KULTUR–SPRÅK–MEDIER Examensarbete i engelska och lärande 15 högskolepoäng, avancerad nivå Teachers’ Perceptions of the Use of Translanguaging within English Education in Grades 4-6 Lärares förhållningssätt till användandet av translanguaging i engelskundervisning i klass 4–6 Cajsa Grenner Niri Hagelin Jönsson Grundlärarexamen med inriktning mot arbete i årskurs Examinator: Chrysogonus Siddha 4–6, 240 högskolepoäng Malilang Examensarbete i engelska och lärande, 15 hp Supervisor: Shaun Nolan Slutseminarium: 2020-03-24 Contributions There were two authors of this research study, Cajsa Grenner and Niri Hagelin Jönsson. We have both contributed with an equal share of work throughout the stages of this project. The stages being: - Formulating the research question - The search for research and literature - Gathering data - Transcribing data - Analysing and selecting the gathered material - Authoring the degree project We hereby state that we together have planned for, conducted and completed every part of this study in agreement. Cajsa Grenner and Niri Hagelin Jönsson Abstract This degree project aims to explore, in the context of translanguaging, teachers' perceptions of the use of pupils’ first language within English as a second language education in Sweden. Following a review of the concept of translanguaging from a historic and pedagogical perspective, teachers’ views on the roles of their pupils’ first and second languages as reported in international research, recent research pertaining to teachers' perceptions and pedagogical methods within translanguaging is highlighted. Results from a methodological triangulation examination of data emanating from a survey, interviews and classroom observations show that: even though the term translanguaging is relatively unknown, teacher respondents use translanguaging as a method within ESL education in Sweden; a majority of teachers value their English-use higher than their use of the pupils’ first language, but are not averse to using translanguaging when deemed appropriate; and a more positive attitude is displayed towards the pupils use of their first language, but the use of English is preferred. Keywords: code-switching, ESL, L1, L2, perceptions, plurilingualism, multilingualism translanguaging Table of contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 2. Purpose and research questions ...................................................................................... 3 3. Theoretical Background ................................................................................................. 4 3.1. Translanguaging ....................................................................................................... 4 3.1.1. Code-switching ................................................................................................. 7 3.1.2. Summary ........................................................................................................... 9 3.2. Teachers’ view on the roles of first and second languages in language education.. 9 3.3. Aspects of translanguaging within the steering documents ................................... 10 3.4. Recent research in code-switching and translanguaging ....................................... 11 3.4.1. Teachers attitudes/perceptions ........................................................................ 11 3.4.2. Pedagogical Methods ...................................................................................... 14 4. Methods ........................................................................................................................ 15 4.1. Interviews ............................................................................................................... 15 4.2. Observations .......................................................................................................... 16 4.3. Survey .................................................................................................................... 16 4.4. Ethical and Legal Considerations .......................................................................... 17 4.5. The participants of the interviews and observations .............................................. 18 5. Results .......................................................................................................................... 19 5.1. Result of the survey ............................................................................................... 19 5.1.1. Teachers’ perceptions of their own language use ........................................... 19 5.1.2. Teachers’ perceptions of their pupils’ language use ...................................... 21 5.2. Results of five interviews ...................................................................................... 23 5.2.1. Teachers’ perceptions of their own language use ........................................... 24 5.2.2. Teachers’ perceptions of their pupils’ language use ...................................... 26 5.3. Results of four observations .................................................................................. 29 6. Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 31 6.1. Teachers’ practices and perceptions of their own use of L1 .................................. 31 6.2. Teachers practices and perceptions of their pupils’ use of L1 ............................... 33 7. Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 36 7.1. Limitations ............................................................................................................. 36 7.2. Further Research .................................................................................................... 37 8. References .................................................................................................................... 39 9. Appendices ................................................................................................................... 44 9.1. Consent form .......................................................................................................... 44 9.2. Survey .................................................................................................................... 48 1. Introduction Over the past decades, Sweden has become more globalised. In May 2018, Studieförbundet Näringsliv och Samhälle - a non-profit organisation with many of Sweden’s biggest companies as members - issued a report regarding the increased amount of globalised companies in Sweden. This development results in a growing need for professions demanding personal interaction (Heyman and Sjöholm, 2018). In this new society, strong and flexible linguistic knowledge with English as one of the primary languages is crucial. It falls to us as teachers to prepare our pupils to be able to thrive and take part in this future. One large part within this emerging multilinguistic society is translanguaging, which could be defined as the dynamic use of different languages as linguistic resources when thinking and communicating (Svensson, 2018). The use of translanguaging as a pedagogical method, with its’ origin in Cen Williams’ classrooms in Wales (Lewis, Jones & Baker, 2012) has now started to expand and has become a component in the aim for language education targeted in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment (hereafter CEFR). Apart from an ongoing research project at Lund University, conducted by Marie Källkvist and Henrik Gyllstad, not much research has targeted the use of translanguaging within the field English as a Second Language (ESL) in Sweden. Therefore, our study targets this area. While the research within this field has been limited in this country, researchers from other countries have conducted such studies concerning English as a Second Language (ESL), translanguaging and teachers’ attitudes in diverse countries such as the U.S.A., Japan and Turkey. Research points to similar results, where teachers are positive towards using translanguaging (Nambisan, 2014, and Yuvayapan, 2019). However, the implementation of translanguaging as a teaching method is still not widespread. The lack of proliferation of this method is due to various reasons, such as a perceived non-correlation with the policy documents (Yuvayapan, 2019) or an unfeasibility to view translanguaging as an asset (Nambisan, 2014). Further support for this notion can be found in other research, which has pointed towards a discord within the teacher community (McMillan & Rivers, 2011). In the Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare 2011/2018 (hereafter LGR11) it is stated that “Language is the primary tool human beings use 1 for thinking, communicating and learning. Having a knowledge of several languages can provide new perspectives on the surrounding world, enhanced opportunities to create contacts and greater understanding of different ways of living” (p. 34). The foundation for LGR11 is the CEFR, in which the Council of Europe (2001) explicitly states that the aim with language education is to “develop a linguistic repertory, in which all linguistic abilities have a place” (p. 5) without achieving mastery of languages in isolation. It is therefore not unrealistic to assume that LGR11 favours multilingualism