See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/338879227

Content Knowledge in English Language Teacher Education: International

Experiences

Book · February 2020

DOI: 10.5040/9781350084650

CITATIONS READS

3 1,735

1 author:

Darío Luis Banegas

University of Strathclyde
131 PUBLICATIONS   637 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Análisis y Garantía de Calidad de la Educación Plurilingüe View project

Ceibal en Inglés View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Darío Luis Banegas on 02 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.

Introduction

Darío Luis Banegas

Let me start with a few questions: how much English

should a teacher of English know to teach it effectively as

another language? How much knowledge about English

should a teacher know to be a good teacher? Should they

know about syntax, phonology, and discourse analysis?

How does that affect a teacher’s professional identity?

Now, let me share two different stories that are connected to the questions posed

above.

Story 1: I was interviewing a group of teenage learners about their teachers’ practices

in secondary education. They criticized some of their teachers for various reasons, but they

also praised others for how much they knew about the subject they taught. One example

specifically referred to their English as a foreign language (EFL) teacher:

Sandra rocks! She knows so much about English. She gives us all kinds of feedback, like

when something is OK, when something is wrong, what other possibilities we can use. Or

she teaches us jokes and expressions, or makes us note differences in meaning according

to intonation, or pronunciation. I now know that we can’t say that British English is purer

than American English because she gave us this explanation about languages, dialects, and

how they evolve. That makes her an excellent teacher!

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
Story 2: I was doing research on EFL teachers’ perceptions as regards the impact that the pre-

service English language teacher education (ELTE) programme they had completed had made

on them (Banegas, 2009). Most participants coincided in stressing the importance of content

knowledge, i.e. knowledge of and about English. For example, one teacher said:

We must learn how to use the language. Mastery of English is absolutely necessary to be a

model. After all, we have to know what we teach. Of course the how is important, but

perhaps the what is a priority because this is what we actually teach: English.

Judging by the stories shared above, it is clear that subject-matter knowledge may define

teachers of English in terms of their professional identity not only in the eyes of their learners

but also in the eyes of colleagues. Language teaching as a sociocultural activity is embedded in

complex and dynamic contexts (Cross, 2010) where both teachers and learners are engaged in

learning as a long lasting process. If we take teaching as a sociocultural activity, ELTE

programmes need to provide (future) teachers with opportunities to imagine and develop

their professional identity and agency socially and critically constructed, which could be

supported by experienced teachers (Donnini Rodrigues, de Pietri, Sanchez, & Kuchah, 2018). In

this regard, teachers’ knowledge of their subject as a component of their professional identity

should be axiomatic (Cross, 2018).

The aim of this edited collection is to understand how tutors/lecturers approach

English-language-as-content knowledge in ELTE programmes. In this regard, the volume does

not aspire to make a significant contribution at research and theoretical levels by renowned

experts. Rather, it seeks to illustrate how tutors deliver modules which represent content

knowledge in a diversity of programmes and settings. While in a previous volume I focused on

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
the intersection between ELTE and pedagogical knowledge (Banegas, 2017), in this volume, the

lens is on how teacher educators, lecturers, or tutors, depending on contextual circumstances,

help (future) teachers develop and configure knowledge of and about the English language.

Accordingly, in their chapters contributors have chosen to share descriptive and reflective

accounts of their practices and modules they teach or present findings based on researching

their own practices. As in Banegas (2017), experiences come from a wide range of

geographical settings, some of them underrepresented in the international literature:

Argentina, Australia, Chile, China, Ecuador, Japan, Mexico, Turkey, and the USA.

Content knowledge in ELTE

Widdowson (2002) has been categorical about the importance of teachers’ knowledge:

It seems reasonable to expect that teachers should know their subject. This

knowledge provides the grounds for their authority, and gives warrant to the

idea that they are practising a profession. Without this specialist knowledge,

they have no authority, and no profession. (p. 67)

Widdowson’s quote seems to respond to what legitimizes teachers of English and what their

knowledge base should consist of. Following Shulman’s (1986, 1987) widespread conception of

the knowledge base, ELTE programmes particularly at pre-service level usually organize what

teachers should know around three broad and interrelated areas, which, according to König et

al. (2016), are (1) content or subject-matter knowledge (CK), (2) pedagogical content

knowledge (PCK), and (3) general pedagogical knowledge (GPK). In this edited volume, our
Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
interest is in exploring CK and how it is approached in ELTE programmes as it has been largely

ignored in the literature (but see Bartels, 2005). In line with Borg (2013), we agree that the

teacher knowledge base should incorporate knowledge created by teachers out of their own

beliefs, personal theories, and trajectories.

In the educational rhetoric, it is usually agreed that CK refers to “the knowledge of the

specific subject and related to the content teachers are required to teach. CK is shaped by

academic disciplines underlying the subject” (König et al., 2016, p. 321). In the case of ELTE,

academics and curriculum developers (e.g., Richards & Farrell, 2011; Roberts, 1998;

Widdowson, 2002; Woodgate-Jones, 2008) agree that CK includes knowledge of the English

language as a system of subsystems and proficiency in using English. The latter is of paramount

importance since English may be both the object of study and the medium of instruction in

ELTE programmes (Bale, 2016). König et al. (2016) add that “language teachers are also

required to develop a high level of language awareness, language learning awareness, and of

intercultural competencies” (p. 322). Thus, CK may be summarized under two contextually

dimensions embedded in mutual dialogue: (1) English as a system and (2) English language

proficiency. These dimensions show that in this volume we take a broad conceptualization of

CK as it is what may actually happen in practice around the world; however, we must

acknowledge the pre-eminent role that linguistics plays throughout the chapters.

English as a system

Knowledge about language refers to understanding, in this volume, English as a system.

Drawing on the fundamental concepts introduced by linguist Saussure, language is often

regarded as a system of signs. Language is a human artefact made up of symbolic and iconic

signs which involve the pairing of form, phonetic and orthographic, and meaning (McGregor,

2009). A system means that such signs coexist in paradigmatic and syntagmatic relationships,
Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
and therefore from a limited number of signs, language users can create an unlimited number

of meaningful units such as words, phrases, clauses, and entire texts to make sense of their

experience, past, present, and future.

Linguistics is the scientific study of language. It studies language by describing the

languages spoken around the world (Bauer, 2007; Brown, 2006; Department of Linguistics,

2016; McGregor, 2009). Therefore, linguistics plays a central role in content knowledge in

ELTE. However, Widdowson (2002) has noted that EFL/ESL teachers do not need to study

language, but the language they teach. Thus, content knowledge, according to Widdowson,

should be primarily concerned with English as a system. In a publication about the relevance of

understanding language variation among so-called non-native teachers in English language

classrooms, Mahboob (2017) is categorical:

Given that the key role of English language teachers (ELTs) is to teach language, it is

essential that language teachers have a more technical understanding of what language

and grammar are. And, more specifically, since NNESTs are teachers of English, teacher

education programs need to help pre- and in-service teachers develop an understanding

of ‘English’ in today’s world. (p. 14).

Linguistics provides ELTE programmes with the technical understanding Mahboob

(2017) stresses in the quote above. ELTE programmes usually include modules or content

related to the following branches of linguistics: grammar, syntax, morphology, phonetics,

phonology, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, language acquisition, pragmatics, discourse

analysis, stylistics, semantics, applied linguistics, and cognitive linguistics, among others. Such

modules and topics are usually delivered in English, thus converting ELTE programmes into

instantiations of English medium instruction (EMI) in settings where English is not the
Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
mainstream language (e.g., Macaro, 2018; Macaro, Purle, Cun, & An, 2018). In this volume,

contributors offer their insights and experiences with teaching some of the branches listed

above.

Whether teacher educators in ELTE programmes follow a formal, functional, or no

particular theory or approach to understanding language, they seek to ensure that there are

strong correlations between linguistic understanding and ELT. In other words, in what ways

does, for example, sociolinguistics, explicitly inform language teachers’ situated practices?

Such a question signals that in ELTE, linguistics-related modules and topics should be pursued

following a pedagogical intent since, as Richards (2017a) rightly argues, “[c]ontent knowledge

in itself does not provide a sufficient basis for the teaching of a language” (p. 12). This is not to

say that there should be an instrumentalist view of linguistic knowledge, but rather a holistic

perspective which shows that ELTE programmes are not educating, at least in principle,

linguists but language teachers. The integration of linguistics-driven content knowledge with

language pedagogy contributes to the realization of the content pedagogical knowledge

dimension of ELTE programmes. In so doing, teachers may develop informed decisions based

on their knowledge of linguistics (i.e. knowledge about the language) which may, for example,

guide their selection of teaching resources (Tomlinson, 2013), or inform the feedback they

provide their learners. Furthermore, as I have stated elsewhere (Banegas, 2017b), linguistics

learning may become more meaningful when it is framed by tutors in the same teaching

approaches that future teachers are expected to enact in their own professional practices. In

this regard, Borg (2013) calls for more research and informed accounts which describe how

knowledge about language can be developed through ELTE in ways that enable future teachers

to support learning.

English language proficiency

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
Knowledge of the language is how proficient teachers are in the language they teach or the

language through which they teach as it may be the case of EMI or content and language

integrated learning (CLIL). Although it has been suggested that language proficiency is a rather

elusive concept (Tsang, 2017), Harsch (2017, p. 250) has broadly defined it as follows:

“proficiency in a second or foreign language comprises the aspects of being able to do

something with the language (“knowing how”) as well as knowing about it (“knowing what”).”

In ELTE programmes, English language proficiency may not only be developed through

modules built around English as a system which are delivered in English but also through

specific modules on written and oral language practices. In Argentina, for example, student-

teachers must complete modules which focus on academic reading and writing, oral skills, the

four skills, or language development (skills, grammar, and vocabulary) usually organized

around topics which aim at integrating content and language learning (Fortanet-Gómez, 2013;

Nikula, Dafouz, Moore, & Smit, 2016). Teacher educators and tutors in charge of these

modules often frame their teaching practices around learning theories such as sociocultural

theory (Lantolf & Poehner, 2014), critical theory in language education (e.g., Hawkins &

Norton, 2009), or cognitivism (Golombek, 2015). Other perspectives also included are

interculturality (Porto & Byram, 2017), English as an international language (EIL), and English as

a lingua franca (ELF). These last perspectives may also be embraced by linguistics-related

modules such as Sociolinguistics or Discourse Analysis or overall ELTE programmes for example

at masters level (e.g., Nguyen, 2017) to challenge the so-called native speaker model (Holliday,

2006). I will return to this concept below.

English language proficiency plays out a major role in teachers’ professional identity

and is said to exert a direct influence on teacher efficacy. In relation to identity, Pennington

and Richards (2016; also Richards, 2010) suggest that teachers’ perception of their English

language proficiency is linked to teaching confidence and perceptions of teaching efficacy.

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
Richards (2017a) has later remarked that in teaching English through English, teachers must be

proficient users of English before, during, and after teaching. As in Widdowson’s quote above,

teachers’ authority somehow rests on English language proficiency, but proficiency should be

understood as a process, and teachers may need to develop a personal disposition as life-long

learner of English to navigate that process.

However, the construct of English language proficiency in ELTE has given rise to a few

concerns. For example, Freeman (2017) challenges the syllogism “the more fluent in English,

the more effective the teacher” since teacher language proficiency as determinant of effective

teaching is based on the highly criticized native-speaker model because it promotes an

ideological position of superiority of native-speaker teachers over non-native speaker teachers

(Martínez Agudo, 2017). This view seems to indicate that only content knowledge, or in fact,

language use, is more important than teaching competency or pedagogical content knowledge

in ELTE.

In terms of proficiency and what counts as acceptable, teachers may have different

bars depending on whether learners or teachers are involved. Through a mixed-methods

study, Nguyen (2017) studied engagement with the native-speaker model among a group of

Vietnamese ELT teachers completing a master’s programme. Results showed that while the

programme and the teachers agreed on promoting linguistic diversity, multilingualism, and

interculturalism, teachers’ language proficiency, particularly oral, was still dominated by a

native-speaker model.

With the aim of offering an alternative approach to the native-speaker model,

Freeman (2017) suggests the construct of English-for-teaching which

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
identifies the English language that teachers can use in the classroom to do their work. In

so doing, the construct bounds this set of language resources within the broader sweep of

general English proficiency. The bounding is grounded by the situations and circumstances

in which the teacher uses (may use; needs to use) English in the activity of teaching. (pp.

41-42).

Two studies lend support to the syllogism criticized above. In a qualitative study, Tsang (2017)

examined the relationship between teachers’ general language proficiency and teaching

effectiveness operationalized by learners’ engagement. Data showed that those teachers with

higher language proficiency were more flexible in the use of English and promoted

metalinguistic knowledge among learners. In addition, learners paid more attention to those

teachers who were seen as “very good” language models. However, when these learners were

asked to choose the most effective teachers, they selected those who were not the most

proficient in English. Instead, they chose teachers who displayed different teaching techniques,

were more inspiring, or had some personal characteristics such as a good sense of humour.

While this English-for-teaching construct may find traction in ELTE, it may be difficult

to predict the English language teachers may use in their potential teaching posts. In times of

approaches which highlight communication, cognition, socioconstructivism, competencies,

problem-solving techniques, and the integration of curriculum content and language, teachers

may need more English than just a few structures and survival vocabulary. That said, it is also

true that ELTE programmes, particularly in pre-service education, cannot possibly “teach it all”

and therefore they need to define what aspects of the English language will be addressed and

included in relation to the teaching degree they offer.

It may be concluded that content knowledge in ELTE poses challenges, debates, and

questions around the knowledge of and about the English language that EFL/ESL teachers need
Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
in order to carry out successful teaching practices. In a reflective chapter on teacher identity in

second language teacher education, Richards (2017b) once again stresses that when teachers

ask themselves where they are in their professional development, there are two components

that will contribute to their sense of identity: language proficiency and content knowledge. In

this volume, the interest lies in taking a look at what teacher educators do and think in relation

to such complex components in ELTE.

Structure of the book

The chapters in this edited volume lie at the intersection between exploring English as a

semiotic system and improving English language proficiency among student-teachers in ELTE.

While Chapters 1-9 concentrate on English as a system, the remaining chapters give more

importance to English language proficiency. However, it should be noted that English language

proficiency and language awareness run across the volume. Below, readers will find an

overview of each chapter. Each chapter summary has a different format given that some of the

chapters are reflective (e.g. Chapter 1), descriptive e.g. (Chapter 2), or primary data-based (e.g.

Chapter 11).

In Chapter 1, Ikeda reflects on the value and usefulness of history of English (HEL) in

the teaching and learning of English at a teaching programme in Japan. The chapter also

presents a sample HEL lesson using CLIL in order to show the possibility and problem of

developing both disciplinary knowledge and language skills at the same time.

In Chapter 2, Chappell describes a unit of study that student-teachers take when

undertaking either a Graduate Certificate of TESOL or a Master of Applied Linguistics and

TESOL programme in an Australian university. This unit of study, Linguistics and Language

Teaching, introduces student-teachers to a functional model of language based on systemic

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
functional linguistics (SFL), systemic functional grammar (SFG), and genre theory and

pedagogy.

Chapter 3 comes from Argentina. Anglada describes two prevalent approaches to the

teaching of English grammar in IELTE: (1) a formal model and (2) a systematic functional

model. The chapter characterizes both teaching models by describing their aims, showing their

foci and including some activities as examples. The traditional approach, which focuses on the

teaching of formal aspects of language sometimes neglecting the role of meaning, has been

losing ground lately.

In Chapter 4, Hardacre and Snow describe a graduate-level pedagogical grammar class

offered at California State University in the TESOL MA programme. It describes foundational

concepts used in the course such as descriptive and prescriptive usage; the Form, Meaning,

Use framework (Celce-Murcia & Larsen-Freeman, 2016); how to use corpora to show teachers-

in-training authentic usage patterns; strategies for giving feedback when teaching grammar;

and examples of grammar activities drawn from content- and task-based projects developed

by the teachers-in-training in the MA programme.

In Chapter 5, Schmitt outlines approaches to incorporating other languages in the

classroom based on a module taught at an ELTE programme in the USA. The author explains

that the use of other languages can enhance the classroom experience, improve empathy for

learners, and empower non-native speakers of English. It additionally offers an appropriate

context for translingual and contrastive linguistic practice.

In Chapter 6, Zhang and Wei describe the learning experience of five MA TESOL

students in a World Englishes module entitled English as a Global Language at the largest Sino-

UK international collaborative university in China. Interviews with the MA TESOL student-

teachers revealed that they experienced “knowledge shock” in learning that (1) English can be

in the plural form, (2) users can claim ownership of a particular variety of the English language,
Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
and (3) challenges for teachers wishing to apply ideas (e.g. world Englishes) from the pluralistic

paradigm to teaching English at primary and secondary levels.

Chapter 7 shows how Heras has addressed the teaching of pragmatics at an IELTE

programme in Ecuador. Heras demonstrates that pragmatics is an important part of language

teaching and learning. Therefore, the teacher plays a big role in the enhancement of students’

pragmatic competence. The author argues that the use of film is one of the best techniques

when attempting to teach pragmatics in the classroom.

Chapter 8, set in Mexico, presents the way a traditional discourse analysis (DA) module

in IELTE was updated in order to allow student-teachers not only to gain knowledge on

discourse and several approaches on its analysis but also to experience doing DA. Salas

Serrano and Téllez Méndez discuss how their student-teachers became aware of the

relationship between discourse and their social and cultural reality.

In Chapter 9, Blázquez, Espinosa and Labastía describe the rationale in the teaching,

learning, contents and assessment of a phonetics and phonology module taught at an IELTE

programme at Universidad Nacional del Comahue, Argentina. This module, designed for a

mixed-ability group of freshmen, follows an eclectic approach by focusing on both segmentals

and suprasegmentals from the very beginning. Student-teachers are engaged in an inductive

way of learning with consciousness-raising activities, paving the way for autonomous learning.

In Chapter 10, Banfi, drawing on her vast experience in Argentinian IELTE, discusses her

approach in teaching a module called English Language IV in different IELTE programmes in the

City of Buenos Aires. The innovative approach provides an integrated scheme that

incorporates contents and skills learnt and developed by student-teachers in prior courses, and

requires them to apply them to different tasks that involve linguistic, intercultural, academic

and professional skills.

Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
In Chapter 11, Saavedra Jeldres and Campos Espinoza discuss how developing writing

skills in student-teachers is a task sometimes neglected due to time constraints. In this chapter

it is shown that the writing portfolio has proven to be an effective tool for improving writing

production in an IELTE programme in Chile. This mixed study pursues to improve student-

teachers’ writing skills and develop their reflective skills using a year-long portfolio.

Chapter 12, authored by Barahona and Benítez, explores the implementation of a

thematic advanced English module in a Chilean ELTE programme that contributes to student-

teachers’ development of their knowledge of the English language. This module enhances

practical learning experiences which allow students to explore current controversial issues in

such a way that it helps put into practice the competency-based curriculum on which it is

based.

Chapter 13 takes us to Turkey. Güngor discusses the knowledge base that enhances

non-native student-teachers’ English proficiency levels in IELTE programmes. Drawing on the

results of international and national studies, constraints and affordances are analyzed in the

IELTE curriculum in Turkey. In addition, the chapter focuses on the ways content knowledge is

approached and how non-native student-teachers are scaffolded to develop knowledge of and

about the English language in Turkey.

Chapter 14 discusses how Soto and Ramírez have incorporated a cultural element into

a reading and writing workshop to enhance student-teachers’ English language proficiency. In

addition, the workshop seeks to raise intercultural awareness so that student-teachers’ self-

expression of their lived experiences disrupts and enriches their language learning process.

Their chapter is based on their teaching experience at an IELTE programme in Argentina.

Readers will find that Chapters 1-14 include what we call questions for change. The

aim of these questions is to generate reflections and open roads of interdisciplinary dialogue

and collaboration with other teacher educators based around the world.
 Banegas, D. L. (2020). Introduction. In D. L. Banegas (Ed.), Content knowledge in English
language teacher education: International experiences. Bloomsbury.
In the Conclusion I highlight the common threads running across the chapters in terms

of topics, experiences, strategies, and research potential. In addition, I put forward possible

future directions in IELTE programmes as regards subject matter knowledge at the intersection

of pedagogy and linguistic preparation.

On behalf of the contributors and myself, I sincerely hope that you find the volume

helpful for ELTE in your context. We have made every effort to represent different contexts

and realities together the voices of both student-teachers and teacher educators.

Before I go I would like to thank Maria Brauzzi from Bloomsbury for believing in me

(once more!). I would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers who provided helpful

comments and suggestions. I would finally like to thank the following colleagues, student-

teachers, and friends who have made this volume possible: Robert Wright, Fernando

Mongiardino, Grisel Roberts, and Sophie Breen. I would finally like to thank Daniel Borelli and

Oinky. We know why.

View publication stats