Toward Linguistically and Culturally Responsive Teaching in the French as a Second Language Classroom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In English-majority contexts such as British Columbia, French second language (FSL) teachers are increasingly encountering students who are also learning French in addition to English and their home languages. Research findings show that dual language learners are successfully supported through multilingual pedagogies that acknowledge and explicitly value students’ prior learning experiences and multilingual knowledge as an integral resource in their language learning. This poses a particular challenge for FSL teacher candidates whose own language learning experiences have been shaped by institutional bilingualism and monoglossic approaches in bilingual education contexts. This article sets out the implications of this challenge and then describes a teacher education course that specifically addresses the Teaching of English as an additional language (TEAL) with teacher candidates in an elementary French specialist cohort program at a university in British Columbia. The discussion provides an overview of the course and then describes some of the ways in which critical language awareness can be fostered among FSL teacher candidates’ strategies to encourage a linguistically and culturally responsive approach to FSL teaching. Dans un contexte majoritairement anglophone comme celui de la Colombie-Britannique, les enseignantes et enseignants de français langue seconde (FLS) se trouvent de plus en plus souvent face à des élèves qui apprennent le français en plus de l’anglais et de la langue qu’ils ou elles parlent à la maison. Les recherches démontrent que les élèves qui apprennent deux langues bénéficient de pédagogies multilingues efficaces qui reconnaissent et mettent explicitement en valeur leurs expériences d’apprentissage antérieures et leurs connaissances multilingues, et ce, en en faisant une partie intégrante des ressources dans lesquelles ils peuvent puiser au cours de leur apprentissage linguistique. Cela pose un défi particulier pour les enseignantes et enseignants de FLS en formation dont les expériences d’apprentissage linguistique ont été façonnées par le bilinguisme institutionnel et une conception monoglossique des contextes éducatifs bilingues. Le présent article expose les implications de ce défi et décrit ensuite un cours de formation d’enseignantes et d’enseignants qui porte spécifiquement sur l’enseignement de l’anglais comme langue complémentaire (TEAL) dans le cadre d’un programme offert par une université britannico-colombienne à une cohorte de spécialistes de la langue française au niveau élémentaire. La discussion présente un aperçu du cours et décrit ensuite certaines façons de favoriser le développement d’une conscience linguistique critique dans le cadre des stratégies des enseignantes et enseignants de FLS en formation afin de promouvoir le développement d’une conception de l’enseignement qui prenne en compte les réalités linguistiques et culturelles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".