**3. Methodology**

The purpose of this study, which was part of a larger international project, was to investigate which instructional strategies primary school teachers in Pretoria utilise within their linguistically diverse classrooms, as well as which strategies they perceived as being effective and could promote learning in linguistically diverse primary school classrooms. A convergent mixed-methods design was used to examine various techniques which teachers employ in order to overcome the teaching challenges presented by linguistically diverse primary classrooms. As stated by Maree [15], convergent mixed-methods design is one of the most well-known mixed-methods designs and is utilised by researchers to develop an adequate and more complete understanding of the phenomena which is being researched. Convergent mixed-methods design is the process of merging, analysing and collecting both quantitative and qualitative data simultaneously [16], which is considered most appropriate for the research when the goal is to collect both data sets simultaneously and merge the different results, in order to draw a single conclusion [15]. Participants were interviewed in order to allow the researcher to gain information about their views, ideas, behaviours, opinions and beliefs [17].

Purposive sampling was used to select the sample of one hundred and fifty participants for the surveys from 10 schools and 8 primary school teachers were interviewed. The following criteria were used to determine the eligibility of participants to be chosen to take part in the study: they should be qualified primary school teachers and should have at least 5 years of teaching experience, they should be teaching in linguistically diverse primary classes, they should have utilised teaching strategies to overcome language barriers in the classroom and they should be willing to share their personal experiences and opinions for the purpose of the research study.

Institutional ethics approval was obtained and informed consent forms were completed by the participating teacher. They were made fully aware of the aim of the research, and also that participation was voluntary and that there were no repercussions for non-participation.

#### **3.1 Survey and interviews**

The survey was self-developed by a group of researchers in the larger study, piloted and refined thereafter. The survey instrument consisted of five parts and a total of 31 questions. Part 1 focused on demographic information; Part II—Preparation for Teaching Diverse Language Students; Part III—Additional Learning for Teaching Diverse Language Students; Part IV—Professional Development for Teaching Diverse Language Students; Part V—Instruction for Diverse Language Learners. Teachers had the option to either complete the surveys in hard-copy format or *via* an online survey platform. Schools will be contacted, prior to the distribution of the surveys, to determine the teachers' preference for either hard-copy surveys or digital surveys, accessed online. The survey data were analysed using a description of trends and a statistical analysis system was to address the research questions [16]. First, descriptive analysis was conducted, followed by inferential analysis, to have a more complete understanding of the data by drawing comparisons between the surveys.

*Teachers' Practices for Supporting Students with Learning Difficulties in Linguistically Diverse... DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113749*

The teachers who were interviewed were selected from the sample of those who completed the questionnaires, and as a result, the demographics from attained from the questionnaire represent the overall sample. The interviews took place in the participants' classrooms at their school and at a time that best suited the teacher. The interview comprised of six questions focused on understanding the teacher accommodations of the students in their linguistically diverse classrooms. The intention was to gather information, which represents the participants' worldviews and experiences. The interviews lasted 30 minutes and, with the permission of the participants, were recorded.

The data analysis included verbatim transcriptions of the recordings. The transcriptions were coded and categorised, and deductive thematic analysis was used to determine the emergent themes [18]. The data analysis software program, NVivo [16] was used for the coding of the data by storing and labelling segments to analyse the relationship between them.

### **4. Results**

#### **4.1 Survey**

#### *4.1.1 Part I: Demographics*

The response rate for the survey was about 40%. Of the 47 teachers that participated in the survey, 98% were female, and 2% were male. The participants' ages ranged between 25 and 60 years. The majority of the participants (68%) were between the ages of 31 and 55 years. The participants' years of teaching experience ranged between 5 and 30 years, and 83% of them considered themselves bi-/multilingual. In addition to the South African official languages, other languages spoken by the teachers include Hindu, Tamil and Gujerati (**Figure 1**).

In their response to their preparedness for teaching diverse language students, during their professional education, 21% disagreed, 28% felt neutral and 51% agreed/ strongly agreed that they were properly prepared for teaching diverse teaching. The majority of teachers (71%) felt that their professional education course made them more aware of the need for linguistic and cultural diversity in education 4% strongly disagreed, 11% disagreed and 14% were neutral. In also enquiring whether their professional education courses had equipped them with strategies for teaching diverse language students, 18% disagreed, 36% felt neutral, 29% agreed and 18% strongly agreed (**Figure 2**).

The teachers unanimously agreed that more professional development and resources were required for supporting linguistically diverse students.

#### *4.1.2 Instruction for diverse language students*

To the questions pertaining to how many hours of in-service professional development teachers typically participate in each year, 14% per cent indicated 0–5 hours, 29% for 5–10 hours, 36% for 10–20 hours, and 4% for 30–40 hours and 18% indicated that they have had training for more than 40 hours. In the past 5 years, if any teachers have participated in professional development that primarily focuses on the needs of ELLs, 37% indicated yes, 55% said no and 7% were not sure. Regarding participation of participants in the in-service professional development

**Figure 1.**

*Preparation for teaching diverse language students.*

**Figure 2.** *Additional learning for teaching diverse language students.*

that addresses the needs of ELLs in part, but not primarily focusing on the topic, 41% said no, 37% indicated yes and 22% were not sure. In terms of the number of hours of professional development that fully or partially addressed the needs of ELLs they participated, 60% indicated 0–5 hours, 19% were 5–10 hours, 15% 10–20 hours, 4% 30–40 hours and 4% with more than 40 hours (**Figure 3**).

When asked concerning ELL students, if teachers felt competent to meet their students' needs according to differences between cultures 4% felt highly incompetent, 22% felt incompetent, 7% indicated that they did not know, 59% felt competent and 7% felt highly competent. For accommodations and modifications for ELL students,

*Teachers' Practices for Supporting Students with Learning Difficulties in Linguistically Diverse... DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113749*

22% felt incompetent, 11% indicated that they did not know, 59% felt competent and 7% felt highly competent. With regard to strategies and best practices for ELL students 31% felt incompetent, 19% said that they do not know, 46% felt competent and 4% felt highly competent. When incorporating knowledge of students' culture in instruction 22% felt incompetent, 30% indicated that they did not know, 37% felt competent and 11% felt highly competent. With the social and emotional development of ELL students, 15% felt incompetent, 4% indicated that they did not know, 74% felt that they were competent and 7% indicated that they felt highly competent (**Figures 4** and **5**).

**Figure 4.** *Modification of instruction.*

**Figure 3.** *Instruction for diverse language students.*

**Figure 5.** *Language use.*

**Figure 6.** *Types of modifications.*

With ELL curriculum and language proficiency standards, 30% indicated that they feel incompetent, 15% said that they do not know, 48% feels competent and 7% feel highly competent (**Figure 6**).

When asked if teachers modify their instruction to assist ELLs 7% said never, 15% said sometimes, 37% said about half the time, 30% said most of the time and 11% said always. When asked if teachers modify their language use to assist ELLs 7% said never, 21% said sometimes, 21% about half of the time, 43% most of the time and 7% said always.

#### *Teachers' Practices for Supporting Students with Learning Difficulties in Linguistically Diverse... DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.113749*

Teachers responding to whether or not they modify the classroom learning environment (e.g. bilingual dictionary, classroom bilingual books, bilingual labelling, resources) to assist ELLs, about 25% said never, 25% indicated sometimes, 21% said about half the time, 21% said most of the time and 21% said always. Additionally, in terms of modification of assessments (e.g. providing a word bank, dictionary, extra time) to assist ELLs, about 25% said never, 29% said sometimes, 7% said about half of the time, 29% said most of the time and 11% said always.

#### *4.1.3 Open-ended questions*

The majority of the teachers expressed interest in receiving further instruction regarding teaching diverse language students. They expressed an interest in learning various teaching strategies that could help them in addressing barriers to linguistic diversity. Some suggestions were curriculum differentiation, inclusive teaching strategies and communication skills. The teachers further expressed an interest in additional learning to improve their linguistic proficiency. Some expressed a desire to learn how to greet in commonly spoken home languages, while others expressed a desire to learn an entirely new language that was relevant to their students. The teacher further indicated that additional learning support materials and resources would go a long way to address linguistic diversity in their classes. Some of the suggestions that were given were textbooks, charts, posters, dictionaries and language teaching props.

The majority of the teachers said that they used various forms of visual aids such as pictures, flashcards, word-picture matching and audio-visual materials to modify their classroom learning environment to assist English Language Students. About 25% of the teachers used bilingual resources or methods of instruction. About 11% of these teachers used oral bilingual methods, while 14% used resources such as bilingual charts, bilingual picture cards and multilingual dictionaries. Some of the teachers said that they gave the students extra activities in the language of instruction to help them improve their language development. While some, only two teachers said that they used modelling and demonstrations of the main concepts and content. They further explained that they used peer assistance to help students who are not fluent in the language of instruction.

The most commonly used assessment modification (26%) was given extra time to ELLs. About 10% of the assessment modification strategies used, accommodated ELLs by giving additional explanation of the instructions. Some of the teachers specified that this was done through one-on-one interaction. Other forms of adaptation of assessments included extended explanation strategies they used to make it easier for the students to understand the assessment. Some examples were providing word banks, incorporating visual material, allowing dictionary use and hinting at the important words by putting them in bold or italics. They were those who used a form of peer assistance, often, peer teaching or shared reading. A further 17%, incorporated group work as a means of supporting ELLs. About 11% of the other strategies used to accommodate ELLs involved additional homework resources in the form of videos, activities and/or additional reading. About 6% of the oral language strategies used involved code-switching done by the teacher, while 14% encouraged the increased use of the language of instruction in the form of debates and discussions in the classroom to enhance the students' competence.
