Religious Research Association, Inc.

Conventional Christian Beliefs and Experimentation with the Paranormal Author(s): F. Carson Mencken, Christopher D. Bader, Rodney Stark Source: Review of Religious Research, Vol. 50, No. 2 (Dec., 2008), pp. 194-205 Published by: Religious Research Association, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20447561 . Accessed: 26/09/2011 14:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Religious Research Association, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Review of Religious Research.

http://www.jstor.org

CONVENTIONAL CHRISTIAN BELIEFS AND EXPERIMENTATION WITH THE PARANORMAL

F. CARSON MENCKEN, CHRISTOPHER D. BADER, AND

RODNEY STARK BAYLORUNIVERSITY

REVIEW OF RELIGIOUS RESEARCH 2008, VOLUME 50(2): PAGES 194-205 We know fromprevious research thatsome individualswith strong,conventional Chris tian beliefs may also profess beliefs inparanormal phenomena incongruent with Christian beliefs (extrasensory perception, psychic abilities, communicating with the dead, etc.). What we don't have a full grasp on is towhat extentpeople with conven tional Christian beliefs will also experiment with these paranormal activities. It is one thing to believe inpsychic abilities, but quite another to consult a psychic. We draw upon differentperspectives in sociology of religion and present competing hypotheses about the relationship between conventional Christian beliefs and para normal experimentation. We use the 2005 Baylor Religion Survey and count regres sions to model thenumber of reported paranormal experiences. In general, conventional Christian beliefs have no direct effecton the reported number of paranormal experi ences, but, these effects are conditioned by the level of church attendance. Among thosewho attend church often, conventional Christian beliefs significantlydecrease the reported number of paranormal experiences. Among those who do not attend church, holding conventional Christian beliefs increases thenumber of reportedpara normal experiences. Implications for theoryand research are discussed.

INTRODUCTION
T here ismounting evidence that many who hold conventional Christian beliefs, such as belief in heaven, hell, God, the resurrection, are also likely to hold beliefs in the paranormal, such as extrasensory perception (ESP), astrology, and psychic abilities (see Bainbridge 2004; Laubach 2004; Orenstein 2002; Rice 2003). In thispaper we pursue thosewho hold conventional religious beliefs also report experimen tationwith the paranormal? In other words, will those who hold conventional Christian beliefs be more or less likely thanothers to experiment with non-Christian paranormal phe nomena? It is one thing to believe thatpsychic abilities are possible, but quite another to consult a psychic. The relationship between beliefs and experimentation parallels the dis tinction between orientations and actions. Merton's (1948) classic work on prejudice and discrimination shows that individuals may believe one way, yet act another. Actions are more visible thanbeliefs, and as such, are more subject to sanctions of social control.We a related topic:Will

194

Conventional Christian Beliefs and Experimentation with theParanormal present competing arguments about this relationship and follow with an analysis of para

normal activities incongruent Christian with beliefs. ConventionalChristianBeliefs and theParanormal

According to Stark and Bainbridge (1987), theholding ofmajority religious beliefs rep resent a stake in conformity. Thus to theextent thatsomeone holds such conventional beliefs, he or she should find alternatives less attractive. Members of groups thatare in power will avoid practices outside of the spiritualmainstream because such beliefs aremore likely to provoke a negative response. Indeed, in a culture where thevastmajority of thepopulation isChristian, one is deviant for rejecting such beliefs. Following this line of reasoning we should expect thosewho espouse Christian beliefs to be less likely to experiment with the so-called paranormal, especially those activities incongruentwith Christian beliefs. Those who profess a strong belief inUFOs, ghosts, or who visit psychics, are viewed as deviant, superstitious, and unsophisticated (Goode 2000). Moreover, conventional Christian denom inations discourage participationwith the supernatural and theoccult (Bainbridge 2004:382; see also Glendinning 2006; MacDonald 1995; Orenstein 2002; Sherkat andWilson 1995; Sparks 2001). In sum, a person who is bound to conventional Christian beliefs should find paranormal practices risky and unattractive. Similarly, Orenstein (2002) argues thatparanormal beliefs and practices are a substitute forconventional religious beliefs and practices. Some argue thatpractitioners represent mar ginalized groups deprived of power in society-less educated, lower income, rural resi dents, women, and minorities (see Mears and Ellison 2000; Rice 2003; Wuthnow 1978). However, to the extent thatparanormal practices represent new religious movements prac may come from the corps of elites, thosewith higher levels of socioeconomic sta titioners tus (SES) whom new religious movements tend to attract (see Brown 1992; Stark 1996; Stark and Bainbridge 1985). In these cases theparanormal is a substitute for conventional

beliefs. Christian
An argument can also be made that individualswith conventional Christian beliefs should be just as likely to experiment with the paranormal as anyone else with a spiritual world view. According to this two spheres approach, conventional Christian beliefs and paranor mal beliefs (e.g. ESP, psychic abilities, astrology, etc.) are part of a larger sphere of spiri and are at odds with conventional scientific tualism.Both are based on non-hypothetical truths thinking (Bainbridge 2004; Goode 2000). On the other hand, materialists (or rationalists) stress critical thinking and rational, logical, scientific explanations of all phenomena and reject supernatural explanations. As such, rationalists are not likely to embrace spiritual beliefs, be theyChristian or paranormal (see also Krull andMcKibben 2006). Both con ventional Christian and paranormal believers have more in common with each other than with materialists and their reliance on conventional scientific standards. Since proponents of both conventional Christian and paranormal beliefs share a common orientation toward spiritualism, it is likely thatholders of one set of beliefs may also be drawn to the other (Brown 1992; Goode 2000; Rice 2002; Wuthnow 1978). Therefore, thosewith conventional Christian beliefs will be just as likely to experiment with theparanormal.

Practicing theFaith
Although conventional Christian denominations discourage paranormal beliefs, holding conventional Christian beliefs may not suffice topredict whether or not actors will experi

195

Rev,iew of Religious Research ment with theparanormal. lannaconne (1992, 1995) maintains thatactors choose theirreli minimize their risk through religious portfolio diver gious activities rationally and seek to sification (Durkin and Greeley 1991; Jannaccone 1992, 1995; Stark andMcCann 1993). According to lannaccone (1995), religious firmscan manage risk inone of twoways: through collective production or through private production/diversification. In collective produc tion religious organizations set and enforce norms of behavior formembers. Those who "cross of the line" are subject to sanctions. The enforcement of norms of stigma and sacri fice vary by institutional characteristics, especially the level of tension between the collec tive and mainstream secular culture (Stark and Bainbridge 1985). The alternative to collective production is private production and portfolio diversifica tion (lannaconne 1995). Actors have access to a wide variety of religious activities. Risk is most efficiently reduced through diversification. In terms of religious portfolios, actors "hedge" by diversifying and consuming a variety of religious services. Actors do not face normative constraints from a well-organized collectivity and are free to consume a variety of religious products, practices, and services (conventional Christian, paranormal, etc.). Risk reduction in religious consumption will affect the compatibility of conventional Christian beliefs and paranormal experimentation. In contexts where stigma and sacrifice are high, therewill be low levels of compatibility between conventional Christian beliefs and paranormal experimentation. Church attendance and being a member of an Evangeli MacDonald cal church exposes one tohigher levels of stigma and sacrifice (Hammond and Hunter 1984; 1995; Sherkat andWilson 1995). Church attendance is an extremely important (negative) predictor of paranormal beliefs (see Glendinning 2006; McKinnon 2002). Going to church often reinforces the veracity and exclusiveness 2003; Rice of conventional

Christian beliefs and thedeceit of paranormal beliefs (Bainbridge 2004; Mears and Ellison 2000). Holding conventional Christian views but not practicing the faith via church atten dance leaves one less exposed to religious tension (Glendinning 2006; McKinnon 2003; Stark and Bainbridge 1985). Among those exposed to lower levels of tension (e.g., going to church less often), it is expected that they will be more likely to diversify religious port folios, and hence, engage in a greater variety of religious practices (such as experimenta tionwith the paranormal).

PREVIOUS RESEARCH ON CHRISTIAN THE PARANORMAL

BELIEFS

AND

The empirical relationship between Christian and paranormal beliefs and experimenta tion is inconclusive. A battery of studies documents a negative relationship between tradi tional (i.e. Christian) beliefs and the paranormal. Wuthnow (1978) finds that traditional religious beliefs decrease (but do not eliminate) reported experiences of extrasensory per ception ESP. Moreover, he finds thatProtestants are less likely to experience ESP thannon religious, or eastem/mystical respondents. Stark and Bainbridge (1980) find thatparanormal beliefs tend tobe strong in areas where traditionalChristianity tends to be weak. Other stud ies show a general negative relationship between traditionalChristian beliefs and paranor mal beliefs (Krull andMcKibben 2006; Sjodin 2002). On theother hand, a number of recent studies have shown that thosewith Christian super natural beliefs also tend to hold paranormal beliefs. Orenstein (2002) points out thata greater level of traditional religious belief has a strong relationshipwith greater paranormal beliefs. Rudski (2003) and Goode (2000) also suggest thatgreater traditional religiosity is associ

196

Conventional Christian Beliefs and Experimentation with theParanormal ated with greater beliefs in paranormal or supernatural phenomena. Furthermore, a num ber of studies fail to find a linear relationship between conventional Christian and para normal or New Age beliefs (Donahue 1993; Rice 2003; Sparks 2001). Still others suggest that the relationship between Christian and paranormal beliefs are nonlinear and/or con textual (see Bainbridge 2004; Glendinning 2006; Krull andMcKibben 2006; McKinnon

2003).
Below we present threehypotheses about the relationship between Christian beliefs and paranormal experiences. A new analysis is needed because the existing literatureon this relationship is limited by several factors.First,many of theprevious studies have used sam ples with limitedgeneralizability. Several studies are undergraduate student samples (Goode 2000; Krull and McKibbon 2006; Rudski 2003). Others are limited in geographic scope (Mears and Ellison 2000; Rice 2002; Wuthnow 1978). Second, threekey studies are based on non-U.S. samples. While the questions of conventional Christian beliefs and the para most devout west is the United States, the normal are not the exclusive domain of the U.S. which to pursue this question. Second, with a few exceptions (e.g. Laubach 2004; Mears and Ellison 2000), sociolog ical studies of the relationship between conventional Christian beliefs and the paranormal have focused primarily on paranormal beliefs. Our question pertains to paranormal exper imentation. This is a difference between orientation and actions. Actions aremore visible and observable than attitudes and beliefs. Hence, actions aremore subject to informal sanc tions. Drawing conclusions about actions from a literature based almost exclusively on beliefs is problematic in thatactorsmay believe one way, but act another (seeMerton 1948). Therefore, we pursue the question with new data on paranormal experiences.

ern nation (Ingelhart and Norris 2004). The U.S. may represent a unique context within

DATA AND METHODS

The data used in this study are from the first(2005) wave of theBaylor Religion Sur vey (BRS) developed by theDepartment of Sociology and the Institute for the Study of Religion (ISR) at Baylor University. Although it contains questions on a variety of topics ranging from civic engagement to political tolerance, themajority of the fixed content of theBRS is devoted to religion items.The BRS was administered and collected by the Gallup Organization using a mixed-mode method. The final sample size was 1,721. For details about themethodology of the survey and how it compares to other national surveys, see Bader, Mencken, and Froese (2007).1

Paranormal Experimentation
measures of paranormal experiences in theBRS There are four thatare incongruent with

Christian beliefs:
As an adult, have you ever done any of the following? * * * * Consulted Called a horoscope to get an idea about the course of your life? (Horoscope) fortune teller, or psychic? (Psychic) to be haunted? (Haunted) person or spirit? (Ouija) or consulted a medium, a Ouija

Visited or lived in a house or place believed Consulted board to contact a deceased

The four items required yes/no responses resulting in four dichotomous measures of para normal experimentation/participation. We summed these four items to create a count of

197

Review ofReligious Research reported paranormal experiences. A Poisson count model was used to predict the reported number of paranormal experiences.

Variables: Controls Independent

The hypothesis thatconventional Christian beliefs and paranormal experimentation are incompatible is grounded in social control and marginalization theory.Socioeconomic sta tus (SES) is a good measure of stake in conformity and indeed measures of SES have neg ative effects on paranormal beliefs (Goode 2000; Hirschi 1969; Mears and Ellison 2000; Orenstein 2002; Stark and Bainbridge 1987). Higher status actors will participate in con ventional religious organizations at a greater rate because theyhave access to the rewards that these institutionsprovide. However, to the extent that religious beliefs become com pensators for the lack of material success in thisworld, therewill be a negative relation ship between beliefs and social class (Stark 1996; Stark and Bainbridge 1985). To theextent education represents development of rational/critical reasoning skills, there should be a strongnegative relationship between education and paranormal experimentation (Krull and

McKibben 2006).
margins of society and have loose bonds to primary groups may Those who live on the eschew conventional standards and be more inclined to experiment with the paranormal (Hirschi 1969; Orenstein 2002; Wuthnow 1978). Demographically, marginalized groups minorities (in addition to those may include those divorced or notmarried, and racial/ethnic with less education and income). Moreover, the existing literature indicates that demo We expect to graphic effects on paranormal beliefs vary considerably from study-to-study. to this on-going debate with the current analysis. contribute The demographic variables in this analysis include: age (in years), gender (1 = female), whether or not the respondent is currentlydivorced (binary),whether or not the respondent is currently employed (binary), education (highest grade completed: 8th or less; 9-12th no diploma, high school graduate, some college, trade/technical/vocational training,college graduate, postgraduate work/degree), income ($10,000 or less, $10,001-$20,000, $20,001

We more). $150,000or $100,001-$150,000, $50,001-$100,000, $35,001-$50,000, $35,000,

also control for region of the countrywith 4 binary variables (West,Midwest, East, South). West is the suppressed category.

Variables: ReligiousMeasures Independent

church teachings (MacDonald Previous research notes the role of church attendance in inhibiting beliefs contrary to 1995; Orenstein 2002; Sherkat andWilson 1995; Sparks

2001). As Mears and Ellison (2000:295) note, thosewho attend church more consistently will "...receive more frequent exposure to thedoctrines and assumptions of those groups." To the extent that thedoctrines of a religious group are at odds with supernatural beliefs or practices, frequent exposure should reduce supernatural beliefs and experiences (lannac cone 1995). Non-Christian beliefs should be less prevalent among Evangelical Protestants (Goode 2000; Orenstein 2002) who practice religious faith in contexts of higher levels of tension and thosewho attend church very often (Glendinning 2006; Krull andMcKibben 2006; McKinnon 2003). There are three religious measures in this analysis. The firstis how often the individual attends church ranging from 0 (never attend) to 8 (several times per week). We also con RELTRAD system of binary variables from trolfor religious traditionusing theRELTRAD

198

Conventional Christian Beliefs and Experimentation with theParanormal (see Steensland, Park, Regnerus, Robinson, Wilcox, andWoodberry 2000): Evangelical Protestant, Roman Catholic, Black Protestant, Jewish, Mainline Protestant, other religion, no religion. Evangelical Protestants are the suppressed category in the analysis.2 Third, the conventional Christian belief index is comprised of five items (see Table 1), which are

Cell Percentages

Table 1 and Factor Loadings forConventional

Christian Belief Items

Cronbach's 8; alpha= .93 Eigenvalue=4.2

Which one statement comes closest to your personal beliefs about God?

Factor
Loading

I don't believe inanything beyondthe physical world 4.70% I believe ina higher poweror cosmicforce 14.70% I sometimes believe in God 1.80% I believe in with somedoubts God, but 11.10% I haveno doubtsthat God exists 67.70% comesclosesttoyour Which one statement beliefs aboutJesus? personal Jesusis a fictional character 1.10% Jesus but probably existed, hewas notspecial 3.50%
Jesuswas an extraordinary person, but he was not a messenger of God Jesuswas one of many messengers or prophets of God 8.40% 12.80%

0.786

0.799

Jesusis thesonofGod Inyouropinion, does heavenexist? Absolutely Probably not Probably not Absolutely Inyouropinion, doeshell exist? Absolutely Probably not Probably not Absolutely Inyouropinion, doesGod exist? Absolutely Probably not Probably not Absolutely 199

74.30% 0.885 66.50% 17.40% 9.80% 6.35% 0.791 55.64% 17.90% 17.22% 9.24% 0.86 75.30% 13.70% 6.90% 4.20%

of Reviewrt Religious Research summed to create an additive index with a Cronbach's alpha score of .938 and an Eigen value of 4.2.3 Finally, we include an interaction termbetween church attendance and con ventional Christian beliefs to determine if the effectof such beliefs depends upon levels of exposure. The hypotheses presented in the literaturereview indicate thatconventional Chris tian beliefs in and of themselves may not have an effect on the reported number of para normal experiences. The implication is thatconventional Christian beliefs will have a negative effect on reported paranormal experiences depending upon the level of church attendance.

RESULTS
Table 2 presents a frequency analysis. These data show that26.2% had consulted a horo scope to get an idea about thedirection of their life.Two itemswith lower levels of partic ipation are visiting a psychic or other medium (14.1% reported yes) and using an Ouija board to contact the dead (6.9%). Nineteen percent (19.1%) report having visited or lived in a haunted house. Forty-two percent of the sample report at least one of these four para normal experiences, and 19% report two or more.

Table 2 Paranormal Experiences

N=1683
As an adult, have you ever done any of the following? Consulted a horoscope to get an idea about the course of your life? Called or consulted a medium, fortune teller, or psychic? Visited or lived in a house or place believed to be haunted? Consulted a Ouija board to contact a deceased person or spirit? % Yes 26.2 14.1 19.1 6.9

Table 3 presents the count models.4 The firstcolumn of data shows that church atten dance and several denomination measures have significant effects on the reported number of paranormal experiences. For each additional unit of church attendance, the reportednum ber of paranormal experiences decreases by 15%. Among the denomination measures, Catholics report 30% more paranormal experiences thanEvangelical Protestants. In con Black Protestants report37% fewer paranormal experiences thanEvangelical Protes trast, tants.Those who report "other" religion report 58% more paranormal experiences than Evangelical Protestants. Religious "nones" report22% fewer paranormal experiences than Evangelical Protestants, but the level of significance (p=.07) does not allow for the rejec tionof thenull hypothesis. There are no differences between Mainline Protestants and Evan gelical Protestants, Jews, and Evangelical Protestants. The conventional Christian belief index has no effect on reported paranormal experiences. The results for the control variables show some support formarginalization theory. Females and those with lower incomes are significantlymore likely to reportparanormal males. With each unit experiences. Females report 191% more paranormal experiences than increase in income, the number of reported paranormal experiences declines by 9%. Age also has a negative effect,while education has no effect on the number of reported para normal experiences.

200

Conventional Christian Beliefs and Experimentation with theParanormal Table 3 of Reported Paranormal Experiences

Poisson Count Regression Model

(n=1437)

Beta Measures Religious -0.157 Attendance Church 0.267 Catholic 0.084 MainlineProtestant -0.447 Protestant Black 0.069 Jews -0.2421 None 0.462 Other BeliefIndex 0.012 Conventional Christian Christian Church Attendance*Conv.
Control Variables

SE 0.013 * 0.089 ** 0.091 0.186*** 0.235 0.134 0.129 * 0.01

Beta 0.091 0.237 0.043 -0.441 -0.026 -0.161 0.437 0.029 -0.012 0.703 -0.017 0.005 -0.083 0.043 -0.078 0.104 -0.045 -0.012

SE 0.086 0.092 ** 0.092 0.186* 0.239 0.136 0.131 * 0.011 * 0.004 ** 0.068 * 0.002 0.002 0.022 * 0.091 0.075 0.091 0.093 0.091

Female Age Education Income Divorced No Job East Midwest South Intercept Pearson Square Chi R-Square
*p<.05; **p<.ol; ***p<.001

0.703 -0.017 0.005 -0.085 0.039 -0.072 0.111 -0.038 -0.002

0.068 *** 0.002 *** 0.022 0.022 * 0.091 0.075 0.091 0.095 0.091

0.64 0.268 *** 1617.6 df=1419 0.214 ***

0.295 0.311 1608.5 df=1418 0.217 ***

The second column of data show the resultswhen the interactionbetween church atten model. The substantive results dance and conventional Christian beliefs is included in the of the original model do not change, with one exception: church attendance does not have a significant direct effect.However, there is a contextual effect-the effectof church atten dance when conventional Christian beliefs are fixed at zero.5The contextual effect forcon ventional Christian beliefs is positive and significant, showing that among those who do not attend church, having conventional Christian beliefs has a positive effecton the num ber of reported paranormal experiences (Aiken andWest 1990; Long 1997). Within this context of not attending church, foreach unit increase in conventional Christian beliefs the number of reported paranormal beliefs increases by 3%. The interaction effect is negative. As church attendance increases, the slope of conventional Christian beliefs decreases. Among thosewho attend church several times a week, the effectof conventional Christian beliefs is strongly negative. In this context of high levels of church attendance, for each

201

Review of Religious Research unit increase in conventional Christian beliefs, the number of reported paranormal experi ences declines by 9.2%.

Figure 1. PredictedNumber of Paranormal Experiences for DifferentLevels ofConventional Christian Beliefs and Church Attendance 1.6 1.4 B1.2

16

u0.8 0.6

Below Mean MeanConventional One Std OneStd Above Mean One Std Below Mean MeanConventional One Std Above Mean Christian Chnstian Conventional Beliefs Conventional ChfistianConventional Christian Christian Christian Beliefs Conventional Beliefs Beliefs Beliefs Beliefs Never Attend Never Attend Never Attend Attend Weekly Attend Weekly Attend Weekly

The information in Figure 1 summarizes this interaction effect. It shows the predicted number of paranormal experiences for different levels of church attendance and conven tionalChristian beliefs. On the leftside of this figure are thepredicted values for thosewho never attend church. These data show that the greatest frequency of predicted paranormal experiences (1.4) is for those respondents who never attend church but are one standard deviation above the mean on conventional Christian beliefs index.Among thosewho never attend church, the predicted number of paranormal experiences increases directly as con ventional Christian beliefs increase. On the right side of Figure 1 are the data for those who attend church at least weekly. These data show thatamong thosewho attend church very frequently, holding strongercon ventional Christian beliefs predicts significantly fewer reported paranormal experiences (significantly less than one, on average).

DISCUSSION

AND CONCLUSION

At first glance itappears that religious beliefs have minimal impact on experimentation with paranormal activities thatare incongruentwith conventional Christian beliefs. After model we do not find conventional Christian beliefs to have a suppressing all, in our first effectupon experimentationwith theparanormal. In otherwords, thosewho are firmbeliev ers inChristianity are just as likely to participate in paranormal activities as those who are not. Further, there is a positive relationship between conventional Christian beliefs and para

202

Conventional Christian Beliefs and Experimentation with theParanormal normal experimentation among those respondents who do not attend church. Non-atten dees who still profess conventional Christian beliefs are in fact themost likely to experi ment with the paranormal. would be incorrect to conclude thatconventional Christian beliefs never Nevertheless, it act to suppress beliefs in thenon-Christian paranormal. The key to understanding the rela tionship between conventional Christian beliefs and paranormal experimentation is church 2003; Orenstein 2002). Attendance has strong negative direct effects on the number of reported paranormal activities. But it also condi tions the effects of Christian beliefs on paranormal experimentation. In otherwords, peo ple who hold strongChristian beliefs and are frequently exposed to others with similar beliefs throughhigh levels of church attendance are the least likely to engage in paranor mal activities thatare incongruentwith conventional Christian beliefs. Theoretically, the concepts of religious portfolios, stigma, and sacrifice help us to under stand this relationship (lannaconne 1992, 1994, 1995, 1997). Church attendance represents a formof religious commitment, exposes individuals to the message, and also places actors under greater social control of the religious collective. Since Christian denominations dis courage experimentation with the paranormal (Bainbridge 2004), ceteris paribus, actors who attend church more often are embedded in a religious collective that will discourage involvementwith theparanormal. Conventional Christian beliefs have their strongest neg ative effect on paranormal experimentation among those actors who attend church at least attendance (Glendinning 2006; McKibbon

weekly.
In sum, the interaction effect between conventional Christian beliefs and paranormal experiences ties together the various hypotheses presented in our initial discussion. Those who have Christian beliefs but attend infrequentlyare comparatively free to engage in out side experimentation. In such cases the line between what are ultimately two differentforms of supernatural beliefs will not be clearly drawn. But to the extent thatconventional Chris tian beliefs are mixed with commitment to those beliefs in the formof church attendance, experimentationwith theparanormal brings increased risk and increased potential for sanc

tion.

Our findings also demonstrate support for marginalization theory as an allied explana more paranormal experiences, tion forexperimentationwith theparanormal. Females report on average-a consistent with previous literature (Mears and Ellison 2000; Rice finding 2002). Older wealthier respondents reported the lowest levels of paranormal experiences. Education, however, has no effect.6 Together these findings suggest thatparanormal exper imentation is not solely theprovince of elites (see Lewis 1992) but ofmarginalized actors.7 In this analysis we examined the effects of conventional Christian beliefs on experi mentation with paranormal activities thatare incongruentwith traditionalChristian beliefs. The paranormal, however, itnot limited to this set of measures (see Goode 2000; Lewis 1992). We see the need for future analyses thatexamine how compatible Christian belief systems are with other forms of paranormal, such as New Age/alternative medicine and paranormal experiences that are not necessarily inconsistentwith conventional Christian beliefs (such as crypto-zoology).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Please direct all comments to F. Carson Mencken, versity, Waco, Texas 76798-7326. Department of Sociology, One Bear Place #97326, Baylor Uni We would like to thank the John Tem E-mail: Carson_Mencken@Baylor.edu.

203

Review ofReligious Research

pleton Foundation for their generous support of theBaylor Religion Survey and three anonymous reviewers for

their helpful comments.

NOTES
"Afull description of theBaylor Religion Survey and its methodology can also be found at www.baylor.edu/isre ligion. was highly negatively cor 2We had initially included a binary variable for race (white/non-white). However, it related with Black Protestant. Therefore we exclude thewhite/non-white binary variable from the analysis. 3We had initially included a measure of Biblical literalism. This itemwas too highly correlated with other reli

to compute the percent change in reported num ber of paranormal experiences (see Long 1997). 5However, zero is not an observable value for the conventional Christian belief index so this effect is not read ily interpretable. 6Several other studies have explored educational effects, but with very mixed results (see Fox 1992; Glendin 2006; McKibbon 2002; Orenstein 2002; Rice 2003). ning 2006; Goode 2000; Krull and McKeller The one exception may be females who have been leaders in new religious movements (Stark 1996). How ever we tested an interaction effect of income and education by gender (female=l) and found no effect.

gion measures to include in themodel. 4The anti-log of the regression coefficient must be calculated

REFERENCES
Aiken, Leona S., and Stephen G. West. 1991. Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. New bury Park, California: Sage Publications. Brown, Susan Love. 1992. Baby Boomers, American Character, and theNew Age: A Synthesis. In Perspectives on the New Age, ed. James R. Lewis, and J.Gordon Melton. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, pp. 87-96. Bader, Christopher D., Paul Froese, and F Carson Mencken. 2007. American Piety 2005: Contents, Methods, and Selected Results from the Baylor Religion Survey. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 46(4):447-63. Bainbridge, William Sims. 2004. After theNew Age. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 43:381-94. Jour Donahue, Michael J. 1993. Prevalence and Correlates of New Age Beliefs in Six Protestant Denominations. nal for the Scientific Study of Religion 32:177-84. Durkin, John T., and Andrew M. Greeley. 1991. A Model of Religious Choice under Uncertainty: On Respond ing Rationally to theNon-Rational. Rationality and Society 3:178-96. W 1992. The Structure, Stability, and Social Antecedents of Reported Paranormal Experiences. Fox, John ological Analysis 53:417-31. Soci

Involvement, Conventional Christian, and Unconventional Nonmaterialist Glendinning, Tony. 2006. Religious Belief. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 45:585-95. Introduction. Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press. Goode, Erich. 2000. Paranormal Beliefs: A Sociological of Evan Hammond, Phillip E., and James Davison Hunter. 1984. On Maintaining Plausibility: The Worldview gelical College Students. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 23(3):221-38. Hirschi, Travis. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. Iannaccone, Laurence R. 1992. Sacrifice and Stigma: Reducing Free-Riding inCults, Communes, and Other Col lectives. Journal of Political Economy 100(2):271-91. _. 1994. Why Strict Churches are Strong. American Journal of Sociology 99(5): 1180-1211. _. 1995. Risk, Rationality, and Religious Portfolios. Economic Inquiry 33(2):285-95. Framework for the Scientific Study of Religion. In Rational Choice Theo Summary and Assessment, ed. Lawrence A. Young. New York: Routledge, pp. 25-44. Inglehart, Ronald, and Pippa Norris. 2004. Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. _. 1997. Rational Choice: ry and Religion: 2006. Skeptical Saints and Critical Cognition: On the Relationship Krull, Douglas S., and Eric S. McKibben. between Religion and Paranormal Beliefs. Archiv fur Religionspsychologie/Archive for thePsychology of Reli gion 28:269-85. Laubach, Marty. 2004. The Social Effects of Psychism: Religion. Sociology of Religion 65:239-63. Spiritual Experience and theConstruction of Privatized

204

Conventional Christian Beliefs and Experimentation with theParanormal

Lewis, to the Study of theNew Age Movement. In Perspectives on theNew Age, ed. and J.Gordon Melton. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press, pp. 1-12. Long, J.S. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks, Califor nia: Sage Publications. James R. 1992. Approaches James R. Lewis

MacDonald, William L. 1995. The Effects of Religiosity and Structural Strain on Reported Paranormal Experi ences. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 34:366-76. toOrenstein. McKinnon, Andrew M. 2003. The Religious, the Paranormal, and Church Attendance: A Response Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42:299-303. Mears, Daniel P., and Christopher G. Ellison. 2000. Who Buys New Age Materials? Exploring Sociodemographic, Religious, Network, and Contextual Correlates of New Age Consumption. Sociology of Religion 61(3):289 314. Merton, Robert K. and theAmerican Creed. In Discrimination and National Welfare, ed. New York: Harper & Brothers. Orenstein, Alan. 2002. Religion and Paranormal Belief. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 41(2):301-12. Rice, Tom W 2003. Believe It or Not: Religious and Other Paranormal Beliefs in theUnited States. Journal for 1948 Discrimination Robert M. Maclver. Rudski, the Scientific Study of Religion 42(1):95-106. Jeffrey.2003. What Does a "Superstitious" General Psychology 130(4):431-45. Person Believe? Impressions of Participants. The Journal of

Wilson. 1995. Preferences, Constraints, and Choices inReligious Markets: An Exam Sherkat, Darren E., and John ination of Religious Switching and Apostasy. Social Forces 75:957-82. Sjodin, Ulf. 2002. The Swedes and the Paranormal. Journal of Contemporary Religion 17(l):75-85. Sparks, Glenn G. 2001. The Relationship 25(5):50-6. 1996. The Rise of Christianity. Princeton, New Jersey: The Princeton University Press. 1985. The Future of Religion: Secularization, Revival, Stark, Rodney, and William Sims Bainbridge. Formation. Berkeley, California: University of California Press. _. 1987. A Theory of Religion. New York: Peter Lang. Stark, Rodney. 1993. Market Forces and Catholic Commitment: Stark, Rodney, and James C. McCann. adigm. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 32:111-24. Exploring and Cult between Paranormal Beliefs and Religious Beliefs. Skeptical Inquirer

theNew Par

Z. Steensland, Brian, Jerry Park, Mark D. Regnerus, Lynn D. Robinson, W Bradford Wilcox, and Robert D. Wood Art. Social Forces 79(1):291 berry. 2000. The Measure ofAmerican Religion: Toward Improving the State of the 318. Wuthnow, Robert. Press. 1978. Experimentation inAmerican Religion. Berkeley, California: University of California

205

Spanish Teachers' Beliefs and Practices on Computers in the Classroom Author(s): Anne Cummings Source: Hispania, Vol. 91, No. 1, Spanish Language Teaching and Learning: Policy, Practice and Performance (Mar., 2008), pp. 73-92 Published by: American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20063625 . Accessed: 26/09/2011 14:25
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hispania.

http://www.jstor.org

Spanish Teachers'

Beliefs and Practices on Computers in theClassroom

Anne Cummings Eau Claire University ofWisconsin

Abstract: nation's research has shown that technology is not being used in the majority of the these findings have often failed to include foreign-language teachers and may However, now be outdated due to the ephemeral nature of technology. Further, research has established that teachers' beliefs may be one of the most effective influences on practices. This study surveyed 340 K-12 Spanish teachers about their use of and beliefs about computers that included questions related to administrative and pedagogic uses of computers as well as beliefs about computers. The survey found that Spanish teachers are using computers classrooms. on a regular basis and are also reporting some pedagogical use respondents' knowingly plan their use of computers to emphasize particular language beliefs about the potential of computers for language learning. administratively beliefs, computers, practices, teachers, technology in the classroom. The skills and report strong In recent years, much

Key Words:

Teachers

Mehlinger programs

1996); currently22 states require a technology component in their teacher-education (Milken Family Foundation 2000). Finally, some researchers are even re conceptualizing the framework for teacher knowledge to include technological pedagogical content knowledge (Mishra and Koehler 2006). These initiatives document the growing importance of technology in the educational process. Along with other partners, similar policy is directed towards practicing teachers and students in the schools. The ISTE developed theNational Educational Technology Standards (NETS) for both students and teachers. In the standards for teachers, technology is viewed as more than just an instructional tool (ISTE/NCATE 2003); it isviewed as ameans forassessment,

teacher development, however, are rapidly changing this situation. In response to criticism that pre-service teachers do not know enough about technology (Albee 2003; Moursund and Bielefeldt 1999;NCATE 1997), technological literacy is gaining a presence in statepolicies and teacher education programs. Leaders want to increase the quality and amount of technology instruction that teachers receive. For example, more states are requiring technology preparation for a teaching license (The Milken Family Foundation 2000). Additionally, teacher-education programs recognize a responsibility to develop technology use in the classroom (Willis and

often promote or inhibit successful implementation of technology into the schools (Cooperman 1998). They decide who uses technology, how frequently theyuse it and forwhat ends. Because teachers play such a significant role in the educational process of change, more information is needed on theiruse of technology. In the past, teachers' use (or lack of use) of technology could have been accounted for largely in terms of theirknowledge or lack of knowledge about computers. Recent trends in

World Languages Standards for the National learning experience itself (1998:32). Further, in the Board of Professional Teaching Standards (2001), Standard IX, InstructionalResources, states:
Teachers' Beliefs and Practices on Computers Hispania Cummings, Anne in the Classroom" 91.1 (2008): 73-92

professional development, and for transforming learning environments. Similarly, the foreign language field has not overlooked the importance of technology. Phillips, theproject director for the national standards, describes technology as "an integral part of the curricular weave, an aspect of learning that crosses all standards and goal areas and thatmust become part of the

"Spanish

74

H?spanla 91March 2008

"Accomplished teachers expand their base of instructional resources by using technology to support sound teaching practices and to offer students opportunities to explore important ideas, standards from concepts, and theories" (39). Technology is interwoven in World-Language
students to novice and expert teachers.

has been observed that CALL encourages language learning (Fotos and Browne 2004). Further, it learner autonomy, satisfaction and self-confidence (Chapelle 2001; Fotos and motivation, Browne 2004; Hanson-Smith 2000; Levy 1997;Warschauer andKern 2000; Warschauer, Shetzer andMeloni 2000; among others). CALL has also been described as valuable to address diverse learning styles by offeringmultiple modes to learners and through its ability to provide a connection to enhance cultural literacy (Furstenberg, Levet, English, and Maillet 2001; Stepp Greany 2002; Warschauer and Healy 1998). Further, in a recentmeta-analysis investigating the effects of CALL on language learning, Felix (2005) presents a body of research "that suggests positive effects on vocabulary development, reading and writing" (12). This meta-analysis, coupled with others of this type (Kulik 2003 ;Liu, Moore, Graham, and Lee 2002), present research thataffirmsCALL's potential impact on language learning. Despite numerous guidelines and initiatives, as well as a growing body of evidence as to the effectiveness of CALL, major questions remain about the use of technology in language

The assumption in these policy initiatives is that technology can be effective for language learning. Thus, the central question becomes why focus on Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL)? A number of recentbooks thatdescribe CALL effectiveness seem tohighlight the role ofCALL indeveloping linguisticproficiency and communicative competence in second

classrooms. To date, little is known about actual practices in the classroom and even less is known about teachers' beliefs about technology (Borg 2003). Only a few studies have been conducted to determine in-service Spanish teacher use of technology. In one of these studies

using computers administratively and pedagogically? (b)What do Spanish teachers report they believe about thepedagogical benefit of learning language with a computer and about computer technology in general? The article highlights the impact of technology use in K-12 Spanish teachers' classrooms. The following review of literature will explore the current context, development, and use of foreign-language teacher use of technology in today's schools. Foreign Language Teacher Use ofTechnology

surveying fourth through twelfthgrade teachers,Becker, Ravitz, andWong (1999) reported that "Math teachers, along with foreign language teachers, are among the least likely to be making computers a regular part of their instructionalpractice" (3). This study explores the currentuse of technology in the Spanish-language classroom and the beliefs behind using or not using technology. The following research questions guided this study: (a) How are Spanish teachers

fourth throughttwelfthgrade teachers (Becker et al. 1999). Although foreign-language teacherswere the smallest group sampled (N=49), thedata from the survey provides perspective. Foreign-language teachers reported that 38% of their students use technology in their classes, compared to an average of 62% among all other areas (science, English, social studies, etc.). In an analysis of high-school teachers only, 63% of foreign language teachers revealed that they are not using computers with students in the classroom. Unlike all other subject teachers, foreign-language teachers were the only group to report no assignments thatused a computer twenty or more times a year. In fact, no teachers reported frequent studentuse (10 ormore lessons) with graphics, spreadsheets, presentation, multimedia or e-mail. Only 4% of foreign-language teachers reported frequent use of word-processing

Computer use in language classrooms has been little investigated. Although limited in United States and highlight number, the studies portray computer use almost tenyears ago in the two concerns. Compared to teachers of other subjects, foreign-language teachers integrated technology into the classroom less than other subjects according to a 1998 national survey of

Beliefs

and Practices

on Computers

in the Classroom

75

World Wide Web (15). programs, CD-ROMs and the found a similar lack of technology use when Spanish teacherswere asked ifthey Gebel (2000) use email or the Internet in their teaching of reading. Almost 60% said theyuse little to no tech nology, and only 6% reported high use of these technologies. Only a few teachersmentioned how the Internetcould provide more readings for students. Moore, Morales, and Carel (1998), also found evidence to support low usage of computers in foreign-language classrooms when investigating how teachers used the Internet in teaching of culture in the foreign-language classroom. The authors concluded that teachers were minimally using technology in the
classroom.

Although Spanish teachers' use of technology has not been investigated for almost ten years, the underlying conclusion from past studies is that teachers are simply not using com puters in the classroom. First, teachers report that theyare not using much technology, including e-mail and the Internet, two skills that are seen as growing skills in the twenty-first century. Second, teachersmay feel comfortable operating a computer, however, many foreign-language teachersmay not know how to use computers to teach in their subjects.While the case may be that teachers are not using computers in their classrooms, theymay be making considerably greater administrative use of technology. Teachers spend much of theirday planning and pre paring to teach. Therefore, teachersmay be using technology behind the scenes. An examination intowhy they use technology administratively and forwhat purpose needs to be made more visible. Administrative Use of Technology A frequently overlooked use of technology is for managerial purposes, such as calculating grades, taking attendance, making handouts, and corresponding with parents. Past surveys of computer use have not been sensitive to these administrative uses of technology. Teachers use technology for daily adminstrative tasks such as grading, writing handouts

Similar to the study above, Lemmon (2002) also reported thatelementary teachers (N=170) were using technology for professional productivity. This productivity included emailing newsletters, creating presentations for parents, grading and colleagues, preparing parent professional research (51). On the one hand, teachers are using technologies for professional administrative tasks.On theother hand, computer use isnot finding its way intoactual language A instruction. closer look at teachers' beliefs about technology could help explain thisdisparity. Beliefs

and taking attendance. Chiero (1999) investigated the professional use of computers by 142 secondary public-school teachers. She found thatalmost 75% of teachers used a computer two to three times aweek and almost 50% used itdaily (380). Creating instructional materials was the use of the computer followed by administrative tasks (380). Conversely, interacting with primary was one of the less-frequentlyperformed tasks. When these teacherswere asked why colleagues theyuse computers, 73% reported thatcomputers allow them to createmore effectivematerials. Saving timewas also stated as a very importantreason (70%) (381). Most teachers surveyed felt very positive about using a computer for professional tasks.

teaching. [...] Teacher behavior is substantially influenced and even determined by teachers' thoughtprocesses" (Clark and Peterson, 1986: 255). This dimension of teaching is defined as what teachers know, believe, and think (Borg 2003). Within this notion of teacher cognition, researchers are attempting to understand how, why, where and forwhat purpose teachersmake

Spanish teachers' beliefs about computersmay be one factor thatcould provide insight into the use (or lack of use) of computers for pedagogical and administrative tasks performed by teachers. Today, the teacher education field has widely acknowledged that "The thinking, planning and decision-making of teachers constitute a large part of thepsychological context of

76

Hispania 91March 2008

decisions in the classroom. All teachers hold beliefs about their teaching. They also hold beliefs about learning, teaching and how to best suit their learners' needs. These beliefs are reflected in the classroom and "drive everyday classroom practice within local contexts" (Richardson and Placier,2001:915).
Beliefs are a messy construct, however, because beliefs are unobservable. This unobser

vable dimension requires that teachers report theirbeliefs, which is risky because self-reported beliefs may not always conform to the respondent's reality. Pajares (1992) summarizes this difficultyby stating thatbeliefs "must be inferredfromwhat people say, intend,and do" (314). The problem is that they are just that, inferred,and ultimately might not reflect true cognition. Despite these concerns, researchers are now calling forbeliefs to become an importantfocus of educational inquiry (Borg 2003; Pajares 1992; Richardson 1996). Beliefs hold thekey tounder standing daily teacher decision-making. It is therefore important to understand what beliefs are and how they may affect computer use by teachers.

make instructionaljudgments and Teachers' beliefs are seen "as filters through [which they] decisions" (Johnson 1999:33). Beliefs, among other factors,have been identified in the literature as making a significant contribution to preinstructional decisions. In one of the first models of a framework by Borko, Cone, Russo, and Shavelson (1979) preinstructional decision-making, main areas thatfactor intoa teacher's decision. Student information,beliefs about presents three and thenature of the task are considered to informpreinstructional decision-making. education, This model presents teaching as a decision-making process where the teacher becomes actively involved indecisions about teaching and student learning.Borko et al. (1979) state that theirfindings "indicate that teachers actually do make complex decisions, carefully weighting information in lightof theirown beliefs about teaching and the task demands" (158). The authors define these beliefs as related to the goals of education. In addition, thegoals of the instructional task and the subject matter, both components of the task, also influence the decision-making process (Borko et al. 1979). A more recent framework of teacher decision-making, developed by Smith (1996), includes the role of context in theprocess. In this model, both teacher characteris context factors are seen as elements thatcontribute to both planning and implementation tics and of decisions. Teachers' beliefs, along with perceptions of the task and second-language theoretical knowledge, are included in the teacher characteristics. These models establish the underlying importance of two factors in preinstructional

decisions: beliefs about learning and perceptions about the instructional task (goals, content, materials). Teachers come to theirclassrooms with preconceived beliefs about language learning and using a computer in an instructional task. The nature of these beliefs can provide insight into theuse of computers (or lack thereof) in the language classroom. Pedagogical Beliefs about theLanguage-Learning Process

technology and not to fear of using technology (Lam 2000; Nutta, Feyten,Norwood, Meros, and Yoshii2002). The belief in pedagogical value of computers is confirmed by Lam (2000), in a study of Spanish, French, and English as a Second Language teacher beliefs and technology. Her or resistance to a respondents (N=10) reported that lack of computer use is not due to fear but ratherpersonal conviction. Some researchers speculate that this is due to the technology, fact that technology has yet to prove itspedagogical potential in the classroom (Garrett 1991; as teachers need it to be (Fraser Salaberry 2001); others attest thatCALL is not as sophisticated

models above, perceptions and beliefs about learning and technology are As outlined in the salient components of teacher decision-making. Further, research suggests that views on the one hand, language-learning potential of technology vary among language teachers. On the to develop. On the other hand, concerns research and resources in language-learning continue for learning the language and meeting high expectations interferewith the desire to use technology. Interestingly, these concerns, in general, relate to the pedagogical benefit of

on Computers in the Classroom 77 CALL does notmeet the instructionalneeds of teachers (Raschio 1993) and stillothers report that and Raymond 2003). Regardless of the reason, the decision to not use technology is driven by Beliefs and Practices Nutta et al. (2002) concur with Lam (2000) that there is little opposition to technology. Spanish elementary teachers in their studywere not resistant to the idea of CALL. Seventy-five percent of the teachers interviewed (N=22) reported that computers were a good idea for language-learning (Nutta et al 2002). The researchers added "even among the teachers who expressed uncertainty about the use of computers, therewas no teacher who was opposed to theiruse; these teacherswere either not sure about the effects orwere rathercautious about their use" (302). Two main issues arise regarding the effects or pedagogical benefit of technology in lan guage-learning. The first is that some teacherswant to seemeasurable evidence of learning from a computer. Chen ( 1996) argues "adoption ofCAI and CALL approaches will not, and should not, spread untilmeasurable benefits can be seen not only for students but also for teachers" (3). The value of computers in language-learning has yet to prove itself to some teachers. The second concern is that technology has not met the high language-learning expectations of teachers (Fraser 1993). Many who wait for "intelligent CALL," however, are skeptical of the day when computer advances will enable artificial intelligence thatreacts to user input. Reasons
learning concerns, not resistance.

behind the documented lack of use are intertwined in teachers' beliefs about means to Most teachers have deep-seated beliefs ofwhat it technology, teaching, and learning. teach with or without technology when they enter their classroom. As Freeman and Richards (1996) state:
We need to know more about language teachers: what they do, how they think, what they know, and how they learn. Specifically, we need to understand more about how language teachers conceive of what they do: what they know about language teaching, how they think about their classroom practice, and how that are learned through formal teacher education and informal and those thinking processes knowledge experience on the job. (1)

This study addresses the missing knowledge base suggested by Freeman and Richards tomore fullyunderstand the nature of computer use in the Spanish-language classroom. The Present Study
Participants and Procedures

This study used a survey to answer questions about Spanish teachers' use of and beliefs about computers in the K-12 context. Pre-planning of the survey began with interviews of target inorder topre-determine categories, questions, and responses for the survey. These participants pre-pilot interviews, as suggested byD?rnyei (2003), allowed the researcher to script answers to was constructed aftera review of existing surveys (Becker et al the survey items.The instrument Gebel 2000; Levy 1997), arguments found in the literature, and conversations with teachers. 1999; Finally, an examination of the format of existing technology instrumentssuch as theTeaching,

Learning and Computing survey (Becker et al 1999) and theCALL survey (Levy 1997) was reviewed to ensure that the instrument looked professional. Two identical versions of the surveywere developed: one paper-based, the otherweb-based version (see Appendix A, Cummings 2005). These two versions were created inorder toprovide

all teachers, regardless of computer ability, an opportunity toparticipate. After careful planning, the online and paper surveyswere pilot tested twice.

Dissemination

There were three different methods utilized to distribute surveys and collect data in this

78

Hispania 91March 2008

these surveyswere returned. Second, an online version of the surveywas placed as a linkoff the American Association of Spanish Teachers and Portuguese (AATSP) Georgia website. Only 2 surveyswere returned from thisweb site. Finally, 500 surveyswere mailed tomembers of theAmerican Council of theTeaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) who listed themselves as Spanish teachers on themembership
roster. Participants were given one month to complete the survey and were sent one reminder via

study. The firstwas an Advanced Placement week-long workshop where participants were selected by theEducational Testing Service to grade AP Spanish exams. One-hundred and fifty surveyswere lefton information tables throughout theweek with a drop box. One-hundred of

e-mail. Two-hundred and thirty-eightsurveys were returnedwith 39 being completed via the online form and 199 returned inpaper form. With all data collection methods taken intoconsideration, the total sample was 340 Spanish was 52.3%. According toGillham (2000), over teachers and the total response rate for this study a 50% returnrate is considered a good return.

Demographics The respondents were comprised of a majority of female (85%) and non-native speakers of Spanish (77%) that represented 45 states in theUnited States. Further, the respondents revealed an aging teaching population with close to 60% of respondents having more than 16 years of experience. Not only were the respondents experienced, over half of the respondents were also

home and used the computer daily (75.7%). Although the sample does seem homogeneous in regards to some factors, the sample demonstrates heterogeneity as well. There is a good combination of teachers in regard towhat level they are teaching and which state they teach in. Results

educated with aMasters or Ph.D. degree. In addition, the majority of respondents tended to come from largeprograms (83.1%), generally high schools (80.7%), in suburban areas (63%). In termsof accessibility, 8.9% of teachers reportednot having a computer in theirclassroom and 97%) reported at least one computer lab in their school. Finally, 97.3% have a computer at

As previously mentioned, the following research questions guided this study: (a) How are Spanish teachers using computers administratively and pedagogically? (b) What do Spanish teachers report theybelieve about the pedagogical benefit of learning language with a computer and about computer technology in general? Administrative Use whether theyuse technologymore forpeda When participants were asked to simply report or administrative reasons, the majority of Spanish teachers, 68.5%, reported thattheyuse gogical computers more for administrative purposes. In fact, teachers report high weekly usage of the computer for administrative tasks. The majority of respondents (over 55%) use computers 3 to 5 hours a week moving toward 6-8 hours for administrative needs. A littleover 16% of teachers reported using computers administratively over 10 hours a week.

During their time on the computer, Spanish teachers report various uses of administrative technologies. The most common administrative uses with a computer are: taking attendance, making handouts for students and recording or calculating grades. An overwhelming 52.8% report recording or calculating grades almost daily and another 23.3% weekly. Respondents are also frequently using computers to take attendance. The percentages suggest that teachers are either taking attendance via computer almost daily, 63.4%, or are not using these programs at all

make handouts for students.A total of (34.2%o). Teachers are also frequentlyusing computers to

on Computers in the Classroom Beliefs and Practices 79 88.5% of respondents reported that they make handouts weekly or almost daily. Another popular task among teachers is looking for teaching resources. Almost 97% of teachers look for teaching
resources with the Internet, either

The least-common administrative tasks or those taskswhere over 50% of respondents report no use of technology are for thedevelopment of an electronic teaching portfolio, posting student assignments to theweb and incorporating digital cameras and scanners. Many of themore popular tasks are required by a majority of schools. A large percentage, 61.4% of teachers, reported that they are required to calculate/record grades and to take at tendance with a computer. A quarter of respondents are required to correspond with parents and submit work-related forms such as transportation requests, personal absences and at-risk

professional

or "realia,"

to some

extent

during

a school

year.

student information. As noted above, Spanish teachers are using computers invarying degrees for administrative uses. It remains to be seen, however, whether teachers are using computers for pedagogical
reasons.

Pedagogical

Use

teachers reported "no lessons" when asked if they use digital video (64.6%) or spreadsheets (67.7%) while teaching. Teachers moderately use, 3 to 9 lessons, CD-ROMs (21.5%) and presen tation software (21.7%). E-mail, digital video, CD-ROMs, the Internet, MS presentation software, Word, spreadsheets and digital images are all minimally used by some teachers.

To explore pedagogical uses, participants were asked to describe technologies that theyuse were frequently used technologies. while teaching.Word-processing and the Internet was used most by teacherswith 39.1%) indicating 10 ormore lessons. Over Microsoft Word all, 88% of teachers report using the Internet in their classroom for at least one lesson during courses and 26.6% of teachers use the Internet during class inmore than ten lessons. Many

Spanish teachers indicate using computers themselves in the classroom. Teachers seem to be favoringMicrosoft Word and the Internetfor theirown use; it is also interesting to note that teachers report frequently assigning these same technologies to their students. Based on the data, students are frequently assigned to use word-processing software, the Internet and presentation software (see Table 1). Over 90% of teachers assign the Internet for research at least one lesson a course and approximately 80%) of teachers assign word-processed compositions at least one lesson a course. Finally, 58.9% of teachers assign presentation soft
to students at least one lesson a course.

ware

Students are occasionally, 1 to 2 lessons, assigned to use CD-ROMs (20.4%o), read online materials with the Internet (27.9%), use presentation software (34.9%), e-mail (20.5%), and use digital images (25.2%).
Number of Lessons that Students N Tasks (340 total) Word-processing compositions 337 337 337 CD-ROMs 333 E-mail 336 Digital337 images Presentation software 338 336 Digital video Spreadsheets or database programs 334 Table Were No 1 Assigned lessons 0/o 21.7 9.2 29.4 39.8 52.9 56.5 59.6 41.4 34.9 19.8 3.8 78.9 84.7 10.8 3.6 .9 15.2 4.8 1.2 43.9 17.5 27.9 20.2 12.2 20.4 17.1 20.58.9 14 25.2 11.3 3.9 9.6 to Computers 1 to 2 lessons o/o o/o 0/o 31.8 24.9 21.7 (Item A5) 10+ lessons

3 to 9 lessons

The Internet for research The Internet to read online materials

80

Hispania 91March 2008

The previous data suggest that students are assigned to use computers occasionally. To explore this use more deeply, teachers were asked which technologies are used forwhich particular learning objectives. Teachers could select any and all language skills that applied to each tech to help students learn grammar as well as nology. For example, a teachermay use CD-ROMs
culture.

processing software, was the second-most used technology by teachers with 265 of 340 teachers.Microsoft Word is used by teachers for grammar (63.4%), vocabulary (60.7%) and writing (89.4%). It is interesting to note that teach technology (as seen inTable 2) is viewed to have its own particular strengthand weakness.
Table Skills Tasks n Focused on with Specific 2 Technologies Writing (Item Listening A6) Reading Culture

Teachers indicated pedagogical purposes for each technology. One of themost popular was used by 307 of 340 teachers.An overwhelming 87.3% of teachers technologies, the Internet, thatuse the Internetuse itfor culture.Additionally, a large percentage, 63.8%> of teachers use the Internet to focus on reading abilities. Another popular technology,Microsoft Word or word

Computer Speaking

Grammar

Vocabulary

(%)
The Internet Microsoft Word 307 265 48.5 63.4

(%)
49.8 60.7 70 51.9

(%)
7.5 11.3 29.5 29.8

(%)
31.3 89.4 25.3 30.9 36.6

(%)
17.6 8.3 68.9 25.9

(%)
87.3 63.8 32.1 38.9 60.7 30.4

(%)

66.8 190 CD-ROMs Presentation software Digital images 140 133 E-mail Digital video 83 57 20.0 27.8 9.6 47.4 181 50.8

53.2

37.1 28.6 28.9 52.6

34.3 3.7 33.7 15.8

23.6 72.9 13.3 24.6

20.7 21.4 4.5 14.5 53.0 14.0 33.3 24.6 25.6 32.3

80

71

Spreadsheets

Beliefs Concerning Pedagogical

Benefits of Learning Language with a Computer

To explore teachers' beliefs about technology, teachers were asked to respond to how beneficial computerswere for learninggrammar, vocabulary, speaking,writing, listening,reading and culture (see Table 3). Teachers report strong beliefs about the potential for computers in language learning. According to Spanish teachers, computers are extremely beneficial for culture (69%) and reading (47.3%). In fact, computers are seen as most beneficial for learning and teaching culture. Only 0.6% of teachers feel thatcomputers are not at all beneficial for culture and only 2.1%) feel that computers are not beneficial at all for reading. Computers are reported to be moderately beneficial for learning grammar (43.6%), vocabulary (42.9%), writing (43.5%) and to a lesser

extent, listening (31%). Computers are not seen to be as beneficial for speaking, with 26.2% reporting not at all beneficial, and 40.7% reporting that computers are slightly beneficial for speaking.

Beliefs
Benefits

and Practices
of Computers Not at all

on Computers
Table 3 Learning for Language

in the Classroom
(Item Bl) Extremely beneficial

81

Skills

(%)
Culture Reading Vocabulary

Beneficial

Slightly

Moderately beneficial

(%)
2.7 13.8 16.1 16.5 23 22.1 40.7

(%)
27.7 36.8 42.9 43.5 31 43.6 20.2

(%)
69 47.3 38.7 35.7 33.4 29.6 13

336 334 336 333 335 335 332

0.6 2.1 2.4 4.2 12.5 4.8 26.2

Writing
Listening Grammar Speaking

(21.5%) thatcomputers can help students learna foreign language. Another strong response was with 12.2% of teachers reporting that they strongly agree that students need to learn computers for the twenty-first century.
Figure 1 in language learning (n=335)

In general, teachers feel positive about thepedagogical potential of computers for learning Spanish. The respondents have strong responses on thepositive end of the scale, for instance as seen inFigure 1,93.8% of respondents slightlyagree (25.4%), agree (46.9%) or strongly agree

It is clear that teachers believe in thecomputer for some learninggoals; therefore, inorder to explore this area further,teachers were asked to specify the role of computers in language learning on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 6 (Strongly agree).

Beliefs

about

the

potential

of

technology

can I feelthat leama foreign computers helpa student language

50

40

30

20

strongly disagree

disagree

agree slightly disagree slightly

agree

agree strongly

Beliefs about theReliability of Computers Respondents were finally asked whether or not they believe in the computer as a piece of hardware. This set of questions addressed issues of reliability, confidence, and trust when using These questions were weighted on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 6 (Strongly computers.
agree).

82

H?spanla 91March 2008

The responses lean toward the positive side of the scale. For instance, 92%) of respondents slightly agreed ( 18.6%), agreed (45.3%) or strongly agreed (28.1%) that theirexperiences with computers have been positive. Participants also felt positive about their confidence using computers and theunpredictable nature of technology. Finally, teachers trustcomputers as seen by 10.2%) slightly agreeing, 46.7% agreeing and 11.1% strongly agreeing. Overall, this subset reflects that teachers report feeling comfortable around the technology and feeling confident
about their use.

vocabulary, reading and culture.Computers are tremelybeneficial for learninggrammar, listening, not reported to be as beneficial in regard to improving speaking skills. Discussion Administrative Use Findings from this study suggest that computers have become routine tools for helping teachers accomplish day-to-day tasks. This finding is supported by Chiero's study (1999) where 75% ofK-12 teachers reported using a computer for professional reasons two to three times a week (380). Similarly, 71.5% of teachers in the current study report thattheirprimary use of com puters is administrative. This is obviously the case forusing a computer to submit and calculate grades (76.1% perform this taskweekly or daily). The advantages of using a computer forgrades are thepowerful tools available tohelp teachers sum, average, and chart grades. This is also seen

Teachers affirm that they are not resistant to using computers due to issues of hardware or reliability.Additionally, teachers reveal that theybelieve in thepedagogical potential of compu ters with over 93.8% agreeing to some degree that computers can help students learn a foreign language. In fact, a strongmajority of teachers believe that computers are moderately to ex

when using a computer to take attendance (63.4% perform this task almost daily). The advantage of an online attendance program is reporting truancyquickly and easily. These percentages suggest thatover 60% of schools have grading and attendance systems inplace for teachers. In fact, 61.4% of teachers reported that they are required by theirschool to
calculate or record

If such requirements are in place, teachersmust have access to computers. Findings from this study suggest that teachers do have computer access with only 8.9%) of Spanish teachers reporting that they do not have a computer in their classroom. Further, 97% of teachers report that theyhave at least one computer laboratory in their school. In contrast,Becker et al ( 1999) reported that 84% of foreign-language teachers did not have a computer in their classroom (9). With increased access and requirements, computers are no longer only for student learning. Teachers are very likely touse computers foradministrative tasks inorder tohelp manage, create, communicate and submit information. Use

grades

and

take

attendance

with

a computer.

Pedagogical

Similar to administrative usage, the analysis of thedata suggests that teacher use of compu ters forpedagogic purposes is beginning to change, in some ways fairlynoticeably. It is still true thatvaluable software, as reported by Becker et al's survey of Spanish teachers in 1999, has not as changed. Word processing programs, the Internetand presentation software are still reported seems to be helpful programs in the foreign-language classroom. It is also still true that culture one of the main reasons touse computers in the classroom, inagreement withMoore et al (1998). Similarly, this study reported that culture was not only one of themost targeted skills with technology but that it is also supported by multiple computer technologies. What has changed is the reported pedagogic use of computers. Pedagogic use seems to have increased since reported by Becker et al. in 1999, where only

38%) of foreign-language teachers (grades 4-12) reported using computers with students in their

on Computers in the Classroom 83 classes (6). In this study, over three-quarters of respondents report using the Internet and MS Word at least once during a course. The increase inusage since 1999 documents thepervasive ness of particular technologies, such as the InternetandMS Word, in society. It also may imply Beliefs and Practices

son per course, the respondents report showing digital video in class (35.3%), using presentation software (65.2%), and even digital images (55%) and CD-ROMs (62.9%). Not only is computer but it is also diversifying. Teachers are beginning to experimentwith different usage increasing, technology,which implies that schools are beginning to offer multiple technologies. Similarly, teachers assign multiple technologies to their students. The assignment of the Internetand word-processing are still quite popular. But a variety of other technologies are also being assigned to students. For instance, students are assigned to use computers for at least one project with the following technologies: presentation software (58.5%), e-mail (43.4%) and even digital video (21.2%). Further, it is interesting to note that the assignment of these computer

that teachers find these programs good startingplaces for the integration of computers in the classroom. Beginning with what is already known is a comfortable startingpoint. Teachers are using more than the InternetandMS Word, however. During at least one les

most popular technology, supportsmany skills. The Internet The Internet,for example, the was reportedby teachers tobe used to learngrammar (48.5%), vocabulary (49.8%), speaking (7.5%), writing (31.3%), listening (17.6%), reading (63.8%) and culture (87.3%). There seem tobe many ways to use technology in the learning of Spanish. In sum, thefindings from this study suggest that the amount of pedagogic use is increasing. This finding stands in contrast to reports from five years ago that implied, although equipped with computers, teachers are not using the technology (Becker et al 1999;Mathews 1996;Milken Family Foundation 1998;Moore et al 1998). This increased use suggests thatnot only are both students and teachers using computers but that they are also experimenting with diverse tech nologies. Current use of computers shows that language classrooms are indeed progressing with
the fabric of our nation's educational infrastructure.

what the assignments entail, it is clear that teachers tend to agree thatdigital video supports the learning of culture. In sum, respondents seem to be actively deciding which specific computer technologies supportwhich particular language skills. The thoughtfuluse of computers perhaps reflects the understanding that it is the instructional objective and not the technology that should be the priority in the classroom. In addition, teachers seem to feel that there is more than one way touse particular technolo most likely depends on the needs of the students, style of teaching, and purpose. gies. Usage

technologies is not haphazard. Teachers report specific rationales behind the assignments. Respondents tend to agree that some computer technologies target specific language skills. For instance, for those teacherswho use digital video, 71% of them use it to support culture.Although this study did not investigate

society's overall usage of computers. Computers are becoming ubiquitous and integrated into

Beliefs about thePedagogical

Benefit of Computers

In this study, the investigation into teachers' beliefs is both informativeand revealing. The findings suggest that teachers believe in the pedagogical benefit of computers in language When asked directly, 93.8% of teachers agree to some extent that computers can help learning. students learn a foreign language. Teachers in this study also reported positive beliefs about computers in regard to preparing students for the twenty-first century, providing appropriate learningmaterials and providing sufficiently sophisticated features to learn Spanish. These findings suggest that teachers believe in thepotential of computers. Similarly,Nutta et al (2002) found that 75% of Spanish teachers thought computers were a good idea for language-learning (298).

Although teachers tend to agree that computers are helpful in language-learning, they do not believe thatcomputers are equally helpful forall language skills. For example, the learning of

84

H?spanla 91March 2008

extremely beneficial for learning to speak. Listening and speaking were two skills thatteachers reportare not as well supported by com puters for language-learning. These findings imply that theremay not be enough software programs for the development of listening and speaking (Liu,Moore, Graham and Lee 2002) or perhaps that teachers do not yet feel that computers can replace oral communication with a per son. From this study, it is not known why computers were believed to be only slightlybeneficial for these two skills.

culture is believed to be well-supported by computers. Almost 70% of respondents believe that computers are extremely beneficial for learning culturewhile only 13% believe thatcomputers are

Beliefs about Computers Almost a decade ago, technophobia was regularlymentioned. This was reflected in research such as Rosen and Weil's study (1995) that a primary concern for elementary and secondary teachers was working with the actual technology. Today, the findings from this study suggest that teachers believe in computers and do not fear them. Not only do teachers believe themselves to be confident users of technology (78.4% agree to some extent) but they also trust computers (84% agree to some extent). In fact, an over

whelming 92%) of respondents reported that theyagree to some extent that theirexperiences with computers have been positive. Teachers seem to feel positively about using the actual computer. These findings are inagreementwith Lam (2000) andNutta et al. (2002) thatteachers are not afraid of using the computers. Technophobia seems to be subsiding and teachers are reportingpositive beliefs about computers. The reported decline in technophobia could perhaps be explained by the integrationof technology in teacher-education programs, in-services and society as a whole. Almost 98%) of respondents reportowning a home computer and 75.7% use theirhome computer daily. Exposure to computers at home and work could build comfort and reduce technology
worries.

Implications The link between technology and school reform is often made during discussions on educational change. Students need to be prepared technologically to enter the twenty-first century and schools are a large part of this process (U.S. Department of Education 2004). How may still be speculative. technology will factor into educational reform Some authors like Cuban (2001) posit two explanations related to technological change. will take changes in the history and context of educational practice to create sig First, that it and nificant change. Or second, the slow-revolution explanation states that"as the infrastructure teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning evolve, more and more teachers will change their concur that teachers' practices and become serious users of computers" (179). Other researchers are a critical component to technological change (Windschitl and Sahl beliefs about computers 2002). Teachers' beliefs are thought to influence their instructionaldecisions. Findings from this study suggest that technology use is changing and thatperhaps a slow revolution is beginning in Spanish-language classrooms. Spanish teachers report positive beliefs about thepotential for computers in language-learning and computers themselves. These beliefs have the potential to affect instructional decision-making. As seen in the findings from this study, positive beliefs coupled with increased and diverse pedagogical use reflect changes in classroom computer use. Thus, the link between beliefs and practice supports the slow computer revolution in the Spanish classroom. As teachers' beliefs about computers change,
also changes.

usage

This change is gradual, however, as noted by Michael Fullan who states "Change is a process, not an event" (2001:52). Thus, findings from this studydo not imply thata technological revolution has occurred; however, perhaps ithas begun. The gradual adoption of computers is

Beliefs
home use of computers.

and Practices

on Computers

in the Classroom

85

occurring in the schools as seen through respondents' increased administrative, pedagogic and is not the first time that language classrooms have dealt with the adoption of technology. This gradual adoptive process has been the case with technological breakthroughs throughout the history of language learning. Technology in the form of phonographs, audio tapes and videodiscs was eventually welcomed as were other devices that supported language With time, however, many of these technologies ended on sour notes and with doubts learning. about theireffectiveness (Roby 2004). The computer revolutionmay notmeet this same fate. This

they are also in daily contactwith computers at school. Almost 92% of teachers reporthaving a computer in theirclassroom and 97% reporthaving a computer laboratory available to them. Second, the findings indicate that schools are requiring teachers to use computers on a daily basis for attendance and grade calculation. Requirements to use computers only further
support exposure to a computer.

The revolution seems to be fueled and maintained by various supporting factors. First, teachers have high access to computers. At home, 97.3% of respondents report that they own a home computer, computer. In fact, the majority of teachers (75.7%) seem tobe active users of their use theircomputer daily. Not only are teachers exposed to computers at home, but reporting they

nology in the language classroom. Not only are teachers optimistic, teachers also report to believe in computers as trustworthyand reliable machines. There is no reported fear of tech nology or technophobia. Because beliefs can influence classroom practices, and because the beliefs in this study support computers, the findings imply that there is indeed a link between beliefs and practice. Teachers report increased use of computerswhile at the same time reporting positive beliefs about computers. These beliefs support the adoption of the computer by lessening worries that technology may fail and building confidence about the pedagogical potential ofCALL.

Finally, teachers' beliefs support the slow revolution. In this investigation, beliefs about computers in language-learning are clearly established. Spanish teachers tend to believe in the potential of computers for language-learning, specifically in regard to the learning of culture, reading,writing, grammar and vocabulary. Today's Spanish teachers seem optimistic about the potential for technology. This optimism carries thepotential for increased use of computer tech

Limitations The primary interpretive limitation of this studywas the representation of the sample. The 340 respondentswere allmembers of an association, either ACTFL, AATSP orAP. Teachers who may be more inclined toward professional development. typically join professional organizations In addition, the findings may not generalize to languages other than Spanish. Due to the popularity of Spanish in theK-12 schools and the amount of computer software available to Spanish language-learners, thegeneralizations made may not be applicable to computer use and related beliefs in other languages. Finally, the instrument is also limited in that the results are reported and not observed. what they "believe" should be believed. Itwould Respondents may feel that they should report be impossible to ascertain whether or not the participants were candid. Recommendations forFuture Research

The purpose of this study was to contribute to the current knowledge on computers in education. Future research is needed to keep this database current and accurate in order to monitor the impact (or lack thereof) of computers in education. Not only is research on the impact of computers on education needed, butmore specifically

this impact inK-12 environments. Investigations in theK-12 schools is lacking in current research. It would be interestingto further understand how computers are used by teachers in the

86

Hispania 91March 2008

computer assignments. Qualitative data would be valuable to answer these questions. Additionally, research on K-12 students and computers merits investigation. For example, which students do teachers feel benefitmost from computers? A teacher in this study specifically mentioned that she uses computers only for heritage learners. Itwould be interesting to note which students teachers feel benefit from technology. Also, how do students react and respond to the use of computers in the foreign-language classroom. An investigation into students' use

schools. Some of the relevant issuesmay be whether or not computers are assigned to be used at school or at home, why themanagement of computers is such a divided issue, how teachers are structuringassignments on computers (independent, pair or group work), and the specifics of the

and beliefs about computers in the Spanish classroom would also be warranted. Another area of concern would be the preparation of second-language teachers in regard to technology. As an aging teaching profession retires,more information is needed in order to understand the type of preparation that new teachers are receiving and how this preparation does (or does not) influence theirpractice. Questions to investigate include: how teacher-educa tionprograms prepare Spanish teachers to use technology (administrative use and/orpedagogic use), which software is primarily focused on, which courses promote technology, and how technology factors into student teaching and practicum.

WORKS CITED
Albee, Becker, Julie J. (2003). of How "A Study It Can Be of Pre-Service Increased." Skill Preparedness and Elementary Teachers' Technology 11.1: 53-71. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 1998 National (1999). "Teaching, Learning, and Computing: Wong. Technology and Organizations. 5 December 2003 <http://

on What Language in Language of Research "Teacher Cognition Teaching: A Review 36.2: 81-109. and Do." Language Think, Know, Believe Teaching and Richard Shavelson. "Teachers' Decision Russo, Borko, Hilda, Richard Cone, Nancy Atwood (1979). on Teaching: and Implications. Eds. Penelope Peterson and Research Making." Concepts, Findings, Herbert Walberg. Publishing Corporation. Berkeley: McCutchan Borg, Simon. (2003). Teachers Chapelle, UP. Chen, Carol. (2001). Computer Applications in Second Language Acquisition. Problem Cambridge, Is A Nail." UK: Cambridge

Henry, Jason Ravitz, and Yantiew on Information Survey." Center for Research www. crito.uci.edu/tlc/html/findings. html>.

Examples

Judy. (1996). 2.7. Journal

"CALL

Is Not A Hammer 2003

5 December

and Not Every Teaching

The Internet TESL

Chiero, Robin. Research

(1999). "Secondary at and Development Presented Papers 1999. and Technology, Communications Educational Peterson. New

<http://iteslj.org/Articles/Chen-CALL.html>. of Computers." Teachers' Use Professional the National Eric Document

Convention

Clark, Christopher, and Penelope Teaching. Ed. M. Wittrock. Cooperman, Naomi.

(1986). "Teachers' Thought 255-96. York: Macmillan. The Interaction Between Doctoral Dissertation.

Service ED 436 166. Reproduction on Processes." Handbook of Research Beliefs and Their Pedagogical Teachers College: Columbia U.

Proceedings of Selected of the Association for

First Connections:

Teachers' (1998).

140. (1998): in the Classroom. and Underused: Computers Cambridge: Harvard UP. Larry. (2001). Oversold in Foreign Language Classrooms: Cummings, Anne. (2005). Administrative and Pedagogical Uses of Computers A Survey of Spanish Teachers' Beliefs and Practices. Doctoral Dissertation. The U of Iowa. Cuban, D?rnyei,

Early Use of the Internet in the Classroom. 59.01 Dissertation Abstracts International

in Second and Research: Zolt?n. Construction, Administration, (2003). Questionnaires Language Publishers. Processing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, a Common Recent Effectiveness Research: Towards CALL Felix, Uschi. Agenda." (2005). "Analyzing 18.1 & 2: 1-32. Learning Computer Assisted Language on CALL for Second-Language eds. (2004). New Perspectives and Charles M. Fotos, Sandra, Browne, Fraser, Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. is Technology "What (1993). Really Doing 26.2: 127-31. Unterrichtspraxis Classrooms. New Catherine. Donald, UP. and Jack Richards, eds. (1996). Teacher for Language Teaching and Learning?" New York:

Freeman,

Learning

in Language

Teaching.

P, 2001. (2001). The New Meaning of Educational Change. New York: Teachers College to (2001). "Giving a Virtual Voice Furstenburg, Gilberte, Sabine Levet, Kathryn English, and Katherine Maillet. 5.1: 55-102. the Silent Language of Culture: The Cultura Project." Language, Learning and Technology in the Service of Language Garrett, Nina. Learning: Trends and Issues." The Modern (1991). "Technology

Cambridge Fullan, Michael.

Beliefs
Journal Language Gebel, Terri. (2000). A Language. Doctoral Gillham, Bill. Hanson-Smith, Teachers ISTE/NCATE. 75.1:

and Practices
75-98.

on Computers

in the Classroom

87

(2000). Elizabeth, of English

ed. (2000). Enhanced Technologically Learning Environments. to Speakers of Other Languages. Standards for Educational December (2000-2002). Technology Programs.

Beliefs and Practices for Teaching Reading in a Second Survey of Spanish Teachers' Dissertation. The U of Iowa. Dissertation Abstracts International 61.06 (2000): 2238. a Questionnaire. London: Continuum. Developing Alexandria, 7, 2007 VA: <http://

Kulik,

in Action. Boston: Heinle/ITP. Language Teaching: Reasoning in Colleges and Universities: What Controlled (2003). Effects of Using Instructional Technology Evaluation Studies Say (No. PI0446.003). SRI International. Arlington, VA: vs. Technophobia: A Preliminary Look at Why Lam, Yvonne. (2000). "Technophilia Second-Language Teachers Do or Do Not Use Technology in Their Classrooms." Canadian Modern Language Review 56.3: James. 390-420. the Integration of Computer into Elementary (2002). Survey of Teacher Attitudes Regarding Doctoral Dissertation. The Pennsylvania State U, 2002. Dissertation Abstracts International

cnets.iste.org/ncate/index.html>. Johnson, Karen. (1999). Understanding

Lemmon, Linda. Class-rooms. 63.09: 3072.

of Teacher Technology Needs in Fifty-Five Southeastern Idaho School Mathews, Jerry. (1996). "Assessment Districts." San Antonio: of the National Rural Education Paper presented at the Annual Meeting Association in San Antonio, TX, October Service ED 402 11-14, 1996. ERIC Document Reproduction 120. Milken ?. Family Foundation. (2000). Learning Technology Technology. Policy Counts. 28 August 2003 2003 publications/publications.taf?page=292>. on Education (1998). Milken Exchange

P. Levy, Michael. (1997). Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Oxford: Clarendon Liu, Min, Zena Moore, Leah Graham, and Shinwoong Lee. (2002). "A Look at the Research on Computer-Based in Second Language Learning: A Review of the Literature from 1990-2000." Journal of Technology Use on Technology in Education Research 34. 3: 250-73.

<http://www.mff.org/

6 December

<http://www.edweek.org/sreports/

J. Koehler. A Frame Content Knowledge: (2006). "Technological Pedagogical Teachers College Record 108.6: 1017-54. Knowledge." and Sheila Carel. (1998). "Technology and Teaching Culture: Results of a State Moore, Zena, Betsy Morales, Teachers." CALICO Journal 109-28. 15.1-3: Survey of Foreign Language in a Digital Age?" Moursund, David, and Talbot Bielefeldt. (1999). "Will New Teachers Be Prepared to Teach on Education Milken 28 August 2003 Exchange Technology. <http://www.mff.org/publications/ work for Teacher 154>. publications.taf?page= National Board for Professional Teaching 2007 National ?. Standards. World Languages Other Than English. Approved (2001). 16 October Guidelines.

tc98/charts/in_c3.htm>. Mishra, Punya, and Matthew

<http://www.nbpts.org/the_standards>. Council of Teacher for the Accreditation

Education.

and Technology 6 December Standards. 2003 <http://www.ncate.org/ standard/new%20program%20standards/iste%202002.pdf>. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, Task Force on Technology and Teacher Education. and the New Professional Teacher: Preparing for the 21st Century Classroom. 6 (1997). Technology December 2003 .htm>. <http://www.ncate.org/accred/projects/tech/tech-21 National Educational the Technology Meeting Plan/NatTechPlan>. National Technology Plan. Getting Challenge. America's (1996). Students 23 February Literacy Ready 2000 for the Twenty-First Century: <http://www.ed.gov/Technology/

D.C.: NCATE. Washington (2002). Educational Computing

(1996).

Curriculum

Educational Standards for Teachers. 6 December 2003 <http://cnets.iste.org/ Technology (2003). teachers/t_book.html>. and J. N. Meros. Nutta, Joyce, C. M. Geyten, A. L. Norwood, (2002). "Exploring New Frontiers: What Do in Elementary School?" Foreign Language Annals Computers Contribute to Teaching Foreign Languages 35.3: 293-306. "Teachers' Beliefs and Educational Pajares, M. Frank. (1992). Review of Educational 62: 307-32. Research Phillips, June K. (1998). "Media for theMessage: Technology's 25-36. Research: Role Cleaning Up a Messy CALICO Construct." Journal 16.1:

in the Standards."

Raschio, Richard, and Robert Raymond. (2003). "Where Are We with Technology?: What Teachers of Spanish to Say about the Presence of Technology and Portuguese Have in Their Teaching." Hispania 86.1: 88-96. Richardson, Virginia. (1996). "The Role of Attitudes and Beliefs in Learning to Teach." Handbook of Research on Teacher Education. Eds. John Sikula, T. J. Buttery, and E. Guyton. New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan. 102-19. on Teaching. Ed. Virgina, and Peggy Placier. (2001). "Teacher Change." Handbook of Research D.C.: American Educational Research Association. Virginia Richardson. Washington in the Service of Foreign Language Learning: The Case of the Language Roby, Warren. (2004). "Technology Richardson,

88

HisDania

91 March
on

2008

on Educational Ed. David Communications and Technology. Laboratory." Jonassen. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. and Technophobia Weil. Rosen, Larry, and Michelle (1995). "Computer Availability, Computer Experience in Human Behavior 11.1: 9-31. Computers Among Public School Teachers." Handbook Research Rafael. of Technology for Second Language and Teaching: "The Use (2001). Learning Modern 537-54. 84.4: Journal Language Retrospective." in the Adult ESL Classroom." Teacher Learning Smith, Deborah Binnie. (1996). "Teacher Decision-Making Teaching. Eds. Donald Freeman and Jack Richards. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP. Lan-guage Salaberry, M. Stepp-Greany, U.S. Jonita. Implications

A in

An Overview." and Deborah and Language Mark, Healey. (1998). "Computers Learning: 28 October 2003 <http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/overview.html>. 31: 57-71. Teaching Language Warschauer, Mark, and Richard Kern, eds. (2000). Network-Based Language Teaching: Concepts and Practice. Cambridge, UK; Cambridge UP. Warschauer, Warschauer, Mark, TESOL. Willis, Heidi Shetzer, and Christine Meloni. Mehlinger. Education. (2000). Internet for English Teaching. Alexandria,

on Language in a Technological "Student Perceptions Environment: (2002). Learning 6.1: 165-80. for the New Millennium." Learning and Technology Language the Inter (2004). "Toward A New Golden Age In American Education?How Department of Education. Students Are Revolutionizing National Education net, the Law and Today's Expectations." Technology 8 January 2005 Plan. <http://www.ed.gov/about/offices/list/os/technology/plan/2004/plan.pdf>.

VA:

Jerry, and Howard Research on Teacher 1029.

and Teacher Education." Handbook (1996). "Information Technology of Ed. John Sikula, T. Buttery, and E. Guyton. New York: Macmillan. 978 "Tracing Teachers' Social Dynamics, Use and in a Laptop Computer School: of Technology Institutional Culture." American Educational

Windschitl, Mark, and Kurt Sahl. (2002). The Interplay of Teacher Beliefs, 39.1: 165-205. Journal Research

AppendixA Survey (Cummings 2005)

Section A: Frequency Al. and Type of Computer activities? Use (Please select) Almost Do not use Occasionally Weekly a a a o a a a a a a a or D a a a Daily

Inwhich of these ways do you use computers for administrative

I use computers to: a. Record or calculate grades.

b. Take attendance. c.Make handouts for students.

d. Correspond with parents. e.Write lesson plans or notes.

f. Incorporate digital cameras or scanners when preparing for class. g. Exchange computer files with a colleague.

h. Post student assignments on the Internet. i.Build an electronic teaching portfolio.

j. Look for teaching resources, either professional "realia". k. Submit work-related personal absences,

forms (e.g. transportation requests, at-risk student info., etc.)....

A2. On average, how many hours a week do you use a computer for administrative needs (Please select one) I?J less than 1 hour LJ 6 to

(as illustrated inAl)?

8 hours

LJ LI 1 to 2 hours 9 to10hours
I?I 3 to 5 hours I?I more than 10 hours

Beliefs
A3. Which LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ LJ Calculate

and Practices

on Computers

in the Classroom

89

of the following activities are required grades

by your school to be done with computers?

(Select all that apply)

Take attendance Correspond with parents Post student assignments on the Internet Build an electronic teaching portfolio Submit work-related forms (e.g. transportation requests, personal absences, at-risk student info., etc.) lessons

A4. For the following, please think about a typical course that you have taught and indicate in how many you used computers while teaching. (Please select) No lessons lto2 lessons 3 to 9 lessons

10+ lessons

orother). a. CD-ROMs (textbook-related Q LJ LJ LJ b.The Internet.Q Q Q c. Presentation software PowerPoint).Q | | | | | (e.g. d. E-mail. Q
skills (e.g. accents, Spanish dictionary, e.Microsoft Word

tables, LJLJLJLJ etc.). spell-check, f. Showdigital video witha computer.Q | or programs. I g. Spreadsheets database [J
h. Digital images, etc.).

| [ I I

| | II I

images (e.g. scanners, digital cameras, web

QQ |

| Q

A5. For the following, please think about a typical course thatyou have taught and indicate in how many your students were assigned to use computers. (Please select) No to 2 1 3 to 9 lessons lessons lessons

lessons 10+ lessons

or a.CD-ROMs other). (textbook-related b.TheInternet for research.

d. Presentation Software PowerPoint). (e.g.

c. The Internet readteacher-selected materials... to online

PJ

Q LJ Q
Q | Q | Q

LJ LJ Q
[ Q | | | | |

e.E-mail. Q f. Word processing compositions. video. g. Digital Q or h.Spreadsheets database programs.

i. Digital images).

Q Q Q
Q\~\ | Q |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

images (e.g. scanners, digital cameras, web

b. Internet. The DO

a. CD-ROMs.
c. Presentation

A6. For each row, please indicate which skills you focus on when using the computer technology listed. For example: to help students learn grammar skills. (Select all that apply, if any) Check the you use CD-ROMs first box if Do Grammar Culture Vocabulary Speaking Writing Listening Reading not use

G Q
G

Q Q ?
Q ?

software. dE-mail. QD Q
f. video... Digital QQ g.Spreadsheets....
h. Digital images. e. Word Microsoft

Q
LILIQLILILI

LI

QQ

QQ

Q QQQQQ

90

Hispania 91March 2008

(while teaching) or administrative reasons (behind-the-scenes

A7. Do you use computers more for pedagogical (Select one") (Select one) management)? preparation and managements?

LJ ADMINISTRATIVE

LJ PEDAGOGICAL
Section B: Beliefs about technology in the classroom

Bl.

Please

indicate how beneficial you believe Not?t all

computers are for learning beneficial O a

the following: Extremely beneficial a a

Slightly

Moderately beneficial a a a

a. Grammar. b. Vocabulary.. c. Speaking. d. Writing. e. Listening. f. Reading. g. Culture.

a a a a

a a D a Section B continued a

Please mark

your response

for each statement based

on the scale below.

5* 3" 6S O CTO 9

as* 5S <re5-

SK

CZ) ere ereo

<*?> S

B2.

It is difficult tomaintain working on computers.

students' attention while a . a a D a

B3.1 B4.1

am not the type to do well with computers am confident when using computers.

a a a a

B5. The Internet is a better foreign language resource thanmy school's library. B6. Computers are not sophisticated enough to teach

language skills.

B7.1 worry thatmy students will use Internet resources such as online translators to do their tasks for them.. B8. While using computers with my class, it concerns me that I have to use so much English to explain what to do.

B9.

It is easy to integrate computers intomy regular lesson plans. I feel that computers can help students learn a foreign language.

a a a a

BIO.

a I don't know D

Bll.

I am hesitant to use computers because what to do if something goes wrong.

B12.

Students need to learn computers for the 21st century. a a

B13. My

experiences with computers have been a

positive.

Beliefs

and Practices

on Computers

in the Classroom

91

B14. Computers are too unpredictable-they the software doesn't work right.

"crash," or

a a
a a o a

a a a a

B15. The value of computers in learning a foreign language is overrated. B16. There are appropriate cultural materials on the World Wide Web formeaningful learning. B17.1 trust computers..

a classroom of students on computers is B18. Managing more difficult thanmanaging a classroom of students without computers. a a a

B19.

Planning a lesson that uses computers involves more work than planning a lesson without computers...

a
LJ Female

Section C: Demographics Cl. What is your gender?

LI Male LlYes LI 36-45

C2. Are you a native speaker of Spanish?

LJNo
over 55

C3. Which

of the following describes your age?

25 LI under

LI 26 -35

46-55

C4. How many years of experience do you have teaching Spanish? LJ 1-3 years LJ 4-10 years LJ

(Select one) 11-15 years LJ 16 or more years

C5. What

is the highest degree that you hold in Spanish?

(Select one)

LjNone
C6. What

LJ BA/BSminor

LJ BA/BSmajor

MA

Ph.D./Ed.D

level(s) of Spanish are you presently teaching? (Select all that apply)

LJ 1st year
C7. What grade-level(s)

LJ 2nd year

LJ 3rd LJ year

4thyear

l?l

5thyear or above

are you currently teaching? (Select all that apply)

LJ Elementary

lJ Middle School

LJ High School

C8. How many foreign language teachers are currently in your school building?

LJOne LJ Two

I?I Threetofive

LJ Six toeight

Nine

or more

C9. How many computers are in your classroom?

LJ Zero

LJ One totwo

LJ Threeto ten

Eleven

or more

C10. How many computer labs are in your school? LJ Cll. Zero LJ One to two LJ Three or more

Do you have a computer at home?

LJ Yes
C12. How I?I Never

LJno
often do you use your home computer? LJ Rarely a Monthly Weekly Daily

92

Hispania 91 March 2008

the location of your school?

C13. How would you describe

LJ Suburban LJ Urban
C14. Please write in the state where you are currently teaching_ you like to receive the results of this survey? please provide your email, school, or home address

I Rural

C15. Would IfYES

Yes Yes I?INo

to C15,

Thank

you for your participation!

Please

return the survey in the envelope

provided.

Anne Cummings,

The University of Iowa ?

2004

Language Use in the Classroom: Understanding the Relationship between Perceptions, Beliefs, and Verbal Communication Author(s): Gregory L. Thompson Source: Hispania, Vol. 92, No. 3 (September 2009), pp. 537-549 Published by: American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40648417 . Accessed: 26/09/2011 14:23
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hispania.

http://www.jstor.org

Pedagogy LanguageUse in theClassroom: the between Understanding Relationship Perceptions, and Beliefs, VerbalCommunication
L. Gregory Thompson Florida University Central of
betweeninstructors' students' Abstract:This articleaddressesthe relationship and and perceptions beliefsabout first and actualclassroom language(LI) and target language(TL) use in the Spanishforeign languageclassroom use. Given the lack of research and and theirteachers their to correlating perceptions beliefsof both students classroomlanguageuse, this studyundertakes discoverwhat relationships to exist. These data were gathered bothquestionnaires video-recordings classroomteaching. and of This studyanalyzeshow accurateand utilizing reliablestudents teachers in predicting and are how muchLI and TL are beingemployed the classroomand in LI whether their beliefsregarding and TL are manifested how theyuse language. in professed Key Words: beliefs,languageuse, perceptions, Spanish,student input

Introduction

in is aspectto consider understanding important languagelearning therole that beliefs perceptions and aboutlearning inlanguage and play acquisition actuallanguage use. Davis (2003) declares, "Thatpeople'sbeliefs instrumentalinfluencing are in their behavior a truism: is and of 'definition thesituation'" peopleactonthebasisofperceptions their continues stating ifpeopleperceive that somesituation be a reality, to then (207). Theauthor by will werethecase regardless whether notitis true. of or in Thisis also true they behaveas ifthat If and believethat are a behavior teaching learning. teachers languages learned certain way,their in willreflect wayofthinking spite possible that of research training thecontrary. and to Students in function much sameway,iftheteaching is occurring notmatch the that does their beliefs then this likely negatively is to influence language their acquisition. Due to thepotential influence thebeliefs, of moreworkis neededto understand which beliefs bothstudents teachers and havethat wouldimpede in somewaylimit or their language Someofthewaystodetermine beliefs learners teachers through the of and is acquisition. quesaboutdifferent tionnaires and observation. and aspectsof languagelearning through Argyris Schn(1974) propose notion reverse the of in of causality theanalysis people's beliefs. They as their beliefs proposethatpeople shouldbe observed to how theyact and thendetermine based on the observed behavior rather thanon whattheysay theybelieve.Davis affirms, beliefs beliefs-in-action notalwaysthesame"(208). Becauseofthefact and are that "Espoused in whatis stated a belief as thestatement, use of the maynotresult actualbehavior supporting both and an whetherrelationa questionnaires observations provide excellent todetermine way between whatis said andclassroom behavior. shipexists that beliefs a greater had than influence theteachers' knowPajares(1992) found teachers' classroom lessonplans,and pedagogical decisionsin theclassroom. teaching, ledgeon their Williams Burden and this that teachers believe (1997) againsupport declaring eventhough may that their actionsare spontaneous, "suchactionsare nevertheless prompted a deep-rooted by that be or belief Thusteachers' beliefs about maynever articulated madeexplicit. deep-rooted
Thompson,GregoryL. the between "Language Use in the Classroom:Understanding Relationship Beliefs,and VerbalCommunication" Perceptions, Hispania 92.3 (2009): 537-549

538

willpervade a how languages learned are their classroom actions morethan particular methoaretoldto adoptorcourse bookthey follow" (57). dology they Muchresearch beendoneinvestigating thedifference has both between teachers' stuand dents'viewsaboutlearning wellas theimportance developing greater as of a between dialogue students teachers tohowtomitigate differences mayexist. and that as Kinchin any (2004a) de"Forstudents be abletomaximize to their learning, needtohaveanappreciation own clares, they ofwhatis expected them their of teacher. Thiswillbe partly determined their teachers' by by Inthe beliefs" there a growing is oftheimclassroom, (301). implicit epistemological recognition of voice.Fielding view:"There a senseinwhich is not (2001) sums this portance thestudents' up the forbidden ofteaching learning becoming legitimate area and is a focus enof only previously from standpoint students well as teachers, also that rolesofteachers the of as but the and quiry students beginning becomeless exclusive excluding eachother" are to and of (49). In spite theaforementioned of other find has findings, researchers thevoiceoflearners been Harland al. (2001) declares the et that voiceofthelearner beenlargely has absent from neglected. theresearch has beenconducted dateandthat educational that to the is notaligned to product theneeds of theconsumer, who in thiscase are thestudents. it is nota practical However, to to and that haveabouthow possibility adaptall teaching thebeliefs understanding students are becausethey, whileexperienced do or consumers, nothavethetraining languages learned of severalstudies intostudent have found Nevertheless, background theteacher. perspectives them be insightful, to and whentalking aboutteaching and measured, intelligent, constructive 1 2003 and 2004b;MacBeath, 999; Rudduck Flutter, 2000; (DanielsandPerry, ; Kinchin, learning and "It be Veugelers de Kat,2002). Davis (2003) concludes, wouldperhaps a braveor foolish teacher didnotaccommodate student who such with and on Of belief, working them maybe them. coursetheprocessis notunidirectional; teachers to own mayneed to be prepared altertheir valuesandbeliefs abouteffective (217). practice" In herstudy university of students' abouthowlanguages learned, are Horwitz perceptions common several that wouldbe detri(1988) identified misconceptions amongstudents shefelt In mental their to of of and French, German, language learning. herstudy 241 students Spanish, in shefound 40% ofthestudents herstudy itwas possible becomefluent a foreign that felt in to in over and students felt language twoyearsor less.Additionally, 60% oftheSpanish German that a was principallymatter translation English theTL. a of from to learning foreign language Horwitz that that attrition occursinFL programs inpart goes ontopropose thelarge-scale may be due to unrealistic beliefs goals that and students haveandofwhich their instructors not are aware.A greater of beliefs wouldhelptheteachers address concerns to understandingthese any or misconceptions students that as mayhave thatcause themto feelunsuccessful language learners. to conducted Kinchin(2004a), some secondary school student According research by in atbeingaskedtocomment teaching learning, on and participants London"expressed surprise that thisis something outside their of usual schoolexperience" (309). One of the suggesting with language concerns the classroom that is are madebytheteachers many assumptions often inregards the and ( to classroom culture. Cortazzi Jin 1999) support bysaying "behaviour this that inthe classroom setwithin is frameworksexpectations, of valuesand attitudes, taken-for-granted beliefs aboutwhat constitutes learning, abouthowtoteachandlearn, whether howto and good askquestions, what textbooks for, howlanguage are and relates broader to issuesofthe teaching nature purpose education" and of (169). at in Davis (2003) investigated teachers students theMacao Polytechnic and Institute China to determine whether notteachers' students' or and beliefs coincided noton howthey or perIn ceivedthat werelearned. thestudy conducted with18 teachers 97 students, and languages in this author usedthetendimensions language of and learning Lightbown Spada (1993) todiscoveranydifferences similarities and between teachers' students' and beliefs. author The found that students teachers and on of and disagreed 60% of thesedimensions language learning in case thestudents believed morestrongly these in much of than every aspects language learning

2009 Hispania 92 September

Language Use in the Classroom

539

to able Thesediscrepancies moreresearch be better to understand their teachers. againrequire can are into and beliefs influence howthese beliefs correlated action howthese learning. and on between student usageandtarget Additionally, perspectives beliefs therelationship minimal attention. their In review theliterature theuse of of on havereceived learning language found "Fewstudies that havefocused LI Turnbull Arnett and the andTL intheclassroom, (2002) TL that their teachers' andL 1use" (211). Also,Horwitz1988) found onwhat learners about feel ( wouldseemto haveobviousrelevance to beliefs aboutlanguage students' learning "Although with commitment successin,and satisfaction of theunderstanding student to, of, expectations haveremained their classes,they (283). relatively unexplored" language but the not the Davis (2003) highlights importance onlyofconsidering student beliefs, also in "Thejuxtaroleis important influencing student behavior: howtheteachers' understanding someilluminating useful and of and of may insights position thebeliefs teachers students offer and behaviours into theirthinking languageteachingand language processes regarding and students' beliefsinfluence behaviour teachers' Beliefsdo affect and,a fortiori, learning. (207). learning" language the of between and (2003) further support opening a dialogue Kozminsky Kozminsky Finally, and teachers that to students' attitudes beliefs, and teachers students declaring in order modify somestudies ownattitudes beliefs and neededtobe awareoftheir Though regarding learning. is to many thegapsandsubof much research still needed fill haveexplored areaofinquiry, this someofthepreliminary stantiate findings. ResearchQuestions on while providing valuable information beliefs and The aforementioned research, and perceptions are how of use, failsto further investigate thesebeliefs perceptions language a this the in use. manifested classroom language Levine(2003) highlights stating needfor study withactual and and students' instructors' that would"compare perceptions attitudes directly fills gap verbal behavior" observation classroom of (356). Thepresent study this bycontributing correlate actualLI and target into of to a greater understanding how beliefsand perceptions In addresstheseissues,the following (TL) use in the classroom. orderto better language wereproposed: research questions correand aboutlanguage and learning perceptions beliefs (i) How do teachers' students' latetoactualLI andTL use intheclassroom? to and believein regards theroleof theLI and TL in the (ii) Whatdo teachers students classroom? language Spanish foreign
Methodology

at of The the Thedataweregathered during Fall 2005 semester theUniversity Arizona. data three Sixteen classeswerevideo-recorded times consisted twodifferent of phases.1) gathering a and both the 2) completed questionduring semester. All oftheparticipants, teachers students, L their about 1 andTL use ofL 1 andTL use intheclassroom, beliefs about their naire perceptions intheclassroom. fromSpanish 102 (first-year, includedeightinstructors The participants Participants. secondsemester instructors Spanish (second-year, from 202 andeight second semester Spanish) inwhich instrucall basedon a stratified random Theinstructors chosen were sample Spanish). and of two native ofEnglish native weredivided into groups: tors speakers Spanish speakers up the 1 this four two the levelsofSpanish 02 and202.From division, classeswhere instructeaching was of and classeswhere instructor a native the of tor was a native speaker speaker English four a of from Spanish102 andSpanish both were chosen 202,for total 16 different randomly Spanish a and instructors classeswith totalof270 students.

540

The 202 Video-Recordings. Spanish102 andSpanish classeswere50-minute classes,with eachclassbeing video-recorded a total three of times thecourse thesemester a total of for during of48 classesand40 hours classroom of instruction. instructors informed advance The were in that researcher the wouldbe recording a givenday.Thiswas doneinorder insure the on to that instructor conducting morestandard was a class as opposedto showing movieor writing a a theentire therecording sucha class uselessfor of thisstudy. hour, composition during making Classes wererecorded from back of theroomin order be outof thelineof sight the the to of students as tomakethecamera ofa distraction. tothefact both students so less Due that the and teachers werebeing itis possible their oftheL 1 andTL werealtered that use observed, however, the observations donetominimize fact. addition, were were this In unaware tothe as multiple they ofthestudy. knewonlythat student teacher and interactions being were specific purpose They observed. had over their level of Also, giventhattheresearcher no authority theteachers, should havebeenoverly not elevated. significant No in difference use oftheLI andTL anxiety was observed acrossobservations. The instructor video-recorded was the class period whilelecturing in all and during entire interactions thestudents, individually as a class.Additionally, ofthestudents' with both and all interactions theinstructor recorded. students with were The werealso recorded their in group due that students talking thesametime, transcripwere at the work; however, tothefact multiple tionof thestudents whilein pairsand/or smallgroups was notdone.All of thestudent and teacher interactions transcribed their were in in to the of entirety order determine percentages LI andTL usage,andfor of analysis thelanguage usage.All ofthespeechwas transcribed exactly as itwas spoken in errors pronunciation grammar. and including Thelanguagequestionnaire. After third final the and of recording theclasses,all students andteacher Appendix 1weregiven questionnaire a their and (see A) regarding beliefs perceptions aboutLI and TL use in theclassroom. questionnaires askedstudents teachers The also and to not beliefs aboutthemosteffective for to analyze onlytheir way learners acquirelistening probut evaluate what in to ownLI andTL use ficiency also tocarefully they perceived regard their intheclassroom wellas thelanguage oftheother as use members theclassroom. language of The was from questionnaire a the questionnaire adapted developed Levine(2003) tofit population by and goals thatthe researcher established, had new questionsthatneeded to be including answeredforthis study.The questionnaire dividedintotwo parts.The first was thirteen for and elicited their oflanguage intheclassroom use questions thestudents teachers perception indifferent and different activities within classroom the environment. These settings involving weredesigned a scaleof0% to 100%andthe on checked boxthat the most questions participants reflected range the considered for in class for each accurately they appropriate language usage The secondpartof the questionnaire a Likert-type was scale from one particular question. to where participants the couldexpress their (strongly disagree) five (strongly agree), agreement ordisagreement a statement with to on according somepoint thescale. Resultsand Discussion of data,the researcher Using the PearsonCorrelation parametric analyzedthe data to measure different the between use oftheLI (English themajority for of relationships perceived thestudents) Spanish and thestudents instructors,responded on and as to (target language) by thelanguage and use the questionnaire actual as measured during three (see recordings Table 1). Thistableshowsthat instructors' the oftheir use positively correlated = perception Spanish (r their actualSpanish intheclassroom. use their .629;p = .009) with Additionally, actualEnglish use had a negative correlation = -.547; p = .028) to their of (r perception Spanishuse. The instructors' of students' of Spanish actualSpanish bythestudents use and use perception their showedno statistically correlation = .094; p = .729), meaning theteachers' that significant (r of perception theirstudents' Spanishuse in the classroomwas not validatedwithactual observational An analysis theteachers' data. of beliefs use regarding Spanish in theclassroom

2009 Hispania 92 September

Language Use in the Classroom

541

use that was correlation to actualSpanish found there no statistically significant compared their = .048;p = .859),meaning a there a negligible that was between their stated beliefs (r relationship in classroom. correlation behavior the nostatistically andactual observed (r Similarly, significant = .030;p = .913) was found use and between teachers' the beliefs aboutEnglish intheclassroom that whatteachers believeshouldoccurin the actualrecorded data,providing againevidence would appearto be at classroom does notalwaysmaterialize least in thesedata.This result the of mentioned studieswhichhighlighted importance to manyof thepreviously contrary and beliefs behavior. their data a correlation= .528;p = .035)between Thestudents' showed positive (r perception also showeda strong their teachers'Spanishuse and actual Spanishuse. The students of their of teachers' use correlation = -.781; p = .000) between Spanish (r perception their negative that In this a strong correlation use andtheir instructors' ofEnglish. instance, signifies negative showed no in their use. accurate predicating instructors' are English Thestudents they relatively use their of own Spanish andtheir correlation between perception their statistically significant thatonlythe students' It actual Spanishuse in the classroom. shouldbe noted,however, so were recorded, the students with interactions theirinstructors may have includedtheir in The did and of they spent groups in pairactivities. students havea perception thetimethat use their of correlation = -.707;p = .002) between Spanish in (r perception their negative strong thatthestudents able to accurately are actualEnglishuse, meaning and their theclassroom use their English intheclassroom. perceive use between students' beliefs aboutSpanish in the correlations No statistically significant further evidence a of andEnglish werefound, use and own Spanish classroom their providing The results also showeda betweenstatedbeliefsand actualbehavior. possibledisconnect the beliefs aboutteachers' correlation = .561; p = .024) between students Spanish (r significant in instructor the of use and use in theclassroom theamount actualSpanish bytheir particular between the a correlation= -.913; p = .000)was also found classroom.2 (r negative Finally, strong use The use and oftheteachers' ofSpanish thestudents' ofEnglish. more students' perception was from their instructor lessEnglish usedintheclassroom them. the by Spanish they perceived the use was whencomparing students' of Spanishin the this However, correlation notfound use. to that use classroom signifying less English didnotcorrelate moreSpanish
Table 1 Pearson Product Correlations of Teachers' and Students' Actual Spanish and English Use with Their Perceptions and Beliefs about Language Use Actual Teacher SpanishUse in the Classroom Teachers' Perceptionof Their Own SpanishUse Teachers' Perceptionof Their Students' SpanishUse Teachers'Beliefs about Teacher SpanishUse Teachers'Beliefs about Student SpanishUse r = .629 p = .009* Actual Teacher EnglishUse in the Classroom r = -.547 p = .028* Actual Student SpanishUse in the Classroom r = .237 p = .376 Actual Student EnglishUse in the Classroom r = -.318 p = .230

r = .565 p = .023*

r = -.118 p = .665

r = .094 p = .729

r = -.271 p = .310

r = .048 p = .859 r = .160 p = .554

r = .030 p = .913 r = -.285 p = .284

r = .034 p = .804 r = .182 p = .500

r = .151 p = .577 r = -.020 p = .940

542

Students' Perceptionof Their Teachers' SpanishUse Students' Perceptionof Their Own SpanishUse

2009 Hispania 92 September

r = .528 p = .035* r = -.781 p = .000* r = .068 p = .804 r = -.913 p = .000*

r = .553 p = .026*

r = -.632 p = .009*

r = .366 p = .164

r = -.707 p = .002*

Students' Beliefs about Student SpanishUse Students' Beliefs about Teacher SpanishUse

r = .175 p = .516 r = .561 p = .024*

r = -.243 p = .364 r = -.486 p = .056

r = -.076 p = .781 r = -.112 p = .680

r = -.169 p = .533 r = -.332 p = .209

* Correlation is significant the 0.05 level (2-tailed). at

Data Comparison. Questionnaire differences were found Many statistically significant between perceptions beliefs theSpanish102andSpanish instructors between the and of 202 and thestudents' teachers' and beliefs perceptions LI andTL use in theclassroom. and of Instructors' to Beliefs at according LanguageLevel.The instructorstheSpanish102 and Spanish202 levels also differed their beliefsaboutusingtheLI and TL. greatly regarding differences found 6 ofthe12 (50%) questions Table2 and were on Statistically significant (see Table 3). Usinga twosamplet-test measure to whether significant a difference overall existed between Spanish102andSpanish instructors, results the 202 the showed significance of a level p<.02. Thequestions askedabout instructors' that the beliefs about andTL use intheclassroom LI werequestions 14-21 (see Table 2). Thesequestions useda Likert-type from to five, scale one withone beingstrongly and fivebeingstrongly disagree made agree.All of thesequestions definitive statements the regarding exclusiveuse of Spanishin theclassroom. all of the On in questions the resulting a statistically 202 instructors significant difference, Spanish believed that moreexclusive of Spanish use was neededintheclassroom. on Additionally, all thequestionsexcept the believedthat moreexclusive of Spanish question #20, 202 instructors the use was better thestudents learn. for to The mostsalient differences regards teaching thoseof question14 and 15. The in to are 202 instructors significantly also differed questions Spanish on about their beliefs lanregarding for guageuse in theclassroom specific uses. The 202 instructors believedthat language more Spanishis neededto discusstests, to quizzes,and other assignments, discusscoursepolicies, and administrative attendance, other and students should onlySpanish use information, that the entire timethey in theclassroom are with boththeinstructor classmates, and bothduring and between activities.
TABLE 2 Spanish 102 and 202 Instructors' Beliefs about Language Use in the Classroom # 14 15 16 Questions Spanish 102 Spanish 202 P-value Average Average p * .05 5 4.54 3 0.01* 0.002* 0.24

I believe the moreSpanish thatstudents in theclassuse room; the better in theywill be at communicating Spanish. 4.63 I believe thatin orderto reallymaster/acquire Spanish, students mustuse Spanish exclusivelyin the classroom. 3.5 I believe thatthereare no situations whichEnglish in shouldbe used in the classroom(i.e., I believe thattotal immersion Spanish classes is best). in 2.38

Language Use in the Classroom

I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to learnabout and 2.63 2.92 grammar usage of the Spanishclass. 18 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to discuss tests, 2.5 3.46 quizzes, and otherassignments. 19 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to discuss course information. 1.88 3 and otheradministrative policies, attendance, of 2 0 I believe that, regardless how muchSpanishstudents should use Spanish at all times choose to use, the instructor 3.75 3.54 in the classroom. 2 1 I believe thatstudents should use only Spanish the entire and timetheyare in the classroomwithboththe instructor 3.75 4.46 and betweenactivities. classmatesbothduring 4 1 = strongly 2 = disagree, = neutral, = agree,and 5 = strongly 3 agree disagree, Key: 17

543
0.45 0.04* 0.02* 0.69 0.05*

own and theself-evaluation their of beliefs 22-25 askedabouttheinstructors' Questions oftheLI andTL intheclassroom Table 3). Theywereaskednotonlytoassesstheir (see usage of students a three-point with1 = on scale and but ownusageofSpanish English, also that their were wheredifferences 2 and 3 = too much.The onlyquestion too little, = theright amount, inthe "I believethat use I was question which #23 states, English statistically significant amount of marked closetotheright BoththeSpanish102and202 instructors classroom." using and 1 a little much the too with intheclassroom theSpanish 02 instructors reporting using English Both groupsof usingtoo little Englishin theclassroom. reporting Spanish202 instructors their belief about their use the almost instructors scored regarding exactly sameonthequestions use and their students' of Spanish.The averagescoresof the of Spanishin the classroom withthe of used theright amount Spanish, that believedthatthey instructors indicated they a Spanish102 averagescorebeing2.06 andtheSpanish202 scorebeing2.00, with scoreof2 believed both of amount TL usage.Not surprisingly, groups instructors of the indicating right that students used too little their Spanishin theclassroom.
TABLE 3 Spanish 102 and 202 Instructors' Beliefs about Language Use in the Classroom # 22 23 24 Questions Spanish 102 Spanish 202 P-value Average p .05 Average 2.06 2.31 1.31 2.75 2 1.77 1.31 2.46 0.79 0.04* 0.98 0.22

I believe thatI use Spanish in the classroom. I believe thatI use English in the classroom. I believe thatmy students use Spanish in the classroom. 25 I believe thatmy students use English in the classroom. 2 and 3 = too much amount, Key: 1 = too little, = the right

' the to aboutTL andLI Use According LanguageLevel.Whenmeasuring Students Beliefs aboutTL use in the beliefs of theSpanish102 and Spanish202 students' overallsignificance the were the classroom, differences notstatistically significant = .06). However, students (p should 202 felt Spanish The on 5 ofthe12questions. Spanish students that differed significantly in differed on The202 students than 102students every the be usedmore significantly question. for which use bythestudents, their beliefs questions on purposes specific concerning Spanish of use should used,andinstructor oftheTL regardless students' be usage.The Spanish Spanish with language greater the and additional 202 students, their with appear proficiency, experience more see in more interested beingexposedtotheTL whilethelowerlevelstudents theneedfor in use ofEnglish theclassroom.

544

TABLE 4 Spanish 102 Students' and Spanish 202 Students' Beliefs on Language Use in the Classroom # 14 Questions Spanish 102 Spanish 202 P-value Students' p <; .05 Students' Average Average 0.02* 0.10 0.56 0.25 0.005* 0.002* 0.02* 0.03*

2009 Hispania 92 September

use in the I believe the more Spanish thatstudents 4.51 4.30 in the classroom, better theywill be at communicating Spanish. 15 I believe thatin orderto reallymaster/acquire Spanish, 3.60 3.35 mustuse Spanish exclusivelyin the classroom. students in 16 I believe thatthereare no situations whichEnglish 2.48 2.42 shouldbe used in the classroom(i.e., I believe thattotal in immersion Spanish classes is best). 17 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to learnabout 2.54 2.41 and grammar usage of the Spanishclass. 18 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to discuss tests, 2.69 2.36 quizzes, and otherassignments. 19 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to discuss course 2.61 information. 2.22 and otheradministrative policies, attendance, of 20 I believe that, regardless how muchSpanishstudents 3.14 2.79 should use Spanish at all choose to use, the instructor timesin the classroom. should use only Spanish the entire 2 1 I believe thatstudents 3.26 and 2.99 timetheyare in the classroomwithboththe instructor and betweenactivities. classmatesbothduring 4 2 3 agree disagree, = disagree, = neutral, = agree,and 5 = strongly Key: 1 = strongly

in much similar rein the were 22-25 were Theresults questions of very revealing that results amount theLI andTL, butalso theamount of wereusingtheright to or gards whether notthey close to instructors usingvery were that found their instructors. students The ofusagebytheir had scoreof2. 10 andthe202 students The 102students an average amount Spanish. of theright were instructors that also found their 2 amount. score 2.04with = the of hadanaverage They right scoreof 1.91 andthe The amount English. Spanish102hadan average of closetotheright using 2 amount had 202 students an averagescoreof 1.89 with = right (see Table 5). These Spanish that found themajority and the results (71%) of by support work Duff Polio (1990 & 1994)that in even instructor though use of the are students pleasedwith amount target language of their used too from that 10%-100% of thetime.Bothclassesbelievedthat their they study ranged withthe 102 students' muchEnglishin theclassroom averageof 2.44 and the202 students' that used too little found they of 2.41 with3 = too much.Bothgroups Spanishin the average 1 of of with classroom the102 average 1.54and202 average 1.56with = toolittle Table4 and (see Table5).
TABLE 5 Spanish 102 Students' and Spanish 202 Students' Beliefs on Language Use in the Classroom # Questions Spanish 102 Spanish 202 P-value Students' p .05 Students' Average Average 2.10 1.91 1.54 2.44 2.04 1.89 1.56 2.41 0.40 0.87 0.73 0.64

I believe thatmy instructoruses Spanish in the classroom. 23 I believe thatmy instructoruses English in the classroom. 24 I believe thatI use Spanish in the classroom. 25 I believe thatI use English in the classroom. and 3 = too much 2 amount, Key: 1 = too little, = the right 22

' and ' aboutLI and TL Use in theClassroom. When Beliefs SpanishInstructors Students and whether overall an difference existed between Spanish the instructors' students' measuring a difference found = .02). Addiwas aboutlanguage beliefs learning, statistically significant (p differences individual on outof12) regarding beliefs there weresignificant (3 questions tionally, The instructors a stronger had use werefound between thesetwogroups. aboutlanguage that on that should usedintheclassroom all ofthequestions be belief more one,even except Spanish Thequestions where significant a were notall ofthedifferences statistically significant. though in more with their instrucwas dealt with students difference found Spanish theclassroom using and students all times, the at and the use torand classmates, exclusive of Spanishby teacher in theclassroom. wereusing Two of theothers that students the amount English of questions statistical of of use the that addressed notion theamount language intheclassroom approached significance.
TABLE 6 Spanish Instructors' and Students' Beliefs on Language Use in the Classroom # Questions Spanish Instructors' Average Spanish Students' Average P-value p .05

Language Use in the Classroom

545

use in the I believe the more Spanish thatstudents 4.42 4.81 classroom;the better theywill be at communicating in Spanish. 15 I believe thatin orderto reallymaster/acquire Spanish, 3.94 3.54 mustuse Spanish exclusivelyin the classroom. students in 16 I believe thatthereare no situations whichEnglish 2.69 2.47 shouldbe used in the classroom(i.e., I believe thattotal in immersion Spanish classes is best). 17 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to learnabout 2.75 2.50 and grammar usage of the Spanishclass. 18 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to discuss tests, 2.56 2.94 quizzes, and otherassignments. 19 I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to discuss 2.44 2.47 and otheradministrative course policies, attendance, information. of 2 0 I believe that, regardless how muchSpanishstudents 3.69 3.04 should use Spanish at all choose to use, the instructor timesin the classroom. should use only Spanish the entire 2 1 I believe thatstudents 3.16 and 4.06 timetheyare in the classroomwithboththe instructor and betweenactivities. classmatesbothduring 4 2 3 agree Key: 1 = strongly disagree, = disagree, = neutral, = agree,and 5 = strongly 14

0.00* 0.17 0.53 0.34 0.26 0.93 0.06 0.00*

in wereusingtoolittle felt the On question both 24, Spanish theclassgroups that students Boththestudents that wereusingless than their students. believed they but room theinstructors that the of the andinstructors almost samescoreregarding amount Spanish theinstructors gave evidence that students generally are Thisresult further wereusingin theclassroom. provides variation was a deal ofindividual with instructors' ofTL use eventhough great the level pleased felt too was and the found Table 7). In addition, students theinstructors that much English (see the eventhough results the showedthat students used in theclassroom thestudents by being about 23% ofthetime. employed English

546

TABLE 7 and Students'Beliefson Language Use in the Classroom Spanish Instructors' # Questions Spanish Spanish Instructors' Students' Average Average 2 2.06 1.19 2.69 2.08 1.86 1.57 2.41 P-value p s .05 0.84 0.06 0.08 0.01*

2009 Hispania 92 September

22 I believethat instructor use(s) (I) Spanish my in theclassroom. 23 I believethat instructor use(s) (I) my English in theclassroom. I 24 I believethat (mystudents) use Spanishin the classroom. I in 25 I believe that (mystudents) use English the classroom. 2 and amount, 3 = toomuch Key: 1 = toolittle, = theright

Conclusions correlations were foundbetweenthe students' and instructors' Statistically significant of use and perception Spanishand English by theinstructor theactualobserved Spanishand use. Thisis a salient studies language intheclassinto use English finding, giventhat previous had this the room mainly but to analyzed datathrough use ofa questionnaire, hadfailed correlate with of these results actualdata.The results thisstudy for of provide support thevalidity using to TL of and the of self-reports students teachers determine quantity teacher andLI use in the and withany classroom. both wereunableto predict Surprisingly, theteachers thestudents TL in thestudents' use ofthelanguage theclassroom eventhough students the could accuracy howmuch used.Regarding lackofability explain student the to the predict English they Spanish to that couldbe due inpart thefact thelanguage inpairsandsmall-groups not use was use,this measured. Whilethequestionnaire asked students abouttheir own use and their specifically classmates' ofSpanish use whenspeaking with their the the did instructor, instructor go around classwhilethestudents wereinpairsandsmall-groups answer to so thismaybe the questions, cause ofthediscrepancy. Further is are and study neededas towhyinstructors students able to TL assess instructor use but not students' use. The questionremains accurately language if unanswered to whatadditional as factors anyare students teachers and intoaccount taking TL oftheamount student use. of whenconsidering perceptions in Thestudents both at levelswerekeenly awareoftheir instructors' behavior the linguistic in ownlanguage andthis was reflected their use. Whilea correlation notimply does classroom, that sucha strong correlation the exists between perception the the of causation, fact negative and instructors' use intheclassroom thestudents' use merits morestudy to as Spanish English If thecause of thiscorrelation. thegoal of a program to lessentheuse of Englishin the is in the found thisstudy would support as students that classroom, correlation perceivemore use bytheinstructor areless likely use English. to Spanish they on Giventhat classlevelhassuchan impact thebeliefs both students teachers the of the and an interesting as to theorigin thisdistinction. dataanalysis of A was runto presents question whether individual the and education theinstructors correlate of contributed to experiences different amounts LI andTL use intheclassroom theonlycontributing found of and was factor theclass levelbeingtaught. lowerlevelstudents instructors use andperceive The and that both in more theL 1 is needed theclassroom of when with classroom administration especially dealing The levelstudents instructors and and grammar. higher moretheneedof appearto appreciate in moreextensive to Spanish theclassroom. instructorsthisstudy The in exposure approached eachlevelwith different a in the and philosophy regarding roleofEnglish Spanish theclassroom. Whencomparing teachers' students' the and there differences perceptions, weresignificant found class levelsregarding between student teacher and as well as beliefs about perceptions use intheclassroom. ofdifferences greater actual were than Nevertheless, language perceptions

differences whenanalyzed observed statistically. In conclusion, study helpedto highlight differences existbetween this has the that native instructors Spanishand nativeSpanish-speaking of instructors in English-speaking especially tothebelief to theimportance exclusive oftheTL with as of use In students. addition, regards statedstrong beliefs regarding while teachersand students English and Spanish in the with didnotcorrelate actuallanguage behavior a disconnect between classroom, they signifying and beliefs linguistic and needtobe further thetwo.Student teacher behaviors studied be able to withlanguageacquisition to modify beliefsthatare inconsistent theories and to existing reinforce thosebehaviors thattendto lead towardgreater and eventuallanguage learning acquisition. NOTES
was included.The student containedthe same questions questionnaire Only the teachers'questionnaire to their withonly slightchangesbeingmade to the wording reflect pointof view. 2It is important note thatbecause the questionnaire administered the end of the semester, is to was at it whether students' the beliefsabout languageuse in the classroom were shapedby their to impossible determine instructor timeor whether instructors' over the was judged based on pre-existing languageuse in the classroom beliefsaboutlanguageusage.

Language Use in the Classroom

547

WORKS CITED
San Argyis,Chris, and Donald Schn. (1974). Theoryin Practice: Increasing ProfessionalEffectiveness. Francisco: Jossey-Bass. and Lixian Jin.(1999). "Cultural Mirrors: Materialsand Methodsin the EFL classroom." Ed. Cortazzi,Martin, Eli Hinkel.Culturein Second Language Teachingand Learning.Cambridge: UP. Cambridge to Daniels, Denise, and Kathyrn (2003). "'Learner-Centered' Theoryinto Practice Perry. According Children." 42: 102-08. Evaluation Davis, Adrian.(2003). "Teachers' and Students'Beliefs Regarding Aspectsof Language Learning." and Research in Higher Education 17.2: 207-16. and CharlenePolio. (1990). "How Much ForeignLanguage is There in the ForeignLanguage Duff,Patricia, Classroom?"The Modern Language Journal74: 154-66. Eisner,Elliot. (1985). The Art of EducationalEvaluation.Lewes, UK: Falmer. Forumfor Promoting 3-19 Education,(Special issue, Comprehensive Fielding,Michael. (2001). Editorial, "Studentvoice") 43: 49-50. Helen Moor, Kay Kinder,and Mary Ashworth. Harland, John, (2001). The Key Stage 3 Phase of the Northern Ireland Curriculum CohortStudy.Slough: NFER. Horwitz,Elaine. (1988). "The Beliefs about Language Learningof BeginningUniversity ForeignLanguage Modern Language Journal72.3: 283-94. Students." Students'Beliefs about Their Preferred Role as Learners."Educational Kinchin,Ian. (2004a). "Investigating Research 46.3: 301-12. - . (2004b). "Achievinga Shared Understanding the Learners'Role through of Teacher StudentDialogue." Education Today 54: 28-30. Kozminsky,Ely, and Lea Kozminsky. (2003). "ImprovingMotivation throughDialogue." Educational Leadership 61.1: 50-54. and Instructor Beliefsand Attitudes aboutTargetLanguageUse, FirstLanguage Levine,Glenn.(2003). "Student Use, and Anxiety: Reportof a Questionnaire Study."The ModernLanguage Journal87: 343-64. Lightbown, Patsy,and Nina Spada. (1993). How Languages are Learned. Oxford:OxfordUP. MacBeath, John.(1999). Schools Must Speak for Themselves:The Case for School Evaluation. London: Routledge. Review Pajares,Frank.(1992). "Teachers' Beliefs and EducationalResearch:Cleaningup a Messy Construct." of EducationalResearch 62: 307-32. Pierre,Jean, and Deborah Kalkman. (2003). "ApplyingLearner-Centered Principlesin Teacher Education." Theoryinto Practice 42.2: 127-32. and Jean,and JuliaFlutter. Rudduck, (2000). "Pupil Participation Pupil Perspective: 'Carvinga New Orderof Experience.'"CambridgeJournalof Education 30: 75-89. Turnbull, Miles, and Katie Arnett. (2002). "Teachers' Use of the Target Language and First Languages in Classrooms."AnnualReviewof AppliedLinguistics 204-18. 22: Second- and Foreign-Language Voice in School Leadership:Promoting Dialogue about Wiel, and Ewoud de Kat. (2002). "Student Veugelers, Students'Views on Teaching."Journalof School Leadership12: 97-108. Williams,Marion,and RobertBurden.(1997). "Psychologyfor Language Teachers: A Social Constructivist New York: Cambridge UP. Approach."

548

2009 Hispania 92 September

Teachers' APPENDIX A Language Questionnaire

Please print class time,and section#: (e.g., Span 102 9:00-9:50am Section21) yourcoursenumber, describesyour current Instructions:Mark the answerthat most accurately Spanish language classroomand and languageuse in the classroom.Unless otherwise yourown feelings regarding languageteaching specified, limit your responses to your in class behavior. 1. 2. 3. 4. I use Spanish to communicate with my studentsabout 0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ with me about My studentsuse Spanish to communicate of the time. ] 81-100% [ ] of the time.

0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] with each other about of the time. My studentsuse Spanish to communicate 0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] I use Spanish to give directions activitiesexclusively(i.e., no translation) Spanish about in for of the time. 0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] I use Spanish to communicate withinactivitiesabout the culture, history,and customs of the of the time we spend on these activities. Spanish-speakingworld about 0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] I use Spanish to communicate with students about grammar and usage about or on we spendon discussing working these. of the time

5.

6.

7.

0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] I use Spanish to communicate with students about tests, quizzes and other assignmentsabout these. of the timewe spenddiscussing 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] 0-20% [ ] I use Spanish to communicate with students about administrative information (course policies, of the timewe spend discussing these. deadlines,etc.) about announcements, 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] 0-20% [ ] I use Spanish to communicate with students outside of class time (e.g., officehours,in the hall, beforeor afterclass, etc.) about of the time.

8.

9.

0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] 10. While students working are withpartnersor groups in my Spanishclass, theyswitch English as to witha particular soon as theyare through about of the time. activity 0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] 1 1. My students of the time. understandwhat I am sayingin Spanishabout 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ] 0-20% [ ] 12. When my students not understandwhat I am sayingin Spanish, theyrequestthatI repeator do of the time. about clarify 0-20% [ ] 21-40% [ ] 41-60% [ ] 61-80% [ ] 81-100% [ ]

describes Instructions: Mark the answerthatmostaccurately yourbeliefs about Spanishand Englishusage in the languageclassroom. 4 12 3 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree the 13. I believethemoreSpanishthatstudents in theclassroom, better use theywill be at communicating in Spanish. 12 3 4 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree in 14. I believethatin orderto reallymaster/acquire mustuse Spanish exclusively the Spanish, students classroom. 12 3 4 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree in 15. I believethatthere no situations whichEnglish shouldbe used in the classroom are (i.e., I believe thattotal immersion Spanish classes is best). in 12 4 3 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree

Language Use in the Classroom

549

16. I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to learnaboutgrammar usage in the Spanishclass. and 12 4 3 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree 17. I believe thatonly Spanish shouldbe used to discusstests,quizzes, and otherassignments. 12 4 3 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree 18. I believe that only Spanish should be used to discuss course policies, attendance, and other information. administrative 12 4 3 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree 19. I believe that,regardless how much Spanish students of choose to use, the instructor should use Spanish at all times in the classroom. 12 4 3 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree 20. I believe thatstudents shoulduse only Spanish the entire timetheyare in the classroomwithboth the instructor fellowstudents and bothduring and betweenactivities. 12 4 3 5 Strongly disgree Strongly agree 21. I believe thatI use too little [ ] 22. I believe thatI use too little [ ] 23. I believe thatmy studentsuse too little [ ] 24. I believe thatmy studentsuse too little [ ] Spanish in the classroom. theright amount [ ] of too much [ ] English in the classroom. theright amount [ ] of too much [ ] Spanish in the classroom. amount [ ] too much [ ] theright of English in the classroom. theright amount [ ] of too much [ ]

the 25. I have made my expectations regarding use of Spanish in the classroomexplicitby discussing themwith students. at thebeginning theterm [ ] regularly of the never [ ] throughout term [ ] or 26. I have spent class time workingthrough discussingcommunicativestrategiesthat will help in studentscommunicate Spanish. of the never [ ] at thebeginning theterm [ ] regularly throughout term [ ] themwith 27. Pick the top 3 reasonswhyyou use Spanish in the classroomand rankthemby ranking and mostimportant. (1) beingthe mostimportant, the second mostimportant (3) being the third (2) Previous teachingexperience Spanish department policies Personalbeliefs about teaching/learning Teacher training Pedagogical theories Teaching Method or Approach Limited English proficiency Other-Explain in 2 8 . Markall of the situations whichyou feel some English shouldbe used To practiceEnglish Classroom administration Translation unknownvocabulary of Grammarinstruction Lack of comprehension material of Classroom management use Respondto students' of English To establishempathy/solidarity class with Other-Explain