Which beliefs on Form-focused instructions do undergraduate
and postgraduate EFL student teachers hold in successive year
groups? - The shift in higher year groups towards a preference for a greater focus on meaning and reactive, implicit, and inductive instruction is in line with what is taught in Dutch teacher colleges and the textbooks that are often used (see, for example, H. Brown, 2007; Kwakernaak, 2009; Staatsen, 2009). - postgraduate group was heterogeneous in terms of years of experience before enrolling in the graduate course, it remains difficult to speculate about what caused this deviation from the undergraduate trend. It is possible, of course, that their starting point compared to the undergraduates examined in this study was altogether different. It is also possible that their work experience influenced their beliefs in such a way that they leant more towards form-focused, explicit, and deductive teaching, which is often seen as a less time-consuming and more direct way of teaching. In any case, postgraduate students themselves chose work experience as the number one source of their grammar beliefs, while the influence of the undergraduate course decreased from 55% to 17%, making the explanation of work experience as a moderating factor certainly plausible. strong bidirectional connection between actual teaching experiences and beliefs (see, for example, Andrews, 2003; Breen, Hird, Milton, Oliver, & Thwaite, 2001; Sato & Kleinsasser, 2004), and that stated beliefs and practices are more likely to correspond in the case of experienced teachers (Basturkmen, 2012). To what extent are these beliefs related to or affected by learner level and grammatical difficulty? - All groups showed a remarkable preference for form- focused instruction, FonFs, and inductive instruction for pupils in the highest level of secondary (pre-university) education; meaning-focused instruction and deductive instruction were deemed most suitable for lower-level pupils (Education level a factor) - higher-level learners to benefit more from teaching that systematically deals with all the major rules and grammatical structures in English. Or, conversely, that meaning-focused instruction is a necessary simplification for lower-level learners instead of a form of language teaching in its own right.
Where does these beliefs originate?
- Taking into consideration the influence of prior language learning experiences on teacher beliefs (S. Borg, 2006), it is conceivable that the way in which student teachers were taught themselves in secondary school plays a role in these beliefs. - learners often expect a teacher to pay explicit attention to grammar (S. Borg, 2003) - Grammatical difficulty - These intuitions are in contradiction to research findings. In a metaanalysis, Spada and Tomita (2010) found that learners benefit more from explicit instruction than implicit instruction in the case of simple as well as complex forms. student teachers feel that the indirect nature of both implicit and inductive instruction combined with complex forms may be too demanding of learners, thereby reducing the chance of successful acquisition. It has been frequently advised to have students reflect on their (pre-existing) beliefs (see, for example, Bartels, 2005; Busch, 2010), enabling them to explore their own theories, and to examine the many experiential, psychological, and contextual factors which shape their practices (S. Borg, 1999b, p. 163). As S. Borg (2011) suggests, such reflective activities may range from belief acknowledgement, clarification, and exploration of the origins of beliefs to in-class discussions, writing assignments, feedback, and questioning existing beliefs. particular attention should also be paid to the interaction of these beliefs with learner level and grammatical difficulty. Last, postgraduates beliefs should be examined in the context of their teaching experiences, as these are bound to have had a considerable impact on their belief system.