You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Education Sciences
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open Access

25 December 2023

The Keys to Developing Communicative Competence as a School Project: A Qualitative View from Teachers’ Beliefs

and
Department of Spanish Philology, Faculty of Humanities and Science Education, University of Jaen, 23071 Jaen, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Educ. Sci.2024, 14(1), 27;https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14010027
This article belongs to the Section Language and Literacy Education
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Review Reports

Abstract

Educational systems have the common objective of coordinating efforts to improve students’ communicative competence and facilitate the development of their oral and written language skills for personal, social, academic, and professional purposes. The work on communicative competence from a school perspective has various antecedents in the international educational context. In Spain, the improvement of students’ linguistic communication competence in all the languages spoken in the schools (mother languages and second languages) has been addressed through different initiatives, among which the SLP (School Language Project) programme, better known in Spanish as Proyecto Lingüístico de Centro (PLC), which has been implemented in the Autonomous Community of Andalusia since the 2013–2014 academic year, stands out. The aim of this paper is to examine the opinions of the teacher coordinators involved in the implementation of SLP in their schools as well as their perceptions about the impact of external factors in the process and, lastly, to highlight the main implications emerging from this global vision for the implementation of interdisciplinary projects to improve LCC (Linguistic Communication Competence) schools. This study is based on the feedback provided by the coordinators of the SLP initiative in Andalusian institutions over five academic years. The findings have been studied utilising a qualitative methodology and assessed using the Atlas Ti 6.0 software, then grouped into five diverse categories. The results indicate that, despite the programme’s strengths, specific improvement measures are necessary in both external and internal aspects related to SLP.

1. Introduction

The concept of Communicative Competence, in its current conception, originates from the works of Gumperz and Hymes [1]. It is closely linked to a view of language as usage and social experience. Consequently, a competent speaker can effectively communicate in culturally significant contexts. In education, Linguistic Communication Competence (LCC) is understood as the result of communicative action and allows students to interact through orality or writing, signed or multimodal, in a coherent and appropriate way in diverse environments and contexts for various purposes [2]. This perspective of language as an activity is at the base of the current competency framework promoted by different international organizations, including the OECD and the Council of Europe.
In this sense, one of the main objectives shared by various educational systems consists of articulating reading, writing, and lecture programmes, which allow for the development of students’ personal and social potential [3,4]. The aim is to promote a treatment of language in use that overcomes a merely descriptive approach to the linguistic systems—still predominant among some teachers—and that favours the acquisition of basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) and the gradual development of cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) [5,6,7].
The focus on literacy and developing students’ oral abilities has a long history in educational research and interventions, which have culminated in movements such as Writing across the curriculum (WAC) that underlines the need to integrate literacy work across different areas of knowledge, both in the framework of higher education and at non-university levels of education [3]. There are other movements associated with WAC, such as Writing to Learn (WTL), which focuses on the cognitive benefits of the writing process to students, or Writing in the disciplines (WID), which focuses on using the specialized language in each scientific discipline.
These movements have resulted in numerous programmes and institutional reforms concerning writing competencies in multiple English-speaking countries since the 1960s. All of these reforms and programmes advocated for the inclusion of writing instruction in all curriculum areas [3,8].
This integrated treatment of writing and communicative competence across various disciplines faces challenges concerning the structure of the subjects in secondary schools, as well as the weak collaborative and interdisciplinary culture that still exists among some teachers [3,9,10]. For this reason, the actions related to the improvement of students’ oral and written skills are much more effective when they are not proposed in isolation and are integrated into the framework of an institutional project involving the school as a unit [9,11,12,13].
As Trujillo claims [11], from these and other antecedents, like the work on communicative competence based on discursive genres [14,15,16], the Whole-language movement [17], or different proposals for the integration of communicative skills in curricular areas [18,19], the idea that the improvement of linguistic communication of the students should be approached from a centre perspective has gradually gained strength. Thus, in its current form, the concept of the School Language Project (SLP) is conceived as a space for coordinating all initiatives that promote the work of LCC in a specific educational institution [20].
In the context of the Spanish education system, within which this study is framed, the SLP has several antecedents related to linguistic standardization processes that lead to a more inclusive understanding of LCC work [21,22,23]. Currently, multiple Spanish administrations are supporting programmes aimed at improving LCC that respond to an interdisciplinary conception of the work of communicative competence and involve the educational institution as a whole [20]. In this context, Programme for Educational Innovation School Language Project (SLP), developed in the Autonomous Community of Andalusia, stands out.
The educational innovation programme School Language Project (SLP) is an institutional initiative promoted and developed by the Ministry of Education of Andalusia from the 2013–2014 academic year to the current 2022–2023 year. The SLP aims to improve students’ linguistic communication skills, both in their mother language and in foreign languages, as a school movement. It is carried out over three complete academic years in preschool, primary, compulsory secondary, and baccalaureate schools. In order to access it, schools interested in the project must accredit the participation of a minimum of 50% of their teaching staff and submit an initial project for evaluation and approval by an external commission [22].
As explained above, the period of permanence in the programme is three academic years. Schools have at their disposal external advice and tailored training during this time. Objectives and final products are determined for each year in accordance with the programme’s various lines of work (Table 1) [24].
Table 1. Lines of work of a SLP.
In each school, there is a coordinator who promotes actions to achieve the targets of the programme [25]. The development over time of the SLP programme, which celebrates its 10th anniversary in the 2023–2024 academic year, as well as the breadth and diversity of its potential beneficiaries—non-university educational centres in Andalusia supported with public funds in which compulsory and non-compulsory education is taught—has enabled this initiative to achieve a high educational impact. It has been demonstrated, based on various indicators, including the total number of class groups that have taken part in the SLP programme from 2016–2017 to the present.
This institutional initiative to improve the LCC, like other school projects, requires, in its practical dimension, the active and coordinated participation of the teaching team. For this reason, it is quite important to listen to teachers’ viewpoints and align closer with their beliefs about the implementation of SLP in a real context [20,26].
Teachers’ beliefs constitute a research field widely explored from different perspectives, which connect with different areas of the curriculum: music education [27]; natural sciences and social sciences [28,29,30]; and mathematics [31].
In the specific field of language education and the development of communicative competence, educators’ viewpoints have been assessed regarding the teaching grammar and writing [32,33], oral proficiency [34], language teaching and multilingualism [35,36], oral language in class [37,38], initial training [39], literary education [40] and the creation and implementation of school language programmes [10,26].
In general, different studies have highlighted the significant impact of teachers’ beliefs on conceptual change, a complex process that relies on cognitive conflict—with other motivational and contextual aspects—as a mechanism to develop self-awareness around mental constructs and enables their reformulation and reintegration in specific educational situations [41,42].
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the previously unexplored views of the coordinators involved in the implementation of SLP in their schools (1) as well as their perceptions about the impact of external factors in the process (2) and, lastly, to highlight the main implications emerging from this global vision for the implementation of interdisciplinary projects to improve LCC in schools (3).

Research Questions

As mentioned above, the current research focuses on three interrelated questions:
  • What are the prevalent beliefs of teachers involved in the coordination of an SLP concerning the development of this initiative in schools?
  • What role do extra-curricular factors play in the design and implementation of a SLP, according to the participants?
  • What are the implications of this study for designing and implementing interdisciplinary CLIL improvement initiatives from a school perspective?

2. Materials and Methods

The SLP is a large-scale educational programme involving a total of 1928 groups of students at all non-university educational levels. The data are presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Class groups by educational levels and academic year participation in the SLP programme.
This research employs a qualitative, non-experimental and descriptive methodology [43,44] based on the open-ended responses collected in the annual monitoring report of the SLP programme prepared by the Plans and Programmes Service of the Department of Educational Development and Vocational Training of the Andalusian Regional Government. The project coordinators provided these open-ended responses voluntarily. The analysis of open-ended responses allows us to collect reflections, arguments, and explanations anonymously and gives a voice to the coordinators as privileged agents and observers in the process [45].
The data collected correspond to five academic years: 2016–2017; 2017–2018; 2018–2019; 2020–2021; and 2021–2022. As previously mentioned, the monitoring report for 2019–2020 has not been published due to the exceptional situation resulting from COVID-19.

2.1. Participants

The participants are practising teachers coordinating an SLP in their respective schools across the eight Andalusian provinces. These publicly funded schools provide compulsory and post-compulsory education for various educational stages, as shown in Table 2. More information on participation is provided in Table 3.
Table 3. Centres participating in the SLP Programme and report completion data.
The SLP coordinators provided a total number of 322 open-ended written responses (see Table 4). Accordingly, 38.24% of the coordinators who filled out the form responded to this field, while the rest did not provide any answers.
Table 4. Number of open-ended responses issued by coordinators. Academic years from 2016–2017 to 2021–2022.
The data collection instrument used is the SLP Programme Informe Anual de Seguimiento or Annual Monitoring Report (referred to as AMR in this document), an institutional private form that has not been analyzed before in any research and created by the Educational Plans and Programmes Service (a specific section of the Ministry of Education of Andalusia) consisting of several sections: programme development (1); centre actions for programme development (2); dissemination (3); overall assessment (4); and other observations, such as challenges and demands (5). The coordinators, using closed and semi-open multiple-choice questions, evaluate Section 1, Section 2, Section 3, and Section 4 quantitatively. Meanwhile, Section 5, which serves as the source for this work, is qualitative and requests from the informants a written response to an open question that the coordinators answer with a brief text.
It is not an instrument specifically designed for the present research—with its consequent limitations—but rather a document focused on the monitoring of the SLP programme developed by the Andalusian educational administration. This document has also been validated by technicians and managers of the central services in this administration. The AMR data are gathered via an online form available to coordinators for a period of 30 days every year. The authors of this paper have access to the AMR information as members of the teaching coordination team of the SLP Programme.
The main advantage of AMR is the origin of its informants, all of whom are SLP Programme coordinators in their respective reference schools.

2.2. Procedures and Data Analysis

The data collection and analysis process were carried out in accordance with the following phases:
  • The Educational Plans and Programs Service developed and validated the virtual form, which has been distributed to all participating centres of the SLP Program;
  • Completion of the form by the SLP coordinators in the centres;
  • Elaboration of the AMR, by the section of Educational Plans and Programmes Service of the Department of Educational Development and Vocational Training (Ministry of Education of Andalusia), and forwarding it to the Pedagogical Coordination of the SLP Programme;
  • Initial content analysis of the responses and establishment of four categories grouped based on a SWOT matrix [46,47]. Subsequently, a fifth category was added, corresponding to general aspects related to the development of the programme (see Table 4);
  • Quantitative–lexical analysis grouped by categories of Section 5 of the AMR, corresponding to Observations: difficulties and demands (open response);
  • Delimitation of the productive base of words;
  • Grouping by lexical families of the productive base (see Table 5);
    Table 5. Categories of analysis used to group responses and abbreviations.
  • Results presentation.

3. Results

The qualitative information analysis was elaborated with the support of the Atlas.ti 6.0 software, which enables efficient textual data processing and interpretation. The production base includes 1562 words distributed by category and academic year (see Table 6).
Table 6. Distribution of the words of the productive base by categories.
Once the words of the productive base have been categorised, the words belonging to the same lexical family (e.g., coordinate, coordination, coordinator) have been grouped together to ensure meaningful clusters. The data on the frequency of occurrence of each word family are then presented in the subsequent graphs (see Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4 and Figure 5).
Figure 1. Internal factors against the SLP design and implementation (C1).
Figure 2. Internal factors in favour of the SLP design and implementation (C2).
Figure 3. External factors against the SLP design and implementation (C3).
Figure 4. External factors in favour of the SLP design and implementation (C4).
Figure 5. Descriptive aspects related to the development of the SLP (C5).
Although the answers analysed in this paper pertain to the section Observations: difficulties and demands, many coordinators have made positive comments, as illustrated in Figure 2 and Figure 4. Other teachers focus more on describing the development of the programme in their centres, as Figure 5 represents. Consequently, although there are more words related to categories 1 and 3, coordinators report both aspects in favour of the project and challenges around the implementation of the project.

4. Discussion

4.1. Internal Factors against the SLP Design and Implementation (C1)

The lack of time in the teachers’ timetable to facilitate the horizontal coordination of the SLP stands out on the line of internal difficulties (C1), as we can deduce from the three most frequent word families in Figure 1 (“time”, “coordination”, and “difficulty”). This lack of time and the interference with other tasks (teaching, tutoring, coordinating, and participating in other plans and programmes, as can be deduced from the results presented in Figure 1) add to the complexity of the work to be coordinated.
The uneven involvement of teachers, especially those in non-language areas (NLAs), who feel less identified with the SLP, is combined with other specific conditions and beliefs about the development of the programme, such as the complexity and diversity of large schools and the presence of a significant percentage of newly recruited teachers (see Table 7).
Table 7. Internal factors against the SLP design and implementation (C1).

4.2. Internal Factors in Favour of the SLP Design and Implementation (C2)

Among the internal factors that favour the design and implementation of an SLP, the informants highlight the role of the teaching staff and the management team as agents of change [13]; the involvement of both sectors is strengthened by the actions aimed at improving internal coordination, strongly supported by the SLP commission and the staff agreements. These strengths (represented by the most frequent word families in Figure 2, “teachers”, “involvement”, and “centre”) translate into short-term results that feed back into the process and make the achievements visible (see Table 8).
Table 8. Internal factors in favour of the SLP design and implementation (C2).

4.3. External Factors against the SLP Design and Implementation (C3)

The external factors that complicate the development of the SLP programme are largely connected to the actions carried out by the Education Administration as the most common terms in Figure 3 show (“coordination”, “training”, “work”, “timetable”), specifically the Autonomous Community of Andalusia. This is based on the coordinators’ declarations and beliefs, as documented in the study.
These statements are supported by various grievances, with the notable absence of reduced working hours for carrying out SLP coordination in schools. The informants claim that commitment to the coordination of the SLP should be reflected in allocated time slots on coordinators’ schedules, much like other institutional programmes and initiatives.
In addition to the absence of reduced working hours, which is not accounted for in the SLP programme, the participants perceive an excessive bureaucratic burden stemming from the programme itself.
Other factors that affect LCC are not directly associated with the structure of the SLP programme and act as external threats. These include the instability of the teaching staff, which obstructs coordinated and sustained efforts to enhance LCC, as well as the inadequate attention and development of teacher training by external support services (see Table 9), specifically the Teacher Training Centres (better known as CEP in Spain).
Table 9. External factors against the SLP design and implementation (C3).

4.4. External Factors in Favour of the SLP Design and Implementation (C4)

Among the external factors that facilitate the design and implementation of SLP, teacher training and the monitoring of work projects by qualified external agents who respond to the specific needs of the schools stand out, as Figure 4 shows through the most common words (“involvement”, “training”, and “CEP”).
In the Andalusian educational context in which this work takes place, and in the specific case of the SLP programme, this support comes from the Teacher Training Centres (CEP) and the Pedagogical Coordination Team (better known as ECP in Spain) of the programme.
On another level, this study’s coordinators emphasise the involvement of the educational community, especially families, and the presence of coordination mechanisms between internal and external agents involved in the process as potential opportunities (see Table 10).
Table 10. External factors in favour of the SLP design and implementation (C4).

4.5. Descriptive Aspects Related to the Development of the SLP (C5)

For its part, the AMR provides reports on various aspects linked to the development of the programme (see Table 11). These offer information on the specific content of the SLP, which aims to enhance communication skills. These aspects range from defining the particular lines of work, such as reading, writing, orality, discursive genres, and standardisation, to measures focused on horizontal coordination (see Figure 5). This includes creating and executing the action plan, along with actions to disseminate and raise awareness of the achievements of the SLP among the educational community, as we can deduce from the most common terms in Figure 5 (“year”, “work”, “action”, and “centre”).
Table 11. Descriptive aspects related to the development of the SLP (C5).

5. Conclusions

The current investigation compiles the viewpoints of the teachers who manage language initiatives in schools in the Autonomous Community of Andalusia for a duration of five full academic years, excluding those related to COVID-19 and its effects due to their temporary nature.
The scope of the sample and the analysis undertaken enables us to draw pertinent conclusions, not only regarding the specific progress of this type of project that concentrates on enhancing students’ linguistic communication skills but also, generally speaking, to emphasise certain crucial elements correlated to executing interdisciplinary initiatives that engage the entire faculty of a school to realise shared goals.
Although the AMR section under examination, Observations: difficulties and demands, is focused on problems and demands, some of the coordinators’ answers in the study indicate that the SLP is seen as a prosperous initiative as it promotes interdisciplinary efforts to enhance communicative competence, teamwork, and consensual decision-making by the teaching staff. This perspective is strengthened in situations where there is substantial teacher participation and a generally positive attitude towards transformation within the educational community [26].
In this sense, it is argued that the SLP is capable of addressing the challenge of linguistic communication competence across various curriculum areas [12]. However, despite its potential and comprehensive nature, the SLP is not immune to difficulties and possible threats [20]. The SLP programme is considered a valid and ambitious initiative, requiring both internal and external support. Internal support should come from teacher involvement, impetus from the management team, and shared leadership exercised through project coordination. Meanwhile, external support should include teacher training, administrative recognition, and staffing stability.
Regarding research question 1 (“What are the prevailing beliefs and representations of the teaching staff involved in the coordination of an SLP with regard to the development of this initiative in schools?”), as previously mentioned, the coordinators emphasise several challenges related to the internal organisation of schools and the tasks associated with coordination. In this regard, the authors emphasise the intricacy linked to the role of the coordinator as a proactive agent who has to motivate all educators, even those beyond the language department, who frequently view the mission of the LCC as extraneous. In this context, the coordination of an SLP is considered a challenging task that requires time and space that are not always accommodated in school timetables and internal organisation processes, particularly in schools with high levels of structural complexity or frequent changes in teaching staff.
These are challenges which, according to the findings and statements gathered in the research, can be mitigated by promoting the cooperation and participation of the teaching faculty, with substantial support from the management team, team collaboration in intermediate coordinating bodies, such as the SLP commission [13], utilising digital tools and spaces focused on collaborative work, and promoting and sharing the accomplishments of the SLP.
These representations suggest the need for proposing new organisational models in centres, which promote teamwork and coordinated work towards achieving common goals [25,48], in short, the creation of structures that allow for the adequate development of coordination tasks and prevent the responsibility for the design and implementation of the language project from falling on a single person.
With regards to research question 2 (“How do factors external to the school influence the design and implementation of an SLP, as stated by the participants?”), the participants positively highlight the presence of consistent educational support structures for teachers, which offer schools assistance that is customized to their specific training requirements [49]. Among these structures, the Andalusian Teacher Training Network and the various Teacher Training Centres (CEP) that are part of it stand out [21]. In this regard, as reported by the respondents, support training for an SLP is more highly regarded when external agents involved in the process have direct knowledge of the educational centre’s needs and respond to them from a solid theoretical and practical basis.
External training is considered a fundamental factor in the success of interdisciplinary initiatives for enhancing LCC, according to the coordinators’ expressed beliefs. To achieve success, the informants emphasise the need for coordinated action between internal and external agents. The involvement of families and the educational community as a whole is particularly positive, as highlighted by the informants.
On the other hand, the beliefs expressed by the teachers highlight the existence of various factors that have a negative impact on the design and implementation of an SLP, ranging from the scarce external training of teachers unrelated to the improvement of communication skills and the needs of the centres to the existence of unstable teaching staff, which prevents the creation of consolidated working teams capable of defining and achieving common objectives.
Among these negative external factors, which in this case are directly related to the structure of the SLP programme, the coordinators highlight the bureaucracy generated by the programme itself and, in particular, the lack of recognition of the timetable and the reduction in the teaching load of the people in charge of coordinating the language project of the centre.
Finally, in relation to the third and final research question (“What are the implications of this study for the design and implementation of interdisciplinary initiatives to enhance LCC from a school perspective?”), the findings of this study, which are derived from the analysis of responses from SLP coordinators, provide valuable information that has direct implications for guiding the processes to improve communicative competence from a school perspective (see Table 12). In this sense, the testimonies of the participants offer various internal and external factors to consider when developing and executing a programmable logic controller (SLP).
Table 12. Implications related to SLP implementation.
These are the keys to building solid projects for improving communicative competence that ensure the progress of students in the acquisition of basic communicative skills and the future and gradual development of cognitive academic linguistic competence, lines of action that are not only applicable in the case of SLP but are exportable to different types of improvement processes that involve the school as a whole and set medium- and long-term work objectives.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; methodology, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; validation, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; formal analysis, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; investigation, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; resources, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; data curation, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; writing—original draft preparation, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; writing—review and editing, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; visualization, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; supervision, S.F.B. and R.J.J.; project administration, S.F.B.; funding acquisition, S.F.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research is a part of the project of Ministry of Science and Innovation (Government of Spain), I+D+I El Desarrollo de la competencia escrita y el razonamiento crítico en los grados de maestro (DECERC-GM) (PID2020-117813RA-I00).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are contained withing the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Gumperz, J.J.; Hymes, D.H. (Eds.) Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication; Rinehart and Winston: New York, NY, USA, 1972. [Google Scholar]
  2. Government of Spain. Ley Orgánica 4/2022, de 20 de diciembre, por la que se modifica la Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de mayo, de Educación. BOE 2020, 340, 122868–122953. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bazerman, C.; Little, J.; Bethel, L.; Chavkin, T.; Fouquette, D.; Garufis, J. Escribir a Través del Currículo; Una Guía de Referencia; National University of Cordoba: Cordoba, Argentina, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  4. Lorenzo, F. Competencia en Comunicación Lingüística para el Avance de la Comprensión Lectora en las Pruebas PISA; Ministerio de Educación: Madrid, Spain, 2016; Volume 374, pp. 142–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Cummins, J. An Introductory Reader to the Writings of Jim Cummins; Baker, C., Hornberger, H., Eds.; Multilingual Matters: Clevedon, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  6. Halliday, K. Language and Education; Continuum: London, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  7. Christie, F. Language Education: A Functional Perspective, Language Learning monograph series; Wiley Blackwell: Oxford, MS, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  8. McLeod, S.; Maimon, E. Clearing the Air: WAC Myths and Realities. Coll. Engl. 2000, 62, 573–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fabregat, S.; Gómez, A. La mejora de expresión escrita a través de la formación en Proyectos de Centro: Proyecto Lingüístico en Secundaria. Leng. Text 2011, 33, 21–28. Available online: http://www.sedll.org/sites/default/files/journal/la_mejora_de_la_expresion_escrita_a_traves_de_la_formacion_en_centros._fabregat_s_.pdf (accessed on 13 September 2023).
  10. Fabregat, S. La mejora de la competencia en comunicación lingüística como proyecto de centro. Una aproximación a las concepciones del profesorado. In Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literatura. Diez Temas Actuales; Fabregat, S., Sánchez Morillas, C.M., Jodar Jurado, R., Eds.; Grao: Barcelona, Spain, 2023; pp. 73–85. [Google Scholar]
  11. Trujillo, F. La Competencia en Comunicación Lingüística como Proyecto de Centro: Retos, posibilidades y ejemplificaciones. Leng. Text 2010, 32, 25–40. Available online: http://www.sedll.org/sites/default/files/journal/la_competencia_en_comunicacion_linga14istica_como_proyecto_de_centror_trujillo_f_0.pdf (accessed on 13 September 2023).
  12. Trujillo, F.; Rubio, R. El PLC Como Respuesta Sistémica al Reto de la Competencia Comunicativa en Entornos Educativos forMales: Propuesta de Análisis de Casos. Leng. Text 2014, 39, 29–38. Available online: http://www.sedll.org/sites/default/files/journal/lenguaje_y_textos_39_volumen_completo_1.pdf (accessed on 13 September 2023).
  13. Fabregat, S. Proyecto Lingüístico de Centro. Cómo Abordar la Mejora de las Habilidades Comunicativas desde la Institución Escolar; Grao: Barcelona, Spain, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  14. Swales, J.M. Genre Analysis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  15. Hyland, K. Genre: Language, context and literacy. Annu. Rev. Appl. Ling 2002, 22, 113–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hyland, K. Genre and Second Language Writing; University of Michigan Press: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  17. Bosch, M.C. La filosofía del ‘Whole language’ en la enseñanza de la lengua. Guiniguada 1992, 3, 377–394. [Google Scholar]
  18. Corson, D. Language Policy across the Curriculum; Multilingual Matters: Clevedon, UK, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  19. Crowhurst, M. Language and Learning across the Curriculum; Allyn & Bacon: Scarborough, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  20. Fabregat, S. La mejora de las habilidades comunicativas como espacio de innovación: Un acercamiento al Proyecto Lingüístico de Centro (PLC). Bellaterra 2020, 13, e992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pavón, P.; Pérez Ivernón, A. Enhancing disciplinary literacies: Languages of schooling and whole-school language projects in Spain. Eur. J. Appl. Ling. 2017, 6, 109–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Fabregat, S. La lectura y las habilidades comunicativas en el marco del Proyecto Lingüístico de Centro: Una propuesta interdisciplinar de mejora de la competencia en comunicación lingüística. In Investigación e Innovación en Educación Literaria; Yagüe, V., Jiménez, E., Eds.; Síntesis: Madrid, Spain, 2019; pp. 229–240. [Google Scholar]
  23. Pérez Ivernón, A. El proyecto Lingüístico de Centro: Una evolución necesaria para la mejora de la Competencia en Comunicación Lingüística. Tejuelo 2019, 30, 13–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Department of Educational Development and Vocational Training. Dosier Proyecto Lingüístico de Centro; Consejería de Desarrollo Educativo y Formación Profesional: Andalucía, Spain, 2022. Available online: https://www.juntadeandalucia.es/educacion/portals/delegate/content/34463e77-edf7-4844-b7eb-75f611dc94e2/Dosier%20PLC%202021-2022.pdf (accessed on 13 September 2023).
  25. Gather, M. Innovar en el Seno de la Institución Escolar; Graò: Barcelona, Spain, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  26. Trigo, E.; Romero, M.F.; García Delgado, A. Las voces de los agentes dinamizadores en la implementación de un PLC como clave para la transformación de un centro educativo. Tejuelo 2019, 30, 37–72. [Google Scholar]
  27. Colás, P.; Hernández-Portero, F. Las concepciones del profesorado de Música de Educación Secundaria. In Proceedings of the 3rd Virtual International Conference on Education, Innovation and ICT, online, 17–19 December 2018; pp. 170–174. [Google Scholar]
  28. Laudadío, J.; Mazzitelli, C.A. Análisis de las concepciones epistemológicas en la formación de docentes de ciencias naturales. Rev. Enseñanza Física 2019, 31, 441–447. [Google Scholar]
  29. Astroza, M.V.; De la Fuente, R.; Quintanilla, M.; Contreras, M.; Páez, R. Estudio exploratorio acerca de las creencias del profesorado de ciencias naturales y ciencias sociales sobre la consulta en línea en diferentes dimensiones. Enseñanza Cienc. Rev. Investig. Exp. Didácticas Extra 2017, 3919–3924. [Google Scholar]
  30. Altamirano, M.A.; Pagès, J. Pensamiento del profesorado de Historia, Geografía y Ciencias Sociales sobre la formación ciudadana en Chile. Clío As. 2018, 26, 34–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Piñeiro, J.; Castro Rodríguez, E.; Castro Martínez, E. Competencias y creencias de profesores de primaria sobre problemas matemáticos, su resolución y enseñanza. Av. Investig. Educ. Matemática 2019, 16, 57–72. [Google Scholar]
  32. Birello, M.; Gil, M.R. Creencias sobre la enseñanza de la composición escrita y de la gramática de estudiantes de grado de Educación Primaria y de Educación Infantil. Tejuelo 2014, 10, 11–26. [Google Scholar]
  33. Camps, A.; Fontich, X. Teachers’ concepts on the teaching of grammar in relation to the teaching of writing in Spain: A case study. L1-Educ. Stud. Lang. Lit. 2019, 19, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Parrales, A.B. Percepciones y Creencias del Profesorado Acerca de la Enseñanza-Aprendizaje de la Ortografía. Detección de necesidades de formación; Universidad de Oviedo: Oviedo, España, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  35. Fernández Álvarez, M.; Paz-Albo, J.; Hervás-Escobar, A.; Montes, A. Las percepciones de profesores bilingües sobre el clima y políticas educativas en Estados Unidos y España. Rev. Complut. Ed. 2022, 33, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gartziarena, M.; Altuna, J. Creencias del futuro profesorado: Multilingüismo y enseñanza de lenguas. Ed. XXI 2022, 25, 107–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cambra, M.; Civera, I.; Palou, J.; Ballesteros, C.; Riera, M.A. Creencias y saberes de los profesores en torno a la enseñanza de la lengua oral. Cult. Educ. 2000, 17/18, 25–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ballesteros, C.; Sangrà, J.P. Las creencias del profesorado y la enseñanza de la lengua oral. In El Discurso Oral Formal: Contenidos de Aprendizaje y Secuencias Didácticas; Santasusana, M.V.I., Ed.; Graò: Barcelona, Spain, 2005; pp. 101–116. [Google Scholar]
  39. Romero, M.F.; Trigo, E. Entre las creencias y la formación inicial de los estudiantes del Máster de Profesorado de Secundaria. Profr. Rev. Currículum Form. Profr. 2018, 22, 73–96. [Google Scholar]
  40. López Rodríguez, R.M.; Núñez Delgado, M.P. La educación literaria desde el paradigma del pensamiento del profesorado: Aportaciones de un estudio de caso colectivo en Secundaria. Álabe 2023, 27, 135–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Elkad-Lehman, I.; Greensfeld, H. Profesional learning and change. L1—Educ. Stud. Lang. Lit. 2008, 8, 5–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Vosniadou, S. Reframing the Classical Approach to Conceptual Change: Preconceptions, Misconceptions and Synthetic Models. In Second International Handbook of Science Education; Fraser, B., Tobin, K., McRobbie, C., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2012; pp. 119–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Bourque, L.B. Cross-sectional research. In The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods; Lewis-Beck, M.S., Byrman, A., Liao, T.F., Eds.; SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2004; pp. 230–231. [Google Scholar]
  44. Fowler, F.J. Survey RESEARCH methods, 5th ed.; SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  45. Poveda, B.; Barcelò, M.L.; Rodríguez, I.; López Gómez, E. Percepciones y creencias del estudiantado universitario sobre el aprendizaje en la universidad y en el prácticum: Un estudio cualitativo. Rev. Comp. Educ. 2021, 32, 41–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Cáceres, P. Análisis cuantitativo de contenido: Una alternativa metodológica alcanzable. Psicopers 2003, 2, 53–82. [Google Scholar]
  47. Carrasco, E.J. Percepción de los futuros docentes sobre la utilización del inglés como lengua vehicular en educación física en educación secundaria: Un análisis DAFO. In Educación Bilingüe; Martínez, J.D., de la Maya, M.G., Alejo, R., Eds.; Universidad de Extremadura: Cáceres, Spain, 2019; pp. 303–320. [Google Scholar]
  48. Bonals, J. La Práctica de Trabajo en Equipo del Profesorado; Graò: Barcelona, Spain, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  49. Engeström, Y.; Hopwood, N. Transformative agency by double stimulation. Pedagog. Cult. Soc. 2022, 30, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Augmenting the Impact of STEAM Education by Developing a Competence Framework for STEAM Educators for Effective Teaching and Learning
Previous
Learning about the Coexistence between Nature and Humans in Elementary Science Education: Developing Lessons Using Folktales That Reflect Ancestors’ Views on Nature
Next