Challenge/Competence Appraisal by Swiss Two-Way Immersion Teachers of the “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” in Their Professionalization Process and Career-Entry Stage Implications

Abstract

The growing number of public one-way and two-way immersion schools (French/German) in the Swiss cantons of Bern, Jura, and Neuchâtel has resulted in an increased need for teachers who are explicitly prepared for those schools. This need led to the thoughtfully conceptualized two-way immersion curriculum “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang,” jointly offered by two universities of teacher education located in the French- and German-speaking areas of Switzerland. This study explores the professionalization process of future primary teachers from Bern, Jura, and the bilingual program who are confronted with professional requirements. A scientific tool, used in a longitudinal perspective (2020–2023), documents how students of the two-way immersion and the French and German programs (n = 1021) weigh these requirements in the competence and challenge dimensions. A linear mixed-effects model was used to analyze their appraisal within each dimension across time and context. Independently of the context, the competence weighting increases for all students between t₁ and t₃. However, the challenge weighting exhibits a peak at t₂ in all contexts, maybe due to the consciousness-raising of faced challenges after half of the program. With teaching internships in two linguistic regions, two-way immersion students demonstrate a capacity for adaptability. Research-based and practitioner-informed implications for an induction program aiming to foster the further professionalization needed to master the new complexities during the career-entry stage are presented.

1. Introduction

Contrary to what Switzerland’s multilingual status might suggest, bilingual education has not always had the wind in its sails, nor has individual bilingualism/plurilingualism received much attention. It is only in the last twenty years that bilingual educational projects have multiplied (Elmiger, 2021). Since 2018, two completely independent monolingual universities of teacher education—Pädagogische Hochschule Bern (PHBern) in the German-speaking city of Berne and the French-speaking Haute École pédagogique de Berne francophone, du Jura et de Neuchâtel (HEP-BEJUNE) in the city of Delémont—have joined forces to offer a bilingual (German–French) initial teacher preparation training program for future primary school teachers: the two-way immersion program “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang.”

Our study focuses on the professionalization process of future primary teachers by describing how they perceive job requirements related to the teaching profession in three different Swiss programs: a German-speaking curriculum (henceforth: DE) at PHBern, a French-speaking curriculum (henceforth: FR) at HEP-BEJUNE, and a two-way immersion French/German curriculum “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” jointly offered by PHBern and HEP-BEJUNE (henceforth: BIL).

This comparative and longitudinal study represents the continuation of a previous study that aimed to analyze the knowledge base of DE, FR, and BIL teacher training programs by comparing them to those in Quebec and Ontario (Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020). To carry this out, we analyzed the course outlines of these teacher training programs, describing the professionalization concepts put into practice. However, the most important limitation of this earlier research was the partial analysis of future teachers’ knowledge. This is why, in the present research project, we focus on realities that have escaped such analysis, with three objectives in mind.

The first objective is to describe the professional requirements perceived by DE, FR, and BIL teachers who are facing challenges and their associated feelings of competence. Our study thus aims to show the process of professionalization arising from the confrontation of those requirements. More specifically, we are interested in analyzing the professional requirements perceived at different phases of their teaching training (t₁, t₂, and t₃) in four main domains: Capacity to teach, classroom management, cooperation, and role finding as a teacher.

The second objective—which consists of comparing the perception of professional requirements in different contexts—may give us a better understanding of the specificities of each context, specifically concerning the students of the “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” (with added pedagogical value).

The third objective is to anticipate the next step for the teachers in our sample: The results call for reflections on how freshly qualified professionals can be supported in acquiring the skills required for induction and how the stress associated with the challenges they face can be minimized. The first outlines of a curriculum fostering professionalization during induction will be drawn.

We begin this study by presenting the social context of this research project, its theoretical framework, and the methodology used. After the presentation of results, we conclude with a synthesis, specifying the limits of this study and subsequent projects.

2. Social Context of the Study

2.1. Swiss Linguistic Landscape

With its four national languages, including three official ones, a diglossic situation in its German-speaking areas, and an asymmetrical demographic weight between its linguistic regions, Switzerland exhibits constitutionally multilingual functioning (García, 2009). This is an essential aspect of the country’s identity that is enshrined in its law.1 German is the most widely spoken language (61.4%), followed by French (22.6%), Italian (7.7%), and Romansh (0.5%). Almost two-thirds of the population speaks more than one language at least once a week, including several dialects such as Swiss German, Patois Romand, or the Ticino/Italo-Grison dialect.2

The social context of the present study is unique and lies at the interface of German- and French-speaking Switzerland in the cantons of Jura, Neuchâtel, and Berne. The latter is one of Switzerland’s few bilingual cantons (French/German) and the only one with two universities of teacher education—one located in the French-speaking part and the other in the German-speaking part of Switzerland (Buser, 2017). Jointly offered by these two completely independent institutions—HEP-BEJUNE in the town of Delémont and PHBern in the town of Berne—“Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” takes advantage of this privileged geographical location. Leading house comprises the French-speaking institution HEP-BEJUNE. With the aim of re-profiling teachers, the two-way immersion program also meets a growing need for well-qualified teachers with the ability to teach in both French and German. This need has arisen due to a growing number of public one-way and two-way immersion schools3 within the same region (Buser, 2014a, 2020; Buser & Narcy-Combes, 2022). These specific needs4 of well-qualified one-way and two-way immersion teachers (Buser, 2014b) resulted in the thoughtfully conceptualized two-way immersion curriculum (Buser, 2017), which has been jointly offered by HEP-BEJUNE and PHBern since 20185 and officially approved by the Swiss Conference of Cantonal Ministers of Education (EDK)6 as of 25 April 2023.

2.2. Initial Two-Way Immersion Teacher Preparation Program “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang”

The initial two-way immersion teacher preparation program “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” is a choice-based educational alternative to “monolingual” programs, integrating French-speaking, German-speaking, and bilingual students (French/German) in each class. Two-way immersion education is fueled by the collaborative expertise that emerges from the interaction between students of the two partner languages and the mutual support between them. It strives to promote bilingualism and biliteracy in addition to grade-level academic achievement and intercultural competencies for all students (Christian, 1994, 1996; Wei, 2008; Blackledge & Creese, 2010; Baker, 2011; Bialystok, 2011; Cenoz, 2013). Bilingualism is thus practiced, integrated, and experienced in everyday life, enabling students to teach in both French and German according to the teaching methods of each linguistic region. Two-way immersion student teachers, therefore, acquire knowledge of both curricula (Plan d’études romand PER and Lehrplan 21) during initial bilingual teacher preparation training.

The methodological approach here differs fundamentally from a dual monolingual approach, in that it adopts multilingual standards throughout the curriculum. Like the monolingual teacher trainings (DE and FR), the bilingual curriculum covers 180 ECTS (corresponding to six semesters) but is based on the principle of two-way immersion: native speakers from both language groups (French-speaking and German-speaking) are in constant interaction, fostering the reciprocal acquisition of languages and intercultural skills associated with them (Buser, 2020). Half the program is carried out in each of the two institutions: three semesters in French in Delémont and three semesters “auf Deutsch” in Switzerland’s capital, Bern. The training thus relies as much on the physical mobility of students between these two cities—some one hundred kilometers apart—as on exposure to a diversity of institutional training and professional practices. The amount of instructional time is equal in the two languages (French during three semesters at HEP-BEJUNE and German during three semesters at PHBern).

“Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang,” which is unique in Switzerland to date7, represents much more than linguistic exchange. Unlike an Erasmus-type exchange, its concept is based on professionalization (Lessard & Bourdoncle, 2002; Mellouki & Wentzel, 2012; Lussi Borer, 2017; Tardif & Lessard, 2004; Lenoir & Bouillier-Oudot, 2006; Tardif & Borgès, 2009; Altet et al., 2013; Etienne, 2017; Lessard, 2017; Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020; Keller-Schneider, 2010, 2014, 2016, 2020) combined with two-way immersion education (Christian, 1996; Howard, 2002; Lindholm-Leary & Howard, 2008; García, 2009; Buser, 2014b, 2017, 2020; Lindholm-Leary, 2020). It is not, therefore, a short-term mobility program. To the contrary, the strength of this bilingual initial teacher preparation program lies in the professionalization process that continues within both institutions (see Section 3.1).

Admission criteria are the same as for the monolingual degree program at HEP-BEJUNE and PHBern. Regarding language skills in the partner language (German at HEP-BEJUNE and French at PHBern), a B2 diploma is required (as it is for their “monolingual” peers). This bilingual program is designed to prepare future teachers who are proficient in both French and German, the two major languages spoken in Switzerland. Consequently, bilingual study program graduates can teach in bilingual and in “monolingual” schools (as very well-qualified French teachers in German-speaking Switzerland and vice versa). Offering practical training in German- and French-speaking schools, as well as in public bilingual schools such as FiBi, Clabi, and PRIMA, the bachelor’s degree diploma enables teachers to work legitimately in both German- and French-speaking Switzerland, as well as in bilingual classes. Furthermore, for each of the six semesters, so-called accompanying modules at HEP-BEJUNE and PHBern are planned to alternate theory and practice (Etienne, 2017) by reflecting on the diversity of training practices—both academic (the school, for pupils) and tertiary (the training institute, for students). By its very nature, a practical internship with the partner language as the language of schooling represents an immersive teaching situation for BIL students. Being immersed in an education system other than the one an individual has experienced can prompt them to question their personal beliefs about teaching and learning. The accompanying modules are designed as a medium for the exchange, clarification, questioning, and documentation of these reflections, using logbooks, scientific readings, debates, and stimulating encounters. BIL students are therefore exposed to a wide variety of concrete teaching and learning conceptions and practices through languages. The aim is not to appropriate the skills of others through contact with diversity, but to render thinking more complex. In terms of content, those modules aim to cover the didactic and sociolinguistic topics that the two institutions cover minimally or not at all in their so-called monolingual training programs: introduction to sociolinguistics; epistemological comparison between curricula and textbooks in the two linguistic regions; awareness of “struggling learners in immersion education contexts” (Fortune & Menke, 2010); didactics of one-way and two-way immersion education (Lyster, 2016); and discovery of the teaching of courses in the native language and culture for allophone pupils in schools or the notion of translanguaging (García & Wei, 2015). The accompanying modules therefore provide a wide variety of conceptions, transdisciplinary approaches, and concrete practices, including questioning and documentation via a logbook of personal reflections, scientific readings, and debates and meetings with numerous external contributors, such as university lecturers, practitioners, and other players involved in various multilingual teaching and learning models.

The two-way immersion program also requires intense collaboration between the two pre-existing institutions with respect to their own curricula and institutional concepts. In addition to people working in the two administrations, it also involves teacher educators of all disciplines in both universities of teacher education. Subject teacher trainers’ first reactions when hearing about the new initial two-way immersion teacher preparation training were sometimes, “I am not a language teacher, and I cannot teach my discipline in the partner language.” In fact, teacher trainers of both institutions “lend their discipline for language goals” (García, 2009, p. 211). Accordingly, they need to develop new methods for teaching their subject. This is why two joint awareness-raising days for professional practices were organized in 2018 and 2019. Just before the first BIL class started in 2018, all teacher educators from PHBern came to Delémont, giving them an opportunity to meet and exchange ideas. The aim was for both parties to show openness and respect for the training program offered by the “partner” institution. One year later, all teacher educators from HEP-BEJUNE were invited to Berne to meet their peers in the same discipline. Already at this point, they realized that they did not have to develop new methods for teaching their subject. Studying in a “bilingual mode” not only increases exposure time in the partner language but also provides qualitative elements in the form of metalinguistic reflection, knowledge transfer, and strategies that draw on the diversity of the linguistic profiles of students in this class (mutual support between two-way immersion students). Undoubtedly, BIL teachers are not proficient in both languages at the same level by the end of their training, but they are proficient enough to meet the professional needs of French-speaking, German-speaking, and bilingual schools. However, what are these professional needs? What are their perceived professional requirements in terms of challenges and the sense of competence? These are the initial questions for the present study.

3. Theoretical Framework

3.1. Process of Professionalization: Dealing with Professional Requirements

In Switzerland, as in other contexts, the difficulties are associated with the professionalization of teacher education, among other things, and the complexity of bringing together theoretical and practical components (Lessard & Bourdoncle, 2002; Tardif & Lessard, 2004; Mellouki & Wentzel, 2012; Altet et al., 2013; Etienne, 2017; Lussi Borer, 2017; Keller-Schneider et al., 2021). Therefore, teacher education, while being provided at tertiary institutions at the university level, must meet the professionalization of teaching requirements “understood as the process of building a knowledge base and a repertoire of skills specific to the act of teaching” (Lessard, 2017, p. 152). Right from the start of their studies, BIL, DE, and FR teachers are thus confronted with different teaching profession requirements (for a detailed analysis, see Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020). Internships in schools are included in the curriculum, improving the quality of the latter at least from the teacher students’ point of view (Lessard & Bourdoncle, 2002; Brouwer & Korthagen, 2005; Buser & Meia, 2023). Their perceptions of professional requirements, shaped by their experiences with respect to challenges and the sense of competence, can influence how teachers deal with these requirements (Keller-Schneider, 2010, 2014, 2020). According to stress-resource theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Hobfoll, 1989), dealing with professional requirements depends on the teacher’s appraisal of the situation and available resources. The latter are mobilized (or not) depending on the outcome of the evaluation. Consequently, “when a requirement is assessed as important and controllable (competence), and the resources available for this purpose are considered sufficient, then this requirement is accepted as a challenge to be met and treated as part of a demanding professionalization process” (Keller-Schneider, 2016, p. 187). Teachers are confronted with professional requirements when taking on various teaching tasks to experiment with during their professional role (Perrenoud et al., 2008; Grossman et al., 2009); putting acquired skills into practice (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Altet et al., 2013); differentiating and individualizing their teaching method (Paré & Trépanier, 2015); and acquiring practical experiences that will be set against theory during theoretical training (Tardif & Lessard, 2004; Keller-Schneider, 2014). This gradual entry into practice enables teacher students to acquire professional skills (Bosse et al., 2012), which, from the point of view of motivation theory, strengthens their willingness to learn (Jerusalem & Hopf, 2002), also contributing to this process. These individual characteristics, particularly the subjective interpretation of requirements, also structure this process.

Figure 1 presents a model for operationalizing this professionalization process (Keller-Schneider, 2010, p. 113) and shows how these requirements are perceived and interpreted by teachers. The experience of feeling competent represents an important resource for mastering professional requirements, and the related challenge—in subjective perception—reflects the extent to which a person commits and thus invests resources (Brouwer & Korthagen, 2005). Being confronted with professional requirements involves differentiating acquired knowledge and skills and developing them in line with lived experience (Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986; Berliner, 2001; Keller-Schneider, 2020). Teaching is a challenge, and teachers need to develop new skills by making the best use of their resources to meet the challenges of a changing environment (Day & Gu, 2007). To pursue professionalization, teachers need to maintain a healthy balance between their sense of competence and the intensity of the challenges (Buchwald & Hobfoll, 2004). Thus, professionalization is an active process, requiring a certain investment (Keller-Schneider, 2010, 2016, 2020). Experiences gained in complex situations contribute to this process. Becoming a teacher, therefore, lies at the intersection between individual characteristics (Keller-Schneider, 2014), which, as resources, shape the process of professionalization and the process of acquiring knowledge and skills (Bosse et al., 2012) arising from confrontation with professional requirements (Keller-Schneider, 2010). Our study continues the reflections of Keller-Schneider’s (2010, 2014, 2016, 2020), which investigated how the perception of requirements evolves during different teacher training and career stages.

Understanding challenge and competence appraisal is relevant for professional development and professionalization (Buser & Meia, 2023). Motivational, volitional, and social factors all play a part in the professionalizing process, as do the individual characteristics (Weinert, 2001; Keller-Schneider, 2014) that shape it. Following Blömeke et al. (2008), competence is thus observed as a potential that contributes to meeting these requirements. Cognitive, emotional, and social factors are also involved in this process. According to Weinert (2001), competence is understood as the capacity and cognitive ability to solve a specific problem. Operational competencies emerge as a particular competency profile in different situations (Oser & Renold, 2005); i.e., specific aspects of potential competency emerge to meet different situation-specific requirements. Consequently, competence as latent potential (Blömeke et al., 2008; Keller-Schneider, 2020) is not visible and is primarily a matter of self-assessment. The lived experience of competence—according to Ryan and Deci (2017)—is a fundamental need that helps the individual in facing challenges. It is a latent, subjectively perceived resource for mastering demands. This approach, therefore, differs from research on measurable skills (Chomsky, 1980).

Most countries in North America and Europe have implemented changes to teacher training, with the aim of fostering professionalization (Tardif & Borgès, 2009; Wittorski, 2015). According to Grimmett et al. (2012), professionalization has two essential meanings: on one hand, it means professionalizing the practice of teaching; that is, defining and operationalizing an elaborated professional knowledge base (Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020). On the other hand, it describes the professionalization of the status of teaching (through mechanisms such as strengthening links with universities and self-regulation). This professionalizing trend, which accompanied institutions in the 1960s, aimed to raise the intellectual level of university teacher education, increase its duration, emphasize the cooperation between training institutions and schools, and use research to build a useful knowledge base for teachers (Tardif et al., 1998; Perrenoud et al., 2008; Wentzel, 2012; Wittorski, 2016; Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020). Moreover, teacher education has adopted a competency-based approach and places great emphasis on cooperation between training institutions and schools, in addition to integrating research into training (Tardif et al., 1998; Perrenoud et al., 2008; Wentzel, 2012; Wittorski, 2016; Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020). The professionalization movement in teacher education varies according to educational contexts and has undergone numerous translations from one country to another and from one institution to another. This local retranslation (Wentzel, 2012) of the professionalization process in social systems—characterized by profound changes linked to society—is not only marked by educational traditions but also by the conjunctural constraints of an economic or demographic nature, etc. (Wentzel, 2012). The social system, being a veritable “mobile mosaic” (Hargreaves, 1994), is constantly undergoing change, and it has thus encouraged research into teachers’ knowledge, with the aim of building a knowledge base specific to the teaching profession and understanding the differences and similarities between teacher training and the teaching profession (Shulman, 1986; Lussi Borer, 2017; Tardif & Borgès, 2009; Lessard, 2017; Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020; Buser & Meia, 2023). A great deal of research has been devoted to studying the professionalization of teacher training and its legitimization (Tardif et al., 1998; Verloop et al., 2001; Darling-Hammond, 2006, 2017; Lenoir & Bouillier-Oudot, 2006; Bosse et al., 2012; Wentzel & Akkari, 2012; Lussi Borer, 2017; Zaouani-Denoux & Wittorski, 2023). However, these scientific studies are limited to a partial analysis of professional knowledge, leaving aside the analysis of the main actors’ adaptations of knowledge: What professional requirements do teachers face in their process of professionalization?

3.2. Four Main Domains of Professional Requirements

Experiences in complex situations help the individual to cope with challenges and represent a latent, subjectively perceived resource for mastering professional requirements. Confrontation with professional requirements implies the differentiation of acquired knowledge and skills such that they can be developed according to these lived experiences (Dreyfus & Dreyfus, 1986; Berliner, 2001; Keller-Schneider, 2020). In this manner, operational competencies emerge in the form of a particular competency profile in different situations; namely, specific aspects of the potential competency emerge to meet different situation-specific requirements. Competencies—as latent potential contributing to meeting these requirements (Blömeke et al., 2008; Keller-Schneider & Hericks, 2013)—are a matter of self-assessment. This approach, therefore, differs from research into measurable skills (Chomsky, 1980).

Our study continues the reflections of Keller-Schneider’s (2010, 2016, 2020) research, which investigated how the perception of requirements evolves during different phases of the professional teaching career. This author first identified requirements from the point of view of in-service teachers (Keller-Schneider, 2010). To carry this out, notes from counseling sessions with 40 beginning teachers were analyzed, and professional requirements of teachers were derived using content analyses (Keller-Schneider, 2010). Factor analysis enabled her to determine the identification of a professional requirement model with four main domains (Keller-Schneider, 2020), and their latent structure comprised 12 factors (see

Table 1. Professional requirements concerning the four main domains (Keller-Schneider, 2020).

Capacity to teach		Cooperation
- Capacity to adapt teaching to individual learner’s needs - Evaluating learners’ performance in relation to general and individual goals - Perceiving and promoting students’ learning processes individually Keeping parents informed and conducting parent-teacher conferences		- Finding my position as a staff member - Cultivating a successful cooperation with the principle Identifying opportunities and limits within the school system
	Professional requirements concerning…
Classroom management		Role finding as teacher
- Creating a pleasant climate in the classroom (direct classroom management) - Perceiving and directing the dynamics in the class (indirect classroom management)		- Dealing with own requirements in an appropriate way - Using and protecting my resources Finding my role and communicating accordingly

).

4. Methodology

4.1. Objectives and Research Questions

The objective of our research study was to analyze how BIL, DE, and FR students perceive professional requirements at different phases of their teacher training (t₁, t₂, and t₃), and which of these are seen as challenges or as resources (sense of competence) concerning the four main domains (capacity to teach, classroom management, cooperation, and role finding as a teacher). Furthermore, we aimed to identify specific characteristics of two-way immersion program students in terms of the perception and interpretation of professional requirements, and to anticipate the career-entry stage of BIL, DE and FR teachers by considering how they can be supported in promoting the optimal use of resources to maximize their sense of competence when starting their teaching career.

Specifically, the following research questions were investigated:

RQ1: How, in terms of challenges and competence, do BIL students perceive the professional requirements concerning the four main areas as compared to their DE and FR peers, and what are the differences according to the three contexts and phases of training (t₁, t₂, and t₃)?

RQ2: How, in terms of challenges and competence, do DE students perceive the professional requirements concerning the four main areas as compared to their BIL and FR peers, and what are the differences according to the three contexts and phases of training (t₁, t₂, and t₃)?

RQ3: How, in terms of challenges and competence, do FR students perceive the professional requirements concerning the four main areas as compared to their BIL and DE peers, and what are the differences according to the three contexts and phases of training (t₁, t₂, and t₃)?

4.2. Research Design

4.2.1. Method

To analyze the competence and challenge appraisal perceived by BIL, DE, and FR teachers within each dimension, a linear mixed-effects model was employed, with time, context, and their interaction term specified as fixed effects. A random intercept was included for each participant ID in this quantitative study.

The estimated marginal means were calculated for each time point (t₁, t₂, and t₃) and context (DE, FR, and BIL) combination. Post hoc pairwise comparisons were performed to investigate differences between language groups, time points, and interaction effects. These included comparisons of time points within each language group, as well as comparisons between language groups at each time point. p-values were adjusted to account for multiple testing. The results were summarized using pairwise contrasts to identify significant effects.

4.2.2. Sample

A total of 1021 future teachers (BIL, DE, and FR) at different stages of their teacher training programs (t₁, t₂, and t₃) completed a survey with respect to professional requirements in the challenge and competence dimensions (Keller-Schneider, 2010).

Table 2. Study sample from the three BIL, DE, and FR contexts at t₁, t₂, and t₃.

Participants	BIL **	DE ***	FR ****	Total
t1	n = 92	n = 221	n = 87	n = 400
t2	n = 35	n = 236	n = 74	n = 345
t3	n = 44	n = 92	n = 140	n = 276
Total Completed questionnaires	n = 171	n = 549	n = 301	n = 1021
Total Participants *	n = 104	n = 308	n = 220	n = 632

* Some participants have completed the survey at several dates of data collection. ** DE = German as language of instruction. *** FR = French as language of instruction. **** BIL = French + German as languages of instruction.

shows the sample for this research project. Please note that the number of respondents is lower than the total number of completed questionnaires, as some respondents took part in more than one survey. A single database was created for all three phases of data collection, with the total number of observations corresponding to the number of respondents (and not the number of questionnaires). This choice made it possible to carry out mean comparison tests for paired samples (e.g., between t₁ and t₂ or between t₂ and t₃).

4.2.3. Instrument

The data collection tool developed by Keller-Schneider (2010, 2016, 2020) was used. In a preliminary study, this author identified professional requirements from the perspective of beginning teachers (Keller-Schneider, 2010). For the present study, the short version (EABest-k) was used consisting of 62 items that were programmed into a SurveyMonkey questionnaire and comprised four professional requirement scales and 12 subscales (see

Table 3. Reliability of the used instrument (α) for scales and subscales.

Scales (Number of Scales) + Subscales (Number of Items)	Item Example	Challenge (α)	Competence (α)
Capacity to teach (4)		t1: 0.84 t2: 0.76 t3: 0.87	t1: 0.88 t2: 0.71 t3: 0.68
Capacity to adapt teaching to individual learner’s needs (3)	Using methods of individualization in class	t1: 0.76 t2: 0.72 t3: 0.72	t1: 0.81 t2: 0.63 t3: 0.63
Evaluating learners’ performance in relation to general and individual goals (2)	Assessing learners’ personal outcomes according to general and individual learning goals	t1: 0.82 t2: 0.75 t3: 0.78	t1: 0.86 t2: 0.74 t3: 0.70
Perceiving and promoting students’ learning processes individually (4)	Dealing with different levels of student motivation	t1: 0.80 t2: 0.73 t3: 0.75	t1: 0.84 t2: 0.71 t3: 0.70
Keeping parents informed and conducting parent-teacher conferences (4)	Building up contacts and cultivating cooperation with parents	t1: 0.95 t2: 0.94 t3: 0.91	t1: 0.95 t2: 0.93 t3: 0.90
Classroom management (2)		t1: 0.87 t2: 0.85 t3: 0.86	t1: 0.90 t2: 0.68 t3: 0.71
Creating a pleasant climate in the classroom (direct classroom management) (3)	Recognizing teaching disruptions at an early stage	t1: 0.80 t2: 0.80 t3: 0.83	t1: 0.85 t2: 0.63 t3: 0.72
Perceiving and directing the dynamics in the class (indirect classroom management) (5)	Formulating explicitly expectations of the students’ behavior	t1: 0.87 t2: 0.84 t3: 0.87	t1: 0.90 t2: 0.74 t3: 0.73
Cooperation  (3)		t1: 0.86 t2: 0.81 t3: 0.88	t1: 0.89 t2: 0.79 t3: 0.80
Finding my position as a staff member (4)	Identifying implicit rules within the team	t1: 0.85 t2: 0.84 t3: 0.88	t1: 0.91 t2: 0.84 t3: 0.78
Cultivating successful cooperation with the principle (3)	Informing the school management in case of difficulties	t1: 0.90 t2: 0.85 t3: 0.81	t1: 0.91 t2: 0.89 t3: 0.76
Identifying opportunities and limits within the school system (3)	Benefit from your institution’s possibilities	t1: 0.86 t2: 0.83 t3: 0.83	t1: 0.90 t2: 0.85 t3: 0.79
Role finding as teacher  (3)		t1: 0.90 t2: 0.86 t3: 0.92	t1: 0.93 t2: 0.78 t3: 0.80
Dealing with own requirements in an appropriate way (5)	Having an overview of the work I have to do and organizing myself efficiently	t1: 0.88 t2: 0.84 t3: 0.88	t1: 0.89 t2: 0.71 t3: 0.79
Using and protecting my resources (4)	Keeping an eye on the essentials	t1: 0.85 t2: 0.83 t3: 0.85	t1: 0.88 t2: 0.77 t3: 0.74
Finding my role and communicating accordingly (5)	Dealing professionally with closeness and distance	t1: 0.83 t2: 0.80 t3: 0.85	t1: 0.88 t2: 0.77 t3: 0.74

for scales, subscales, and item examples). Each item was assessed in terms of challenge (…is a challenge for me) and competence (I am successful at …) using a 6-point Likert-type scale (1 = low; 6 = high). The survey duration was around 25 min.

It should be stressed here that we limit our research to the dimensions of competence and challenge. We therefore do not show results of the third evaluation dimension as developed in the tool by Keller-Schneider (2010), that is, the dimension of relevance of each professional requirement. This is because the perception of requirements being considered as important (relevance) reached very high averages across all domains, contexts, and phases of training (for detailed results, see Buser & Meia, 2023).

Table 3 shows the reliability of the instrument with its scales (number of scales) and subscales (number of items) in terms of Cronbach’s alpha, as well as the item examples. The internal consistency obtained for the scales and subscales and the reliability of the tool according to Cronbach’s α coefficient can be described as “good,” with values between 0.63 and 0.95 (see also Buser & Meia, 2023).

4.2.4. Data Collection and Analysis

Data Collection

Our research context includes three training courses. Between 2020 and 2023, data were collected from BIL, DE, and FR students who were attending a tertiary-level professional training course with a so-called single diploma, which combines professional and academic training in a single program spanning 6 semesters. Unlike an Erasmus-type exchange, the concept of an initial two-way immersion teacher preparation program is based on professionalization (see Section 3.1) combined with two-way immersion (Lindholm-Leary & Howard, 2008; García, 2009; Lindholm-Leary, 2020; de Boer et al., 2018; Buser, 2014a, 2017, 2020). It is therefore not a question of short-term mobility; to the contrary, the strength of BIL training lies in the professionalization process that continues within both institutions. In an earlier study, we analyzed the knowledge bases of the three programs, comparing them with several programs in Canada (for a detailed analysis, see Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020, p. 99). As a result, the general profile of training content is quite similar in our three contexts.

Data Preprocessing

In a previous study (Buser & Meia, 2023), analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted in SPSS (version 29), which required data in a wide format (i.e., each participant’s data for all time points stored in a single row). For the current study, however, the dataset was converted from wide to long format, wherein each participant’s measurements at the three time points (t₁, t₂, and t₃) were distributed across three rows. This long format was essential for estimating a linear mixed-effects model (LMM) in R (version 4.3.1), a method that inherently requires data in long formats and is particularly advantageous for longitudinal analyses.

Data Analysis Overview

This study aimed to examine how time (within-subject factor) and language groups (between-subject factor: DE, FR, and BIL) influenced various dependent variables measured longitudinally. The analysis proceeded in two main stages:

• Descriptive statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, sample sizes, etc.) for each time point and language group combination were calculated, providing an overview of the data distribution and identifying basic trends.
• Inferential statistical modeling: A linear mixed-effects model was fitted to evaluate the main effects of time and language group, as well as their interactions, on each outcome of interest.

Inferential Statistical Modeling

To capture the nested structure of the data (repeated measurements of individuals at multiple time points), a linear mixed-effects model was fit using the lmer function from the lme4 package in R. Each model had the following general form:

$$Y_{ij}={\beta }_0+{\beta }_{1}Tim{e}_{ij}+{\beta }_{2}LanguageGrou{p}_{ij}+{\beta }_{3}Time\times LanguageGrou{p}_{ij}+u_j+{ϵ}_{ij}$$

(1)

• ${\mathit{Y}}_{\mathit{i}\mathit{j}}$ represents the dependent variable for the i-th observation in the j-th subject.
• ${\mathit{\beta }}_0$ is the overall intercept.
• ${\mathit{\beta }}_1,{\mathit{\beta }}_2$, and ${\mathit{\beta }}_3$ are the fixed-effect coefficients for time, language group, and their interactions, respectively.
• ${\mathit{u}}_{\mathit{j}}$ is the random intercept (participant-level effect) capturing individual variability.
• ${\mathit{ϵ}}_{\mathit{i}\mathit{j}}$ is the residual error term.

Including participant-specific random intercepts accounted for within-subject correlations over repeated measures. This approach allowed the model to handle individual differences over time while simultaneously estimating the overall trends.

Analysis of Variance and Post Hoc Comparisons

After fitting the LMM, ANOVA was performed on each model to assess the statistical significance of the main effects (time and language group) and their interaction. Where significant effects or interactions emerged, post hoc pairwise comparisons were conducted and reported. These comparisons were evaluated:

• Differences among language groups (BIL, DE, and FR) at each time point.
• Differences among time points (t₁, t₂, and t₃) within each language group.

p-values from the post hoc tests were adjusted to mitigate the risk of Type I errors resulting from multiple comparisons.

Visual Representation of Findings

To assist in interpreting the results, estimated marginal means (EMMs) were plotted for each language group across time points. This visual representation rendered it easier to compare patterns across groups and time points and to spot notable trends in the data.

Method Summary

In this quantitative study, a linear mixed-effects model was used to analyze the competence and challenge appraisal. Estimated marginal means (EMMs) were calculated for each combination of time point (t₁, t₂, and t₃) and context (DE, FR, and BIL). A random intercept was included for each participant ID. Post hoc pairwise comparisons were performed to investigate differences between language groups, differences across time points, and interaction effects. p-values were adjusted to account for multiple testing. The results were summarized through pairwise contrasts to identify significant effects. The estimated marginal means were reported with their corresponding standard errors (SEs).

5. Results

In the following sections, we present the results of perceived professional requirements—in the BIL, DE, and FR contexts and over time—with respect to challenge and competence.

We also present the results showing estimated marginal means for the perception of requirements with respect to challenge and competence using a Likert scale from 1 = low to 6 = high (see Figure 2 and Figure 3). The significant differences between contexts (group differences) and across time points in terms of analysis of variance with a post hoc test (p) are described in

Table 4. Estimated marginal means (EMMs) for each language group and across time points.

	Variable	EMM/SE									Group Differences	Time Differences
		BIL t1	DE t1	FR t1	BIL t2	DE t2	FR t2	BIL t3	DE t3	FR t3
CHALLENGE	Capacity to teach	3.73/0.1	3.94/0.06	3.39/0.13	4.23/0.16	4.24/0.06	3.78/0.11	3.91/0.1	4.21/0.11	3.61/0.1	t1: DE > FR *** t2: DE > FR ** t3: DE > FR ***	FR: t1 > t3 *
	Classroom management	3.45/0.12	3.79/0.07	3.42/0.14	3.56/0.17	3.72/0.07	3.17/0.12	3.19/0.11	3.58/0.11	3.04/0.11	t1: DE > BIL * t2: DE > FR *** t3: DE > BIL *; DE > FR **	FR: t2 > t1 *
	Cooperation	3.14/0.12	3.04/0.07	2.7/0.14	3.34/0.18	3.06/0.07	3.13/0.12	3.27/0.11	3/0.12	3.01/0.11	t1: BIL > FR *	BIL: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 *** DE: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 *** FR: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 ***
	Role finding	3.6/0.15	3.5/0.07	3.32/0.14	3.62/0.28	3.64/0.07	3.64/0.13	3.55/0.27	3.58/0.11	3.38/0.13		BIL: t2 > t1 * DE: t2 > t1 *** FR: t2 > t1 *
COMPETENCE	Capacity to teach	3.46/0.09	3.3/0.06	3.5/0.12	3.64/0.14	3.82/0.06	3.99/0.1	4.17/0.09	4.05/0.09	4.32/0.09		BIL: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 *** DE: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 *** FR: t2 > t1 *; t3 > t1 **
	Classroom management	3.95/0.09	3.92/0.06	4.32/0.11	4.52/0.14	4.55/0.05	4.66/0.09	4.7/0.09	4.63/0.09	4.77/0.08	t1: FR > BIL *; FR > DE **	BIL: t3 > t1 *** DE: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 ***; t3 > t2 *** FR: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 ***; t3 > t2 *
	Cooperation	3.65/0.12	3.53/0.07	3.09/0.14	3.9/0.18	4.04/0.07	3.99/0.12	4.44/0.11	4.55/0.12	4.39/0.11	t1: BIL > FR **; DE > FR *	BIL: t2 > t1 * DE: t2 > t1 *** FR: t2 > t1 *
	Role finding	3.58/0.12	3.74/0.06	3.69/0.12	4.73/0.24	4.24/0.06	4.26/0.11	4.49/0.23	4.48/0.1	4.41/0.11		BIL: t3 > t1 ***; t3 > t2 * DE: t2 > t1 ***; t3 > t1 ***; t3 > t2 * FR: t2 > t1 **; t3 > t1 ***; t3 > t2 *

Challenge/Competence Appraisal (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001).

.

5.1. Teachers’ Perception of Professional Requirements Across Time Points and Between Contexts (RQ1)

5.1.1. Perceived Requirements in Terms of Challenge

Figure 2 shows the estimated marginal means at t₁, t₂, and t₃ for the challenge appraisal relating to the four major domains: capacity to teach, classroom management, cooperation, and role finding as a teacher. Table 1 provides an overview of all items of the subscales (for detailed results regarding the items of the subscales, see Buser, n.d.).

Capacity to Teach

Professional requirements relating to the thematic axis “capacity to teach” include individual adaptation of the teaching practice to pupils’ possibilities (pedagogical differentiation/individualization); encouraging and evaluating their learning and performance behavior; promoting their personal responsibility; and establishing and maintaining contact with parents (see Table 1).

Within the BIL group, there was a significant increase in the perception of challenge with regard to “capacity to teach” from t₁ [EMM = 3.73, SE = 0.10] to t₂ [EMM = 4.23, SE = 0.16]: t(700.45) = −2.74, p = 0.017. However, no significant differences were observed between t₁ and t₃ [EMM = 3.91, SE = 0.10]: t(731.93) = −1.34, p = 0.374. There were also no significant differences between t₂ and t₃ [t(675.95) = 1.77, p = 0.180]. As far as BIL students are concerned, their scores at t₃ are in all domains (except for “cooperation”) compared to their DE and FR counterparts. Although we must be cautious in our interpretation, this could be due to a certain adaptability of this group of BIL students because they were trained in two different institutions located in two linguistic regions: t₁, at the French-speaking HEP-BEJUNE; t₂, at the German-speaking PHBern; and at t₃, returning to the French-speaking HEP-BEJUNE (see Section 2.2).

Within the DE context, there was a significant increase in challenge perception concerning the item “capacity to teach” from t₁ [EMM = 3.94, SE = 0.06] to t₂ [EMM = 4.24, SE = 0.06]: t(515.42) = −3.82, p < 0.001. The difference between t₁ and t₃ [EMM = 4.21, SE = 0.11] approached significance: t(585.86) = −2.31, p = 0.056. No significant difference was observed between t₂ and t₃: t(586.93) = 0.32, p = 0.945.

Within the French context (FR), the challenge appraisal of “capacity to teach” increased significantly from t₁ [EMM = 3.39, SE = 0.13] to t₂ [EMM = 3.78, SE = 0.11]: t(802.82) = −2.42, p = 0.041. However, no significant differences were observed between t₁ and t₃ [EMM = 3.61, SE = 0.10]: t(711.90) = −1.48, p = 0.303. There were also no significant differences between t₂ and t₃ [t(717.89) = 1.23, p = 0.435].

Between-group comparisons at individual time points revealed significant differences. At t₁, the DE context [EMM = 3.94, SE = 0.06] scored significantly higher than the French context [EMM = 3.39, SE = 0.13]: t(925.38) = 3.80, p = 0.001. A similar pattern was observed at t₂, where the DE context [EMM = 4.24, SE = 0.06] exhibited higher challenge values with respect to the capacity to teach than the French context [EMM = 3.78, SE = 0.11]: t(925.25) = 3.59, p = 0.001. At t₃, the DE context [EMM = 4.21, SE = 0.11] again scored higher than the FR context [EMM = 3.61, SE = 0.10]: t(907.64) = 4.06, p = 0.001.

No significant differences were observed between the BIL and DE context at any time point. However, at t₂, the comparison between the BIL context [EMM = 4.23, SE = 0.16] and the FR context [EMM = 3.78, SE = 0.11] approached significance, [t(901.63) = 2.26, p = 0.062], suggesting a potential trend toward higher challenges in their capacity to teach in the BIL group.

Classroom Management

This domain includes tasks related to classroom management, as well as those concerned with the indirect orientation of classroom culture, notably through the optimization of work processes, the establishment of rituals, the perception of group dynamics, and the identification of potential conflicts (see Table 1).

As far as BIL scores are concerned, they are significantly lower than those of DE individuals at t₁ and t₃ (thus similar to those of FR); this is probably because they are at the beginning and end of their BIL studies in an FR context. At mid-term and at the end of training, BIL scores are again between those of DEs and FRs in the classroom management domain.

Within the French context (FR), a significant decrease in the challenge perception with regard to “classroom management” can be observed from t₁ [EMM = 3.42, SE = 0.14] to t₃ [EMM = 3.04, SE = 0.11]: t(668.03) = 2.39, p = 0.045. No significant differences were found between t₁ and t₂ [EMM = 3.17, SE = 0.12]: t(757.58) = 1.46, p = 0.313. There were also no significant differences between t₂ and t₃: t(679.21) = 0.90, p = 0.641. Within the BIL context and the DE context, no significant differences were found across any time points, with all p-values exceeding 0.18.

Between-context comparisons at t₁ revealed a significant difference between the BIL context [EMM = 3.45, SE = 0.12,] and the DE context [EMM = 3.79, SE = 0.07]: t(915.35) = −2.50, p = 0.033). Higher levels of challenge were reported in the DE context. A marginal difference was observed between the DE [EMM = 3.79, SE = 0.07] and FR [EMM = 3.42, SE = 0.14] contexts: t(925.01) = 2.31, p = 0.054. No significant differences were found between the BIL and FR contexts, [t(926.53) = 0.14, p = 0.990].

At t₂, the DE context [EMM = 3.72, SE = 0.07] reported significantly higher levels of challenge compared to the FR context [EMM = 3.17, SE = 0.12]: t(922.90) = 3.89, p = 0.001. No significant differences were found between the BIL context [EMM = 3.56, SE = 0.17] and the DE [t(875.49) = −0.83, p = 0.683] or French [t(889.97) = 1.84, p = 0.156] contexts.

At t₃, the DE context [EMM = 3.58, SE = 0.11] again showed significantly higher levels of challenge perception compared to the FR context [EMM = 3.04, SE = 0.11]: t(904.34) = 3.40, p = 0.002. Also, the DE context, as compared to the BIL context, [EMM = 3.19, SE = 0.11] showed higher levels of challenge perception: t(909.22) = −2.39, p = 0.045. No significant differences were observed between the BIL and FR contexts, [t(916.43) = 0.99, p = 0.586].

Cooperation

Cooperation involves an individual’s positioning within the school, collaborating with colleagues and management, using the school’s internal opportunities and resources, and managing the collective aspects of the teaching profession (see Table 1).

Within the FR context, a significant increase in the challenge appraisal relating to “cooperation” was observed from t₁ [EMM = 2.70, SE = 0.14] to t₂ [EMM = 3.13, SE = 0.12]: t(797.76) = −2.39, p = 0.045. No significant differences were found between t₁ and t₃ [EMM = 3.01, SE = 0.11]: t(706.77) = −1.85, p = 0.155. There were also no significant differences between t₂ and t₃: t(713.54) = 0.78, p = 0.712. Within the BIL context and the DE context, no significant differences were found across any time points, with all p-values exceeding 0.59.

As far as BIL students are concerned, their scores concerning challenge appraisal at t₃ are in all domains between those of their DE and FR peers—except for the domain “cooperation,” as mentioned before. Again, this may be due to the fact that the BIL group’s program takes place in French-speaking HEP-BEJUNE, followed by German-speaking PHBern (and back to the French-speaking institution at t₃). Accordingly, they become familiar with a variety of teaching cultures in the two language regions and numerous schools, which may influence their perception of cooperating with colleagues (see Section 2.2). In particular, when it comes to the identification of implicit rules within a team according to each language region and its cultural characteristics, this might represent a challenging issue for two-way immersion students.

Between-context comparisons at t₁ revealed a significant difference between the BIL context, [EMM = 3.14, SE = 0.12,] and the FR context, [EMM = 2.70, SE = 0.14]: t(926.53) = 2.38, p = 0.046 (with higher levels of challenge reported in the BIL context). The comparison between the DE [EMM = 3.04, SE = 0.07] and FR contexts approached significance: t(925.30) = 2.09, p = 0.092. No significant difference was found between the BIL and DE contexts: t(920.86) = 0.76, p = 0.727. At t₂ and t₃, no significant differences were observed between any of the contexts.

Role Finding as a Teacher

Constructing a professional identity requires perceiving and managing professional challenges in light of one’s strengths, possibilities, conceptions, and ideals (see Table 1).

Between t₁ and t₃, the three BIL, DE, and FR groups exhibit similar scores (with no significant differences). The EMMs of the individual’s conceptions and ideals concerning their role as a teacher were between three and four (Likert scale) relative to the beginning and end of training.

For comparisons across time points, none of the contrasts were significant within each context (DE, FR, and BIL). Comparisons between language groups at each time point did not reveal any significant differences.

In summary, the examined development of professional identity in teaching among the three groups and across three time points showed that all three groups exhibited similar scores regarding the perceptions of their roles as teachers, with no significant differences noted. The EMMs for the individuals’ conceptions and ideals about their teaching roles ranged between three and four on a Likert scale throughout the training period. Concerning comparisons, no significant differences were found at any of the time points: neither within contexts nor between language groups.

In conclusion, it can be observed that there is a strong tendency for the perception of the challenge to break down in the middle of each curriculum (DE, FR, and BIL) at t₂. This trend is independent of the contexts and concerns of all major professional requirement domains. It seems that all students realize—in the middle of their initial teacher preparation program—that the various professional requirements they face represent challenges for them. In general, all future teachers of our sample encountered the most difficulties in the “capacity to teach” domain, which includes the differentiation and individualization of teaching and learning, assessment practices, and collaboration with parents (for a detailed analysis, see Buser, n.d.). Similarly, the construction of their professional identity is, from their subjective point of view, persists as a challenging issue until the end of their teacher training.

5.1.2. Perceived Requirements in Terms of Competence

Figure 3 shows the estimated marginal means at t₁, t₂, and t₃ for the competence appraisal relating to the four following major domains: capacity to teach, classroom management, cooperation, and role finding as a teacher. Table 1 provides an overview of all items of the subscales (for detailed results regarding the items of the subscales, see Buser, n.d.).

Capacity to Teach

Within the BIL context, there was a significant increase in competence appraisal with regard to the domain “capacity to teach” from t₁ [EMM = 3.46, SE = 0.09] to t₃ [EMM = 4.17, SE = 0.09]: t(729.45) = −4.69, p = 0.001. A significant increase was also observed from t₂ [EMM = 3.64, SE = 0.14] to t₃: t(671.36) = −2.41, p = 0.043. However, the increase from t₁ to t₂ was not significant: t(695.81) = −1.12, p = 0.504.

Within the DE context, the feeling of competence related to “capacity to teach” significantly increased from t₁ [EMM = 3.30, SE = 0.06] to t₂ [EMM = 3.82, SE = 0.06]: t(512.61) = −7.32, p = 0.001. It also increased significantly from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.11, SE = 0.09]: t(580.09) = −7.82, p = 0.001. A smaller but significant increase is observable from t₂ to t₃: t(581.17) = −2.82, p = 0.014.

Within the FR context, the subjective perception of competence related to “capacity to teach” significantly increased from t₁ [EMM = 3.50, SE = 0.12] to t₂ [EMM = 3.99, SE = 0.10]: t(799.56) = −3.37, p = 0.002. It also increased from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.32, SE = 0.09]: t(708.59) = −6.01, p = 0.001. A significant increase can also be observed from t₂ to t₃: t(715.09) = −2.64, p = 0.023.

Between-context comparisons at t₁ revealed no significant differences among the BIL [EMM = 3.46, SE = 0.09], DE [EMM = 3.30, SE = 0.06], and FR [EMM = 3.50, SE = 0.12] contexts. Similarly, at t₂, there were no significant differences between the BIL [EMM = 3.64, SE = 0.14], DE [EMM = 3.82, SE = 0.06], and FR [EMM = 3.99, SE = 0.10] contexts. At t₃, the comparison between the BIL [EMM = 4.17, SE = 0.09] and FR [EMM = 4.32, SE = 0.09] contexts approached significance, [t(921.37) = −2.32, p = 0.053], suggesting a potential trend toward higher competence in the FR context. No other significant differences were observed.

To summarize, there was a significant increase from t₁ (3.46) to t₃ (4.17) in the BIL context, and the increase between t₂ (3.64) and t₃ was also significant. In the DE context, significant increases from t₁ (3.30) to t₃ (4.05) can be observed. This was also the case in the FR context, where competence appraisal consistently increased from t₁ (3.50) to t₃ (4.32). For all comparisons, no significant differences were found with respect to competence appraisal among contexts at any time point.

Classroom Management

Within the BIL context, significant increases in competence appraisal regarding “classroom management” were observed from t₁ [EMM = 3.95, SE = 0.09] to t₂ [EMM = 4.52, SE = 0.14]: t(735.99) = −3.64, p = 0.001. There was also a significant increase from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.70, SE = 0.09]: t(748.40) = −6.40, p = 0.001. However, no significant differences were observed between t₂ and t₃: t(711.47) = −1.14, p = 0.491.

Within the DE context, there were also significant increases in competence appraisal in the same domain from t₁ [EMM = 3.92, SE = 0.06] to t₂ [EMM = 4.55, SE = 0.05]: t(537.86) = −8.89, p = 0.001. Significant increases were also observed from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.63, SE = 0.09]: t(634.33) = −6.95, p = 0.001. The difference between t₂ and t₃ was not significant: t(635.40) = −0.82, p = 0.692.

Within the FR context, the feeling of competence in “classroom management” significantly increased from t₁ [EMM = 4.32, SE = 0.11] to t₂ [EMM = 4.66, SE = 0.09]: t(825.31) = −2.41, p = 0.042. It also significantly increased from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.77, SE = 0.08]: t(735.71) = −3.46, p = 0.002. No significant difference was observed between t₂ and t₃: t(737.26) = −0.98, p = 0.588.

Between-context comparisons at t₁ revealed significant differences between the BIL [EMM = 3.95, SE = 0.09] and FR contexts [EMM = 4.32, SE = 0.11]: t(926.66) = −2.61, p = 0.025. There were also significant differences between the DE [EMM = 3.92, SE = 0.06] and FR contexts: t(925.87) = −3.20, p = 0.004 (with higher competence values reported in the FR context). No significant difference was found between the BIL and DE contexts. At t₂ and t₃, no significant differences were observed between any of the contexts.

To summarize, significant increases can be noted in the BIL context from t₁ (3.95) to t₃ (4.70). When it comes to DE and FR contexts, there were comparable significant increases across time. Finally, concerning comparative insights, FR students reported higher competencies than BIL and DE at t₁.

Cooperation

Within the BIL context, competence appraisal in the “cooperation” domain significantly increased from t₁ [EMM = 3.65, SE = 0.12] to t₃ [EMM = 4.44, SE = 0.11]: t(717.34) = −4.00, p = 0.001. No significant differences were found between t₁ and t₂ [EMM = 3.90, SE = 0.18]: t(674.93) = −1.25, p = 0.426. There were also no significant differences between t₂ and t₃: t(650.85) = −1.76, p = 0.184.

Within the DE context, significant increases in competence appraisal with regard to “cooperation” were observed across all time points. Competence significantly increased from t₁ [EMM = 3.53, SE = 0.07] to t₂ [EMM = 4.04, SE = 0.07]: t(500.24) = −5.90, p = 0.001. It also increased significantly from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.55, SE = 0.12]: t(555.64) = −8.02, p = 0.001. A significant increase was also observed from t₂ to t₃: t(556.70) = −4.01, p = 0.001.

Within the FR context, significant increases in the evaluation of the feeling of competence related to “cooperation” were observed across all time points as well. Competence increased significantly from t₁ [EMM = 3.09, SE = 0.14] to t₂ [EMM = 3.99, SE = 0.12]: t(783.96) = −4.95, p = 0.001. It also increased significantly from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.39, SE = 0.11]: t(693.09) = −7.71, p = 0.001. A significant increase was also found between t₂ and t₃: t(701.69) = −2.63, p = 0.024.

Between-context comparisons at t₁ revealed significant differences between the BIL [EMM = 3.65, SE = 0.12] and FR [EMM = 3.09, SE = 0.14] contexts: t(926.51) = 2.98, p = 0.008. there were also significant differences between the DE [EMM = 3.53, SE = 0.07] and FR contexts: t(925.13) = 2.69, p = 0.020. No significant difference was found between the BIL and DE contexts: t(919.08) = 0.87, p = 0.662. At t₂ and t₃, no significant differences were observed between any of the contexts.

To summarize, a significant increase from t₁ (3.65) to t₃ (4.44) is observable in the BIL context, whereas similar significant increases across all time points were reported for the two other contexts. Regarding comparative insights, higher competence appraisal was reported by BIL and DE students compared to their FR peers at t₁.

Role Finding as a Teacher

Within the BIL context, significant increases in competence appraisal regarding “role finding as a teacher” were observed from t₁ [EMM = 3.58, SE = 0.12] to t₂ [EMM = 4.73, SE = 0.24]: t(528.82) = −4.50, p = 0.001. There were also significant increases from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.49, SE = 0.23]: t(528.02) = −3.84, p = 0.0004. No significant difference was found between t₂ and t₃: t(341.13) = 0.69, p = 0.770.

Within the DE context, significant increases in their subjective perception of feeling competent in their “role finding as a teacher” were observed from t₁ [EMM = 3.74, SE = 0.06] to t₂ [EMM = 4.24, SE = 0.06]: t(430.17) = −6.87, p = 0.001. There were also significant increases from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.47, SE = 0.10]: t(481.51) = −6.71, p = 0.001. The difference between t₂ and t₃ was not significant: t(479.74) = −1.98, p = 0.118.

Within the FR context, competence appraisal in “role finding as a teacher” also significantly increased from t₁ [EMM = 3.69, SE = 0.12] to t₂ [EMM = 4.26, SE = 0.11]: t(673.16) = −3.68, p = 0.001. And it also increased significantly from t₁ to t₃ [EMM = 4.41, SE = 0.11]: t(596.42) = −4.79, p = 0.001. No significant difference, however, was found between t₂ and t₃: t(616.84) = −0.97, p = 0.596.

Between-context comparisons at t₁ revealed no significant differences between the BIL context [EMM = 3.58, SE = 0.12] and the DE [EMM = 3.74, SE = 0.06] or FR contexts [EMM = 3.69, SE = 0.12] at t₁, with all p-values exceeding 0.47. Similarly, at t₂, no significant differences were observed between the BIL [EMM = 4.73, SE = 0.24], DE [EMM = 4.24, SE = 0.06], or FR [EMM = 4.26, SE = 0.11] contexts. At t₃, comparisons between the BIL [EMM = 4.48, SE = 0.23], DE [EMM = 4.47, SE = 0.10], and FR [EMM = 4.41, SE = 0.11] contexts also revealed no significant differences.

In summary, the results of the analysis of our sample are rather pleasing with respect to the universities of teacher education: the values that are linked to the development of a subjective sense of competence generally exhibit a rather linear trend between t₁ and t₃. Accordingly, the estimated marginal means for perceived competence in the four main domains increased from t₁ to t₃ in all three contexts, and values of above four (on the six-point Likert scale) were achieved. In conclusion, we observed a positive trend in the development of professional requirement perceptions in terms of competence. When students in the three contexts progress further in their initial teacher preparation training, they consider themselves to be more competent and to have the necessary skills for teaching (Lessard, 2017). These results may be an indication that all teacher students of our sample are undergoing a process of professionalization during their training.

6. Discussion

6.1. Perception of Professional Requirements in Terms of Challenge and Competence

Keller-Schneider’s tool (Keller-Schneider, 2010), used in a longitudinal and comparative perspective, allowed us to document the professionalization process of future primary school teachers from different contexts, including two-way immersion teachers. The aim of our research was to analyze the perception of professional requirements in terms of challenge and competence at t₁, t₂, and t₃ and within three contexts (BIL, DE, and FR). Two findings emerged from our study.

First, we see a positive trend in the perception of requirements relative to competence from the subjective point of view of student teachers in all four main domains. When BIL, DE, and FR teachers progress further in their training, they feel more competent during the act of teaching (Lessard, 2017). This result may reflect the fact that they are partaking in the process of professionalization from the beginning to the end of their training. Even in the face of the complex demands, future teachers in our sample feel increasingly competent, which is probably a favorable condition for performance and job satisfaction (Caprara et al., 2003) and commitment (Klassen & Chiu, 2010). Moreover, this positive feeling of competence is essential for developing the capacity to deal with professional requirements and fosters further professionalization (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Bakker & Demerouti, 2006).

As a second point, it should be noted that for all three contexts, there is a break in the perception of challenge in the middle section of the initial teacher preparation training. Students of all three contexts seemed to realize—at t₂, after their first experiences with practical internships—that the professional requirements of all four main domains are challenging. At t₃, the scores of all three groups dropped again, which may be linked to their higher sense of competence at the end of their program. However, all students of our sample still judged the “capacity to teach” domain as highly challenging when combined with a lower sense of competence at the end of teacher training. In addition, they perceived the “role finding as a teacher” domain as a challenge.

6.2. Specific Features of the Students of the Two-Way Immersion Programs

As mentioned before, the professionalization process of future two-way immersion teachers takes place at two institutions located within different language regions. This may influence their perception of requirements due to institutional and linguistic/cultural differences, in addition to various teaching practices. BIL students earn more than just a bilingual diploma: They are qualified to teach in both languages and across both language regions. They also learn about the “teaching culture” of the other language region (Buser, n.d.). Following Grosjean (1989) and his famous metaphor of the hurdle race, which comprises neither sprinting nor high jumping (although it does involve aspects of both) but is a discipline in its own right, our goal is not to compare BIL students to their DE and FR peers. Rather, we aim to identify BIL’s specific characteristics, which are neither those of one (DE) nor the other (FR), nor the sum of the two (Grosjean, 1985, 1989, 2015). Instead, experiences show that BIL students who finish their two-way immersion program are not always equally proficient in French and German, but they are proficient enough in both languages to meet their professional needs. Having analyzed the professional requirements in terms of challenge and competence, the question is whether there are any specific features in the BIL group.

In terms of competence, it can be observed that it increases between the beginning and end of their two-way immersion program. The only exception concerns the “role finding as a teacher” domain at the end of their training (when they are back in the FR context): BIL scores in this domain decrease at t₃. One hypothesis that could explain this decrease is that they are carrying out practical internships in German-speaking, French-speaking, and bilingual schools with a variety of teaching and school cultures (see Section 2.2). This confrontation of various teaching styles and forms of cooperation may influence their sense of competence regarding role finding. We thus acknowledge that the contextual characteristics of “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang,” may have an impact on their professional identity.

When it comes to challenge appraisal, the estimated marginal means for all students rise from t₁ to t₂ in general and then fall again at t₃, as if they become aware of all professional requirements after half of their program (see Section 5.1.1). More specifically, BIL students’ scores at t₃ can be observed in all domains between those of FR and DE in terms of faced challenges (see Table 4):

• Role finding as a teacher: FR 3.38 < BIL 3.55 < DE 3.58.
• Capacity to teach: FR 3.61< BIL 3.91 < DE 4.21.
• Classroom management: FR 3.04 < BIL 3.19 < DE 3.58.

The only exception concerns the domain of cooperation: BIL scores at t₃ are higher than those of their DE and FR peers (FR 3.01 < BIL 3.27 > DE 3.0). BIL students may perceive cooperation (positioning within the team, cooperation with superiors, and opportunities/limits of the school system according to Table 3) with other team members of a school as a greater challenge than the other two groups of our sample, as they are confronted with not only two teaching cultures. In addition, two-way immersion teaching students may judge professional requirements related to cooperation to be more of a challenge because they have experienced two teacher training institutions in the FR and DE contexts. Moreover, they complete their teaching internships in both language regions and are also called upon to teach in their partner language (immersion teaching).

If we examine the quantitative data in a rather qualitative form of analysis—with all due caution—it is interesting to come back to the fact that BIL scores most often fall between those of the other groups (except for cooperation). If we take the estimated marginal means for the DE and FR groups as bounds, then at t₃, the BIL students are mostly in the middle of the other two groups. How can we understand this evolution in BIL scores? We hypothesize that their personal characteristics and background—when placed in an initial two-way immersion teacher preparation program (Buser, 2017)—sensitize them to professional requirements. The scores seem to be linked to the institutional and school context in which they find themselves. Moreover, they carry out their practical internships in both language regions/cultures and in a variety of school environments. Accordingly, they have taken on various teaching tasks in their first or partner language; have experienced their professional role in DE, FR, and BIL contexts; and have put their acquired knowledge and skills into practice according to PER and Lehrplan 21. This enables them to develop teaching skills that are specific to the content of the two institutions’ pedagogical and didactic training, and it also allows them to discover certain disciplines in a different light in terms of concepts, approaches, and scientific traditions. Although we must be cautious in our interpretation, they have probably developed a certain adaptability capacity. The fact that the two-way immersion teachers’ scores fall between those of their DE and FR counterparts at t₃ may reflect the fact that BIL students are forced to develop more cross-disciplinary skills—such as mutual peer support and solidarity; listening skills and effective forms of communication with students in the partner language of their BIL group; the ability to exercise reflective practices and problematize situations (critical thinking); and the ability to adopt a problem-solving approach (adaptability to the complexity of two independent institutions and different school/teaching cultures). Following Gajo and Serra (2002), who found that the bilinguals (compared to monolinguals) develop different ways of processing subject knowledge, our findings seem to confirm their results: While monolinguals develop informational knowledge (associated with memorizing knowledge), bilingual individuals’ strength comprises operational knowledge, including their “ability to transfer and apply knowledge to new situations” (García, 2009, p. 212). While caution must be exercised in interpreting this link with regard to the current results, the added pedagogical value of the two-way immersion curriculum may consist of adaptability, open mindedness, and flexibility in BIL students, including their acquisition of competencies in two languages and cultures. According to Tynjälä and Heikkinen (2011), adaptability involves—following a dynamic skill model—the ability to acquire new skills, recognize contextual changes, and adjust teaching practices accordingly. This theoretical framework (Tynjälä & Heikkinen, 2011) emphasizes the importance of cognitive flexibility, reflexivity, and problem-solving for teacher adaptability. As BIL students have developed a certain capacity for adaptability, their experiences and opportunities with respect to adapting to situations at the two training institutions and relative to different teaching cultures could interact with competence elements (such as individual resources) to trigger coping strategies. Through these effective coping skills, knowledge is acquired such that interactions between challenge and competence (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) facilitate the individual’s professional development.

In this manner, their perceptions of professional requirements matter as much, if not more, than the nature of the requirement itself. Confrontation with new approaches and sensitivities most likely leads BIL students to become aware of other issues linked to the field (practical internships). Reflection, discourse on one’s own actions, and the ability to exercise reflective practices and problematize situations (Schön, 1993) are probably stimulated during their bilingual training and awareness of one’s professional identity may be challenged. Adaptability to the complexity and uniqueness of each situation can foster their ability to find solutions to problematic situations (Schrittesser, 2009). Similarly to organizational skills, adaptability seems to be one of the key competencies for coping with society’s rapid changes. While knowledge and technical skills are essential for the teaching profession, soft skills are just as important in a collective environment and include characteristics that are related to individual behavior, such as organizational skills, creativity, emotional intelligence, and adaptability. The latter refers to teachers’ ability to adapt to changes in their environment. In addition, an “adaptable” teacher displays communication skills, such as interpersonal skills or an aptitude for non-verbal communication, and a creative mindset and the ability to overcome difficulties. In concrete terms, adaptability means the capacity to adjust to new situations or (linguistic) contexts.

While caution should be exercised again with generalizations, the following trends can be observed: While frontal teaching sequences are longer in French-speaking Switzerland and teaching is more oriented toward and focused on theory, there are generally varied social forms with great diversity regarding teaching methods in German-speaking Switzerland (groups and workshops with greater emphasis on autonomy and individual responsibility for learning). Moreover, hierarchies are more marked in the teacher–student relationship (a more distanced relationship toward students) in the FR context. The challenge is precisely that the school is itself situated in the culture of the respective linguistic region and intimately linked to history (e.g., for the FR context, which is standardized by the Académie française). In addition to the context (two initial teacher training institutions located in two language regions), teachers have their own personal convictions that may also influence their perception of requirements and the school context in which they teach. As the teaching methods of the two regions are sometimes different, it is worth recalling once again that the teaching profession is profoundly cultural (Tardif, 2012) because of its pivotal role: It reproduces regional culture via the school. Accordingly, BIL students are exposed to a wide variety of concrete conceptions and practices of teaching and learning in and through languages. The aim is not to appropriate the skills of others through diversity but to make thinking more complex. Immersing oneself in an educational system other than one’s own, for example, can prompt one to question one’s personal beliefs about the world of teaching. To participate in teaching is to constantly be exposed to external and internal pressures that demand continuous adaptation. They must not only master their content area but also adapt to changing student needs, technological innovations, and evolving educational policies. Being able to adapt becomes a crucial skill for teachers. Adapting means coping with societal change (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005; Cochran-Smith & Villegas, 2015). In response to an educational reality subject to incessant sociological and technological change, an overhaul of initial teacher training seems inescapable. The unprecedented renewal of the student population and the consequent need for qualified teachers capable of responding to the many individual needs that evolve and change over time render it difficult for teachers to adapt to complex and dynamic demands (Doyle, 1986; Keller-Schneider, 2010, 2020). This forces them to constantly reassess their capabilities. If their individual resources are considered sufficient, these demands are accepted as a challenge to be met and dealt with in a professionalizing process (see Section 3.1).

In short, the two-way immersion program not only increases exposure to the partner language but also includes hours of contact with the target language. Apart from quantitative aspects, the program also introduces qualitative elements in the form of metalinguistic and intercultural reflection and knowledge transfer from two different scientific traditions and language learning strategies. While it enables students to consolidate their linguistic, cultural, and professional skills, its real added value lies in the development of adaptability, enabling aspiring teachers (1) to become aware of intercultural themes and the diversity of professional practices in the two language regions, so as to be prepared for the heterogeneity of student profiles; (2) benefit from the experience of partner-language placements to experience solidarity, support, and mutual aid between students and teachers with different first languages; (3) enhance their language-learning skills in general (metalinguistic strategies) and in their work with allophone students (for whom all teaching is immersion teaching); (4) become aware of the importance of the issues at stake and the work to be carried out, thanks to the confrontation of new approaches and sensitivities in relation to the theme of pedagogical differentiation, which is the focus of certain courses in both institutions; and (5) develop interdisciplinary modes of learning, stemming from their experiences in French-speaking and German-speaking, as well as bilingual, teaching internships. Although there is a similar knowledge base of BIL, DE, and FR curricula (Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020), this does not preclude different pedagogical values; different relationships relative to students and other actors in the school system; and different didactic methods. The following goes without saying: I can teach the same thing as my colleagues, but I can do it in a very different way. That, too, reflects the autonomy and freedom of teaching professionals. It is worth pointing out that BIL students sometimes demonstrate a cultural conflict with their culture and the values of their family and/or region of origin (Buser, 2017). It is sometimes difficult to find an explanation for certain misunderstandings. Are they due to linguistic/cultural constellations or rather personal ones? Often, the tendency is to explain them in terms of precipitated cultural differences, without analyzing the obstacles in depth.

In summary, the professional development of future two-way immersion teachers occurs in a unique context with a program in two linguistic regions, which may shape their perception and understanding of teaching requirements. BIL students earn more than just a bilingual diploma; they also immerse themselves in the learning and teaching culture of both language regions. Rather than comparing BIL students with their DE and FR counterparts, the goal is to highlight the distinct characteristics that define them. Overall, the two-way immersion program “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” goes beyond increasing language exposure; it enhances students’ linguistic, intercultural, and professional competencies. In this sense, we wrote earlier that it would never occur to an athletics fan to compare the 110 m hurdler to both a high jumper and a sprinter. And yet, the former partly combines the skills of the jumper and the sprinter but does so in such a manner that they become an indissociable whole, forming new skills (Grosjean, 1989). Moreover, it is only as a high-performance athlete that they can be compared to a sprinter or jumper. This analogy reflects the specificities of BIL students well compared to DE and FR students. In the same spirit, BIL training should be distinguished from monolingual courses (García, 2009). To carry this out, we need to avoid systematically viewing BIL training from a monolingual perspective (Gogolin, 1994). The two profiles cannot be applied identically. Similarly to the 110 m hurdler, the trained BIL student has their own exit profile that distinguishes them from their peers in monolingual DE and FR programs. Despite these specific BIL findings, all the students of our sample have similar characteristics at t₃ with respect to development potential, including themes that deserve support during their professional career-entry stage.

6.3. Outlines of a Professional Induction Program for Beginning DE, FR, and BIL Teachers

If we link the competency and challenge assessments by teachers, the interplay between these two important dimensions in teacher professionalization may help in identifying areas with development potential and possibilities for regulation (Lauermann & König, 2016). According to stress theory (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Schwarzer & Knoll, 2007), an increased sense of competence can regulate stress levels. Teaching is challenging (Keller-Schneider et al., 2020), and teachers need to develop new professional competences by using their personal resource in the best way to meet the challenges of the changing teaching profession (Day & Gu, 2007; Lindqvist, 2019). During the process of professional development, maintaining a balance between “feeling competent” as a resource and “facing challenges” as a demand is important (Bakker & Demerouti, 2006). From the subjective point of view of teachers, a higher sense of competence than challenge indicates strength, because their resources for dealing with the requirements are adequate for maintaining a balance. When a faced challenge is accompanied by a low feeling of competence, stress can occur. Therefore, the feeling of competence represents an essential resource for mastering professional requirements and for facing related challenges (Keller-Schneider et al., 2020). This reflects the extent to which a professional commits and thus invests resources (Brouwer & Korthagen, 2005). However, despite good theory-based and practitioner-informed teacher training, when teachers enter the job market as novices, they find that their actual skills may not be as adequate as they had assumed (Keller-Schneider, 2010, 2016, 2020). Complex and dynamic requirements (Doyle, 1986) force teachers to reassess their abilities, which can result in a diminished sense of competence. Being a fully responsible teacher requires constant attention to many individual needs that evolve and change over time, making it difficult for novice teachers to adapt to complex classroom dynamics over a long period of time. Even though teachers of our sample are not yet fully responsible teachers, our results at t₃ (see Figure 2 and Figure 3) call for reflection on how beginning teachers can be supported in acquiring the requisite skills and minimizing the stress associated with the challenges they face at the end of their initial teacher preparation training. Their sense of competence and their experience of challenges can vary as they develop within the four main professional requirement domains (see Section 3.2).

The experience of challenge in the “capacity to teach” domain—which includes the capacity to “adapt teaching to individual learners’ needs,” “evaluate learners’ performance in relation to general and individual goals,” “perceive and promote students’ learning processes individually,” and “keep parents informed and conduct parent–teacher conferences”(see Table 3)—tends to be higher than the competencies for all three programs at t₃ (DE 4.21 > BIL 3.91 > FR 3.61). The relatively low estimated marginal means (below 4.5 on the 6-point Likert scale) for the feeling of competence in our sample at the end of all three programs (DE 4.05 < BIL 4.17 < FR 4.32) may indicate that teachers of all contexts feel the need for further professionalization during their career-entry stage at t₃, and mastery is deemed possible only with a very high investment of resources (Hobfoll, 1989). As documented elsewhere (for detailed results, see Buser, n.d.), professional requirements related to working with parents, evaluation of learners’ performances, issues associated with differentiated teaching (adapting teaching to individual learner’s needs), and individualization (promoting pupils’ learning processes individually) are considered as major challenges when accompanied by low competence. Future teachers from other contexts were found to be lower in competence as well, but teachers’ experiences of challenge varied at different career stages. A link between the perceptions of the groups in our sample can legitimately be assumed (Keller-Schneider, 2020; Keller-Schneider et al., 2021; Buser & Meia, 2023).

The findings of the present study call attention to facilitating new teachers in accomplishing the required competencies and minimizing any stress arising from the challenges they face concerning the “capacity to teach,” including topics that seem to be completely linked to issues relating to heterogeneity (Buser, 2014b, 2020, n.d.). The individual adaptation of teaching to pupils’ conditions proves to be a particular challenge until the end of the initial teacher preparation training. For all students in our sample, this topic seems to be an area requiring further support when they become fully responsible teachers who will have to face the complex demand dynamics. Another point concerns the evaluation practices according to general and individual objectives (Buser, n.d.). Pupils’ needs vary, and expectations change. Hence, our results indicate that teachers may feel the need further for professionalization in this area.

Teachers’ sense of competence in the “classroom management” domain is—for all three categories of students at t₃—higher than their perceived competence in the other main domains. While DE, FR, and BIL students seem to perceive this domain as less challenging at the end of their training, beginning teachers’ evaluation of this domain may be less optimistic when confronted with the complexity of “real” classrooms. The students of our sample may have underestimated the challenge they will experience without assistance from experienced teachers and mentors during practical internships. Accordingly, when they are in their career-entry stage, they may need to adjust to meet complex daily requirements (Dicke et al., 2015).

For the “cooperation” domain, our results reflected substantially higher competencies (DE 4.55 < BIL 4.44 < FR 4.39) than the challenge domain (DE 3.0 < BIL 3.27 > FR 3.01). For all teachers in our sample, the perceived challenge in cooperation was relatively low, whereas their sense of competence was relatively high. This indicates a pleasing result because a sense of competence outweighing a sense of challenge tends to promote job satisfaction (Caprara et al., 2003; Klassen & Chiu, 2010) and buffer emotional exhaustion (Buchwald & Hobfoll, 2004; Morgenroth & Buchwald, 2015). Promoting the optimal use of resources through cooperation in the workplace may help teachers maximize their sense of competence. In addition, student teachers and beginning teachers also represent a potential source of innovation for schools. Teachers of all three contexts in our sample seem to experience cooperation as a resource. However, similarly to “classroom management,” teachers of our sample may underestimate the challenges they will have to face as beginning teachers because vast differences exist in school environments (Keller-Schneider et al., 2020). However, as far as two-way immersion students are concerned, their scores concerning challenge appraisal at t₃ in the “cooperation” domain are higher than those of their DE and FR peers. As mentioned before, this may be explained by the particularity of “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang,” which takes place in French-speaking and German-speaking institutions. Accordingly, BIL students become familiar with different teaching cultures in schools located in the two language regions, which may influence their perception of cooperating with colleagues.

The “role finding as a teacher” domain includes the capacity to “deal with own requirements in an appropriate way,” “use and protect my resources,” and “find my role and communicate accordingly.” To deal with the teacher role, a balance between competence and challenge is essential in order to manage (sense of competence) one’s resources and requirements adequately and build a frame of reference that opens up possibilities while respecting limits—probably even more so in the phase of entering professional life (Mukamurera, 2011; Thomas et al., 2019a). Our results show a relatively equitable balance (see Figure 2 and Figure 3). According to Keller-Schneider et al. (2020), the “balance between challenge and competence concerning the role of a teacher can be perceived as a resource, but maintaining the balance also needs energy and further professionalization” (Keller-Schneider et al., 2020, p. 50).

Detailed results in the domain of “role finding as a teacher” showed that all students in our sample considered themselves to be relatively unskilled in knowing how to protect their personal resources and identify their school’s internal resources (for detailed results, see Buser, n.d.) at t₃. This result may imply a need for support in burn-out prevention (Buchwald & Hobfoll, 2004; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010; Lauermann & König, 2016), personal assistance (e.g., telephone advice line), or even general advice for current emergencies (e.g., major geopolitical crises).

Furthermore, based on our findings, the first outlines of a curriculum encouraging professionalization during induction may include two introductory offers: internal collegial support such as mentoring, sponsorship, and tutoring (Hobson et al., 2009; Struyve et al., 2016) and external group supervision (e.g., coaching, supervision). Other possibilities for support could include exchanges with experts to discuss ways forward and develop new procedures (Thomas et al., 2019b); for example, in the form of professional practice analysis (e.g., small-group exchanges/simulations, use of educational technologies for “virtual classroom management”). More specifically, such a professional induction program could include (1) working with parents (regular contact, parents’ evenings, etc.) (Fantilli & McDougall, 2009); (2) managing heterogeneity through differentiation and individualization and more specifically the individual adaptation of teaching, promoting student learning on an individual basis (Paré & Trépanier, 2015), management of emergencies linked to geopolitical crises, having a direct influence on teaching work, etc. (Hagenauer & Hascher, 2018); (3) evaluative practices (assessing student performance according to general and individual objectives); and (4) protecting one’s own resources (e.g., preventing burnout, providing immediate help in emergencies, etc.) (Hobfoll, 1989; Buchwald & Hobfoll, 2004; Halbesleben, 2006; Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010). As the needs of beginning teachers are very individual and different (Keller-Schneider, 2010, 2016, 2020; Väisänen et al., 2017), it could make sense to offer a variety of courses in accordance with their own priorities and choices.

7. Limitations and Perspectives

7.1. Limitations

Certain aspects limit the interpretation of our results. First, it is obvious that a larger sample size would have provided greater statistical power (with COVID-19 not being conducive to data collection).

The second limitation is due to the different sample sizes. The modest size of the BIL sample may be a limitation. However, “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” only started in 2018; thus, it was not possible to have a larger sample for this group.

A third limitation emerges concerning the used tool (Keller-Schneider, 2010): The results presented may only be interpreted as teachers’ subjective perceptions, and not necessarily as their actual competence or challenge experiences in the real context. The findings may therefore not be generalized across national and other cultural contexts, as teachers’ perceptions of their role in professional requirements may differ culturally.

The fourth limitation relates to the fact that it would be interesting to interpret our results in terms of individual factors that influenced teachers’ competence and challenge appraisals.

7.2. Perspectives: Research-Based and Practitioner-Informed Implications for an Induction Program

As an extension of the present research project, two consecutive projects are planned. On one hand, the same instrument (Keller-Schneider, 2010) is being used to add other contexts (Montreal and Quebec) in order to develop comparative international perspectives. This will enable us to compare the differences and similarities between future teachers of different language areas within the same country (French and German in Switzerland; French and English in Canada) and of the same language (French) in different countries (Switzerland and Canada). This study may also investigate contextual patterns—for example, differences among schools—using multi-level modeling and triangulation with qualitative data.

On the other hand, a consecutive project with focus groups aims to analyze how the perception of professional requirements by some of the teachers of our current sample may change when they become beginning teachers. The aim of these focus groups is to involve the latter in the research project by exposing them to the results of the present project. Moreover, a needs analysis with data from a survey (questionnaire) completed by DE, FR, and BIL beginning teachers will inform us with concrete suggestions regarding how to support them. Based on these findings, a research-based and practitioner-informed induction program for beginning two-way immersion teachers in their career-entry stage is being developed at HEP-BEJUNE8.

8. Conclusions

The present research project investigated Swiss primary school teachers’ perception of their competence in dealing with professional requirements with respect to the resources available (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984). More precisely, this study focused on these teachers’ perceived sense of competence and the associated challenges faced in the four main domains during their teacher training, even though other factors (e.g., school environment support, parents, or individual factors) may also contribute to their professional development (Keller-Schneider, 2014). Independently of the context, the weighting was found to vary between t₁ and t₃: while the competence weighting increased for all students, the challenge weighting showed a peak at t₂.

The two-way immersion program “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang,” in which students are instructed via two languages and within a group of members from two linguistic regions, provides many conditions that are essential for the professionalization process. Interestingly, BIL students’ challenge scores at the end of their training at t₃ mainly fall between those of their FR and DE peers across all main domains. Although we must be cautious in our interpretation, this result may reflect the specific characteristics of the BIL group: With teaching internships in two linguistic regions, BIL students demonstrate a capacity for adaptability. In their teaching internships, they have to use the partner language as the language of schooling, allowing them to discover certain disciplines in a different linguistic and conceptual light and, more generally, experience immersion education themselves in their role as teachers. This can also raise their awareness of the heterogeneity in classrooms: They learn to appreciate and navigate the cultural and educational differences between the two language regions, helping them prepare for the heterogeneous student profiles they will encounter. Moreover, they have taken on various teaching tasks in their first or partner language, putting into practice the knowledge and skills they have acquired in accordance with PER and Lehrplan 21. The diversity of training practices in both schools (as teachers) and tertiary institutions (as students) in French-speaking and German-speaking Switzerland is likely to influence their perception in their challenge/competence appraisal. Being confronted with teaching cultures of two linguistic regions may help them to develop critical skills such as flexibility, problem-solving, and reflective practices in their actions and decisions (Schön, 1993). While knowledge and technical skills are essential for the teaching profession, soft skills such as adaptability are just as important, including the capacity to react quickly to changes. Accordingly, adaptable teachers may display an aptitude for non-verbal communication, a creative mindset, and an ability to overcome difficulties. Furthermore, the two-way immersion program may provide opportunities for sustained, personalized contact with members of the partner language group in a supportive, structured environment. Former students of the “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” report that they maintain friendships with their peers of their bilingual class and organize letter exchanges/joint school runs across the language border, such that their pupils can benefit from the richness of these exchanges. In sum, two-way immersion teachers’ adaptability skills may be of paramount importance in a constantly changing context and in training programs that remain a contradiction: The aim is to train effective, reflective professionals who will work in schools that are themselves “learning organizations.” Should we not revisit the question of what it means to be a teaching professional—a professional in the service of whom or what? Perhaps we need to replace debates on the teaching profession and its training with a broader critical reflection on schools and education (Tardif, 2012; Tardif & Borgès, 2009). In this sense, we also need to question the impact of the movement to professionalize teaching (Tardif & Lessard, 2004).

Our findings at t₃ point to areas that can be developed with respect to acquiring and further mobilizing knowledge (La Velle & Assunção Flores, 2018) and professionalization at the career-entry stage (Keller-Schneider, 2020). It should be emphasized that modeling teachers’ perceptions can provide empirical support for conceptualizing competence and challenge as contrasting aspects to study the relationships between these important dimensions in their professionalization process. The results can provide us with guidelines for addressing critical areas for healthy professional development. Supporting new teachers in acquiring the skills they need and minimizing the stress associated with the challenges they face is essential to maintaining a balance between competence as a resource and challenge as a demand (Bakker & Demerouti, 2006). Accordingly, at t₃, our results show aspects that may require further professionalization during induction; namely, (1) working with parents, (2) managing heterogeneity (differentiation, individualization, and management emergencies linked to geopolitical crises), (3) assessment practices, and (4) protecting one’s own resources and burnout prevention (see Table 3 and Table 4). More specifically, teachers at the career-entry stage may benefit from such a research-based and practitioner-informed induction program, which aims to foster the further professionalization needed to master new requirement complexities. It is important for teachers to perceive demanding situations in a positive manner in order to cope with stress, according to the understanding of Lazarus and Folkman (1984). Subsequently, the resources available and those to be mobilized are weighed against each other (Hobfoll, 1989). The process of further professionalizing teachers can thus foster a more dynamic and enriching encounter between theoretical knowledge and professional practice than during initial training. The aim will be to meet the complex challenges of beginning teachers, in order to help minimize the stress associated with the challenges encountered during induction (Wentzel & Akkari, 2012). Promoting the optimal use of resources can help newcomers to maximize their sense of competence (Bromme, 1992; Berliner, 2001; Mukamurera, 2011; Ingersoll & Strong, 2011). Their subjective perceptions and experiences are powerful enough to endow nuances in their actions and decision-making (see Hobfoll, 1989; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984)—and, ultimately, job satisfaction and mental health (Bakker & Demerouti, 2006; Pas et al., 2012). The requirements that are perceived as challenging—in terms of the stress and resources they involve, and based on resource conservation theory (Hobfoll, 1989)—are those requiring intense processing accompanied by a low sense of competence. A positive sense of competence is essential for developing the ability to cope with requirements (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Bakker & Demerouti, 2006; Keller-Schneider, 2020). This helps them to avoid potential burnout in the career-entry stage (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010; Brouwers et al., 2011). However, such an induction program should focus not only on requirements related to teaching and learning issues but also on available individual resources (Karademas, 2006) and social support, in order to cope with complex requirements in a proactive manner (Halbesleben, 2006; Schwarzer & Knoll, 2007). Imperatively, further studies to identify the types of support that most effectively mitigate challenges and promote competence are needed (see Section 7.2).

Finally, it should be noted that the results of our study cannot be generalized across national and cultural contexts, as the perception of a teacher’s role concerning professional requirements may vary from one culture to another. As mentioned above, the teaching profession is profoundly cultural. By virtue of its pivotal position in the process of reproducing national culture via the school (Tardif, 2012), it is intimately linked to local history and territory. The professionalization movement has thus undergone numerous translations from one country to another and from one continent to another. Even assuming the existence of relatively clear trends in a common knowledge base for the teaching profession (Morales-Perlaza et al., 2020), it is always re-translated according to the contexts in which they are received. Among the ideals of the early movement of teacher training professionalization (see Section 3.1), the emphasis on student success in terms of learning progression is more relevant today than ever, regardless of the context. As they are constantly changing, the adaptability of teachers is of paramount importance in a changing world with diversified pupil profiles. Innovative programs such as “Cursus bilingue/Bilingualer Studiengang” may show potential for optimizing the professionalization process by helping two-way immersion student teachers develop adaptability skills. To return to Grosjean’s (1989) famous metaphor of the hurdle race, which is neither a sprint nor a high jump, we hypothesize—with all due caution—that BIL students do indeed have a specific profile that is characterized above all by a certain capacity for adaptation. Could this be, after all, a key skill in facing the demanding requirements of the teaching profession in a challenging world?