Students' and Teachers' Perceptions of Effective Foreign Language Teaching: A Comparison of Ideals
Abstract
Foreign language (FL) teachers and students may have very similar or disparate notions of effective teaching, and the intersection of the two sets of beliefs has ramifications for language learning and the effectiveness of instruction. Horwitz (1990), Kern (1995), and Schulz (1996) have argued that mismatches between FL students' and teachers' expectations can negatively affect the students' satisfaction with the language class and can potentially lead to the discontinuation of study. The principal objectives of this study were to identify and compare, overall and by teacher, teachers' and students' ideals of effective teacher behaviors. Of 83 intact 1st‐ and 2nd‐year classes across 9 languages at the University of Arizona, 49 FL teachers and their students responded to a 24‐item Likert‐scale questionnaire covering several areas of FL pedagogy. The students seemed to favor a grammar‐based approach, whereas their teachers preferred a more communicative classroom, as evidenced by significant differences in such areas as target language use, error correction, and group work. The significant discrepancies between teacher and student beliefs in several relevant areas point to the need for FL teachers to seek out their students' perspectives actively and to engage them in brief classroom discussions about the rationale behind certain instructional strategies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Positive beliefs may incline learners to be more receptive to interaction in the classroom, thereby increasing its benefits.
“Such positive beliefs may incline learners to be more receptive to interaction in the classroom, thereby increasing its benefits (see also Lasagabaster & Sierra 2005;Brown 2009).”
From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Brown 2009
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Interaction and instructed second language acquisition
Loewen, S., & Sato, M. (2018) · Language Teaching · doi:10.1017/s0261444818000125 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Modeling Teacher Beliefs and Practices in Context: A Multimethods Approach
NISHINO, T. (2012) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01364.x · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Simon, E., & Taverniers, M. (2011) · English Studies · doi:10.1080/0013838x.2011.604578 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Sato, R. (2023) · Language Teaching Research · doi:10.1177/1362168820977825 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
- Authors
- BROWN, A. V.
- Affiliations
- University of Kentucky (US)
- Corresponding author
- BROWN, ALAN V.
- ORCID
- BROWN, ALAN V.
- Venue
- The Modern Language Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2009-02-09
- Volume
- 93
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 46-60
- ISSN
- 0026-7902 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-4781
- OpenAlex
- W2026260360
- Cited by
- 461
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 42 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 28 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 153.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Modern Language Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Second Language Learning and Teaching
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Keywords
- foreign language teaching, teacher beliefs, student perceptions, teaching effectiveness, grammar instruction, communicative language teaching, error correction, target language use, group work, student satisfaction, language learning motivation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review