<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>1657-0790</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Profile: Issues in Teachers' Professional Development.]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[profile]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>1657-0790</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Departamento de Lenguas Extranjeras, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S1657-07902008000200005</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[English Teachers&#39; Beliefs about Communicative Competence and their relationship with their Classroom Practices]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Creencias de los profesores de inglés sobre la competencia comunicativa y su relación con sus prácticas de clase]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[González Peláez]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Moravia Elizabeth]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="A01">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidad Nacional de Colombia  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></addr-line>
<country>Colombia</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>12</month>
<year>2008</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>12</month>
<year>2008</year>
</pub-date>
<numero>10</numero>
<fpage>75</fpage>
<lpage>90</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S1657-07902008000200005&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S1657-07902008000200005&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S1657-07902008000200005&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[This article describes a research project conducted with two English Teachers from the Extension Program at Foreign Language Department, National University in Bogotá. The purpose of the study was to establish the relationship between what English teachers understand on communicative competence and what they actually do in their English classes. The teachers were observed during 4 months, and they were also interviewed. The findings show how hard it is to define what communicative competence is in teachers&#39; own words. Data also show how important students are in the English classrooms. English teachers should make careful decisions to help them develop their language competence.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="es"><p><![CDATA[Este artículo describe un proyecto de investigación llevado a cabo con dos profesores de inglés de la Unidad de Extensión del Departamento de Lenguas Extranjeras de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia, en Bogotá. El estudio tenía como objetivo establecer la relación entre lo que los profesores comprenden sobre la competencia comunicativa y lo que ellos realmente hacen en el salón de clase. Los profesores fueron observados por un período de cuatro meses y también fueron entrevistados. Los resultados del estudio muestran lo complejo que resulta para los profesores definir la competencia comunicativa en sus propias palabras. También es posible evidenciar la importancia que los estudiantes tienen en el salón de clase de inglés. Los profesores de inglés deben ser cuidadosos al momento de tomar decisiones con el fin de ayudar a los estudiantes a desarrollar su competencia en la lengua extranjera.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Communicative competence]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[English teacher's beliefs and reflections]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[classroom practices]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[English students' roles]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[decision making]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Competencia comunicativa]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[creencias y reflexiones de los profesores de inglés]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[prácticas de clase]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[roles de los estudiantes de inglés]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[toma de decisiones]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><body><![CDATA[  <font face="verdana" size="2">      <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p align="center"><font size="4"><b>English Teachers&#39; Beliefs about    Communicative Competence and their relationship with their Classroom Practices    </b></font></p>     <p align="center"><font size="3"><b>Creencias de los profesores de ingl&eacute;s    sobre la competencia comunicativa y su relaci&oacute;n con sus pr&aacute;cticas    de clase </b></font></p>     <p align="center">&nbsp;</p> <b>Moravia Elizabeth González Peláez</b>*     <p> * E-mail: <a href="mailto:egonzalez6@gmail.com">egonzalez6@gmail.com</a></p>     <p> Address: Calle 71B # 76-06. Barrio Santa Helenita. Bogot&aacute;.</p>     <p> ICFES &amp; Universidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogot&aacute;, Colombia</p>     <p align="center"> This article was received on February 5, 2008 and accepted    on August 5, 2008.</p> </font> <hr size="1"> <font face="verdana" size="2">      <p> This article describes a research project conducted with two English Teachers    from the Extension Program at Foreign Language Department, National University    in Bogot&aacute;. The purpose of the study was to establish the relationship    between what English teachers understand on communicative competence and what    they actually do in their English classes. The teachers were observed during    4 months, and they were also interviewed. The findings show how hard it is to    define what communicative competence is in teachers&#39; own words. Data also    show how important students are in the English classrooms. English teachers    should make careful decisions to help them develop their language competence.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> <b><font size="3">Key words</font></b><font size="3">:</font> Communicative    competence, English teacher&#39;s beliefs and reflections, classroom practices,    English students&#39; roles, decision making</p> </font> <hr size="1"> <font face="verdana" size="2">      <p> Este art&iacute;culo describe un proyecto de investigaci&oacute;n llevado    a cabo con dos profesores de ingl&eacute;s de la Unidad de Extensi&oacute;n    del Departamento de Lenguas Extranjeras de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia,    en Bogot&aacute;. El estudio ten&iacute;a como objetivo establecer la relaci&oacute;n    entre lo que los profesores comprenden sobre la competencia comunicativa y lo    que ellos realmente hacen en el sal&oacute;n de clase. Los profesores fueron    observados por un per&iacute;odo de cuatro meses y tambi&eacute;n fueron entrevistados.    Los resultados del estudio muestran lo complejo que resulta para los profesores    definir la competencia comunicativa en sus propias palabras. Tambi&eacute;n    es posible evidenciar la importancia que los estudiantes tienen en el sal&oacute;n    de clase de ingl&eacute;s. Los profesores de ingl&eacute;s deben ser cuidadosos    al momento de tomar decisiones con el fin de ayudar a los estudiantes a desarrollar    su competencia en la lengua extranjera.</p>     <p> <b><font size="3">Palabras clave:</font> </b>Competencia comunicativa,    creencias y reflexiones de los profesores de ingl&eacute;s, pr&aacute;cticas    de clase, roles de los estudiantes de ingl&eacute;s, toma de decisiones</p> </font> <hr size="1"> <font face="verdana" size="2">      <p><b><font size="3">Introduction</font></b></p>     <p> As Colombian language teachers are aware, education has gone through many    changes during the last few decades.</p>     <p> Those changes are related mainly to the purpose of teaching and specifically    to what Colombian students need in order to deal with the national and international    contexts in which they have to be &#39;competent&#39;. According to Bogoya    (2000), to be considered competent certainly depends on the type of circumstances    in which a person has to act while making use of certain knowledge. Based on    this, he proposes an interdisciplinary work in which the individual, while acting    in a context, takes into account some aspects regarding different areas of knowledge.</p>     <p> The changes mentioned above have been integrated into the Colombian educational    system based on the National Ministry of Education proposals which include Ley    General de Educaci&oacute;n (MEN, 1994), Resoluci&oacute;n 2343 (MEN, 1996),    Lineamientos Curriculares - Foreign Languages Area (MEN, 1999), and more recently,    the National Standards on Foreign Language Competence (MEN, 2006). The intention    of all those proposals is to give teachers and administrators guidelines to    develop students&#39; communicative competence in a foreign language. But    how do English teachers understand the concept of communicative competence?</p>     <p> Moreover, how do their teaching practices inform us about their understanding    of communicative competence? The current article deals with the possible answers    to these two questions.</p>     <p><font size="3"><b> Literature Review</b></font></p>     <p> The three main constructs which supported the study are: the definition of    communicative competence, teaching practice and teachers&#39; beliefs.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><b> Defining Communicative Competence</b></p>     <p> Savignon (1983) defines communicative competence as follows:</p>     <p> &quot;[...]it is a dynamic rather than a static concept[...], it depends    on the negotiation of meaning[...], it applies to both written and spoken language    as well as to many other symbolic systems[...], it is context specific[...],    it takes place in an infinite variety of situations[...], it is defined as a    presumed underlying ability[...], it is relative, not absolute, and depends    on the cooperation of all the participants involved&quot; (Savignon, 1983,    pp. 8-9).</p>     <p> Savignons&#39; definition is related to Canale &amp; Swain&#39;s communicative    competence model (1980, in Savignon, 1983). For them, communicative competence    has four different components: grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence,    discourse competence, and strategic competence. These components allow teachers    to develop a classroom curriculum and to structure teaching practice. Canale    &amp; Swain&#39;s model can be seen in an English classroom when meaning negotiation    takes place, and when all the participants in the classroom are involved in    trying to develop their communicative competence. When you have students negotiating    meaning, it is important to provide an appropriate atmosphere in which students    feel free to interact cooperatively. Regarding interaction, Stern (1990) refers    to a classroom in which social and cultural components are part of the students&#39;    interaction. He particularly suggests that language teaching gives greater importance    to these components rather than to the language structure.</p>     <p> Beyond Canale &amp; Swain&#39;s model, Bachman (1990) proposes a model for    evaluating students&#39; language competence, which, in my opinion, is related    to what teachers should do in the English classroom.</p>     <p> His model includes different competences from organizational competence to    sociolinguistic competence which are related to structural, cohesive, functional    and social aspects of the language. This implies that teachers should have many    aspects in mind when deciding about what to teach and how to do it. That also    involves seeing language not just as a system, but also as a means of communication.</p>     <p> Besides the said models, the Common European Framework (Council of Europe)    describes Communicative language competence &quot;[...]as comprising several    components: linguistic, sociolinguistic and pragmatic. Each of these components    is postulated as comprising, in particular, knowledge and skills and know-how&quot;    (CEF, p. 13). This definition goes beyond language knowledge and emphasizes    on knowing how to use the language, and to act with it.</p>     <p><b> Teaching Practice Discussion</b></p>     <p> In an article published by the Colombian National Ministry of Education (1998),    teaching practice is described as a crucial social event to which the field    of pedagogy has a lot to contribute. They state that this &#39;social task&#39;    has evolved and changed throughout time going from a &#39;simple&#39; duty    developed in a particular setting (the classroom) to an elaborated task that    might have a social, cultural and political impact, etc. This article also suggests    that teaching practice is not abstract; rather, it is factual and verifiable.</p>     <p> It is possible to identify its outcomes and to relate them to the society    in which we live. That is why, based on an individual&#39;s behavior in society,    we can picture the type of education they were involved in.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> Another important discussion on teaching practice is found in Richards (Richards    &amp; Nunan, 1994). He highlights the systematic way teachers are working now    in contrast to the way they used to act based on intuition or common sense.    Now, he argues, teachers are taking advantage of theoretical issues that might    help them understand and improve the way they teach. He also mentions that nowadays    second language teachers are interested in examining language development, pedagogy,    acquisition, and curriculum, along with other issues, which allow them to assume    an autonomous behavior to some extent.</p>     <p> Finally, Bartlett (in Richards &amp; Nunan, 1994, p. 203) proposes characterizing    teachers&#39; actions as follows: &quot;[...]teacher&#39;s actions are    influenced by intentions in the social settings and by the beliefs and chains    of reasoning that are held before and after the occurrence of the action&quot;    . This shows the close relationship between what teachers do in the classroom    and what they think or believe in, and how the former makes teachers&#39;    understanding about what teaching is evident, for instance.</p>     <p><b> Teachers&#39; Beliefs about Teaching Practices</b></p>     <p> Johnson (1999) establishes a relationship between reflective teaching and    teachers&#39; beliefs by asking the following question: What are teachers&#39;    beliefs and how do they influence teachers&#39; reasoning? She answers it    by defining the term &#39;beliefs&#39;. She says that beliefs have a cognitive,    an affective, and a behavioral component. She also states that all human perception    is influenced by beliefs which influence the ways in which events are understood    and acted on.</p>     <p> Johnson also mentions that teachers shape their beliefs based on who they    are and what they do. Their beliefs are the product of their personal and professional    experiences. If the affective component of teachers&#39; beliefs is taken    into consideration, it is possible to see how difficult it is for them to deal    with criticism and changes that might affect their teaching practice.</p>     <p> On the other hand, Richards &amp; Lockhart (1999) assume teachers&#39; beliefs    are constructed based on many aspects such as goals, values, understanding about    teaching content and process, their work environment, and their roles. All these    aspects constitute teachers&#39; background when making decisions and acting    or what it is known as &quot;culture of teaching&quot; (p. 30). They say that    when studying teacher-thinking, some questions like these should be asked:</p>     <p>- What do teachers believe about teaching and learning?</p>     <p>- How is their knowledge organized?</p>     <p>- What are the sources of teachers&#39; beliefs?</p>     <p>- How do teachers&#39; beliefs influence their teaching?</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> (Richards &amp; Lockhart, 1999, p. 30)</p>     <p> Those are some of the questions I posed when deciding on conducting this research.    Closely related to them are two investigations in the area teachers&#39; beliefs    and their practices, which are worth summarizing.</p>     <p> The first study is about the congruence of student teachers&#39; pedagogical    images and actual classroom practices conducted by Fung &amp; Chow (2002) in    Hong Kong. The purpose of this research was to establish a profile of pedagogical    images of a group of student teachers, and to see if there is congruence between    their pedagogical images and teaching practices.</p>     <p> The researchers developed a questionnaire to explore teachers&#39; views    about teaching, and this was administered to 59 first-year student teachers    before and after their teaching practicum in physical education for secondary    schools. The researchers found that student teachers have an approach in mind,    but when they are in actual classes they have a mixture of approaches. It means    that they considered themselves as teachers who have in mind child-centered    approach, but when having their classes they actually followed a teacher-centered    approach.</p>     <p> The second study was conducted in Colombia and was done by two novice teacher-researchers    in Bogot&aacute; (Zuleta &amp; Prada, 2005) with four primary school student    teachers. It was a case study in which researchers were interested in questioning    student teachers about their practice based on their teaching preparation and    how they dealt with some difficulties. They used student teachers and practice    counselor&#39;s journals and conferences as well as semi-structured interviews    as instruments to collect data. The study results showed that student teachers    faced stressful situations when developing their practicum, especially when    they found difficulties; however, they felt happy at the end of the process.    Results also showed that the reflective approach chosen by the practice counselor    allowed student- teachers to see their practice from a critical perspective    and it was enriching for them.</p>     <p> These two studies are very closely related to my research in terms of the    type of questions or inquiries researchers have. They seek to compare student    teachers and teachers&#39; beliefs, perceptions, and ways of seeing teaching    with their current practices.</p>     <p><font size="3"><b> Methodology</b></font></p>     <p> Before portraying the setting, participants and instruments used to collect    the data, it is necessary to say that the study carried out with in-service    teachers followed the descriptive case study features pointed out by Cohen &amp;    Manion (1995). They state that a researcher who develops a descriptive case    study observes and describes a group of people who represent a specific community    that can be characterized based on the data analysis. That is what I did as    researcher. I observed and described a group of English teachers, and then analyzed    the phenomena that characterize them.</p>     <p> <b><font size="3">Participants</font></b></p>     <p> The participants of this study were two English teachers. Both of them got    their undergraduate degree at the National University in Bogot&aacute;, one    of them in the mid-nineties, and the other in 2000.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> The first participant, Martha Correa<sup><a href="#1" name="s1">1</a></sup>,    is an English teacher whose experience began in 2001 after getting her degree.    But she actually started working as a teacher before graduation while doing    her teaching practice. During the three years before her participation in this    study, she taught at different levels and in different settings.</p>     <p> She began teaching in primary school, then went on to high-school students    (eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh graders); and after that worked with university    students at two universities. She has also been part of the program called ALEX,    at the National University of Colombia, which is based on an autonomous paradigm    that was started by the Foreign Languages Department some years ago in order    to teach foreign languages to students who were studying different majors at    the university. She has also worked as an assistant researcher at the same university.</p>     <p> The second participant, Patricia Rojas<sup><a href="#2" name="s2">2</a></sup>    is an English teacher with ten-years of experience. She holds a postgraduate    degree in applied linguistics (especializaci&oacute;n). She has taught English    at different levels and in different settings, but mainly she has worked in    a school in the northern part of the city for ten years. There, she has taught    English at all high school levels and she has been in charge of the Foreign    Language Area. She also has worked at the National University of Colombia in    the extension courses for more than seven years. She also had the opportunity    of teaching Spanish and English to high school students at La Chorrera (Amazonas)    for one year. Finally, she got a scholarship and worked as a Spanish teacher    in Manchester (England) for one year. During that period of time, she enrolled    in an advanced course in English literature.</p>     <p> <b><font size="3">Setting</font></b></p>     <p> The study was done at the National University in Bogot&aacute;, mainly in    the Extension English courses that take place at night from Monday to Thursday.    At the time the data was collected, the courses were divided into four different    levels, which were also divided into two. For instance, students in an elementary    level began with 1A, continued with 1B, and then were promoted to the second    level (2A), and so forth.</p>     <p> The students who attended those courses were adults who work and/or study    during the day, and were studying English for different reasons, which varied    from personal interests to job requirements.</p>     <p> Teachers organized their classes following a textbook. This means that the    program was mainly based on the textbook. However, teachers were allowed to    use extra materials related to the topics proposed by the textbook. In each    one of the levels throughout the entire course, teachers had to develop a minimum    of four units from the textbook ready.</p>     <p><font size="3"><b> Collecting Data</b></font></p>     <p> Interviews and observation sheets were used to collect the data. Regarding    interviews, the format employed was based on Seidman&#39;s proposal (1998)    about the use of the three-interview series designed by Dolbare and Schuman    (Schuman, 1982, cited by Seidman, 1998). Seidman argues that when this series    of interviews is used, the interviewer guarantees an environment in which interviewee&#39;s    background is taken into account.</p>     <p> Due to restrictions on the participants&#39; availability, it was decided    to merge the threeinterview series in which they were asked about Seidman&#39;s    proposal issues. Despite the fact that I did not do the three interviews, their    responses to the semi-structured interview made it possible to elicit their    beliefs about communicative competence in relation to their life history and    professional experience at the same time.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> The second instrument used to collect data was observation sheets. This was    used to see the relationship between their beliefs and their actual teaching    practices.</p>     <p> The two participants were observed before the interviews were done. I attended    nine class sessions of two hours each with the first participant and six class    sessions, also of two hours each, with the second participant. This was done    on a weekly basis from October to November 2003 and from October to November    2004.</p>     <p> In the class sessions observed, everything that happened during the class    was described following a narrative structure using the observation sheet. After    the first three observation sessions, the interview was done in November 2003.    This took about one hour. It was recorded and the corresponding transcription    was made. Finally, I believe these instruments allowed me to elicit teachers&#39;    beliefs and practices better. Calderhead (1988 in Breen, Hird, Milton, Oliver    &amp; Thwaite, 2001) mentions that it is difficult to ask teachers about their    beliefs or &#39;principles,&#39; because teachers&#39; professional knowledge    is embedded in their actions. That is why it is complex for them to make those    beliefs explicit. Breen et al. also suggest that this data collection can be    done by observing and using elicitation techniques. These guiding principles    were important for negotiating with the teachers to avoid the influence of their    affective component and the resistance they might have towards a research oriented    to describing and analyzing their way of acting as professionals in the educational    context.</p>     <p> <b><font size="3">Findings</font></b></p>     <p> While reading the data, I used some coding techniques as suggested by Strauss    &amp; Corbin (1990). One of these consists of analyzing the interview and observation    line-by-line. Based on this, I started by reading the data collected with the    observation sheets in which some comments were included in the right hand column.    When the interview was transcribed, I contrasted it with what had been found    through the observation process. The comments included in the observation sheets    were mainly labels or concepts, as Strauss &amp; Corbin (1990) call them. After    that, I grouped and listed them in a matrix where I tallied their frequency.</p>     <p> While tallying, I used different colors to identify some commonalities that    drew my attention. In relation to commonalities, I read the data gathered, looked    for some regular patterns and highlighted them. I mainly concentrated on the    ones related to those already found through the observation instrument.</p>     <p> After having identified the commonalities I came up with categories and subcategories,    as follows:<a href="#t1"> table 1</a></p>     <p align="center"><font face="verdana" size="2"><font face="verdana" size="2"><a name="t1"><img src="img/revistas/prf/n10/n10a05t1.gif"></a></font></font></p>     <p> In the core category we can see teachers&#39; actions which are mainly based    on what they consider is important to develop students&#39; communicative    competence. Based on this, many of the teachers&#39; actions show that communicative    competence development implies different aspects beyond language itself. It    embraces students&#39; needs (affective and language needs), the way they    interact in the classroom (classroom organization and ways of working in class),    and the type of materials teachers use.</p>     <p> Teachers&#39; beliefs could be also identified: they were represented by    different attitudes seen in the classroom when I observed them and by their    awareness when they were asked about their practices. Those beliefs have to    do with the ways teachers see their students and mainly, what they consider    their students need to develop their language competence. Based on those beliefs,    teachers also start to reflect upon what they consider should be taught and    how. These considerations allowed me to talk about two sub-categories: Starting    from students&#39; needs and deciding upon classroom organization and environment.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><b> Starting from Students&#39; Needs</b></p>     <p> First of all, Seedhouse (1995) considers learners&#39; needs really important,    because it allows teachers to set their class goals, and it is directly related    to what happens in a classroom. From the very beginning of each class, I noticed    that participants in this study consider learners not only individuals in a    classroom, but also people who deserve consideration. This makes students feel    comfortable and relaxed, which is why teachers greet them: &quot;Hello! Good    evening&quot;, in a friendly manner and ask them about their day, for instance.    Here is some evidence from the observation sheets and from the interviews to    illustrate this subcategory:</p>     <p> Teacher greets students by asking them how their day was. One of the students    says that she had a terrible day and the teacher asks: &quot;Why? Tell us&quot;.</p>     <p> (Observation sheet N&ordm; 01. Entry: November 12, 2003)</p>     <p> Teacher begins by saying: &quot;Hello!&quot; Then, she addresses a student    and says to him: &quot;Nice to see you again&quot;.</p>     <p> (Observation sheet N&ordm; 06. Entry: October 13, 2004)</p>     <p> This evidence shows teachers&#39; attitude towards students in terms of    considering classroom atmosphere important; that is why they have a particular    way of starting the class in order to, perhaps, have the appropriate atmosphere    to begin with the class. To do that, they take care of greeting and asking students    about themselves. I interpret this attitude as a way showing concern about their    students as the human beings they are.</p>     <p> Secondly, some evidence taken from the interviews is also relevant to illustrate    this sub-category in which teachers&#39; opinion or view about class atmosphere    is expressed. Teacher 1 (Martha):</p>     <p> 681. My students&#39; work environment</p>     <p> 682. is very important for me so</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> 683. I try to make them feel comfortable,</p>     <p> 684. get to know each other and see that</p>     <p> 685. they are not sitting with a</p>     <p> 686. stranger in the first class.</p>     <p> (Interview. November 22, 2003)</p>     <p> Here, we notice how Martha considers creating the appropriate conditions before    starting the class really important. Conditions that include having students    interacting among themselves to meet their own interests, or at least to share    their personal information, which later on will allow them to interact in a    friendly manner. At the end, they will feel really comfortable in the class    and that will help them to develop language competence.</p>     <p> Teacher 2 (Patricia):</p>     <p> 419. ...well, ahhh, first I would say that</p>     <p> 420. before teaching an English class,</p>     <p> 421. it&#39;s... you need to [sic] open your</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> 422. heart to the students and feel that</p>     <p> 423. they can give a lot and that</p>     <p> 424. they aren&#39;t afraid to want to say</p>     <p> 425. things in English because that</p>     <p> 426. limits them a lot.</p>     <p> 427. It is a disease that many have.</p>     <p> (Interview. November 29, 2003)</p>     <p> In this evidence, we can see Patricia&#39;s feelings in terms of offering    students some opportunities to feel free to say what they think without fear    of being judged. This is also an example of teachers&#39; purpose about creating    an appropriate atmosphere for learning, which implies thinking about students&#39;    needs.</p>     <p> When thinking about students&#39; needs, teachers&#39; beliefs were reflected    in three important aspects that show how they consider students&#39; interests    and confidence when developing communicative competence. In other words, teachers    believe that communicative competence implies thinking broadly about students&#39;    needs. That is to say, when developing communicative competence, students bring    to class what they are in terms of themselves, their feelings and their interests;    so teachers should control all these aspects by providing the appropriate conditions    in order to guarantee an appropriate learning environment.</p>     <p> Promoting confidence is one of the characteristics of this sub-category, which    I consider really important when teaching. With respect to it, we can see teachers&#39;    beliefs about the importance of avoiding student anxiety by fostering confidence    were evident. &quot;Communicative language teaching requires a sense of community    -an environment of trust and mutual confidence, wherein learners interact    without fear or threat of failure&quot; (Savignon, 1983, p. 122). This quotation    reveals the importance classroom atmosphere has in the development of communicative    competence.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> There are some pieces of evidence taken from the data analysis to illustrate    this discussion:</p>     <p> Teacher 1 (Martha):</p>     <p> 692. &quot;...but what we try to do is to</p>     <p> 693. lower the level of anxiety and</p>     <p> 694. make the environment become</p>     <p> 695. more friendly and perhaps</p>     <p> 696. that is one of the nice things&quot;.</p>     <p> 697. Researcher: &quot;So you are talking</p>     <p> 698. about the environment in class&quot;.</p>     <p> (Interview. November 22, 2003)</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> Teacher 1 (Martha):</p>     <p> 699. &quot;For me this is very important</p>     <p> 700. because it allows them to talk...</p>     <p> 701. intervene, they don&#39;t feel reprimanded</p>     <p> 702. by me nor by their classmates.</p>     <p> 703. This is a part that I have realized that</p>     <p> 704. they don&#39;t talk because xx no,</p>     <p> 705. it is that the person beside me</p>     <p> 706. is going to say that I xx these concepts</p>     <p> 707. that we call representations here xx</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p>708. I try to change them.</p>     <p> 709. Now that we trust each other xx</p>     <p> 710. so xx we play a little game xx and</p>     <p> 711. go on with the topic because now</p>     <p> 712. they are relaxed and now they can</p>     <p> 713. work on the topic we are dealing with</p>     <p> 714. in class or the one we are going to introduce.&quot;</p>     <p> (Interview. November 22, 2003)</p>     <p> Teachers&#39; interest in giving students confidence was also noticed in    the way teachers acted, for example, they smiled frequently during a class.</p>     <p> &#8230;She nods very often while she is listening to a student asking a question.    Sometimes she does so when she says: &quot;yes.&quot; While listening to students,    she also smiles regularly.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> (Observation sheet N&ordm; 03. Entry: October, 29, 2003)</p>     <p> Some aspects related to teachers&#39; role in the classroom can be seen    in this observation. When communicative language teaching is followed, Richard    &amp; Lockhart (1999) identify the role of the teacher as that of a facilitator    whose attitudes and behaviours influence students&#39; progress. This role    is easily observed and evident in the way one of them nods when students are    participating, as a way of assenting (Observation sheet N&ordm; 03. Entry: October,    29, 2003).</p>     <p><b> Deciding upon Classroom Organization and Environment</b></p>     <p> Coming back to the sub-categories, now I am referring to the second one. This    second sub-category involves some aspects related to the way teachers have students    interact in class, the use of extramaterial for developing some activities,    and a core aspect of this study--the relevance teachers give to developing communicative    competence through the different subcompetences, and the development of the    four language skills.</p>     <p> In the majority of the classes I observed, I noticed how teachers changed    from one activity to another and this implied also changing students&#39;    organization in the classroom. The students seemed to enjoy these changes. Something    that called my attention was that some students who were reluctant to participate    in a certain activity changed their attitude when they were asked to arrange    desks in a complete different way. Here we can see how teachers&#39; decisions    regarding different classroom arrangements are related to the way they think    this would help students to develop their communicative competence.</p>     <p> Teacher 1 (Martha):</p>     <p> 921. Researcher: &quot;And in the end</p>     <p> 922. how does the organization of your class</p>     <p> 923. with your students work?</p>     <p> 924. How is it related, shall we say,</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> 925. with that goal that is the development</p>     <p> 926. of communication competence?</p>     <p> 927. Is there a relationship?</p>     <p> 928. Do you feel like there is a relationship</p>     <p> 929. when you think about organizing the class?&quot;</p>     <p> 930. T: &quot;Of course, because look,</p>     <p> 931. this thing of developing communicative</p>     <p> 932. competence is not an individual matter</p>     <p> 933. xx I don&#39;t sit there in a classroom and</p>     <p> 934. look at certain structures like they do</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> 935. in certain kinds of classes.</p>     <p> 936. That makes you think of:</p>     <p> 937. one desk behind another and</p>     <p> 938. another desk behind that and</p>     <p> 939. like managing a class on anatomy</p>     <p> 940. or something like that. This is not</p>     <p> 941. the same. So you have to create spaces</p>     <p> 942. and structures such as a half-moon,</p>     <p> 943. small circles, groups of three where</p>     <p> 944. they can exchange knowledge.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> 945. They can xx that they have a</p>     <p> 946. common reference to be able to share it</p>     <p> 947. and that seems very important to me.</p>     <p> 948. I always try to do it. Whenever I have lecture</p>     <p> 949. classes, the desks are one behind the other</p>     <p> 950. but when I am practicing, the format is different&quot;.</p>     <p> (Interview, November 22, 2003)</p>     <p> In the last part of this interview (lines 949-952), the way the teacher decided    to have students organized differently depending on the type of process they    were going through in the class was noticeable. In other words, when the teacher    introduces a topic, she has students sitting in rows one behind the other.</p>     <p> But if she has them practicing, students are organized differently depending    on what it is. That means, students have the opportunity of practicing the language    while they are organized in ways that imitate real communication to develop    their communicative competence. Rivers (1992) supports my thinking by saying    that since language is a vehicle of communication it must take place in communicative    situations in which students can interact among themselves and with the teacher.</p>     <p> Finally, let&#39;s look at some of the evidences concerning how participants    coped with multiple competences and language abilities, an important characteristic    of this sub-category. Teachers&#39; beliefs about communicative competence    can be seen through the way they incorporate a competence model into their classes.    They express their belief by including activities and tasks which make students    develop their competence (organizational and pragmatics competence) following    Bachmans&#39; model (1990), for instance, without being aware of it.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> Teacher 1 (Martha):</p>     <p> 774. &quot;Communication competence is made up</p>     <p> 775. of various things. That is to say, what</p>     <p> 776. I taught my students the other day,</p>     <p> 777. it is not only that you know the structure</p>     <p> 778. but when you can use that structure.</p>     <p> 779. Because you are not going to use</p>     <p> 780. &#39;quiubo&#39; / &#39;what&#39;s up?&#39; with your boss</p>     <p> 781. because you can&#39;t do that.</p>     <p> 782. There are many things that this</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> 783. implies and I believe that as a professor</p>     <p> 784. one knows that but putting it into</p>     <p> 785. words just like that is difficult x</p>     <p> 786. for me it is difficult right now.</p>     <p> 787. How do you develop your students&#39;</p>     <p> 788. competence? I don&#39;t know.</p>     <p> 789. I try to make them work a little on</p>     <p> 790. each thing that communicative</p>     <p> 791. competence is made up of&quot;.</p>     <p> (Interview, November 22, 2003)</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> In the previous data, it is possible to see how teachers incorporate some    of the elements Bachman (1990) talks about regarding communicative competence.    They give great importance to the appropriate use of language structure depending    on speakers&#39; role. In that sense, they are considering grammar and pragmatic    competences. They also see the relation between Bachman&#39;s communicative    competence model and the development of the four language skills.</p>     <p> On the other hand, teachers think communicative competence implies a complex    process because it involves many things such as form, function, purpose and    use, for instance. They argue that it is difficult for them to define what communicative    competence implies.</p>     <p> However, they take into account many of the elements they consider part of    what communicative competence embraces.</p>     <p> This discussion can be related to what Savignon (1983) mentions in regards    to communicative competence. She says that this notion goes beyond linguistics    and psychology, that it also covers anthropology and sociology. Based on this,    it is understandable that communicative competence is seen as a macro concept    as one of the teachers suggested. Her reason was that she found it hard to fulfill    all the requirements and, therefore, proving that a teacher is really working    on students&#39; communicative competence is not easy.</p>     <p> <b><font size="3">Conclusions</font></b></p>     <p> Teachers revealed communicative competence complexity in their teaching practices.    Nonetheless, the analysis of data gathered allowed me to answer the inquiries    posed in this research.</p>     <p> First of all, here are some of the conclusions related to my first sub-question:    How do English teachers understand the concept of communicative competence?    It was observed that teachers find difficult to define what communicative competence    is.</p>     <p> They state that communicative competence can be seen as a macro concept and    that its development goes beyond language. They also believe or think there    is a model of communicative competence composed of elements such as grammar,    lexis, functional aspects, and the four language abilities as well. It turn,    these components are seen as an integrated whole in the classroom.</p>     <p> Communicative competence is also described by teachers as related to functional    issues in terms of having language use in mind when teaching language structures    to students. This is closely related to the fact that teachers consider communicative    competence a context-based issue.</p>     <p> Nonetheless, participants think that nowadays teachers do not take into account    all of the components of communicative competence when they work on developing    it in the classroom.</p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p> Secondly, the following conclusions are related to the second sub-question:    What do their teaching practices tell us about their understanding of communicative    competence? Teaching practices show that teachers act based on their beliefs    about communicative competence. Teachers consider students&#39; needs thus,    they plan and do things in the classroom while keeping in mind what students    prefer.</p>     <p> Likewise, while developing communicative competence, teachers believe students    need support.</p>     <p> Participants think that communicative competence development depends on classroom    atmosphere, classroom organization and the use of extra-materials. They assert    that the development of communicative competence implies thinking about the    students themselves as well as the way they interact in the classroom.</p>     <p><font size="3"><b> Pedagogical Implications</b></font></p>     <p> This study shows how teachers are going through a reflective process that    leads them to see themselves as professionals who have certain beliefs about    teaching that shape what they do in class. These reflections are necessary for    socialization with the English language community. This process implies having    teachers interacting among them and sharing these experiences. That is one of    the main flaws in the current educational system. There is no room for teachers    to really reflect about how they teach and learn together about teaching and    learning issues, along with other aspects.</p>     <p> Based on that, I believe these findings show how important and necessary it    is to have the space to discuss educational issues such as the ones described    here.</p>     <p> These spaces have to be established by teachers themselves and facilitated    by the government and institutions if they are to succeed in this attempt. Spaces    like these should bring teachers not just the possibility of sharing reflections    and beliefs but also of thinking about ways to enrich their teaching practices.    These would also have to do with the type of available courses, or even graduate    programs for teachers to make them more qualified. In that sense, government    support is needed to implement programs in which teachers can be updated in    terms of political and educational changes that allow them to reflect upon their    practices and make decisions to improve them quickly.</p>     <p> Another pedagogical implication has to do with the teaching practice itself.    First of all, from this study it is possible to see how teachers&#39; decisions    in the class have a purpose and a basis which comes not only from their knowledge,    their experience and their beliefs but also from institutional patterns that,    in many cases, shape the way teachers act in the classroom. Based on this, it    is necessary to see the teaching practice as the complex process it is. Not    only that but more importantly, to see English teachers as individuals who have    to struggle with many problems to do their task: developing students&#39;    foreign language competence.</p>     <p> The second issue has to do with the awareness teachers must have when assuming    the responsibility of teaching a foreign language in our country. This awareness    is related to the relationship between theory and practice. In this study, I    saw how teachers faced difficulties when putting some concepts into practice    in the classroom. Then, I asked myself:</p>     <p> Is it a matter of simply relating one thing to another one or is it a matter    of being updated in terms of studying, and why not, doing research? I think    that teachers have plenty of literature that can help them become updated in    terms of teaching, but they also have ample opportunities to question their    practices that perhaps would minimize the problem of relating what they know    with their actual practice.</p> </font> <hr size="1"> <font face="verdana" size="2">      ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p><sup><a href="#s1" name="1">1</a></sup> This is a fictitious name used to    protect the participant&#39;s identity.</p>     <p> <sup><a href="#s2" name="2">2</a></sup> This is a fictitious name used to    protect the participant&#39;s identity.</p> </font> <hr size="1"> <font face="verdana" size="2">     <p> <b><font size="3">References</font></b></p>     <!-- ref --><p> Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford:    Oxford University Press.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000216&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Bartlett, L. (1994). Teacher development through reflective teaching. In J.    Richards &amp; D. Nunan (Ed.), Second language teacher education (pp. 202-214).    Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000217&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500002&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Bogoya, D. (2000). Una prueba de evaluaci&oacute;n de competencias acad&eacute;micas    como proyecto. Bogot&aacute;: Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Unibiblos.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000218&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500003&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Breen, M., Hird, B., Milton, M., Oliver, R., &amp; Thwaite, A. (2001). Making    sense of language teaching: Teachers&#39; principles and classroom practices.    Applied Linguistics Journal, 22(4), 470-501.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000219&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500004&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Cohen, L. &amp; Manion, L. (1995). Research methods in education. London:    Routle.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000220&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500005&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Colombia. Ministerio de Educaci&oacute;n Nacional [MEN]. (1994). Ley General    de Educaci&oacute;n. Ley 115. Bogot&aacute;: Author.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000221&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500006&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Colombia. Ministerio de Educaci&oacute;n Nacional [MEN]. (1996). Resoluci&oacute;n    2343. Bogot&aacute;: Author.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000222&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500007&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Colombia. Ministerio de Educaci&oacute;n Nacional [MEN]. (1998). Serie documentos    especiales. Bogot&aacute;: Author.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000223&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500008&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Colombia. Ministerio de Educaci&oacute;n Nacional [MEN]. (1999). Lineamientos    Curriculares. Idiomas Extranjeros. Bogot&aacute;: Author.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000224&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500009&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Colombia. Ministerio de Educaci&oacute;n Nacional [MEN]. (2006). Est&aacute;ndares    B&aacute;sicos de Competencias en Lenguas Extranjeras: Ingl&eacute;s. Bogot&aacute;:    Author.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000225&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500010&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Common European Framework. A common European framework of reference for languages.    Retrieved February 2, 2005, from Council of Europe Web site: <a href="http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Linguistic/CADRE_EN.asp"target="blank">http://www.coe.int/T/DG4/Linguistic/CADRE_EN.asp</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000226&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500011&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Fung, L., &amp; Chow, L. (2002). Congruence of student teachers&#39; pedagogical    images and actual classroom practices. Educational Research, 44(3), 313-321.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000227&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500012&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Johnson, K. (1999). Teachers&#39; beliefs: The rock we stand on. Understanding    language teaching. Canada: Heinle &amp; Heinle publishers.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000228&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500013&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Richards, J. (1994). The dilemma of Teacher Education. In J. Richards &amp;    D. Nunan (Ed.), Second language teacher education (pp. 3-15). Cambridge: Cambridge    University Press.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000229&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500014&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Richards, J. &amp; Lockhart, C. (1999). Reflective teaching in second language    classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000230&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500015&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Rivers, W. (1992). Communicating naturally in a second language. Cambridge:    Cambridge University Press.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000231&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500016&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Savignon, S. J. (1983). Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice.    U.S.A.: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000232&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500017&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Seedhouse, P. (1995). Needs analysis and the general English classroom. ELT    Journal, 49, 59-65.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000233&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500018&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers    in education and social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000234&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500019&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Stern, H. H. (1990). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford    University Press.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000235&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500020&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p>Strauss, A. &amp; Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded    theory procedures and techniques. London: Sage.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000236&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500021&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><!-- ref --><p> Zuleta, X. &amp; Prada, L. (2005). Tasting teaching flavors: A group of student-teachers&#39;    experiences in their practicum. PROFILE, 6, 157-170.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scielo.php?script=sci_nlinks&ref=000237&pid=S1657-0790200800020000500022&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');">Links</a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><p>&nbsp; </p> </font>       ]]></body><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bachman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Fundamental considerations in language testing]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Oxford ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Oxford University Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bartlett]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Teacher development through reflective teaching]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Richards]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Nunan]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Second language teacher education]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<page-range>202-214</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cambridge ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Cambridge University Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bogoya]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Una prueba de evaluación de competencias académicas como proyecto]]></source>
<year>2000</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Universidad Nacional de ColombiaUnibiblos]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Breen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hird]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Milton]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Oliver]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Thwaite]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Making sense of language teaching: Teachers&#39; principles and classroom practices]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Applied Linguistics Journal]]></source>
<year>2001</year>
<volume>22</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>470-501</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cohen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Manion]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Research methods in education]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[London ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Routle]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>Colombia. Ministerio de Educación Nacional [MEN]</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Ley General de Educación. Ley 115]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Author]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>Colombia. Ministerio de Educación Nacional [MEN]</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Resolución 2343]]></source>
<year>1996</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Author]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>Colombia. Ministerio de Educación Nacional [MEN]</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Serie documentos especiales]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Author]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>Colombia. Ministerio de Educación Nacional [MEN]</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Lineamientos Curriculares: Idiomas Extranjeros]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Author]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>Colombia. Ministerio de Educación Nacional [MEN]</collab>
<source><![CDATA[Estándares Básicos de Competencias en Lenguas Extranjeras: Inglés]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Bogotá ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Author]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<source><![CDATA[Common European Framework: A common European framework of reference for languages]]></source>
<year></year>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Fung]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Chow]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Congruence of student teachers&#39; pedagogical images and actual classroom practices]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Educational Research]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>44</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>313-321</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Johnson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Teachers&#39; beliefs: The rock we stand on]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Canada ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Understanding language teachingHeinle & Heinle publishers]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Richards]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The dilemma of Teacher Education]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Richards]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Nunan]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Second language teacher education]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<page-range>3-15</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cambridge ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Cambridge University Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Richards]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Lockhart]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Reflective teaching in second language classrooms]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cambridge ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Cambridge University Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rivers]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Communicating naturally in a second language]]></source>
<year>1992</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cambridge ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Cambridge University Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Savignon]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S. J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice]]></source>
<year>1983</year>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Addison- Wesley Publishing Company, Inc]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Seedhouse]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Needs analysis and the general English classroom]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[ELT Journal]]></source>
<year>1995</year>
<volume>49</volume>
<page-range>59-65</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Seidman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and social sciences]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[New York ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Teachers College Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Stern]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H. H]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Fundamental concepts of language teaching]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Oxford ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Oxford University Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Strauss]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Corbin]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[London ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Sage]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zuleta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[X]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Prada]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Tasting teaching flavors: A group of student-teachers&#39; experiences in their practicum]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[PROFILE]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<numero>6</numero>
<issue>6</issue>
<page-range>157-170</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
