1.1 Corpus linguistics and educational research
The potential of corpus linguistics (CL) as an approach to research in education has been recognised for some time now, as will also be illustrated throughout this volume (Biber, 2006a, 2006b; Biber, Conrad & Cortes, 2004; Biber, Conrad, Reppen, Byrd & Helt, 2002; Cobb, Stephan, McClain & Gravemeijer, 2011; Conrad & Biber, 2004; Csomay, 2013; Farr, 2011a; Farr, Farrell & Riordan, 2019; Farr & OâKeeffe, 2019; OâKeeffe & Farr, 2003; OâKeeffe, McCarthy & Carter, 2007; Schleppegrell, 2007, 2010). Indeed, CL offers methodologies to study a wide variety of characteristics of language use. Using corpus linguistic tools enables practitioners and researchers alike to explore language in specific educational contexts, allowing for a more detailed description of language which, in turn, has led to a number of pedagogical advances. First, insights have been gained into the difference between spoken and written language (Biber, Johansson, Leech, Conrad & Finegan, 1999; Carter & McCarthy, 2006). Within language education, CL investigations have resulted in revised descriptions of pedagogic grammar. Using tools such as word frequency has influenced the process of vocabulary selection for teaching and presentation in coursebooks (Grabe, 2010; Nation, 2004). CL has also afforded insights into patterns occurring in language, for example through collocations. Finally, within language education, CL also yields insights into language varieties and their use within foreign language teaching (Farrell, 2019). Boulton (2017) provides an overview of research into the use of corpora in second and foreign language teaching.
As previously discussed, CL has helped to elucidate the difference between spoken and written language. However, CL tools also allowed us to stream words into those that we can denote as âeverydayâ, and those belonging to spoken contexts from specialised domains for which register-specific corpora are built (McCarten, 2007). One such context, for example, is a mainstream primary or secondary classroom; however, as Chambers (2019) points out, these are extremely rare.
Through analysis of lexical and grammatical patterns of both spoken and written texts, we are able to elicit knowledge of the reasoning processes and meaning-making conventions within a given discipline such as mathematics. Increased awareness of subject-specific discursive norms heightens teacher understanding of how their own linguistic practices may impact on the subject matter learning. Indeed, the hybridity of mathematical language and the multisemiotic nature of mathematical knowledge (language, mathematical symbolism and visual representations) rest on teacher ability to use these meaning-making tools in a way that best enables subject matter learning. Thus, the merits of compiling specialised corpora, such as is described in this volume, has been highlighted as a starting point to identify not only important discursive norms, such as what it means to âspeak mathematicallyâ, but also localised practices. Therefore, corpus linguistic studies of language in mainstream classrooms, such as mathematics, extend the pedagogical knowledge of teachers and foster conditions where teachers improve their own teaching strategies. Moreover, corpus analysis, often in conjunction with other tools, educes insights into the interactional structure of a classroom or lecture setting (Biber, 2006b; Walsh, Morton & OâKeeffe, 2011; Walsh & OâKeeffe, 2007b) and advances educator understanding of how discursive practice can open or close spaces for learning.
1.2 Context and background to the study
Historically associated with consistent patterns of emigration, the increased demand for labour during the Celtic Tiger years (early 1990s to mid-2000s) changed Ireland into an attractive destination for returning Irish emigrants and economic migrants alike (Bryan, 2009). Consequently, the Celtic Tiger era is not only linked with the transition from an outward to inward migration country but also from a homogenous to a multicultural1 one (Bryan, 2009). The former perception is deeply embedded despite the long-standing presence of minority groups in Ireland, such as Travellers, Jews and Asians (Bryan, 2009; Parker-Jenkins & Masterson, 2013).
Another key event which had a considerable impact on Irish society was the 2004 enlargement of the European Union, when the accession of ten new countries marked the start of an intensified migratory movement from the new member states to the existing EU15. With its competitive economy, Ireland quickly became an appealing destination and immigration numbers grew extensively, although not consistently. At its peak in 2006/07, the number of new arrivals in Ireland increased from 3% in 1999 to 6% in 2002 and 10% in 2006 (CSO). According to the 2016 census results, while the immigrant population in Ireland now represents 200 different nationalities, 73.6% of all migrants originate from 12 nations; namely, the UK, Brazil, Poland, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, China, India, Romania, the USA and Croatia (in order of total inward migration to Ireland) (CSO 2017). As such, it is clear that the bulk of Celtic Tiger immigrant population hail from non-English speaking backgrounds and indeed, CSO statistics confirm that approximately 13%2 of the Irish population as a whole speak a language other than English or Irish within the home (CSO 2012). Moreover, in the face of the current international refugee crisis, many EU member states have opened their borders to large numbers of international asylum seekers, and while the reports in the Irish context have been varied (RTĂ, 2015), the linguistic landscape of Ireland is set to become even richer.
Finally, increasing social diversity is also reflected in the sphere of religious beliefs. Despite a decrease of approximately 6%, the results of the 2016 census confirm that Catholicism remains the preeminent religious denomination in Ireland (78.3%) (CSO 2017). At the same time, however, the 2016 census also reports growing numbers of Muslims (+29%), Buddhists (+12%) and Jews (+29%), compared to the results from 2011. Such religious diversity has inevitably had a significant effect on primary and secondary education in Ireland, since Irish schools continue to be almost exclusively owned, affiliated and managed by religious bodies, usually the Catholic Church, albeit funded by the State (Rougier & Honohan, 2015:72). Department of Education and Skills (DES) statistics for the school year 2016/2017 report that almost 90% of primary schools currently fall under the auspices of the Catholic Church (Tickner, 2017:2). Although secondary schools are somewhat more diverse than primary schools, the bulk of post-primary schools similarly fall under the patronage of the Church. Since Irish schools have been traditionally characterised as âCatholic, white and Gaelicâ (Parker-Jenkins & Masterson, 2013:477â478) then, they reportedly find it challenging to recognise and acknowledge other religious affiliations, cultures and races (Parker-Jenkins & Masterson, 2013:477â478). Indeed, in response to the growing diversity of the pupil population, particularly at primary school level, the Forum on the Patronage and Pluralism in the Primary Sector was established in 2011, with the stated aim of providing recommendations on the implementation of more inclusive educational programmes to cater for a growing number of other denominational and/or non-denomination learners in Irish schools.3 As a result of these societal changes, there has also been growing support for non-denominational schools, such as Educate Together4 which currently runs 82 primary and nine post-post primary schools, with many further start-up groups campaigning across the country. Finally, the Government has announced plans to remove the so-called âbaptism barrierâ for entry to Catholic primary schools, whereby an enrolment preference may not be applied to baptised children (OâBrien, 2018).
The Irish education system has undergone significant transformations in the last two decades, with changes influencing the curriculum and its implementation as well as the nature of teaching as a profession. Certain elements of these adjustments and innovations will be briefly discussed in order to further contextualise this research. Considerable changes in the national demographic structure, especially in the period between 2002 and 2007, have had a significant impact on Irish education. On one hand, the increasing numbers of immigrant children attending both primary and post-primary schools created an urgent need to adjust established daily classroom practices to better respond to the incoming childrenâs learning needs: many such strategies stemmed from the ground up (Lyons, 2010; Wallen, 2011). On the other hand, policy statements, guidelines and reports were produced by both the government and its relevant branches, frequently in cooperation with teacher education institutions, in order to meet the needs of both teachers and learners already entrenched within the education system, as well as educate students in the initial teacher education programmes.
One of the key publications focusing on multiculturalism at primary and second-level education was The Intercultural Education Guidelines for Schools published by the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) (2005, 2006). The main objective of this document was to present information on ethnic and cultural diversity, racism, and intercultural education, and to provide practical examples on the use of intercultural approaches across a wide range of curricular areas. This aligns with Gundaraâs contention that intercultural education should be embedded in the mainstream curriculum in order to pre-empt the development of racist reactions as far as possible (2000:65). In addition, the guidelines also detailed how the language development of English as an Additional Language (EAL)5 learners may be properly supported in mainstream classrooms, since mainstream teachers are no longer merely subject specialists, but also effectively language educators (NCCA, 2006:108). Since these matters are salient to this research, the following two sections focus on issues pertaining to both English as an Additional Language learners and language support provision and teacher development.
The Wittgensteinian proposition of language as the âvehicle of thoughtâ (1953:107 Part One §229) has particular resonance in the context of multicultural and multilingual classrooms. On foot of inward migration on a historically unprecedented scale, the Irish education system was obliged to respond to the new circumstances and the unforeseen challenges of increased international diversity among EAL learners (Byrne, McGinnity, Smyth & Darmody, 2010). As there are no built-in curricular differentiations between Irish national and newcomer pupils (Lyons & Little, 2009:5), and, as previously mentioned, the majority of non-Irish learners are not native speakers of English, the post of language support teacher (LST) was instantiated in 20006 as a means of assisting EAL learners to access the mainstream curriculum. The predominant mode of such provision for language support has consisted of the removal of EAL pupils from certain mainstream classes, such as Irish or Religion (DES, 2012a; Lyons, 2010; Lyons & Little, 2009) despite international trends towards an integrated approach wherein the classroom teacher and LST work in partnership (Costley & Leung, 2014; Farrell & Baumgart, 2019; Leung, 2007). Language support is limited to a period of two years for each EAL pupil unless a strong case for extension is made by a school (DES, 2003). In terms of resource allocation, the number of LSTs is correlated to the number of EAL learners per school; with the maximum of six LSTs per school in 2007 (DES, 2007) and total number of 2000 posts in 2008 (Office of the Minister for Integration 2008). Unfortunately, as a result of the economic crash, significant budgetary cuts introduced across all government sectors in 2009 meant the level of language support plummeted to a maximum of two LST teachers per school (DES, 2009). In the face of the financial crisis, Circular 15/09 (DES, 2009) explicitly defined the roles of mainstream and language support teachers in the language learning process of EAL students as follows:
EAL support teachers are appointed to assist schools in providing additional EAL support teaching for pupils. The EAL pupil remains [emphasis added] the responsibility of the mainstream class teacher at primary level and the subject specialist at post primary level who will work closely with EAL support teachers.
(DES, 2009: Section 3)
Two observations arise with regard to the above quote. First, this study argues that every subject classroom is representative of a discipline-specific discourse community, as well as a community of practice in which the teacher provides the linguistic models to be followed by learners. Second, patterns of markedly lower attainment on standardised tests of academic knowledge among pupils from migrant backgrounds (OECD, 2007) underscore the need for targeted language support among this group. The work of Cummins, in particular, demonstrates that while migrant pupils may attain a basic level of interpersonal communicative skill (BICS) within two to three years, a period of five to seven years is necessary for them to master the cognitive and linguistic proficiency skills (CALP) required to access the curriculum (1979, 1984, 2008). Thus, the crucial role of mainstream teachers may be seen as an example of domain-specific language use.
The key role of subject specialists in the language teaching of EAL learners was further elucidated in additional publications, such as The Survey of Language Support Practices in Post-Primary Schools prepared by the Language Support Unit of the Trinity Immigration Initiative (Lyons & Little, 2009:35â43), a report prepared by the Economic and Social Research Institute entitled Adapting to Diversity: Irish schools and newcomer students (Smyth, Darmody, McGinnity & Byrne, 2009) and the OECDâs Review of Migrant Education in Ireland (2009). Knowledge of the language of instruction was also cited as one of the ten key components of the Intercultural Education Strategy 2010â2015 prepared by the DES and the Office of the Minister for Integration, which again underlined the role of mainstream teachers in the process of language acquisition of EAL students (2010:46 and 51). Moreover, a review of the quality of teaching and learning of EAL learners in post-primary education prepared by the DES also pointed out that the responsibility for the development of EAL pupils should be approached on a whole-school basis rather than delegated to the language support teachers as an exclusive task (2012a:31). The recommendations put forward by DES are particularly significant in light of data presented by Lyons and Little (2009:36) which indicated that only 55% of their respondents saw a direct link between language support and the mainstream curriculum. Finally, Circular 009/12, which effectively merged learning support and language support into a single allocation fund in second-level schools (DES, 2012b), has placed mainstream teachers under increasing pressure to assume a more central role in the linguistic development of EAL learners (this policy continues to be in place, see: DES, 2017). However, research reveals considerable unwillingness among mainstream subject specialists to assume the role of language instructors, with lack of appropriate resources and training cited as the main issues (for example, Lyons & Little, 2009).
As Harford states, teaching in Ireland is an all-graduate profession, and like many other countries, is generally characterised by elevated socio-economic status. As such, there is a high level of competition for places on teacher education courses (2010:351). However, despite the implementation of internal reforms stemming from reviews of initial teacher education (Harford, 2010:355),7 until recent times the continuous professional development of teachers had been perceived as fragmented and ad hoc in nature (Harford, 2010:355). Indeed, the Teaching and Learning International Survey conducted by the OECD (Egan, 2004; Harford, 2010; Murtagh & Francis, 2012) found that Irish teachers compared unfavourably with their international peers in terms of the number of days devoted to continuous professional development (CPD). In any event, until quite recently, CPD predominantly focused on curricular change rather than the development of new pedagogical approaches and teacher reflection on practice (Harford, 2010:357).
In 2001, the Teaching Council was established as a statutory bodyâ (âTeaching Council Actâ, 2001:8, Chapter 1 point 6) with the three main functions of its remit set out as follows:
- To regulate the teaching profession and the professional conduct of teachers
- To establish and promote the maintenance and improvement of standards of:
- a. programmes of teacher education and training
- b. teac...
