth grade English-only teacher,
one fourth grade Dual Immersion teacher, and two sixth grade English-only teachers. All four
teachers were chosen based on their responses to a self-efficacy survey. They indicated the
highest levels of efficacy among the eight upper grade (i.e., grades 4, 5, 6) teachers who
completed the survey. The four teachers were elementary school teachers in a school district in
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 45
the southwestern United States. Since the researcher’s goal was to understand why English
learners in this particular region are not making progress equivalent to that of their English-
proficient peers, it was necessary for the researcher to select teachers in a district located within
this area. The reason for selecting upper grade teachers is that there are more data in these
grades to show whether or not English learners are making sufficient academic progress. Based
on the research questions the researcher selected a typical sample, which is the “average person
in the phenomenon of interest” (Merriam, 2009, pg. 78). The participants were teachers who
had been teaching for up to five years. The researcher wanted to include teachers who were not
too far removed from their teacher education programs and could recall their experiences. In
addition, teachers who fit within this range had been teaching long enough to have experiences
working with English learners as well as participating in professional development within their
school sites. Purposeful selection was used as a way to gather information from people who are
familiar with the district and have knowledge about the ways the district has attempted to address
the problems it has been facing with the academic progress of its EL population (Maxwell,
2013). The fourth grade Dual Immersion teacher is fluent in the native language (i.e., Spanish)
of the English learners in the district. Her participation allowed the researcher to examine her
perceptions of efficacy and classroom practice compared to that of the teachers who did not
speak the students’ native language. The researcher contacted teachers by phone to ask for
voluntary participation in the study.
Site Selection
Selection decisions sometimes require a great deal of knowledge about the setting
(Maxwell, 2013). The selected district has a high percentage of English learners because of its
proximity to the U.S.-Mexico border. The district has trained its teachers in specially designed
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 46
academic instruction in English (SDAIE) and systematic English language development (ELD).
Guided Language Acquisition Design (GLAD) is another instructional model that is present in
the district. Each component in the model contains both ELD and SDAIE strategies. Sheltered
Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) is another instructional approach that is present in the
district, but its use is limited to a few schools that have received training in it. For the purposes
of this study, the researcher focused in SDAIE and ELD strategies, as they are models that
teachers in the district are expected to implement in order to support the English learner students
in their classrooms. Surveying and interviewing teachers as well as performing classroom
observations at this district helped the researcher make sense of why the English learners’
academic performance in this area continues to trail behind that of their English-proficient peers.
Data Collection
The data gathered in this study deepened the researcher’s understanding about levels of
teacher efficacy toward providing effecting English language instruction for their English
learners. The first component of the data collection was a self-efficacy survey given to ten upper
grade teachers. The second component of the data collection was a semi-structured interview.
The responses provided by the respondents were the primary source of data for this study. The
interviews were tape recorded, transcribed, and coded for themes. The third component of the
data collection was classroom observation. The researcher used scripting to record field notes
during the observations and coded the notes for themes. Three forms of data were used to allow
for triangulation, which increased the credibility of the findings (Maxwell, 2013).
Self-Efficacy Survey
Bandura’s (2006) research shows that individuals with high levels of efficacy approach
challenging tasks with more positive attitudes than those individuals with low levels of efficacy.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 47
Using his guide for constructing efficacy scales, the researcher created a survey to determine
teachers’ levels of efficacy when providing instruction to English learners. Very few efficacy
scales that were available measured efficacy toward English learners. Bandura (2006) states that
efficacy scales should be adapted to fit different areas of interest. As a result, the survey created
for this study was adapted from the Ohio State teacher efficacy scale (OSTES). It is a
compilation of questions from previously written scales (Eslami & Fatahi, 2008; Bandura, 2006),
but modified to focus on English learners. According to the OSTES, classroom management,
instructional strategies, and student engagement are the key elements of effective teaching and
learning (Huangfu, 2012). The survey asked teachers to rate their perceptions of their ability to
perform tasks in these three areas as related to ELs. The Likert scale used a 1 to 9 rating system.
A rating of 1 (not at all) indicated very low efficacy, and a rating of 9 (a great deal) indicated
high efficacy. Respondents answered questions based on what they believed they could do
rather than what they did to reflect how they perceive their capabilities (See Appendix A for self-
efficacy survey). Surveys were distributed to upper grade teachers at different school sites prior
to the interviews and observations. The survey took approximately ten minutes to complete.
Each survey was assigned a code to keep the identities of the respondents confidential.
Interview Protocol
Interviewing is important when the researcher wants to obtain information about factors
related to the study that are unobservable, such as feelings, attitudes, and beliefs (Merriam,
2009). Interviews were critical to this study as feelings, attitudes, and beliefs made up much of
the data. The interview questions were crafted to understand how teachers felt about the
experiences they had in their teacher education programs and professional development provided
by their district. More specifically, the teachers answered questions about the preparation they
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 48
received with regard to providing English language instruction to English learners. The
interview questions were developed based on findings in the literature about what teacher
education and professional development should be comprised of in order to adequately prepare
teachers to provide instruction to ELs (Wong-Fillmore & Snow, 2009 & Desimone, 2009).
Teachers who reported the highest levels of efficacy on the survey were contacted by phone to
ask if they would be willing to participate in an interview. Each teacher participated in one 45-
minute interview. The interviews were tape recorded and transcribed by the researcher.
Observation Protocol
Merriam (2009) emphasized that the study’s purpose should help the researcher
determine what to focus on. Classroom observations were done using an observation protocol
that was grounded in the study’s purpose. The observations lasted approximately 45 minutes
during content area instruction. The reason for this form of data collection was to identify
whether teachers were using the instructional method designed for ELs that they learned in their
teacher education programs and/or professional development. Based on interview responses, the
researcher determined that the four teachers had received training in Specially Designed
Academic Instruction in English (SDAIE) and English language development (ELD). Each
teacher was observed on two separate occasions during instruction in the same content area.
Two observations helped the researcher notice patterns during instruction. The researcher used
scripting during the observations. Scripting allowed the researcher to take notes on everything
that was seen and heard during the observation. This method of recording prevented the
researcher from missing out on key data. The focus of the observations was on the relationships
between perceived levels of efficacy expressed in the survey and the implementation of
instructional practices. The researcher used and ELD/SDAIE Observation Checklist developed
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 49
by Dr. Hee-Won Kang of Sonoma State University to analyze the scripting immediately
following the observations (see Appendix C for ELD/SDAIE checklist).
Data Analysis
Corbin and Strauss (2008) emphasize that analysis should begin immediately after the
first pieces of data are collected. With the amount of data to be collected, waiting until later to
begin analysis will make the task seem insurmountable. The researcher began the data analysis
process by using open coding with the data. The researcher read through the interview
transcripts and field notes and identified parts of the data that helped to answer the research
questions. Maxwell (2013) states that the goal of coding is to develop themes by pulling apart the
data and putting them into categories. The information the researcher highlighted led to the
formation of several categories that were relevant to the study’s purpose. During the coding
process the researcher used substantive categories. Substantive categories use the language of
the participants and capture their ideas and beliefs (Maxwell, 2013). These categories were
based on characteristics of effective teacher education programs and professional development as
described in the research literature well as English language development instructional practices.
The researcher created a matrix of coded responses. Having the data laid out in this form
simplified the process of generating a list of coded themes.
Immediately following the conclusion of each session, the researcher identified SDAIE
and ELD strategies from the notes and marked them on her list. Scripting allowed the researcher
to write observational notes that were not limited by the strategies on her list; however, it was
important for her to have a prewritten list of anticipated strategies to help her remember what she
observed. Reflective notes were also a critical feature of the observation protocol. By engaging
in reflection following each observation, the researcher recorded her thoughts while they were
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 50
still fresh. The protocol kept the observations focused on the study’s purpose and prevented the
researcher from focusing on anything that may have been irrelevant to the study. The
ELD/SDAIE Checklist was critical in allowing the researcher to interpret the observation
scripting.
Validity and Reliability
Validity refers to the correctness or credibility of a study (Maxwell, 2013). The
researcher acknowledged concerns about the validity of the study because of inherent threats
related to the participants and site that were selected. A validity threat the researcher may have
run into was researcher bias, which addresses the values and expectations researchers bring to
the study (Maxwell, 2013). Choosing to survey, interview, and observe teachers at a district with
which the researcher affiliated, may have caused the researcher to approach the data collection
with certain biases. Having knowledge about the district and its ELD program, the researcher
could have anticipated the responses and behaviors. In order to ensure that interview responses
were not based on what the researcher believe should be said, the researcher systematically
performed member checks. These member checks reduced the possibility of misinterpretation of
interview responses (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher asked for vague responses to be restated
or clarified to ensure the accuracy of interpretations. Triangulation was done using data form the
survey, interviews, and observations. The purpose of triangulation was to increase the credibility
of the findings (Merriam, 2009).

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 51
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
The purpose of this study was to examine how teacher education programs and
professional development have impacted teachers’ perceptions of efficacy with providing
support to English learners. Three English-only teachers and one Dual Immersion (DI) teacher
were selected as participants for this study based on their responses to a self-efficacy survey
adapted from the Ohio State teacher efficacy scale (OSTES). The self-efficacy survey results
indicated that the selected teachers’ perceptions of efficacy were the highest among all of the
teachers who completed the survey (see Table 5 for complete self-efficacy survey results). The
researcher interviewed and observed the four teachers to gather information regarding their
perceptions of self-efficacy as well as the influence of their teacher education programs and
professional development experiences on their efficacy development. This study also
investigated the relationship between perceived efficacy and observable classroom practice. This
chapter will present an analysis of the findings. The study was guided by the following research
questions:
(1) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from their teacher
education programs for teaching English learners?
(2) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from
professional development for teaching English learners?
(3) To what degree do teachers believe the knowledge and skills gained from their
teacher education programs and professional development contribute to their efficacy in
English language instruction?
(4) What is the relationship between perceived teacher efficacy and observable classroom
practices used to support English learners?
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 52
Research questions 1 and 2 were developed to understand teachers’ perceptions of the
quality of their teacher education programs as well as to gain insight about the professional
development experiences that they value. Research question 3 was developed to examine
teachers’ beliefs about the influence teacher education and professional development has on their
efficacy with English language instruction. Research question 4 was developed to determine
whether or not a relationship existed between teacher efficacy and teaching practice.
Table 2
Matrix of Protocols to Research Questions
Self-Efficacy Survey Interview Observation
Research Question 1 x
Research Question 2 x
Research Question 3 x x x
Research Question 4 x x x

Participants
Teacher 1 is a first-year teacher. He completed his teacher education program two years
ago and has worked in the district as a long-term substitute at different sites. His current position
as a fourth grade teacher is his first full-time position. Teacher 1 is in the final year of a graduate
program at the same public four-year university where he earned his bachelor’s degree and
teaching credential. He holds a Crosscultural, Language, and Academic Development (CLAD)
certificate and teaches in a mainstream English-only classroom.
Teacher 2 is in her fifth year of teaching. She received her bachelor’s degree, teaching
credential, and master’s degree from a public four-year university. She is proficient in both
English and Spanish. She has Bilingual, Crosscultural, Language, and Academic Development
(BCLAD) certification. All of her teaching experience has been in upper grade Spanish Dual
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 53
Immersion classes. Prior to teaching in the current district, she taught DI in a neighboring
district for one year.
Teacher 3 has been teaching for five years. She taught at a school on the east side of the
district for four years before transferring to a school located on the west side. The east side has
newly developed communities and the schools have smaller populations of English learners than
the schools on the west side. She has taught fifth and sixth grade. Teacher 3 received her
bachelor’s degree, teaching credential, and master’s degree from a private four-year university.
She is CLAD certified and teaches in a mainstream English-only classroom.
Teacher 4 is in her fourth year of teaching. She taught first and second grade for three
years before switching grade levels. This is her first year teaching sixth grade. She has CLAD
certification and teaches in a mainstream English-only classroom. She is currently working on a
master’s degree at the same four-year private university where she earned her bachelor’s degree
and credential.
Table 3
Description of Participants
Teacher 1 Teacher 2 Teacher 3 Teacher 4
Ethnicity White/Vietnamese Hispanic White/Filipino White
Grade 4 4 6 6
Class English only
Spanish
Dual Immersion English only English only
Years of Teaching
Experience 1 5 5 4
Language
Proficiency English English/Spanish English English
Educational
Background
B.A.
M.A. – in progress
B.A
M.A.
B.A
M.A.
B.A.
M.A. – in progress
Teacher Education
Program
California
State University
University of
California
Private Four-Year
University
Private Four-Year
University
Certification CLAD BCLAD CLAD CLAD
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 54
Table 4
Matrix of Interview Questions to Research Questions
Research Question Interview Question(s)

1
On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent did the coursework in your teacher education program
contribute to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent did the fieldwork in your teacher education program
contribute to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?
2
On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the content focus of professional development
opportunities contributed to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the active learning of professional development
opportunities contributed to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the coherence of professional development
opportunities contributed to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?
On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the duration of professional development
opportunities contributed to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the collective participation of professional
development opportunities contributed to your ability to support English learners in the
classroom?

3
You were chosen for this interview because you ranked high on the efficacy survey you
completed previously. Of the three areas on the survey, in which do you feel the most
efficacious?

Out of the three areas, can you explain which one your teacher education program
impacted the most?

Out of the three areas, can you explain which one professional development has impacted
the most?

I noticed you were most efficacious about your ability to ___________________________.
• Did your teacher education program influence your sense of efficacy in this area?
If yes, what was the most valuable to you in this area – coursework or fieldwork?

• Have any professional development experiences influenced your sense of efficacy
in this area? If yes, what was the most valuable to you in this area – content
focus, active learning, coherence, duration, or collective participation? Can you
describe the________________________ of the professional development
experience?

I noticed you ranked _________________________________________ the lowest on the
survey.

• What was lacking in your teacher education program that caused you to be less
efficacious in this area? Was it the coursework or fieldwork?

• What has been lacking in your professional development experience that is
causing you to be less efficacious in this area? Is it content focus, coherence,
duration, active learning, or collective participation?
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 55
Findings
Teacher Education Program
Research Question 1: How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from
their teacher education programs for teaching English learners?
All four teachers who participated in this study completed teacher education programs
that are located in the southwest United States. Universities within the same county offered the
programs. The universities are situated in an area where English learners make up
approximately 25% of the student population. Based on the steady increase of English learners
in this area, pre-service teachers who come out of these programs are very likely to find
themselves working with ELs if they choose to enter classrooms in the neighboring communities.
Given these circumstances, it is important to examine teachers’ perceptions of the quality of the
knowledge and skills made available to them in their teacher education programs. During the
interview, the teachers were asked to rate the coursework and fieldwork offered by their teacher
education programs. They used a rating scale of 1 to 5. The rating was as follows: 1- did not
contribute, 2- contributed little, 3- contributed somewhat, 4- contributed sufficiently, and 5 –
contributed greatly.
Table 5
Teacher Education Program Coursework and Fieldwork Ratings
Coursework Fieldwork
Teacher 1 1/2 3
Teacher 2 3 4
Teacher 3 2 4
Teacher 4 3 4

Coursework. The teachers gave the coursework offered by their teacher education
programs ratings that ranged from 1 to 3. Teacher 1 indicated that the only exposure he had to
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 56
teaching ELs was through his English Language Arts (ELA) methods course. All four teachers
expressed that the instruction they received was insufficient – regardless of the program they
went through. During the interviews, Teacher 3 and Teacher 4 indicated that there was a course
in their teacher education programs that was dedicated to English Language Development.
Another comment that was consistent among Teacher 1, 3, and 4 was that none of them received
coursework in linguistics and second language learning, which research shows are essential for
understanding the challenges English learners face acquiring a new language (Fillmore & Snow,
2000; Lucas & Villegas, 2010). Teacher 4 mentioned that in her ELD course, she learned
strategies and “different buzz words, like realia,” but was not prepared to implement what she
learned once the course was over. Teacher 2 discussed the preparation she received while
working on her BCLAD certification. She felt the BCLAD training prepared her to work with
English learners more than the general coursework in her teacher education program. She
explained the BCLAD emphasizes language learning.
Strategies and Implementation. A common theme that emerged from the discussions
about coursework was that the teachers learned strategies for working with ELs, but did not
receive enough instruction on how to implement those strategies. Teacher 4 commented, “I
knew all the right words to write in my unit plan, but then to know what that would look like
with actual kids was a totally different ball game.” She went on to explain her frustration in
knowing how to plan lessons to pass her courses, but not knowing how to implement anything
she had planned. Teacher 2 discussed some of the strategies she learned in her courses, such as
frontloading vocabulary and providing visuals, but she also stated that the how piece was
missing. “I was not trained specifically how to teach English language development in my
teacher preparation program.” She contrasted that with what she learned in her Dual Immersion
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 57
program. Teacher 1 described his experience with language instruction by stating, “The
coursework included an English language arts methods course that just mentioned quick
strategies for English learners. ELs were not a focus.” He remarked that discussing ELs was
merely an aside in his ELA methods course. From Loughran’s (2006) perspective, there is a
difference between school teaching and teaching about teaching. He suggests that students of
teaching must not only learn about strategies that work, but also the pedagogical reasons behind
how and why they work. The coursework-related experiences described by the four teacher
participants lacked that pedagogical component.
Fieldwork. The teachers gave the fieldwork experiences they had during their teacher
education programs ratings that ranged from 3 to 4. The interviews revealed that the fieldwork
component of teacher education programs impacted teacher efficacy more positively than the
coursework. From the beginning, Teacher 3 made it clear: “Fieldwork is a stronger memory than
coursework.” Teacher 2 felt the student teaching experience “was more productive than the
coursework” because of the opportunity to work alongside veteran teachers. While all four
teachers agreed that their fieldwork experiences were more valuable than the coursework, only
Teacher 2 commented that she felt there were many opportunities to work with second language
learners because all of her student teaching placements were in Dual Immersion classrooms.
Teachers 1, 3, and 4 were placed in mainstream English-only classrooms. Although they
encountered ELs in their placements, they felt that ELD instruction was limited. Teacher 1
remarked that there was more English language development instruction being done in his first
student teaching placement because he was in a first grade classroom where a majority of the
children needed the language support. As a result, Teacher 1 observed how to implement
different strategies with students in the primary grade. In Teacher 1’s second placement,
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 58
however, ELD instruction was limited because he was in a sixth grade classroom where the ELs
had higher CELDT levels and “did not need as much instruction.”
Modeling. One facet of the fieldwork experience that was mentioned by Teachers 1, 2
and 4 was the opportunity for pre-service teachers to observe experienced teachers implement
research-based strategies. Bandura’s (1988) Social Cognitive Theory states that individuals can
increase their knowledge by observing others. Teacher 4 commented, “I think my master
teacher did an amazing job modeling what that [SDAIE strategies] looks like, you know, SDAIE
strategies in the flesh, right there in front of me.” Teacher 2 stated, “I worked with teachers and
that’s what they did – they taught language.” In both of these instances, pre-service teachers
learned by watching their cooperating teachers use ELD and SDAIE strategies that, up until then,
they had only read about. Feinman-Nemsar’s (2001) study of an exemplary support teacher
highlighted the value of providing pre-service teachers with living examples of different ways of
teaching through apprenticeships or demonstrations. Teacher 1 mentioned that observing his
first cooperating teacher implement ELD with primary students prepared him to do the same. He
was less prepared to implement ELD with upper grade students because of the lack of modeling
by his sixth grade cooperating teacher. Teacher 1 stated that, based on his experience, English
learners in the upper grades were further along in the stages of English language development
than the students in the primary grades. He did not feel that the techniques he learned to use with
primary students would be developmentally appropriate for the students in the upper grades.
Teacher 1, 2, and 4 felt they gained the most from observing more experienced teachers during
their fieldwork experiences.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 59
Professional Development
Research Question 2: How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from
professional development for teaching English learners?
In-service professional development is necessary to help teachers gain the knowledge and
skills necessary to support the growing number English learners in their classrooms. The overall
findings suggest that, while the district in this study has attempted to provide its teachers with
English language development (ELD) training, it has not always been successful in fully
preparing them to work with English learners. Teacher 3 summed up her experiences by stating,
“I remember feeling like there was just a lot of information, but nothing about what to do or how
to do it. I can’t recall what they [trainers] said, which obviously means I didn’t learn much.”
Desimone’s (2009) framework for effective professional development highlights five key
components: content, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective participation. Her
research suggests that all five components must be in place in order to maximize the benefits of
professional development experiences. During the interview, the teachers were asked to rate the
five features of Desimone’s (2009) framework for effective professional development for PD
they received specific to ELD. They used a rating scale of 1 to 5. The rating was as follows: 1-
did not contribute, 2- contributed little, 3- contributed somewhat, 4- contributed sufficiently, and
5 – contributed greatly.
Table 6
Professional Development Core Features Ratings
Content
Focus
Active
Learning
Coherence Duration Collective
Participation
Teacher 1 2 1 1 1 3
Teacher 2 4 2 2 3 5
Teacher 3 2 3 2 4 4
Teacher 4 1/2 1 4 1 3/4
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 60

Content focus. According to Desimone (2009), content focus refers to the topic of a PD
experience and has the greatest impact on teacher learning. Content focus received ratings of 1
and 2 by the English-only teachers and 4 by the Dual Immersion teacher. The interviews
revealed that the English-only teachers’ professional development experiences have been
focused on interpreting ELD standards and analyzing data on the California English Language
Development Test (CELDT) rather than on ELD pedagogy. Teacher 3 stated, “ELD trainings
were not valuable because there was a lot of information about how the [CELDT] levels
changed, but not a lot of strategies.” Teacher 4 described the professional development
experiences as having “…no reality of what teachers really go through. They [trainers] are just
presenting information and not showing how to teach.” The teachers have attended the district’s
ELD Academies expecting to receive information about how to support their English learners,
but instead they end up discussing testing and policy. Teacher 2 commented that the content
focus of PD changes as the district’s priorities and views of effective ELD instruction change.
For example, one year teachers were trained in a holistic approach to incorporating ELD support
into their instruction, and the following year the teachers were told they had to have a more
isolated, systematic way of providing ELD support. Issues of policy could be responsible for the
constant shift in focus, although teachers are unaware if it. Teachers 1, 3, and 4 mentioned that
the district’s shift in focus has prevented them from truly becoming proficient in any form of
ELD instruction. Teacher 3 discussed this change by saying, “ELD trainings changed when
standards changed then changed again when CELDT levels changed. We learned GLAD, then
systematic ELD, then learned how to use the Side-by-side document, but heard nothing about
any of it after that.” The statements made by Teacher 3 show that teachers are constantly being
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 61
required to learn new ways of teaching without being given the opportunity to become proficient
in any one of those ways.
The views expressed by Teacher 2 were notably different. Due to her position as a Dual
Immersion teacher, Teacher 2 has participated in numerous professional development
experiences that mainstream teachers have not had access to. While the other teachers found the
content focus to be lacking or constantly shifting, Teacher 2 stated she has experienced PD with
“good” content. She acknowledged that as a DI teacher she has had opportunities to attend ELD
trainings that non-DI teachers do not participate in. Her comment, “I would say a majority of the
more effective PD has been with the Dual Immersion program,” highlights the way the district
has provided PD to DI teachers that specifically targets second language learning and teaching.
Teacher 2 went on to state that the last two Dual Immersion trainings have been specific to
providing ELD support to the English learners in dual immersion classrooms. For example, the
most recent PD discussed teaching vocabulary using cognates, morphology, and cognitive
content dictionaries. Cognates are words that are derived from the same root words in different
languages (e.g., English delicious and Spanish delicioso). Morphology refers to the study of
word forms. Cognitive content dictionaries are resources made by students to support them as
they learn the meanings of new academic English vocabulary.
Active Learning. A piece that appears to be missing from the professional development
experiences of all four teachers is the active learning feature, which refers to engaging in an
activity that support the new learning. The lack of engagement in PD was a common frustration
expressed by the teachers. Teacher 1 gave active learning the lowest rating and stated, “I can’t
remember a PD focused on ELD that I was actively engaged in.” Teacher 3 made the connection
that her experiences in PD for English learners have not been engaging; so they have not been
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 62
valuable. Teacher 2 echoed this sentiment by commenting, “At [non-DI] PD, they’re [ELD
trainers] talking at us.” A comment made by Teacher 4 captured the essence of this point. She
said, “I mean… we just sit there and listen.” Similar to the feelings they expressed earlier with
regard to their fieldwork in their teacher education programs, the teachers desire opportunities to
practice what they are learning.
Coherence. Coherence is another key aspect of effective professional development
(Desimone, 2009). Coherence refers to the alignment of the professional development focus
with teachers’ existing beliefs and current educational policies. Teachers 1, 2, and 3 gave ratings
of 1 and 2 for the coherence of their PD experiences, while Teacher 4 gave coherence a rating of
4. As a first-year teacher, Teacher 1 stated that he has not experienced PD that has been
coherent. Having taught for the same number of years, Teachers 2 and 3 commented that it is
difficult to determine the coherence of PD experiences because the district’s focus is constantly
changing. Teacher 4 gave coherence a fairly high rating because she believes that the district
provides PD on specific topics when it is concerned with maintaining compliance and following
policies and mandates; however, she feels, “They [district] might be doing all the right things
legally, but it doesn’t necessarily make it helpful, especially for new teachers.” She referenced
the ELD training where the emphasis was on making sure teachers knew of the changes in ELD
standards and policies, rather than equipping teachers with practical tools to successfully support
their English learners. When discussing the coherence of PD with educational policies, the
researcher discovered that the newer teachers knew little about the policies that, in the past, have
impacted teachers’ ability to provide ELD support that is culturally and linguistically responsive
(e.g., using a student’s native language during instruction). Having just received his teaching
credential in the last two years, Teacher 1 stated that he does think about policies and mandates,
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 63
such as Proposition 227 or No Child Left Behind. He realizes that there is pressure to do well on
standardized test; however, the specific policies do not have an influence on his practice.
Duration. Guskey (2000) suggests that PD should be ongoing if it is to bring about
changes in teaching. Duration refers to the length and frequency of professional development.
Teachers 1 and 4 gave the duration of ELD professional development a rating of 1. Both felt that
their PD experiences have been “one-and-done” with no accountability. Teacher 4 gave duration
a low rating because she feels that the PD provided at the district “has no follow up, not even
here at our own school site by administrators.” Teachers 2 and 3 gave duration higher ratings of
3 and 4, respectively. Despite giving the higher ratings, both teachers emphasized that PD on
English language development is neither long enough nor frequent enough to equip teachers
adequately for teaching English learners. Teacher 2 mentioned that the most recent ELD training
was a half-day PD rather than a full day, like PD in other content areas. Birman, Desimone,
Garet, Porter, and Yoon (2001) address the challenges that schools face with regard to time for
professional development. The first challenge is that teachers do not want to commit to PD that
goes beyond their normal school hours. The second challenge is that it is time-consuming to
design opportunities that incorporate all five of the core features of effective professional
development.
Collective Participation. Of the five features in Desimone’s (2009) framework of
effective professional development, collective participation was rated the highest among all four
teachers. Collective participation refers to the collaboration among professional development
participants to extend new learning. The ratings for this feature ranged from 3 to 5. Teachers 1,
3, and 4 gave rating of 3, 4, and 4, respectively. Teacher 2 gave a rating of 5 based primarily on
her Dual Immersion professional development experiences. All four teachers agreed that
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 64
collective participation has had the greatest impact on the development of their knowledge and
skills in ELD. The opportunity to collaborate with colleagues has increased camaraderie and
allowed teachers to share ideas and instructional practices with one another. Teacher 2
commented, “The most effective piece [of professional development] is being able to observe
how other teachers work.” She gained the most from watching her colleagues approach specific
situations, especially those that deal with socio-emotional issues. She also discussed how the
feedback she has received from her peers has been helpful because “receiving feedback [from
colleagues] is a lot less scary than getting feedback from administrators.” Teacher 4 remarked, “
That’s probably where I think I gained the most knowledge. It’s by talking to other teachers and
seeing what others have done.” She has found observations of teachers applying SDAIE
strategies, such as using anticipatory guides and cooperative dialogue, to be the most beneficial
feature of PD. Teacher 3 pointed out the advantages of attending district, rather than site-
specific, PDs by stating, “You have the opportunity to work with teachers from other schools
who have similar populations.” She has learned the ways that different schools in the same
district approach their ELD time. Some have embedded ELD into their content area instruction,
while others have maintained separate ELD blocks. Teacher 1 found the conversations with his
grade-level team to be the most helpful in helping him improve his practice. He mentioned that
it has helped him understand how to implement ELD strategies, such as teaching form and
function. In all four of the teachers’ comments, it is clear that collaboration has significantly
influenced teacher learning.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 65
Teacher Efficacy
Research Question 3: To what degree do teachers believe the knowledge and skills gained from
their teacher education programs and professional development contributed to their efficacy in
English language instruction?
Table 7
Efficacy Matrix

Most
Efficacious
Influenced
Most by TEP
Influenced
Most by PD
Least
Efficacious
Lacking in
TEP
Lacking in PD
Teacher 1 Classroom
Management
Instructional
Strategies
Instructional
Strategies
Instructional
Strategies
Coursework Content Focus
Teacher 2 Student
Engagement
Student
Engagement
Instructional
Strategies
Classroom
Management
Coursework Content Focus
Teacher 3 Classroom
Management
Instructional
Strategies
Instructional
Strategies
Instructional
Strategies
Coursework Coherence
Teacher 4 Classroom
Management
Instructional
Strategies
Instructional
Strategies
Student
Engagement
Coursework Active Learning
The present study adapted the Ohio State teacher efficacy scale to develop a model for a
teacher efficacy survey (see Appendix A for self-efficacy efficacy survey). According to the
OSTES, classroom management, instructional strategies, and student engagement are the key
elements of effective teaching and learning (Huangfu, 2012). The survey asked teachers to rate
their perceptions of their ability to perform tasks in these three areas as related to English
learners. The Likert scale used a 1 to 9 rating system. A rating of 1 (not at all) indicated very
low efficacy, and a rating of 9 (a great deal) indicated high efficacy.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 66
Table 8
Results of Self-Efficacy Survey
Survey Questions Teacher 1 Teacher 2 Teacher 3 Teacher 4
Student Engagement
How much can you do to motivate English
learners who show low interest in schoolwork?
8 7 7 6
How much can you do to keep English learners
interested in their schoolwork?
8 7 7 6
How much can you do to make learning enjoyable
for English learners?
8 9 7 7
How much can you do to help English learners
value learning?
8 7 7 6
Instructional Strategies
To what extent can you effectively teach oral
language (listening and speaking) skills?
7 8 8 7
To what extent can you effectively teach written
language (reading and writing) skills?
5 8 7 7
To what extent can you craft good questions for
you students?
5 8 7 7
To what extent can you provide alternative
explanations for English learners who appear
confused?

7 8 5 8
How well can you implement alternative
instructional strategies when certain strategies do
not work?

4 7 7 8
To what extent can you help English learners
reach the learning objectives?
8 7 7 6
Classroom Management
How well can you establish a classroom
management system within your classroom with
different groups of students?

8 8 9 8
To what extent can you get different groups of
students to follow classroom procedures?
8 7 9 8
To what extent can you get different groups of
students to follow the classroom rules?
8 7 9 8
Note. Likert Scale: 1 = not at all; 5 = some influence; 9 = a great deal
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 67
During the interviews, teachers responded to questions about their teacher education
programs, professional development experiences, and perceptions of efficacy based on their
responses to the survey (see Appendix B for interview protocol). They discussed which areas
they felt the most efficacious and least efficacious in. The teachers also related their experiences
in their teacher education programs and professional development to their perceptions of
efficacy. In several cases, the area that the teachers felt most efficacious in was not necessarily
the area that was most influenced by TEP or PD. It appears that the teachers did not interpret the
terms impact or influence to mean that there was a positive result. Their responses revealed that
impact or influence simply mean that TEP or PD yielded results, whether positive or negative.
Sources of Efficacy Development. According to Bandura (1997), efficacy development
comes from the following sources: (1) mastery experiences, (2) physiological states, (3)
vicarious experiences, and (4) verbal persuasion. Mastery experience refers to the success or
failure an individual encounters when performing an action. Physiological states are the body’s
responses to different experiences. Vicarious experiences occur when someone models an
activity for an individual. Verbal persuasion refers to feedback given to an individual by a more
knowledgeable other. The data collected through interviews and surveys show that the four
teachers’ efficacy levels with supporting their English learners have been shaped by one or more
of these sources.
Teacher Education Program. Teacher 1 commented that he felt most efficacious in
classroom management. The self-efficacy survey showed that Teacher 1 gave himself a rating of
8 on all three components of the classroom management section, which indicates that he feels he
has great influence in this area. In his interview, he stated that he had not had any negative
experiences related to classroom management. As a result, he correlated lack of negative
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 68
experiences with success. He attributed his efficacy to his fieldwork experiences during his
teacher education program and the experiences he has had as a classroom teacher. Teacher 1’s
mastery experiences influenced his perception of efficacy. Teacher 1 felt that his teacher
education coursework had the potential to positively influence his efficacy in instructional
strategies, but it did the opposite. He referenced his English language arts methods course when
discussing why he felt the least efficacious in instructional strategies. “The most I got out of my
teacher education program in terms of English learners was in the ELA course where we did
address EL issues as an aside. It was never really a focus.” Receiving side notes for supporting
ELs was not enough to increase his perceptions of his ability to impact EL achievement.
Teacher 2 stated that her perception of efficacy is highest in student engagement. The
highest overall rating on the self-efficacy survey is a 9, which is what Teacher 2 reported with
regard to making learning enjoyable for English learners. She discussed the emphasis she has
placed on truly knowing and developing personal relationships with her students. Understanding
behaviors, such as lack of motivation and acting out, has allowed her to know how to respond to
students and get them back on track. She is knowledgeable about her students’ socio-emotional
needs. Teacher 2 reported that her adrenaline is triggered when she is in situations that require
her to be emotionally responsive to her students. She interprets her physiological response to be
a sincere desire to provide her students with socio-emotional support. According to Bandura
(1997), physiological states, which refer to the physical reactions that are triggered in response to
different situations, is a source of efficacy development. “I feel strong in student engagement
because, for me, developing personal relationships with my students is important and I think I
emphasize that.” Teacher 2 felt that her teacher education program was most influential in
building her efficacy in student engagement, though it was an indirect result of the coursework.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 69
“I didn’t always learn from the courses themselves; I learned from talking and observing other
teachers and students.” This is aligned with the notion of vicarious experience serving as a
source of efficacy development.
Teacher 3 feels that “with classroom management and student engagement, you have to
be in the classroom to learn.” She emphasized that it is important to be in real situations with real
students in order to develop knowledge and skills related to classroom management and student
engagement. Teacher 3’s perception of high efficacy is seen in the ratings of 9 that she reported
on all three areas of the classroom management section of the self-efficacy survey. Teacher 3
commented that observing other teachers during her fieldwork influenced her efficacy in
classroom management. “After observing teachers, I realized it’s something you just kind of
have.” She has observed teachers model both effective and ineffective classroom management
techniques, and this has contributed to her perception of efficacy. By observing effective
teachers during her student teaching placements, she built a solid foundation for classroom
management and gained confidence in her ability to implement learned techniques. Vicarious
experiences and Bandura’s (1988) Social Cognitive Theory are once again highlighted here.
Teacher 4 indicated that her perceived level of efficacy in classroom management was
the highest. On the self-efficacy survey, she reported ratings of 8 in all three areas of the
classroom management section, while she rated herself either 6 or 7 in the other areas. “I know
that that’s something that I really pride myself in with student teaching. I think I have an ability
to create a safe and comfortable classroom – my confidence is pretty high.” As a result of the
success she has had in both her student teaching and full-time teaching experiences, Teacher 4 is
most confident in her ability to create a classroom environment that is supportive of her English
learners. Like Teacher 1, she attributes her efficacy to her own experiences working with them
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 70
during her pre-service and in-service experiences. Mastery experiences have contributed to both
Teacher 1 and Teacher 4’s perception of efficacy; however, the two teachers differ in that
Teacher 1 feels efficacious because of the absence of negative experiences, while Teacher 4 feels
efficacious because of the presence of positive experiences. Teacher 4 commented that she
believes teacher education programs prepare pre-service teachers well in instructional strategies,
in general, but have not done so with English language instruction. She explained that her
teacher education program was structured to provide pre-service teachers with instructional
strategies in all curricular areas, but did not receive the same preparation for working with
English learners.
Shortcomings of teacher education. Teacher 1 commented that he gained very little
related to teaching English learners from the coursework that was a part of his teacher education
program. “The courses were a waste of time.” The coursework did not contribute to Teacher 1’s
efficacy because none of Bandura’s (1997) sources of efficacy development were present. When
Teacher 4 indicated she was the least efficacious in student engagement, she attributed that to her
program’s lack of emphasis on getting to know the students. “I feel like my program didn’t
really talk about how to engage kids. It just talked about instructional strategies and how to
manage them [kids]. They told us eventually it would all fall into place.” Her interview
responses showed that she felt her teacher education program glossed over many of the details
that go along with working with English learners. Teacher 4 left her program feeling anxious
about the idea that all she had to do was teach, and one day, her English learners would get it.
Physiological responses such as anxiety are often translated into perceptions of inability
(Bandura, 1997). Perceptions of inability, in turn, negatively impact efficacy. Teacher 3 stated
that she believes more research exists in the area of instructional strategies than in classroom
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 71
management and student engagement, which is why her teacher education program put more
emphasis on increasing knowledge and skills in instructional strategies through coursework.
Although there was an emphasis on instructional strategies geared toward the general student
population, there was not much emphasis placed on instruction for the EL subgroup. Although
she was introduced to ELD and SDAIE strategies, Teacher 3 noted that instruction specific to
English language acquisition was never a focus.
Professional Development. All four teachers stated that professional development was
most influential on their efficacy levels in instructional strategies. Teacher 1 commented that the
ELD academy he attended showed him how to use the new ELD standards to inform his
instruction. “The PD showed me how to interpret the standards and align them with Common
Core.” He stated that although he was now familiar with the standards, he still did not have any
practical strategies to incorporate into his teaching practice. Teacher 1 believes that PD usually
focuses on instructional strategies and, therefore, could influence it the most. In the case of ELD,
however, he has not received training that has been helpful, which has had a negative effect on
his perceived efficacy. The negative influence stems from the not gaining the knowledge and
skills that he had expected from the PD experience.
Teacher 2 explained, “[During PD] we are constantly being reminded of the non-
negotiable components of our instruction, for example, using depth of knowledge questions and
developing objectives.” She explained that professional development typically focuses on
supplying teachers with methods for instruction, so it has the greatest influence on instructional
strategies. While that is the case, she does not feel that her general experiences with PD have
equipped her with the tools to be the effective in instructing her ELs. She stated that the PD
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 72
designed for DI teachers have been more successful in increasing her knowledge and skills in
language learning.
Teacher 3 agreed that PD has the potential to positively impact instructional strategies
with ELs, but it has not been effective in doing so. She shared the same dissatisfaction with the
other teachers about the way professional development has generally not been successful in
providing teachers with the knowledge and skills to support English learners, with the exception
of the DI professional development experienced by Teacher 2. Teacher 3 did, however, mention
that her efficacy in classroom management is high due, in some part, to professional
development. “I feel most efficacious in classroom management. This is based upon feedback
from teachers and administrators from multiple school sites and my Beginning Teacher Support
and Assessment (BTSA) support provider. “My professional development experiences have
helped me some. I think it’s because during PD I have the opportunity to talk to other teachers
who are not necessarily from the same school and we can share ideas.” Her responses showed
that verbal persuasion from people she has interacted with during professional development
experiences has impacted her perception of efficacy.
Teacher 4 discussed the amount of instructional tools that PD provides.
Her response clearly mentioned the impact of PD on her perceived level of efficacy in
implementing instructional strategies. “They [the district] try to give us information about ways
to help our English learners, but the truth is, the strategies are not helpful if we can’t see how
they’re supposed to work.”
Shortcomings of professional development. Teacher 1 and 3 feel the least efficacious in
instructional strategies. Teacher 1 believes the content focus of professional development has
not taught him how to actually provide English language instruction to English learners. “The
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 73
content is not focused on what I find valuable, such as transferrable EL instructional strategies
and approaches.” Teacher 1 used the word transferrable to mean that his ELD training has been
geared toward ELs in primary grades or who are in the early stages of their language
development, and he has not be able to transfer those strategies to his instruction with upper
grade students or those in more advanced stages of language development.
Teacher 2 felt the least efficacious in classroom management. She attributed this low
efficacy to PD duration. “There is no time to process what we are learning.” As mentioned
earlier, professional development in ELD has not been allotted the same amount of time as
professional development in other content areas. This lack of time has resulted in more
concentrated efforts to provide training on ELD standards, rather than more comprehensive
approaches to providing ELD support.
Teacher 3 attributed her low efficacy in instructional strategies to the lack of coherence
found in PD. “It’s [ELD] constantly changing, so it’s hard to become proficient in something
that’s changing all the time.” As discussed by Teacher 2 earlier, the district idea of what
constitutes effective ELD instruction has shifted from year to year. From embedding ELD
within the core curriculum to providing isolated English-language instruction, teachers have been
held responsible for implementing something every year.
Teacher 4 felt less efficacious in the area of student engagement. She believes the active
learning piece is lacking from her PD experiences. “We’re not given enough time to really talk
and peel the layers of what this [engaging EL students] really looks like. We’re given all the
right words, but no actions to go with them.” Teacher 4 expressed her dissatisfaction in merely
knowing what to say, but not knowing what to do.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 74
Classroom Practice
Research Question 4: What is the relationship between perceived levels of efficacy and
observable classroom practices used to support English learners?
Bandura’s (1997) self-efficacy theory states that individuals are more likely to put effort
into performing tasks if they believe they will be successful. If this holds true, the results of the
self-efficacy surveys suggest that teachers will incorporate ELD and SDAIE strategies in the
areas where they felt the most efficacious. For the purpose of this analysis, ELD and SDAIE
strategies were grouped into eight general categories. Table 7 lists the eight categories on the top
row. Each category was then matched with just one of the three key elements of effective
teaching (i.e., student engagement, instructional strategies, and classroom management).
Although several of the categories could have been matched to more than one of the key
elements, doing a one-to-one match allowed for a more focused analysis of the data.
Table 9
Matrix of ELD/SDAIE Categories and Key Elements of Effective Teaching
Student
Engagement
Instructional
Strategies
Classroom
Management
Teacher Language x
Making Lessons
Comprehensible
x
Questioning
Strategies
x
Activities x
Interaction x
Student Feedback x
Lesson Design x
Culture x

The teachers each participated in two 45-minute classroom observations. Teachers 1 and
2 were observed teaching fourth grade social studies on two non-consecutive days. Teachers 3
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 75
and 4 were observed teaching sixth grade math on two non-consecutive days. During the
observations, the researcher focused on the teachers and their classroom practice (see Appendix
C for the ELD/SDAIE observation checklist that was used in conjunction with scripted notes for
the analysis).
Student Engagement. For the purposes of this study, the researcher determined that the
student engagement section of the self-efficacy survey referred to those strategies or practices
that either kept the students actively involved in the learning or demonstrated cultural
responsiveness. The categories include teacher language, activities, and culture.
Teacher language. Teacher 2 demonstrated knowledge of her students by implementing
various approaches to teaching language based on need. Before her social studies lesson,
Teacher 2 met with four of her EL students to preview vocabulary. During this small-group
lesson, Teacher 2 introduced the word revolt. The teacher asked the students if they knew the
definition for the word. When no one responded, she provided the definition. “Revolt means to
rebel or go against.” Teacher 2 then began discussing other meanings of the word as a way to
emphasize the importance of context clues when coming across multiple meaning words. One of
the other meanings she discussed with the group was for the word revolting, which she defined
as “disgusting”. Following the vocabulary lesson, Teacher 2 did a whole group social studies
lesson about Native Americans. At one point, one of the EL students came across the word
revolting in the reading and told the class it meant “disgusting”. The student’s response showed
that he remembered the definition from his vocabulary preview and applied it to a new context.
Upon hearing the student’s definition, Teacher 2 realized that he misunderstood what they had
discussed during their small group lesson. She took the opportunity to clarify the misconception
and engage in another vocabulary review with the entire class.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 76
Activities. All four teachers provided clear instructions before the students began their
activities. For example, Teacher 3 asked the students to take out the math performance tasks
they had worked on the day before. She then instructed the students to review them and talk to
their partners about their processes for deconstructing the tasks. Before she allowed them to turn
to their partners and share, she asked a student to repeat what she had just said. To make use of
different learning modalities, Teacher 3 walked over to a group of her EL students and read the
task aloud as they followed along. Doing so provided her English learners with an opportunity
to see and hear the text simultaneously.
Culture. In a small group setting, Teacher 2 pre-taught the vocabulary words that the
students would encounter during the whole-group lesson. After introducing and teaching four
vocabulary words, she looked at the students and said, “Guess what. You are all experts with
words that the rest of the class is going to learn later on today.” The EL students smiled as
though the teacher had just told them a very important secret. During the whole-class lesson, the
EL students responded to questions that they may not have been able to respond to had they not
been given the vocabulary preview. In addition, Teacher 2 affirmed student responses using
their native language, Spanish. When she could, she used cognates to assist ELs in their
comprehension of new vocabulary. For example, one of the vocabulary words she taught was
neophyte. She used the Frayer model, a strategy she learned from professional development, to
teach the word. In this model, students provided definitions, characteristics, examples, and non-
examples of the vocabulary word. After spending time using the Frayer model to teach
neophyte, Teacher 2 provided the cognate neofito as a way to deepen their understanding. This
example demonstrates her understanding of culturally responsive pedagogy.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 77
Instructional Strategies. For the purposes of this study, the researcher determined that
the instructional strategies section of the self-efficacy survey referred to those strategies or
practices that were directly related to content area instruction. The categories include making
lessons comprehensible, questioning strategies, and lesson design.
Making lessons comprehensible. During a social studies lesson about pueblos, Teacher
1 asked the students to take out the foldable activity they had started the day before. In the
foldable, the students had notes about the different parts of a pueblo. The objective for the
current lesson was to understand the concept of communities within a pueblo. In order to make
the lesson comprehensible for students, Teacher 1 reviewed key vocabulary (i.e., pueblo and
plaza) and contextualized language through a dramatization activity that he learned through the
coursework of his teacher education program. The teacher told each table group of five that they
were their own village. Each student in the group was assigned a role. The roles were crafts
worker, farmer, storeowner, judge, and mayor. The students had to act out scenes based on what
they understood about their assigned role. All of the students, including the English learners,
were excited about this activity. One of the English learner students took the lead and directed
the rest of his team to do their jobs. This activity allowed all students to be engaged in the
learning. ELs are sometimes inadvertently silenced when activities are structured in a question
and respond format. The dramatization provided ELs with an opportunity to participate without
reservation.
Questioning strategies. All four teachers allowed for sufficient response times as well as
varied response methods when posing questions. These practices were learned during a
professional development experience offered by the district. Teacher 1 used a countdown system
to signal when time was almost up and offered alternative methods for responding, such as
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 78
giving the thumbs up signal to show agreement. Teacher 3 allowed for choral responses, which
is an effective way to lower anxiety, especially in English learners. In Teacher 4’s classroom,
the students were using the shaka sign to respond to the questions posed by the teacher. The
shaka is also known as the “hang loose” sign used in Hawaii, which means the thumb and pinky
finger are out while the other three fingers are folded in. Teacher 4’s use of the shaka symbol
appeared to be part of the students’ routine as they responded in that way without even being
prompted. By utilizing a non-verbal response system, ELs could respond to questions without
being afraid of making mistakes related to their limited proficiency in English. Gibbons (2003)
highlighted the importance of silent responses during English learners’ preproduction period.
Not only did Teacher 2 use similar strategies for responding to questions, she also posed
a variety of questions for the students. It was evident in her questioning that she had knowledge
of her students and their language skills. For example, she asked, “What would happen if
neophytes worshipped other gods?” She selected two English learners and one English-only
student to respond. Another question she asked was, “How did the Native Americans revolt
against missionaries?” She allowed students to discuss with partners. The partnerships included
an English-proficient student and an English learner student. Following the partner sharing,
Teacher 2 called on two English-proficient students to share out loud to the class.
Lesson design. Teacher 2 designed her social studies lesson to incorporate the use of
multiple language skills, which was something that was emphasized during one of her Dual
Immersion PDs. The students were engaged in reading, writing, speaking, and listening
throughout her lesson. She read aloud information as the students listened and followed along in
their texts. She posed the question, “How did offering Native American schools in the missions
help the transition from English to Spanish?” She gave the students three minutes to discuss
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 79
their responses with their partners. At the end of the three minutes, the students were instructed
to produce written responses in their journals.
Classroom Management. For the purposes of this study, the researcher determined that
the classroom management section of the self-efficacy survey referred to those strategies or
practices that allowed for seamless transitions and implementation of classroom activities. The
categories include interaction and student feedback.
Interaction. Teachers 2, 3, and 4 facilitated a variety of interactions during their lessons.
The percentage of student-to-student interaction was much greater than student-to-teacher
interaction in these three classes. It was evident that partner talk was a well-established routine
because none of the students hesitated when they were instructed to turn to their partners and
share. Professional development offered by the district consistently highlights the importance of
academic discourse among peers. The teachers were intentional in the way the assigned partners.
Depending on the CELDT level of the EL, he or she was partnered up with an English-proficient
student who could model academic English when speaking. The one exception was a student in
Teacher 3’ s class. This student had newly emigrated from Mexico to the Unites States and did
not speak any English. Teacher 3 put her in a partnership with a student who was proficient in
both the new student’s native language (i.e., Spanish) and English. The teacher allowed her
current student to support the new student by using Spanish to clarify instructions.
Student feedback. Teacher 4 provided student feedback consistently throughout her
math lessons. As the students engaged in partner talk, Teacher 4 would listen and affirm
responses in front of the class. For example, two students (one English-proficient student and
one English learner) were talking about how to convert fractions to decimals. Teacher 4 heard a
statement she liked and said, “I really like the way Alfred told his partner to remember that the
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 80
denominator is the divisor.” This comment reinforced Alfred’s response and served as a
reminder for the rest of the class. Teacher 4 gained this skill while observing her guide teacher
during her fieldwork placement.
Teacher 1 provided feedback by charting responses. During his social studies lesson, he
asked the questions, “What can be found in the middle of a pueblo?” One of his English learners
replied, “A plaza.” To affirm the response and signal that the student was correct, Teacher 1
sketched a pueblo on the document reader and wrote the word plaza in the center.
Perceived Efficacy and Observable Practice. Based on the self-efficacy survey,
Teacher 1 indicated that he had a great deal of influence in classroom management, but only
some influence in instructional strategies. The observations revealed that his practice was
consistent with what he believed he was most capable of doing. It was evident that he had
structures in place to ensure that all students, regardless of English language proficiency,
understood the policies and procedures of the classroom. Teacher 1 had established a
management system early on in the school year. His observation also revealed that his
perception of his influence in instructional strategies was consistent with his practice. During his
lessons, he implemented strategies that are commonly used in classrooms, for all students, not
just English learners. This resulted in inadvertent benefits for EL students. There was no clear
evidence that there was intentional planning done specifically for English learners.
On the other hand, Teacher 2 indicated that she had a great deal of influence in student
engagement and quite a bit of influence on classroom management. Although she rated herself
as being less efficacious in classroom management, her scores still showed that she was very
confident in that area. It was clear during the observations that Teacher 2 was more intentional
in the way she supported her English learners. She exhibited sensitivity to their cultures, used
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 81
their native language as a means of support, provided them with direct small group instruction
prior to whole-class lessons, and utilized their different learning modalities. She attributed her
efficacy to the support and preparation she received as a dual immersion teacher. Her knowledge
and skills to provide effective ELD are beyond what English-only teachers in the district assert
they possess.
Teacher 3 indicated that she was most efficacious in the area of classroom management
and least efficacious is student engagement. Her observations revealed that a relationship exists
between her perceived efficacy and classroom practice. The seamless transitions, strategic
grouping of students, and procedures demonstrated that Teacher 3 had a firm grasp of classroom
management. During the interview she explained that the feedback she had received from others
helped increase her efficacy in this area. It was evident that she had given much thought and
effort into ensuring that structures related to classroom management were in place.
Teacher 4 also stated that she was most efficacious in the area of classroom management.
Her process for fostering interactions between students as well as interactions between teacher
and students is indicative of her skill in classroom management. In addition, Teacher 4
demonstrated an understanding of providing students with timely feedback. During partner work
in math, Teacher 4 paid special attention to her English learners and made the effort to reinforce
correct responses both verbally and in writing. She also made an effort to clarify incorrect
responses as soon as she saw them.
Conclusion
The data revealed that the English-only teachers implemented fewer instructional
strategies to support English learners than the Dual Immersion teacher. All four teachers
indicated high levels of efficacy on the survey; however, the Dual Immersion teacher was the
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 82
only one whose sense of efficacy with English language instruction translated into classroom
practices that were supportive of English learners. The English-only teachers’ perceptions of
efficacy were evident in their general instructional practices. There did not appear to be
intentional implementation of practices designed specifically for ELs in the English-only
classrooms.
The interview responses showed that the knowledge and skills in instructional strategies
that the English-only teachers received from their teacher education programs and professional
development had a limited amount of influence on their efficacy. On the other hand, the
knowledge and skills the Dual Immersion teacher received through her BCLAD certification
training in her teacher education program and through the DI professional development
opportunities had a positive impact on her perception of efficacy toward supporting English
learners.
Research Questions 1 and 2
How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from their teacher education
programs for teaching English learners?
How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from professional
development for teaching English learners?
The major finding for Research Questions 1 and 2 is that learning occurs when teachers
are actively engaged in an experience and have opportunities to collaborate with others. Active
engagement includes observing or being observed, having discussions with colleagues, and
providing and receiving feedback as part of teacher education and professional development
experiences (Desimone, 2009; Guskey, 2000). The teacher participants agreed that modeling by
experts is helpful when learning how to implement new practices, which is consistent with
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 83
Bandura’s (1997) Social Cognitive Theory. The Social Cognitive Theory states that learning
occurs when individuals have the opportunity to observe others. Individuals choose to imitate
behaviors based on the outcomes that are observed. Behaviors with positive outcomes are likely
to be replicated, while behaviors with negative outcomes are likely to be avoided.
The teachers emphasized the positive influence of collaboration on their efficacy
development. Learning is sociocultural (Webster-Wright, 2009). Through interviews, the
researcher determined that the teachers gained the most knowledge and skills related to
supporting English language development when social interactions were part of the process.
Whether the PD was offered to English-only teachers or Dual Immersion teachers did not matter
as long as teacher had opportunities to interact with their colleagues.
Research Question 3
To what degree do teachers believe the knowledge and skills gained from their teacher education
programs and professional development contributed to their efficacy in English language
instruction?
The major finding for Research Question 3 is that teacher education and professional
development have great potential to influence teacher efficacy with implementing effective
instructional practices for English learners, but the lack of active learning and constant shift in
focus have produced limited impact according to the teachers’ responses to interview questions.
As with the previous two research questions, the lack of active learning has emerged as one of
the reasons why teacher efficacy in instructional strategies received low ratings. The aspect of
active learning that arose most often in interview responses was the opportunity to observe others
in action. In the case of the teacher participants in this study, observing their cooperating
teachers and colleagues incorporate ELD or SDAIE strategies into their classroom practice
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 84
helped increase their teacher efficacy because they saw positive results. Teachers felt less
efficacious about implementing strategies and practices that had never been modeled for them.
Again, there is consistency between the teachers’ feelings and Bandura’s (1988) Social
Cognitive Theory. Exchanging ideas as well as giving and receiving feedback was seen to
increase the participating teachers’ efficacy because they found support in their peers. Based on
these results, vicarious experiences and verbal persuasion appeared to have the most influence on
teacher efficacy (Bandura, 1997).
Another element that arose several times during the interviews was the constant shift in
focus of PD opportunities. Based on the teachers’ interview responses it appears that there is
uncertainty about which practices are the most effective for English learners. Effective research-
based practices are at the core of pre-service and in-service training; however, it appears that
teachers are unsure about how to implement those practices. Two processes for implementing
ELD are up for debate among teacher educators. They are: (1) to embed ELD support into
academic content instruction and (2) to provide systematic, isolated ELD support.
Research Question 4
What is the relationship between perceived levels of efficacy and observable classroom practices
used to support English learners?
The major finding for Research Question 4 is that intentional implementation of support
for English learners was more evident in the Dual Immersion class than in the English-only
classes. The results of the observations revealed that the dual immersion teacher had more
knowledge and skills than the English-only teachers in providing linguistically responsive
instruction to the ELs in her classroom. According to Alanis and Rodriguez (2008), a key
benefit of dual immersion programs in that DI teachers view language acquisition as enrichment
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 85
versus remediation. This way of thinking allows teachers to be linguistically responsive and
provide English learns with what they need. Collier and Thomas (2004) highlight that DI
teachers possess cultural sensitivity and work tirelessly to ensure that both sets of students in the
classroom (i.e., English-proficient and limited English-proficient) respect one another. The
interviews and survey showed that Teacher 2 was the most efficacious of the four teachers in
providing ELD instruction. Her high sense of efficacy was attributed to the specialized language
training she received as a DI teacher. Teacher 2’s perception of efficacy was consistent with her
observable classroom practice. The English-only teachers’ low perceptions of efficacy were
evident in their missed opportunities to provide ELD or SDAIE support to their English learners
(Lee & Maerten-Rivera, 2012).
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 86
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
Historically, English learners have not had the same access to educational opportunities
as their English-proficient peers (Abedi & Gandara, 2006). Research on this topic of inequitable
opportunities often places the blame on factors outside of school, such as cultural differences and
socioeconomic status (Gutierrez & Orellana, 2006). This study went beyond those factors that
schools have no control over and focused primarily on the preparation of teachers to provide
effective English language instruction to English learners. According to Balderamma (2001),
after parents, teachers have the greatest influence on student achievement.
Studies on efficacy have shown a correlation between teacher efficacy and student
achievement (Mujis & Reynolds, 2002; Tschannen-Moran & Woolfolk Hoy, 2001). The
purpose of this study was to examine how teacher education and professional development have
contributed to teacher efficacy in providing English language instruction to English learners.
The study also analyzed the relationship between perceptions of efficacy and observable
classroom practice. Bandura (1997) claims that teachers’ perceptions of efficacy impact the
learning environment they create for their students. Qualitative data were gathered using teacher
efficacy surveys, semi-structured interviews, and classroom observations. The participants of the
study were two English-only sixth grade teachers, one English-only fourth grade teacher, and
one Dual Immersion fourth grade teacher. All four participants are teachers in a district that
serves a large population of English learner (EL) students. English learners are those students
who reported having a home language other than English on a Home Language Survey. The
following research questions guided this study:
(1) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from their teacher
education programs for teaching English learners?
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 87
(2) How do teachers rate the quality of knowledge and skills received from
professional development for teaching English learners?
(3) To what degree do teachers believe the knowledge and skills gained from their
teacher education programs and professional development contribute to their efficacy in
English language instruction?
(4) What is the relationship between perceived teacher efficacy and observable classroom
practices used to support English learners?
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a discussion about the major findings. This chapter is
organized into the following sections: (1) discussion of findings, (2) implications, (3)
recommendations for practice (4) recommendations for future studies, and (5) conclusion.
Discussion of Findings
Bandura (1997) defines self-efficacy as an individual’s belief in his or her ability to
perform a task successfully. Based on this theory, teacher efficacy is a teacher’s belief in his or
her ability to influence student achievement. Teachers’ beliefs in the amount of influence they
have over student learning can impact their instruction (Tuchman & Isaacs, 2011). Four sources
of efficacy development have been linked to Bandura’s theory. These sources are mastery
experiences, vicarious experiences, physiological states, and verbal persuasion. The results of
this study showed that teacher education and professional development experiences contributed
to each of these sources, which in turn influenced the participants’ efficacy development. Using
the completed surveys, transcribed interviews, and scripted observational notes; the researcher
analyzed the features of pre-service and in-service preparation that contributed to the four
sources. Teacher education was divided into coursework and fieldwork, while professional
development was divided into Desimone’s (2009) core features of effective professional
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 88
development (i.e., content focus, active learning, coherence, duration, and collective
participation). The study also established that a relationship existed between the Dual Immersion
teacher’s perception of efficacy in supporting English learners and actual classroom practice.
She set aside time to pull her English learners into a small group to preview vocabulary before
her lessons. In addition, the DI teacher knew the appropriate cognates and translations in the L1
to help clarify information. The relationship between the English-only teachers’ perceptions of
efficacy was evident in the implementation of general instructional practices. Teacher 1 planned
a high-interest dramatization activity in social studies to engage his students. Teacher 3
purposefully partnered her students so that they could support each other during math
discussions. Teacher 4 encouraged silent responses through hand signals as she posed questions
during math. There was little evidence of intentional planning done specifically for English
learners.
Finding: Learning occurs when teachers are actively engaged in an experience and have
opportunities to collaborate with others. Overall, teachers felt that their coursework experiences
required them to play a passive role, while their fieldwork experiences were active.
Implementing, working, practicing, observing, and being in front of students were the words used
by all four teachers as they described their student teaching. As a result, the fieldwork
component of their teacher education programs more positively influenced their perceptions of
efficacy related to working with English learners. As pre-service teachers, they observed their
cooperating teachers implement ELD and SDAIE strategies for developing Academic English
into their practice. The teachers also had the chance to implement the ELD and SDAIE
strategies they learned in their coursework with the ELs in their student teaching placements.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 89
As in-service teachers, they highlighted the features of active engagement and
collaboration during professional development. The feelings teachers had are consistent with
Desimone’s (2009) suggestion that active learning and collective participation aid individuals in
acquiring and remembering new knowledge and skills for delivering English language
development instruction. Teachers’ beliefs are also consistent with the Social Cognitive Theory,
which highlights the impact observations have on a person’s behavior (Bandura, 1988).
Observation is key feature for both active learning and collective participation. Teachers are
likely to imitate observed behaviors that have positive results.
Finding: Teacher education and professional development have great potential to
influence teacher efficacy with providing effective instructional strategies for English learners,
but the lack of active learning and constant shift in focus have produced limited impact
according to the teachers’ responses to interview questions. The major finding in this section is
that teacher education and professional development can have the most influence in perceptions
of efficacy in instructional strategies. The coursework of TEP is not sufficient in preparing
teachers to work with English learners. Fieldwork experiences are needed for teachers to engage
in their learning. In addition, the ever-changing content focus and lack of active learning in PD
have prevented teachers from becoming proficient in providing ELD instruction to their EL
students. These findings further highlight the need for active participation at both the pre-service
and in-service levels.
Finding: Intentional implementation of support for English learners was more evident in
the Dual Immersion class than in the English-only classes. The observations revealed that the
teachers in English-only classrooms implemented what they believed were best practices
designed for all students. There was little evidence of purposeful planning for English learners.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 90
This finding suggests that the English-only teachers’ low perceptions of efficacy in
implementing instructional strategies for ELs has impacted the instructional support offered the
these students. They used instructional approaches that ware supportive of all students, rather
than approaches designed to support language acquisition and development. Teacher 2, however,
demonstrated a purposeful approach to instruction with ELs. She engaged her ELs in vocabulary
reviews, used their native language, and demonstrated cultural sensitivity, which indicates that
she is more comfortable using second language supports in the classroom than her English-only
counterparts. Their classroom behaviors are consistent with their interview responses regarding
the knowledge and skills they received through their teacher education programs and
professional development.
Implications for Practice
This study is consistent with past research, which highlights teachers’ lack of preparation
in providing adequate English language development support to the English learners in their
classrooms (Gersten, 1999; Abedi & Gandara, 2006; Chen, Kyle, & McIntyre, 2008; Yoon,
2008; Rumberger & Gandara, 2004; Janzen, 2008; Cadiero-Kaplan & Rodriguez, 2008).
Interviews revealed that teachers have a desire to increase their expertise in providing English
language instruction to their English learners. There was consensus among the teachers that they
lacked preparation specific to working with English learners in their teacher education programs
and professional development. The researcher hypothesized that teachers would find coursework
in educational linguistics and second language learning and development valuable (Wong
Fillmore & Snow, 2009; Lucas & Villegas, 2010). This study, however, showed that teachers
were more concerned with increasing their repertoire of ELD and SDAIE strategies rather than
learning about how language development actually works.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 91
Knowle’s (1989) theory of adult education states that there are different motivations for
adult learning. One of the motivations is referred to as readiness, which means that adults want
to learn about subjects that have immediate relevance to their work. Based on this theory, the
reasons for the teachers’ desire to increase their collection of strategies becomes clear. With so
many responsibilities placed on them throughout the day, they want to be efficient with their
time. Having strategies to incorporate into their practice seems to be a more feasible experience
during the school day than taking the English learners through the complex process of language
learning. This result is consistent with the literature that shows teachers are more focused on the
goal of content learning than the goals of language acquisition (Gersten, 1999). Arming teachers
with practical strategies, along with teaching them how to make sound instructional decisions,
would improve their practice targeted toward ELs (McIntyre, Kyle, Chen, Munoz, and Beldon,
2010).
The data gathered regarding professional development highlighted the need for active
learning and collective participation throughout the PD experience. In order for teachers to
develop their knowledge and skills for supporting ELs, there must be a conscious effort on the
part of PD developers to incorporate time to engage (or do) activities as well as time to
collaborate with peers (Webster-Wright, 2009). Although Desimone (2009) offered five core
features of effective professional development, active learning and collective participation came
up in conversation more frequently than the other three features. According to the interviews,
active participation was by and large the feature of in-service and pre-service preparation that
teachers believed could impact their perceptions of efficacy.
Classroom observations showed a relationship between perceptions of efficacy and
classroom practice, though the relationship was not as straightforward as the researcher had
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 92
hypothesized it would be. The three English-only teachers who were least efficacious in the area
of instructional strategies tended to implement fewer ELD or SDAIE strategies than the Dual
Immersion teacher who reported having higher efficacy in that area. The old adage that “people
don’t know what they don’t know” seems an appropriate description of what was observed in the
classroom. The three English-only teacher participants appeared unaware that they had many
missed opportunities to foster language development in their English learners during their
content-area instruction. Making teachers reflect and become more aware of their practice could
lead to more concerted efforts to provide appropriate instructional supports to ELs.
With the phasing out of state standards and the transition to national standards, there
appears to be little concern with the policies governing ELs among the teacher participants. In
this period of transition, little is known about what impact the new standards will have on the
ways in which teachers provide ELD support. While meeting proficiency targets and
reclassifying ELs continue to be goals for the four teachers, they placed more emphasis on
wanting to increase their knowledge and skills in supporting their English learners on a day-to-
day basis rather than on how to meet these long-term goals. Teachers need to be educated on the
policies so they can make informed decisions about their practices (Gandara & Baca, 2008).
Based on the interview responses, teachers only have a surface level understanding of the
policies impacting English learners. The literature shows that teachers hesitate to use effective
research-based instructional strategies (e.g., using a student’s native language) because they are
afraid of facing consequences for misapplying laws (Gandara, 2000). Opportunities for teachers
to develop their practice are lost because they are not well informed about policies that impact
their English learner students. A deeper understanding of policies would allow teachers to make
instructional decisions that are based on what they know rather than what they fear.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 93
Recommendations for Practice

Teacher Education Programs
Based on the findings presented in this study, teacher education programs should
consider the impact mastery and vicarious experiences have on teacher efficacy. A structure in
which coursework and fieldwork are interwoven throughout the program would call for
coursework to be immediately followed by hands-on experiences where pre-service teachers can
implement newly acquired skills and knowledge as well as observe expert teachers at work.
Instead of completing required coursework all at once before participating in fieldwork,
programs should allow for real practice to occur during the course of the program. Partnering
with schools may make a system like this one possible. Teacher education programs should also
be vigilant when identifying fieldwork placements. Under ideal circumstances, placements
would include diverse student populations, such as English learners. Teacher education
programs should provide pre-service teachers with authentic experiences by giving them the
chance to practice the skills they are learning with the actual groups of students who will be
receiving the instruction. Although the teachers in the study expressed more interest in building
their repertoire of English language development strategies than in developing a deeper
understanding of language learning and acquisition, it would be of value for teacher education
programs to offer an educational linguistics course. A course that is primarily focused on
language learning processes would give pre-service teachers a solid foundation from which they
could build in the future.
Professional Development
The data showed that in-service teachers gained the most from professional development
when active engagement and collective participation were incorporated into their experiences. If
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 94
the goal of professional development is to improve teacher practice, then it would be beneficial
for PD developers to mindfully structure experiences to include time for teachers to participate
in activities as well as time for them to collaborate with colleagues. One way this could happen
would be to set up PDs at school sites, rather than at off-site locations (e.g., district offices), so
that part of the time could be spent visiting classrooms and observing other teachers. Like
teacher education, professional development should focus on increasing opportunities for in-
service teachers to engage in both mastery and vicarious experiences in order to positively
influence their efficacy development. Future PD may also include an accountability piece,
which involves teachers implementing their new learning with their own students. Teachers
would be required to collect evidence of implementation to share with colleagues at follow-up
PDs. The evidence that is shared could serve as catalysts for discussions among teachers about
strategies and techniques. A final recommendation would be to gather information from teachers
about their greatest areas of need and develop focused PD based on their responses.
Recommendations for Future Research
Including a larger sample size of teachers in future studies about teacher efficacy and
support for English learners may make the results generalizable. As it stands, the results of this
study may only be representative of feelings and beliefs of the teachers at this particular district.
The field of education would benefit from a study that incorporates a wider range of teachers
who work with a similar population of students.
Another way to examine this topic would be to compare the effectiveness of different
schools of education in developing perceptions of high efficacy for working with English
learners within their pre-service teachers. Doing so has the potential to provide teacher
educators with a model of effective teacher education. On the same note, future studies could
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 95
compare the way different districts develop perceptions of high efficacy for working with ELs
among their classroom teachers. A thorough analysis and comparison of effective professional
development opportunities may provide a framework for other districts to follow (Karabenick &
Noda, 2010).
Future studies may also consider looking at the impact of professional experience on the
development of efficacy. Rather than focusing on the ways in which teachers are prepared (i.e.,
teacher education and professional development), researchers may want to examine how in-
service experience influences teacher efficacy. This study was focused on the feelings and
beliefs of teachers who had one to five years of teaching experience. It would be of value to look
at the difference in perceptions of efficacy between new teachers and veteran teachers. Soodak
and Podell (1997) found that pre-service teachers feel more efficacious during their fieldwork
experience than during their first year of teaching. Studying the factors that impact these
feelings could help teacher educators develop systems to keep teachers’ perceptions of efficacy
high.
When this study was started, issues of policy were thought to be significant. With the
rolling out of national standards and the conclusion of NCLB, teachers are in a state of transition.
Without clarity about the expectations of current policies, teachers are less focused on following
them. There are lost opportunities to make sound instructional decisions when teachers are not
informed about the laws and mandates that impact them. Future studies may want to specifically
examine current policies on English learners and the impact they have on teacher efficacy.
Conclusions
Well-intentioned teacher education and professional development experiences do not
always bring about desired results. Education is currently in a state where teachers’
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 96
responsibilities are multiplying, but the time and resources they are allotted to fulfill these
responsibilities remain the same. In an attempt to cover the multitude of topics teachers need to
be familiar with, many schools of education and school districts have not been able to give
English language development preparation the time it deserves. Training in ELD is critical, as
the population of English learners is sure to grow. If Bandura’s (1997) theory of self-efficacy is
true, then the focus of teacher educators at the pre-service and in-service levels must be on
working to increase teacher efficacy among all teachers. Perceptions of high efficacy can
motivate teachers to try new things and persevere through challenges. Teachers need to believe
that they have the ability to open doors of opportunity for their English learner students. ELs are
in need of teachers who are knowledgeable and willing to serve their needs. More importantly,
English learners need teachers who will see them as individuals whose educational experiences
will be enriched by the development of the English language rather than individuals who come to
school with a deficit that needs to be fixed. Once English learners are given the support they
need, they can then begin to access educational opportunities that were once only available to
their English-proficient peers. No matter what conditions ELs face at home, teachers have the
ability to make this goal a reality.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 97
References
Abedi, J. (2002). Standardized achievement tests and English language learners: Psychometrics
issues. Educational Assessment, 8(3), 231-257.
Abedi, J., & Gandara, P. (2006). Performance of English language learners as a subgroup in
large-scale assessment: interaction of research and policy. Educational Measurement:
Issues and Practice, 25(4), 36-46.
American Civil Liberties Union. (2013). California failing to deliver vital instruction to
thousands of English learner students. Retrieved January 24, 2013, from
http://www.aclu.oeg/racial-justice/california-faling-deliver-vital-instruction-thousands-
english-learner-students
Athanases, S., Wahleitner, J., Bennett, L. (2012). Learning to attend to culturally and
linguistically diverse learners through teacher inquiry in teacher education. Teachers
College Record, 144, 1-50.
Au, K. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse
backgrounds. Journal of Literacy Research, 30(2), 297-319.
Balderrama, M. (2001). The (mis) preparation of teachers in the proposition 227 era:
Humanizing teacher roles and their practice. The Urban Review, 33(3), 255- 267.
Bandura, A. (1988). Organizational Application of Social Cognitive Theory. Australian Journal
of Management, 13(2), 275–302.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and
Company.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 98
Birman, B. F., Desimone, L., Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes
professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers.
American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.
Bunch, G., Kibler, A., & Pimentel, S. (2013, May). Realizing opportunities for English learners
in the Common Core English language arts and disciplinary literacy standards. Paper
presented at the meeting of American Education Research Association, San Francisco,
CA.
Cadiero-Kaplan, K., & Rodriguez, J. (2008). The preparation of highly qualified teachers for
English language learners: Educational responsiveness for unmet needs. Equity &
Excellence in Education, 41(3), 372-387.
Calderon, M., Slavin, R., & Sanchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction for English learners. The
Future of Children, 21(1), 103-127.
Chacon, C. (2005). Teachers’ perceived efficacy among English as a foreign language teachers
in middle schools in Venezuela. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 257-272.
Chappell, P., & Moore, S. (2012). Novice teachers and linguistics: Foregrounding the
functional. TESOL Quarterly, 46(3), 589-598.
Chen, C., Kyle, D.W., & McIntyre, E. (2008). Helping teachers work effectively with English
language learners and their families. School Community Journal, 18(1), 7-20.
Clark, B. A. (2000, November). First-and second-language acquisition in early childhood. In
Issues in early childhood education: Curriculum, teacher education, & dissemination of
information. Proceedings of the Lilian Katz Symposium (pp. 5-7).
Commins, N.L. & Miramontes, O.B. (2006). Addressing linguistic diversity from the outset.
Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 240-246.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 99
Crouch, R. (2012, May). The United States of education: The changing demographics of the
United States and their schools. Retrieved September 2, 2013, from
http://www.centerforpubliceducation.org/You-May-Also-Be-Interested-In-landing-page-
level/Organizing-a-School-YMABI/The-United-States-of-education-The-changing-
demographics-of-the-United-States-and-their-schools.html
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy
evidence. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). [on-line] Available:
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1/.
Desimone, L.M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: toward
better conceptualization and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181-199.
Echevarria, J., Richards-Tutor, C., Chinn, V., Ratleff, P. (2011). Did they get it? The Role of
fidelity in teaching English learners, Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 54(60),
425-434.
Fetler, M. (2008). Unexpected testing practices affecting English language learners with
disabilities under no child left behind. Practical Assessment, Research and evaluation,
13(6), 1-8.
Feinman-Nemsar, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: Lessons from an exemplary support
teacher. Journal of Teacher Education 52(1), 17-30.
Fillmore, L.W., Snow, C. (2000). What teachers need to know about language. Washington DC:
Center for Applied Linguistics. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 444379)
Retrieved June 26, 2014, from PsycINFO.
Gandara, P., & Baca, G. (2008). NCLB and California’s English language learners: The perfect
storm. Language Policy, 7(3), 201-216.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 100
Gandara, P., & Rumberger, R. (2003). The inequitable treatment of English learners in
California’s public schools. Revised report prepared for the lawsuit, Williams v. State of
California. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/ item/ 6v77c7tj#page-3
Gandara, P., & Rumberger, R. (2009). Immigration, language, and education: How does
language policy structure opportunity? Teachers College Record, 111(3), 750-782.
Gay, G., (1997). Multicultural infusion in teacher education: Foundations and applications.
Peabody Journal of Education, 72(1), 150-177.
Genzuk, M. (2011). Specially designed academic instruction in English (SDAIE) for language
minority students. Center for Multilingual, Multicultural Research Digital Papers Series.
Center for Multilingual, Multicultural Research, University of Southern California.
Gersten, R. (1999). Lost opportunities: challenges confronting four teachers of English-language
learners. The Elementary School Journal, 100(1), 37-56.
Gibbons, B. A. (2003). Supporting elementary science education for English learners: A
constructivist evaluation instrument. The journal of educational research, 96(6), 371-
379.
Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a
content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 247-273.
Grissom, J. (2004). Reclassification of English learners. Education Policy Analysis Archives,
12(360, 1-38.
Guskey, T.R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Gutierrez, K., Asato, J., Pacheco, M., Moll, L., Olson, K., Horng, E., Ruiz, R., Garcia, E.,
McCarty, T. (2002). Sounding American: The consequences of new reforms on English
language learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(3), 328-343.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 101
Hudley, A., & Mallinson, C. (2011). Understanding English language variation in U.S. schools.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Janzen, J. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas. Review of
Educational Research, 78(4), 1010-1038.
Karabenick, S., & Node, P. (2010). Professional development implications of teachers’ beliefs
and attitudes toward English language learners. Bilingual Research Journal: The Journal
of the National Association for Bilingual Education, 28(1), 55-75.
Lillie, K., Markos, A., Arias, M.B., & Wiley, T. (2012). Separate and not equal: The
implementation of structure English immersion in Arizona’s classrooms. Teacher’s
College Record, 114(9), 1-33.
Lim, C., Maxwell, K. Able-Boone, H., & Zimmer, C. (2009). Cultural and linguistic diversity in
early childhood teacher preparation: The impact of contextual characteristics on
coursework and practica. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24, 64-76.
Loughran, J. J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching
and learning about teaching. New York: Routledge.
Lucas, T., & Villegas, A. (2010). The missing piece in teacher education: the preparation of
linguistically responsive teachers. National Society for the Study of Education, 109(2),
297-318.
Maxwell, L. (2013). Common core ratchets up language demands for English-learners.
Education Week, 33(10), 14-16.
Menken, K. (2010). NCLB and English language learners: Challenges and consequences.
Theory Into Practice 49, 121-128.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 102
Mujis, D., & Reynolds, D. (2002). Teachers’ beliefs and behaviors: What really matters? Journal
of Classroom Interaction, 37(2), 3-15.
Nation, P. (2003). The role of the first language in foreign language learning. Asian EFL
Journal, 5(2), 1-8.
National Clearinghouse for English Learner Acquisition, (2011). Available at
http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/uploads/9/growingLEP_0809.pdf
Painter, G., & Flores, E. (2013). Reclassification and academic success among English language
learners: New evidence from a large urban school district. B.E. Journal of Economic
Analysis and Policy, 13(1), 107-136.
Palmer, D. (2007). A dual immersion strand program in California: Carrying out the promise of
dual language education in an English-dominant context. International Journal of
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(6), 752-768.
Peacock, M. (2001). Pre-service ESL teachers’ beliefs about second language learning: A
longitudinal study. System, 29, 177-195.
Pease-Alvarez, L., Samway, K., & Cifka-Herrera, C. (2010). Working within the system:
Teachers of English learners negotiate a literacy instruction mandate. Language Policy.
Advance online publication. doi: 10.1007/s10993-010-9180-5
Reese, L., Goldenberg, C., & Saunders, W. (2006). Variations in reading achievement among
Spanish‐speaking children in different language programs: Explanations and confounds.
The Elementary School Journal, 106(4), 363-385.
Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. V. (2005). The big picture: A meta-analysis of program
effectiveness research on English language learners. Educational Policy, 19(4), 572-594.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 103
Robinson, J. (2011). Evaluating criteria for English learner reclassification: A causal-effects
approach using a binding-score regression discontinuity design with instrumental
variables. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(3), 267-292.
Rumberger, R., & Gandara, P. (2004). Seeking equity in the education of California’s English
learners. Teacher’s College Record 106(10), 2032-2056.
Saunders, W. & Marcelletti (2013). The gap that can’t go away: The catch-22 of reclassification
in monitoring the progress of English learners. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 35(2), 139-156.
Shin, F. H. (2004). English language development standards and benchmarks: Policy issues and
a call for more focused research. Bilingual Research Journal, 28(2), 253-266.
Short, D., & Echevarria, J. (2005). Teacher skills to support English language learners.
Educational Leadership, 62, 8-13.
Sleeter, C.E. (2001). Epistemological diversity in research on preservice teacher preparation for
historically underserved children. Review of Research in Education, 25, 209-250.
Stetcher, B., & Kirby, S. (2004). Organizational improvement and accountability. Santa Monica:
RAND Corporation.
Tasan, A.P. (2001, April). Teacher efficacy and diversity: Implications for teacher training.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Seattle, WA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 453201)
Tuchman, E. & Isaacs, J. (2011). The influence of formal and informal pre-service experience on
teacher self-efficacy. Educational Psychology, 31(4), 413-433.
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 104
Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R.W. Rieber & A.S. Carton (Eds.), The collected
works of L.S. Vygotsky: Vol 1. Problems of general psychology (pp. 37-285). New York:
Plenum.
Yoon, B. (2008). Uninvited guests: the influence of teachers’ roles and pedagogies on the
positioning of English language learners in the regular classroom. American Education
Research Journal, 45(2), 496-522.
Yough, M.S. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions of ability: Measuring teacher efficacy for instructing
the ESOL student. Retrieved June 7, 2014, from
https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/handle/1811/320

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 105
Appendix A
Self-Efficacy Survey
Please
answer
the
questions
by
circling
the
number
the
best
reflects
your
opinion.

Refer
to
the
key
below.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Not
at
all

Very

little

Some

influence

Quite
a

bit

A
great

deal

Student
Engagement

How
much
can
you
do
to
motivate
English
learners
who
show
low
interest
in

schoolwork?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

How
much
can
you
do
to
keep
English
learners
interested
in
their

schoolwork?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

How
much
can
you
do
to
make
learning
enjoyable
for
English
learners?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

How
much
can
you
do
to
help
English
learners
value
learning?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Instructional
Strategies

To
what
extent
can
you
effectively
teach
oral
language
(listening
and

speaking)
skills?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

To
what
extent
can
you
effectively
teach
written
language
(reading
and

writing)
skills?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

To
what
extent
can
you
craft
good
questions
for
you
students?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

To
what
extent
can
you
provide
alternative
explanations
for
English
learners

who
appear
confused?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

How
well
can
you
implement
alternative
instructional
strategies
when

certain
strategies
do
not
work?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

To
what
extent
can
you
help
English
learners
reach
the
learning
objectives?
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Classroom
Management

How
well
can
you
establish
a
classroom
management
system
within
your

classroom
with
different
groups
of
students?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

To
what
extent
can
you
get
different
groups
of
students
to
follow
classroom

procedures?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

To
what
extent
can
you
get
different
groups
of
students
to
follow
the

classroom
rules?

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 106
Appendix B
Interview Protocol

Name of Researcher: Marianne Geronimo

Date of Interview:

Name of Interviewee:

Grade: # Years Teaching: Sex:

Setting:

Start time: End time:
________________________________________________________________________
Introduction

Hi XX,

My name is Marianne, and I am a researcher at University of Southern California’s Rossier School of Education. I
am conducting a study to identify the factors that contribute to teacher self-efficacy. I am also examining how
varying levels of efficacy influence the way in which teachers support English learners in their classrooms. More
specifically, I am interested in learning how teacher education programs and continuing in-service professional
development contribute to teachers’ perceived levels self-efficacy.

The information you provide will add to the existing knowledge about the current status of support provided to
teachers in the area of working with English learners.

Any information that can be identified with you will be kept confidential. I will not use your name or position
without your permission.

Teacher Education Program

(1) On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent did the coursework in your teacher education program contribute to your
ability to support English learners in the classroom?

Would you like to comment as to why you ranked the coursework as you did?

(2) On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent did the fieldwork in your teacher education program contribute to your ability
to support English learners in the classroom?

Would you like to comment as to why you ranked the fieldwork as you did?

Professional Development

(1) On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the content focus of professional development opportunities contributed
to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

Would you like to comment as to why you ranked the content focus as you did?

(2) On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the active learning of professional development opportunities contributed
to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 107

Would you like to comment as to why you ranked the active learning as you did?

(3) On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the coherence of professional development opportunities contributed to
your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

Would you like to comment as to why you ranked coherence as you did?

(4) On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the duration of professional development opportunities contributed to
your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

Would you like to comment as to why you ranked duration as you did?

(5) On a scale of 1 to 5, to what extent has the collective participation of professional development opportunities
contributed to your ability to support English learners in the classroom?

Would you like to comment as to why you ranked collective participation as you did?

Efficacy

(1) You were chosen for this interview because you ranked high on the efficacy survey you completed previously.
Of the three areas on the survey, in which do you feel the most efficacious?

(2) Out of the three areas, can you explain which one your teacher education program impacted the most?

(3) Out of the three areas, can you explain which one professional development has impacted the most?

(4) I noticed you were most efficacious about your ability to ___________________________.

(a) Did your teacher education program influence your sense of efficacy in this area? If yes, what was the
most valuable to you in this area – coursework or fieldwork?

(i) If coursework – Can you recall and describe which class(es) contributed to your
efficacy?

(ii) If fieldwork – Can you recall and describe the field experience that contributed to
your efficacy?

(b) Have any professional development experiences influenced your sense of efficacy in this area? If yes,
what was the most valuable to you in this area – content focus, active learning, coherence, duration,
or collective participation? Can you describe the ______________________________of the professional
development experience?

(5) I noticed you ranked _________________________________________ the lowest on the survey.

(a) What was lacking in your teacher education program that caused you to be less efficacious in this
area? Was it the coursework or fieldwork?

(b) What has been lacking in your professional development experience that is causing you to be less
efficacious in this area? Is it content focus, coherence, duration, active learning, or collective
participation?

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 108
Appendix C
ELD/SDAIE Observation Checklist

N/A
ELD/SDAIE Observation Checklist
Developed by Hee-Won Kang
No Yes
FOCUSESO NCO MM UNIC ATIO N CO NTENT MEANINGANDORTASK R ATHERTHANO N LANGUAGEFOR MS DR AWSLANGUAGESITUATIO NSANDFOR MSFR O MSTUDENTS CURR ENTNEEDS DESIR ES ANDINTER ESTS USESAVAR IET YOFLANGUAGETEAC HINGAPPR OAC HESANDMETHODOLOGIES APPR OPR IATEL Y ADAPTSLESSO NANDMATER IALSTOPR O VIDECO NTEXTUALIZ EDANDCO MPR EHENSIBLE INSTR UCTIO N CO NTEXTUALIZ ESLANGUAGETHR OUGHUSEOFOBJECTS MANIPULATIV ES VISUALS PR OPS GESTUR ES R EALIA DR AMATIZ ATIO NOFMEANING FACIALEXPR ESSIO NS ETC MODIlESANDADJUSTSLANGUAGETOMAXIMIZ ECO MPR EHENSIBILIT YUSESASLO WER R ATEOFSPEEC H C LEARENUNCIATIO N APPR OPR IATEL YCO NTR OLSVOC ABULAR YAND SENTENCELENGTH MAKESUSEOFCOGNATESWHENPOSSIBLE LIMITSTHEUSEOF IDIO MATICEXPR ESSIO NS MAKESUSEOFLO NGERANDNATUR ALPAUSES USESF E WER PR O NOUNS ETC CO NSISTENTL YC HEC KSFORCO MPR EHENSIO NANDORATTENTIO N R EPEATS EXPLAINS PAR AP HR ASESANDOREXPANDSINFOR MATIO NANDQUESTIO NS WHENNECESSAR Y PR E VIE WSKE YCO NCEPTSANDVOC ABULAR YANDUSESACTIVITIESTODR AWFR O MAND BUILDUPO NSTUDENTS BAC KGR OUNDKNO WLEDGEEXPER IENCE HELPINGTHEMTO R ELATENE WINFOR MATIO NTOPR IORKNO WLEDGE R E VIE WSMAINTOPICSKE YVOC ABULAR YINAVAR IET YOFWA Y SANDPR O VIDES CO NTENTANDVOC ABULAR YEXPANSIO NACTIVITIES POSESAVAR IET YOFQUESTIO NSATDIFF ER ENTLE V ELSANDUSESAPPR OPR IATE QUESTIO NINGTEC HNIQUES AL LO WSSUFlCIENTR ESPO NSETIMEFORSTUDENTSTOANSWERQUESTIO NS Making Lessons Comprehensible
4 HETEAC HER Teaching Language
Questioning Strategies
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 109

N/A
ELD/SDAIE Observation Checklist
Developed by Hee-Won Kang
No Yes
4 HETEAC HER Lesson Design
Activities
Interaction
Student Feedback
VAR IESACTIVITIESACCOR DINGTOSTUDENTS STAGEOFLANGUAGEACQUISITIO N PR IOR KNO WLEDGE ANDPR EF ER ENCES PR O VIDESC LEARINSTR UCTIO NSSUPPOR TIV ESTR UCTUR ETOACTIVITIES PLANSHANDS
O NACTIVITIESWHENE V ERAPPR OPR IATE MAKESUSEOFDIFF ER ENTLEAR NINGMODALITIES MODELSANDFACILITATESACQUISITIO NOFCOGNITIV EMETACOGNITIV EAFF ECTIV E STR ATEGIESANDSKIL LS FACILITATESTEAC HER
TO
STUDENTSTUDENT
TO
STUDENTINTER ACTIO N C AL LSO NAR ELATIV EL YEQUALDISTR IBUTIO NOFSTUDENTS INC LUDINGSTUDENTSFR O M DIFF ER ENTBAC KGR OUNDS PR O VIDESOPPOR TUNITIESFORAVAR IET YOFPAIR GR OUP ANDCOOPER ATIV E LEAR NINGACTIVITIES USESAPPR OPR IATEERR ORCORR ECTIO NTEC HNIQUES SUC HASCORR ECTINGERR ORS THATHINDERCO MM UNIC ATIO NORMODELINGTHECORR ECTFOR MAF TERASTUDENT R ESPO NSEWHILEMAINTAININGFOCUSO NCO NTENT PR O VIDESEFF ECTIV EANDTIMEL YF EEDBAC KO NSTUDENTS PER FOR MANCEAND EFFOR TS DESIGNSANDUSESLESSO NSTHATINCOR POR ATEUSEOFAL LLANGUAGESKIL LS LISTENING SPEAKING R EADING W R ITING PLANSLESSO NSTHATINC LUDEBOTHLANGUAGECO NTENTOBJECTIV ES SHO WSSENSIVIT YTOLINGUISTICANDCULTUR ALDIFF ER ENCESANDATTEMPTSTO VALIDATESTUDENTS EXPER IENCE MAKESTEAC HINGTEAC HINGST Y LES INTER ACTIO NPATTER NS C LASSR OO M ORGANIZ ATIO N CURR ICULUM IN VOL V EMENTWITHPAR ENTSANDCO MM UNIT Y ETC CULTUR AL L YR ESPO NSIV E Culture
TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 110

Figure
1.
Top
Ten
Spoken
Languages
in
English
Learner
Students’
Homes
In the Migration Policy Institute analysis of the 2009 American Community Survey, December 2010, Retrieved July
5, 2014, from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/top-languages-spoken-english-language-learners-nationally-
and-state. Copyright 2010 by Jeanne Batalova and Margie McHugh.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 111

Figure 2. ELD vs. SDAIE – What’s the Difference?
The similarities and differences of ELD and SDAIE, In the Understanding Language Initiative, Retrieved Jan 2,
2015, From http://notebook.lausd.net/pls/ptl/docs/page/ca_lausd/fldr_organizations/fldr_
instructional_svcs/instructionalsupportservices/language_acq_home/language_acquisition_master_pla_
rewrite/mpi%202013-14-handouts-%20elem-%20a2c.pdf

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 112

Figure 3. Desimone’s Framework of Effective Professional Development
Proposed core conceptual framework for studying the effects of professional development on teachers and students.
Adapted from “Improving Impact Studies of Teachers’ Professional Development: Toward Better
Conceptualizations and Measures,” by L. Desimone, 2009, Educational Researcher, 38, p. 185. Copyright 2009 by
the American Educational Research Association.

TEACHER EFFICACY AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTRUCTION 113

Figure 4. Bandura’s Model of Self-Efficacy

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Building academic vocabulary for English language learners through professional development: a gap analysis

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

A case study on influences of mainstream teachers' instructional decisions and perceptions of English learners in Hawai'i public secondary education

PDF

Effective coaching of teachers to support learning for English language learners

PDF

Teachers’ perceptions and implementation of instructional strategies for the gifted from differentiation professional development

PDF

The beliefs and related practices of effective teacher leaders who support culturally and linguistically diverse learners

PDF

Maximizing English learners' success in higher education with differentiated instruction

PDF

Examining the relationship between knowledge, perception and principal leadership for standard English learners (SELs): a case study

PDF

Explicit instruction’s impact on the student achievement gap in K-12 English language learners

PDF

Instructional proficiency strategies for middle school English language learners

PDF

An investigation on the integration of science and literacy for English language learners

PDF

The role of music in the English language development of Latino prekindergarten English learners

PDF

Transformative justice in California’s public schools: decreasing the education debt owed to California’s Latino students through collaboratively-developed professional learning for secondary teachers

PDF

Learning the language of math: supporting students who are learning English in acquiring math proficiency through language development

PDF

Teacher perceptions of instructional practices for long-term English learners

PDF

Defying odds: how teachers perceive academic language growth despite high poverty

PDF

Building teacher competency to work with middle school long-term English language learners: an improvement model

PDF

A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers' perceptions and impact in their dual language immersion classroom

PDF

Building capacity in homeroom teachers to support English language learners

PDF

Effective reading instruction for English learners

Asset Metadata

Creator Geronimo, Marianne G. (author)

Core Title Support for English learners: an examination of the impact of teacher education and professional development on teacher efficacy and English language instruction

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 04/21/2015

Defense Date 03/13/2015

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag English learners,OAI-PMH Harvest,professional development,Teacher education,teacher efficacy

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Rousseau, Sylvia G. (committee chair), Carbone, Paula M. (committee member), Mora-Flores, Eugenia (committee member)

Creator Email geronimo@usc.edu,mariannegeronimo@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-555563

Unique identifier UC11299028

Identifier etd-GeronimoMa-3357.pdf (filename),usctheses-c3-555563 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-GeronimoMa-3357.pdf

Dmrecord 555563

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Geronimo, Marianne G.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA