IELTS Research Reports

Wayne Sawyer and Michael SinghA useful overview of the research on the correlation between English proficiency and subsequentacademic performance is contained in Davies (2008) and a further useful discussion in Hyatt andBrooks (2009).2.5 International students, English language proficiency and teacher educationLanguage use in the classroom has, of course, been the subject of detailed concern in education,especially since the early 1970s, with the growth of the language-across-the-curriculum movement.This concern with language and the huge number of studies devoted to it has tended to focus onlanguage as an instrument of pupil learning. Teacher language use in this tradition tends to focuson language-as- pedagogical-strategy. This literature is not concerned with the teacher’s languagebackground though it is highly suggestive in terms of teacher language use. A selection of the classicworks in this huge corpus includes Britton, 1970; Wilkinson, 1971, 1975; Creber, 1972; Cazden etal, 1972; Cashdan et al, 1972; Rosen and Rosen, 1973; Bullock, 1975; Marland, 1977. Some of thishas focused specifically on the discourse structures of classrooms (Barnes et al, 1971; Barnes, 1976;Coulthard, 1977, pp 93ff; Sinclair and Brazil, 1982; Stubbs, 1976, 1983). Where the teacher’s ownproficiency with spoken language, in particular, has been an object of interest in teacher educationit has tended to be dealt with often as a micro-skills issue, highlighting skills such as explaining,discussing, questioning etc. (e.g. Turney et al,1983a, 1983b). If one consults generalist texts for thebeginning teacher, the issue of the teacher’s use of spoken language is touched on when such texts dealwith specific language tasks, such as:■■questioning (Barry and King, 1988, pp 77ff, 363ff; McBurney-Fry, 2002, pp 87ff; Arends,2004, pp 429ff; Zwozdiak-Myers and Capel, 2005, pp110ff)■■explaining (Barry and King, 1998, pp 63ff; McBurney-Fry, 2002, pp 84ff; Arends, 2004,pp 284ff; Zwozdiak-Myers and Capel, 2005, pp 109-10)■■■■discussing (Barry and King, 1988, pp 372ff; McBurney-Fry, 2002, pp 92-93;Arends,2004, pp 430ff; Zwozdiak-Myers and Capel, 2005, pp 113-14)responding to pupils (Barry and King, 1988, p 83ff; McBurney-Fry, 2002, pp 90ff;Arends, 2004, pp 287ff, 312ff, 441ff; Zwozdiak-Myers and Capel, 2005, pp 114; Capeland Gervis, 2005, p 132-33).In terms of specific language qualities, such texts tend to deal only with the very global notion of‘clarity of communication’ (Barry and King, 1988, pp 61ff, 354ff; Arends, 2004, pp 283-84). However,based largely on research in the contexts of non-native-speaker teachers/teaching assistants and herown observations, Elder (1993a, p 237) has developed a more extensive list of ‘desirable features ofteacher communication’, which she has applied to non-native-speaker teachers, viz:■■■■■■■■■■■■■■intelligibilityfluencyaccuracycomprehensionuse of subject-specific languageuse of the language of classroom interactionoverall communication effectiveness86 www.ielts.org