The aim of this subject is to develop the knowledge, skills and illusion to be an English teacher in Pre-Primary and Primary Education. Based on the evidence of social impact on education, the aim of the course is to teach how to create the best conditions for learning English, taking into account that it is essential to include all students, whatever their profile. This means that teachers have to effectively promote equal outcomes for all students, in line with internationally approved agreements and conventions, such as Goal 4 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, which calls for "ensuring inclusive education, equitable and quality education," or Article 29 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Girls and Boys, which advocates that "the education of girls and boys shall be directed to the development of the personality, talents and mental and physical abilities of girls and boys to their fullest potential." Research validated by the international scientific community demonstrates that these are objectives that can be achieved and are in fact achieved in schools that apply scientific evidence of social impact. Therefore, the objective of this course is that students in the 4th year of the Infant Education and Primary Education degrees acquire the knowledge that will enable them to carry out their teaching work in a way that guarantees equal results for all students, regardless of their profile.



To be able to access the Minor in Foreign Language, students must have a B2 level of English. At the end of the Minor, at the end of the 4th year, students must have a C1 level of English and have knowledge and skills for teaching English in Primary and Pre-Primary Education. The completion of the Minor in Foreign Language allows the Primary Education degree students to be English teachers in public education in Primary Education.

Reference competences in Primary and Pre-Primary Education



CB2 - They are able to use their knowledge professionally for their profession and in their field of study are able to work and defend arguments and give solutions to problems.

CB3 - They are capable of collecting and interpreting significant data and carrying out analyses with them, including social, scientific and ethical reflections.

G003 - They can effectively promote language learning in contexts where there is linguistic and cultural diversity.

G004 - In contexts of diversity, they design and intervene in learning spaces focused on gender equality, equity and human rights.

G006 - They have internalized the need to adapt the teaching role to scientific, pedagogical and social changes throughout life.

G012 - They understand the functions and opportunities of education. They are aware of the quality improvement models applied in schools.

G013 - They have a good knowledge of a foreign language. They produce and understand enough to function as teachers in multilingual contexts. They have developed respectful attitudes towards linguistic and cultural diversity.

M03CM01 - They have developed classroom knowledge and practical knowledge for classroom management. They know the processes of interaction and communication in the classroom and have skills to promote knowledge and coexistence in the classroom.





The competencies of the course Communicative Competences in English II are the following:



I. Ability to read and analyze scientific texts on second or foreign language learning and the conditions that facilitate learning.

II. Ability to interpret and assess classroom situations based on scientific literature on evidence of social impact.

III. Ability to develop effective teaching interventions.

IV. Level C1 of English of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages.



Learning outcomes of the subject



I. They actively participate in pedagogical dialogues and reads, analyses and exposes scientific texts effectively.

II. They identify and explain at a theoretical level the concepts of the scientific literature

III. They identify the fundamental theoretical concepts in practice in the case studies, applies the theory effectively and analyses the situations according to it, identifies the strong points and proposes solutions to overcome the problems.

IV. They organise educational actions effectively in Micro Teaching sessions.

V. They demonstrate having C1 level in English in all the activities of the subject (competence IV of the subject).

1. Second language teaching based on evidence of social impact.

1.1 Transformative education: high expectations for all learners

1.2 Beliefs in education that have no scientific basis.

1.3 Criteria for identifying evidence of social impact in education.



2. Interaction and Scaffolding in the Zone of Proximal Development

2.1 Engaging in interactions generates learning

2.2 Zone of Proximal Development and scaffolding (Scaffolding)

2.3 Grouping models: inclusion, mixture, streaming, tracking.

2.5 Models of family participation

2.6 Interactive groups



3. Collaborative interactions in violence-free contexts. Dialogic Model for Conflict Prevention and Resolution.

The teaching methodology is based on participatory and dialogic learning. The main objective is to learn what is the work that teachers should do in the classroom, analyzing at all times how teaching and learning takes place in the classroom. References to effective educational actions are the basis of the contents. The educational actions that are worked on are based on scientific evidence of social impact. The scientific evidence is worked on in groups through egalitarian dialogue. Collaboration, constant feedback and reflection are fundamental. Both scientific texts and case studies are analyzed.



Assignments are planned in detail both inside and outside the classroom (Light, 2001).

References on the methodology of the subject:



Darling-Hammond, L., Burns, D., Campbell, C., Goodwin, A.L., Hammerness, K., Low, E.E.L., McIntyre, A., Sato, M. & Zeichner, K. (2017a). Empowered Educators. How High-Performing Systems Shape Teaching Quality Around the World. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.



Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M.E., Gardner, M. & Espinoza, D. (2017b). Effective Teacher Professional Development. Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf (accessed 2020-02-14).



Flecha, R., Racionero, S., Tintoré, M., & Arbós, A. (2014). Successful Performances in the University. Towards Excellence Taking the Best Universities as a Model. Multidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 131-150. doi: 10.4471/remie.2014.08.



Light, R. (2001). Making the Most of College. Students Speak Their Minds. Harvard University Press.

Peña, J.C., Arbós, A., & Zubiri, H. (2021). Dialogic pedagogic gatherings: contributing to educational and social transformation from teacher education. In Marta Soler & Roseli Rodrigues, (Ed.), Schools as Learning Communities. New York: DIO Press. ISBN: 978-1645040941.



Rodriguez, J.A., Condom-Bosch, J.L., Ruiz, L., & Oliver, E. (2020) On the Shoulders of Giants: Benefits of Participating in a Dialogic Professional Development Program for In-Service Teachers. Frontiers in Psychology 11(5). Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00005.

• Continuous Assessment System
• Final Assessment System
• Tools and qualification percentages:
  • Multiple-Choice Test (%): 40
  • Realization of Practical Work (exercises, cases or problems) (%): 60

1) On-site students: On-site students must attend at least 85% of the sessions. They must complete all the assignments specified throughout the course and take the exams during the exam period. The continuous evaluation has a weight of 60% in the final grade and the final exams have a weight of 40%.



2) Non-attendance students: In accordance with UPV/EHU regulations, non-attendance students must inform the professor, before the ninth week, of their decision to take the course in a non-attendance mode. These students have two options:

A) For those cases in which the activities are carried out continuously, adapting to a non face-to-face situation: 60% of the program is evaluated by continuous assessment and the calendar of the subject determines the dates of completion and transfer of the work to the teacher. On the other hand, 40% of the course is evaluated through a final test. This test will take place on the day and at the time established by the academic calendar of the Faculty of Education, Philosophy and Anthropology. It is essential to pass all sections of this test. It is not enough that the average score exceeds 5 out of 10.

B) For those cases in which the complete program is carried out in a non-attendance way: 100% of the program is evaluated by means of a final test. This test will take place on the day and at the time established by the academic calendar of the Faculty of Education, Philosophy and Anthropology. It is essential to pass all sections of this test. It is not enough that the average score exceeds 5 out of 10.



3) Waiver of the exam: Students who wish to waive the exam will receive, in accordance with the UPV/EHU regulations, the grade of "pending presentation". Since the last test in this subject has a weight of less than 40%, the waiver of the call will be made at least one month before the end of the teaching period of the subject in question. Such request must be submitted in writing to the professor responsible for the subject.

1) On-site students: On-site students must attend at least 85% of the sessions. They must complete all the assignments specified throughout the course and take the exams during the exam period. The continuous evaluation has a weight of 60% in the final grade and the final exams have a weight of 40%.



2) Non-attendance students: In accordance with UPV/EHU regulations, non-attendance students must inform the professor, before the ninth week, of their decision to take the course in a non-attendance mode. These students have two options:

A) For those cases in which the activities are carried out continuously, adapting to a non face-to-face situation: 60% of the program is evaluated by continuous assessment and the calendar of the subject determines the dates of completion and transfer of the work to the teacher. On the other hand, 40% of the course is evaluated through a final test. This test will take place on the day and at the time established by the academic calendar of the Faculty of Education, Philosophy and Anthropology. It is essential to pass all sections of this test. It is not enough that the average score exceeds 5 out of 10.

B) For those cases in which the complete program is carried out in a non-attendance way: 100% of the program is evaluated by means of a final test. This test will take place on the day and at the time established by the academic calendar of the Faculty of Education, Philosophy and Anthropology. It is essential to pass all sections of this test. It is not enough that the average score exceeds 5 out of 10.



3) Waiver of the exam: Students who wish to waive the exam will receive, in accordance with the UPV/EHU regulations, the grade of "pending presentation". Since the last test in this subject has a weight of less than 40%, the waiver of the call will be made at least one month before the end of the teaching period of the subject in question. Such request must be submitted in writing to the professor responsible for the subject.

The readings included in the basic bibliography are essential for the subject.

Basic bibliography

Kelly, J.K. (2001). Classroom Interaction and Language Learning. Ilha Do Desterro. A Journal of English Language, Literatures in English and Cultural Studies 41, 17-39.



Li, P., & Jeong, H. (2020). The social brain of language: grounding second language learning in social interaction. npj Sci. Learn. 5, 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-0068-7



Walki, A. (2006). Scaffolding Instruction for English Language Learners: a Conceptual Framework. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 9(2), 159-180.



Dekker, S., Lee, N.C., Howard-Jones, P. & Jones, J. (2012). Neuromyths in education: Prevalence and predictors of misconceptions among teachers. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 429.



Flecha, R. (2015). Forms of Classroom Arragement: Streaming, Mixture, Inclusion & Successful Educational Actions In/Outside the Classroom. Interactive Groups. Ramón Flecha (Ed.), Successful Educational Actions for Inclusion in and Social Cohesion in Europe. London: Springer.



Zubiri-Esnaola, H., Vidu, A., Rios-Gonzalez, O. & Morla-Folch, T. (2020). Inclusivity, participation and collaboration: Learning in interactive groups. Educational Research, 62(2), 162-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2020.1755605



López de Aguileta, G., & Soler-Gallart, M. (2021). Aprendizaje significativo de Ausubel y segregación educativa. Multidisciplinary Journal of Educational Research,11(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.4471/remie.2021.7431



Egan, K. (2005). Students’ Development in Theory and Practice. The Doubtful Role of Research. Harvard Educational Review, 75(1), 25-41.



Melgar, P., Pulido-Rodríguez, M.A., & Valverde, B. (2016). Modelo dialógico de prevención de conflictos. Padres y maestros, 367, 32-37. https://doi.org/pym.i367.y2016.006



Villarejo-Carballido, B., Pulido, C.M., de Botton, L., Serradell, O. (2019). Dialogic Model of Prevention and Resolution of Conflicts: Evidence of the Success of Cyberbullying Prevention in a Primary School in Catalonia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16, 918. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16060918



Vygotsky, L.S. (2012). Capítulo 6. Interacción entre aprendizaje y desarrollo. In L.S. Vygotsky, El desarrollo de los procesos psicológicos superiores. Barcelona: Planeta.



Navarro, R., Yubero, S. & Larrañaga, E. (2018). A Friend is a Treasure and May Help You to Face Bullying. Frontiers for Young Minds.



Villardón-Gallego, L., García-Carrión, R., Yáñez-Marquina, L., & Estévez, A. (2018). Impact of the Interactive Learning Environments in Children’s Prosocial Behavior. Sustainability, 10, 2138. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10072138



Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J. & Clark, R.E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

In-depth bibliography

Bruner, J. (1985). The Role of Interaction Formats in Language Acquisition. In J.P. Forgas (Ed.), Language and Social Situations, 31-46. New York: Springer.

Donato, R. (1994). Collective Scaffolding in Second Language Learning. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Learning. Westport: Ablex.

Lowen, S. & Sato, M. (2018). Interaction and Instructed Second Language Acquisition. Language Teaching 51(3), 285-329. doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000125

Oliver, E. (2014). Zero Violence Since Early Childhood: The Dialogic Recreation of Knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(7), 902–908. doi: 10.1177/1077800414537215

Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Massachusetts: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Journals

Research on Language and Social Interaction
Studies in Second Language Acquisition
Language Teaching
Language Learning
Modern Language Journal
Language Teaching Research
TESOL Quarterly
Second Language Research
Foreign Language Annals
ELT Journal
Harvard Educational Review
Cambridge Journal of Education

Web addresses

Bilbioteca UPV/EHU
Web of Knowledge
Scopus