Personal Practical Knowledge of Graduate Spanish-Teaching Assistants: An Issue of Experience

315 Pages·2015·3.24 MB·English

Georgia State University
ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University
Applied Linguistics and English as a Second Department of Applied Linguistics and English as a
Language Dissertations Second Language
Summer 8-12-2014
Personal Practical Knowledge of Graduate Spanish-
Teaching Assistants: An Issue of Experience
Nancy Yanez-Pinto
Follow this and additional works at: htps://scholarworks.gsu.edu/alesl_diss
Recommended Citation
Yanez-Pinto, Nancy, "Personal Practical Knowledge of Graduate Spanish-Teaching Assistants: An Issue of Experience." Dissertation,
Georgia State University, 2014.
htps://scholarworks.gsu.edu/alesl_diss/31
Tis Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Applied Linguistics and English as a Second Language at
ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Applied Linguistics and English as a Second Language Dissertations by
an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact
PERSONAL PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE OF GRADUATE SPANISH-TEACHING
ASSISTANTS: AN ISSUE OF EXPERIENCE

by

NANCY YANEZ-PINTO

Under the Direction of Dr. John Murphy

ABSTRACT
The significant role of Graduate Spanish-Teaching Assistants (GSTAs) in Spanish as a foreign
language programs at North American universities has not been matched by the development and
support efforts of those programs. That is, GSTAs are at the forefront of the introductory and
intermediate Spanish courses while receiving very limited support. At the same time, and in spite
numerous research focused on graduate teaching assistants, efforts to explore what these novice
teachers know, the sources of their knowledge, and how such knowledge may be informing their
teaching practices, have been minimal. The purpose of the present study was, therefore, to gain
further understanding of the personal practical knowledge (PPK) of inexperienced GSTAs as
compared to that of experienced GSTAs. The categories of PPK found in the data were:
knowledge of self, knowledge of students, knowledge of instruction, knowledge of subject
matter, knowledge of purpose, and knowledge of context. The project consisted of eight case
studies (four experienced GSTAs and four inexperienced GSTAs), with a qualitative approach to
the collection of data. The sources of data were: semi structured interviews, classroom
observations, reflective journals, and stimulated recall. Findings revealed that the PPK of
experienced and inexperienced GSTAs is complex, contextual, interconnected, experiential, and
constantly evolving. Knowledge of students was consistently the most salient and influential area
of the PPK of all participants, and it informed more pedagogical choices than the remaining
areas. The knowledge of instruction of the experienced GSTAs was found to be more developed
than that of the inexperienced group, and they also relied more on experience than their new
counterparts. However, the first-time GSTAs were able to work collaborative and thus
accelerated the development of their knowledge of instruction while aiding their teaching
practice.

INDEX WORDS: Case study research, Classroom research, Graduate teaching assistants,
Personal practical knowledge, Spanish as a foreign language, Teacher cognition, Language
teacher education, Teacher knowledge, Qualitative research
PERSONAL PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE OF GRADUATE SPANISH-TEACHING
ASSISTANTS: AN ISSUE OF EXPERIENCE

by

NANCY YANEZ-PINTO

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in the College of Arts and Sciences
Georgia State University
2014
Copyright by
Nancy Yanez-Pinto
2014
PERSONAL PRACTICAL KNOWLEDGE OF GRADUATE SPANISH-TEACHING
ASSISTANTS: AN ISSUE OF EXPERIENCE

by

NANCY YANEZ-PINTO

Committee Chair: John Murphy

Committee: Gayle Nelson
Diane Belcher
Victoria Rodrigo

Electronic Version Approved:

Office of Graduate Studies
College of Arts and Sciences
Georgia State University
2014
iv

DEDICATION
To my son, Sebastian- your arrival changed my life in the scariest and most wonderful
ways. To my husband Isaias- thank you for your unwavering love, patience and tireless support,
and for being an extremely reliable sounding board. To my parents, Nancy and Roger- thank you
for everything you have done for me since birth, and continue to dol ong past the time I left the
nest. This work is dedicated to all of you.
v

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Even though it is my name on the cover of this manuscript, there are many people who
share much of the credit for getting me to this stage in my academic career. I would like to start
with my dissertation and academic advisor all the way from the MA program, Dr. John Murphy.
You are the reason I even made it to GSU all those years ago when you were so considerate to
answer my urgent plea and found my MA application somewhere in the university, in time for
me to make arrangements to come here. You have guided me through two graduate programs
and, to top it all, have devoted countless hours reading and re-reading my manuscript, and
providing much needed feedback. You have also made me a better writer, and for that, I will
always be grateful.
I would also like to thank the remaining members of my dissertation committee: Dr.
Gayle Nelson, Dr. Diane Belcher, and Dr. Victoria Rodrigo. Your guidance and suggestions
made this a much better project than I set out to do in my proposal. Keeping the sights of the
research on GSTAs made the project much more interesting, relevant, and focused.
To my professors and colleagues in the Applied Linguistics Department. Thank you for
providing wonderful examples of academic and professional conduct that I can only hope to
imitate. And thank you for all of the support you have provided me over the years.
Special thanks go to the Department of Modern and Classical Languages. You have been
my home for the past nine years, and you have given me the best gift of all: classrooms full of
students with whom I could share my language and culture on a regular basis. I would like to
thank my boss and supporter, Dr. Oscar Moreno, for being always there for me as an instructor
and, lately, as a researcher.
vi
Finally, to my brave, open, honest, and al-laround wonderful participants: Julio, Pat, Ann,
Elena, Mary, Margarita, Lula, and Claire. Your participation allowed me, and those who may
read this work, to open a window into your thoughts, beliefs, passions, feelings, and fears as you
navigate the rough seas of language teaching.I t was an honor to work with you.T hank you from
the bottom of my heart. Thank you, Lourdes, for being ‘participant zero’ and help me hone my
research methods. And thank you for being an amazing friend to me and my small family here in
the US. All three of us love you .
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... .v#
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................... xiv#
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................... xv#
1# INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1#
1.1# Context of the Study ............................................................................................ 3#
1.2# Purpose of the Study and Research Questions ................................................. 7#
1.3# Organization of the Study .................................................................................. 7#
2# LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 9#
2.1# Graduate Language Teaching Assistants .......................................................... 9#
2.2# Teacher Cognition ............................................................................................. 12#
2.3# Teachers’ Personal Practical Knowledge ........................................................ 17#
2.4# Case Studies ....................................................................................................... 20#
3# METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 23#
3.1# Context and Participants .................................................................................. 23#
3.2# Data Collection .................................................................................................. 24#
3.2.1# Sources of Data ............................................................................................. 29#
3.3# Data Analysis ..................................................................................................... 35#
3.3.1# Organization of the data ............................................................................... 35#
3.3.2# Interpretive framework ................................................................................. 35#