Search

Listening comprehension serves as a basic means for communication and participation in society. Unfortunately, especially low-performing students have difficulties understanding informational content presented in a listening format, even more so than with the comprehension of printed texts. Based on empirical findings that text features, such as global text cohesion, have proven to be effective for promoting reading comprehension, and cognitive processes of reading and listening to academic texts share commonalities, the question arises as to how much global cohesion can support students' listening comprehension. 140 ninth-grade students in German secondary schools listened to one of two informational listening texts which differed in their degree of global text cohesion (low vs. high in cohesion). Listening comprehension was assessed with a written test after listening. Regression analyses show that global text cohesion promotes listening comprehension and that the effect of cohesion remains significant and stable when controlling for topic-related prior knowledge and language-related background variables. Low-performing students profited more from the highly cohesive text than high-performing students. Thus, cohesion contributes to the comprehensibility of informational listening texts which can have implications for the construction of listening texts and listening comprehension instruction at school. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to reduce language-related disparities in educational attainment, teaching standards in many (Western) countries nowadays request teachers of all subjects and grades to focus on their students' academic language development: Especially second language learners and socioeconomically disadvantaged students need continuous and systematic language support (linguistically responsive teaching) in order not to be left behind. To be able to act accordingly, (prospective) teachers need to acquire pedagogical language knowledge and develop positive beliefs about linguistically responsive teaching practices. Our cross-sectional survey among German pre-service teachers (n = 115) shows that – despite positive beliefs towards linguistically responsive teaching – hardly any of the participants had acquired a solid knowledge base in the area of educational linguistics: The majority could not identify a substantial amount of academic language features (known to be challenging especially for second language learners) in a content-specific explanatory text. This ability, however, is the basis for planning and carrying out linguistically responsive lessons. Although latent profile analyses show differences among the participants, many of them did not have opportunities to learn in the area of linguistic diversity during their studies. The results give rise to the question whether and how pedagogical language knowledge could become compulsory in teacher training. Um sprachbedingte Unterschiede im Bildungserfolg von Lernenden zu verringern, ist in den Bildungsstandards und Curricula vieler (westlicher) Länder mittlerweile festgeschrieben, dass Lehrkräfte aller Fächer und Klassenstufen die (bildungs-)sprachliche Entwicklung ihrer Schüler:innen im Unterricht unterstützen sollen: Insbesondere Deutsch als Zweitsprache Lernende und sozioökonomisch benachteiligte Schüler:innen benötigen eine durchgängige und systematische Unterstützung in Form von sprachförderlichem Fachunterricht, um ihre schulischen Erfolgschancen zu verbessern. Um dieser Aufgabe gerecht werden zu können, müssen (angehende) Lehrkräfte pädagogisches Sprachwissen erwerben und positive Überzeugungen zu einer sprachbewussten Unterrichtgestaltung entwickeln. Unsere querschnittlich angelegte Befragung unter Lehramtsstudierenden in Deutschland (n = 115) zeigt, dass trotz positiv beschaffener Überzeugungen zu sprachsensiblem Fachunterricht nur die wenigsten der Teilnehmenden über ein solides linguistisches Basiswissen verfügten: Die Mehrheit von ihnen war nicht in der Lage, sprachliche Merkmale, die sich insbesondere für Zweitsprachenlernende als verstehenserschwerend erwiesen haben, in einem fachspezifischen Erklärtext zu identifizieren. Diese Fähigkeit ist jedoch eine wichtige Voraussetzung dafür, Unterricht sprachsensibel zu gestalten. Latente Profilanalysen fördern zwar individuelle Unterschiede zwischen den Teilnehmenden zu Tage, es lässt sich aber festhalten, dass viele von ihnen während des Studiums kaum Lerngelegenheiten zum Umgang mit sprachlicher Diversität im Unterricht wahrgenommen haben. Die Ergebnisse werfen die Frage auf, ob und wie pädagogisches Sprachwissen ein verpflichtender Bestandteil der Lehrkräfteausbildung werden kann. In order to reduce language-related disparities in educational attainment, teaching standards in many Western countries nowadays request teachers of all subjects and grades to focus on their students' language development: Especially second language learners and students growing up in socioeconomically disadvantaged families need continuous and systematic language support (linguistically responsive teaching) in order not to be left behind. To fulfil this challenging task, teachers do not only need to be willing to engage in such teaching practices, but have to develop awareness about the function and the particularities of academic language. In our online survey, 115 German pre-service teachers were asked to identify linguistic features that may potentially hinder high school students' understanding of the content in a mathematical explanation. We also investigated the language-related learning opportunities the participants had during their university studies, and their attitudes towards linguistically responsive teaching. The participating pre-service teachers showed great awareness of linguistically responsive teaching being generally important and necessary. At the same time, their ability to identify academic language features was very limited. As knowledge about academic language is an important basis for planning and providing linguistically responsive lessons, it is questionable whether the future educators will be able to cater for the needs of linguistically diverse students. The rather worrisome result does not come as a surprise when looking at the pre-service teachers' language-related learning opportunities: Many of the participants had not or only briefly encountered topics such as second language learning and linguistic diversity during the course of their university studies. The results give rise to the question whether and how pedagogical language knowledge can become a compulsory part of teacher education programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]