This article reports on a comparative study of teacher and student perceptions on effective instructional practices in the Spanish heritage language classroom. The data were collected through an online questionnaire administered to 460 students in different Spanish courses and 9 instructors at a large university as well as focus groups. Based on the results, it is suggested that teachers work toward a mutual understanding with students about the main classroom pedagogical activities, methods, and tools to prevent student dissatisfaction and disengagement.
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. (2002). ACTFL program standards for the preparation of foreign language teachers. Yonkers, NY: Author.
2.
BeaudrieS. (2011). Spanish heritage language programs: A snapshot of current programs in the southwestern United States. Foreign Language Annals, 44, 321-337.
3.
BeaudrieS. (2012). Research on university-based Spanish heritage language programs in the United States: The current state of affairs. In BeaudrieS.FaircloughM. (Eds.), Spanish as a heritage language in the United States: State of the field (pp. 203-221). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
4.
BeaudrieS.DucarC.Relaño-PastorA. (2009). Curricular perspectives in the heritage language context: Assessing culture and identity. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 22, 157-174.
5.
BellT. (2005). Behaviors and attitudes of effective foreign language teachers: Results of a questionnaire study. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 259-270.
6.
BitchenerJ.KnochU. (2010). The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten-month investigation. Applied Linguistics, 31, 193-214.
7.
BrownA. V. (2009). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions of effective foreign language teaching: A comparison of ideals. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 46-60.
8.
ChenY.HoshowerL. B. (2003). Student evaluation of teaching effectiveness: An assessment of student perception and motivation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28, 71-88.
9.
DucarC. M. (2008). Student voices: The missing link in the Spanish heritage language debate. Foreign Language Annals, 41, 415-429.
10.
EllisR. (2009). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT Journal, 63, 97-107.
11.
GreenJ. M. (1993). Student attitudes toward communicative and non-communicative activities: Do enjoyment and effectiveness go together?The Modern Language Journal, 77, 1-10.
12.
HarlowL. L.MuyskensJ. A. (1994). Priorities for intermediate-level language instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 78, 141-154.
13.
HedgcockJ.LefkowitzN. (1994). Feedback on feedback: Assessing learner receptivity in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3, 141-163.
14.
IngoldC. W.RiversTesserE.AshbyE. (2002). Report on the NFLC/AATSP Survey of Spanish Language Programs for Native Speakers. Hispania, 85, 324-329.
15.
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (2011). Model core teaching standards. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
16.
KernR. (1995). Students’ and teachers’ beliefs about language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 28, 71-92.
17.
LiS. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 309-365.
18.
LoewenS.LiS.FeiF.ThompsonA.NakatsukasaK.AhnS.ChenX. (2009). L2 learners’ beliefs about grammar instruction and error correction. The Modern Language Journal, 93, 91-104.
19.
McCargarD. F. (1993). Teacher and student role expectations: Cross-cultural differences and implications. The Modern Language Journal, 77, 192-207.
20.
MileyW.GonsalvesS. (2003). What you don’t know can hurt you: Students’ perceptions of professors’ annoying habits. College Student Journal, 37, 447-455.
21.
MooreM. S. (1996). Assessing college teaching effectiveness: A comparison of graduate teaching assistants and their students. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (Accession Order No. 9629921).
22.
NoelsK. A. (2001). Learning Spanish as a second language: Students’ orientations and perceptions of teachers’ communicative style. Language Learning, 51, 107-144.
23.
PeacockM. (2001). Language learning strategies and EAP proficiency: Teacher views, student views, and test results. In FlowerdewJ.PeacockM. (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 268-285). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
24.
SchulzR. A. (1996). Focus on form in the foreign language classroom: Students’ and teachers’ views on error correction and the role of grammar. Foreign Language Annals, 29, 343-364.
25.
SchulzR. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA–Colombia. The Modern Language Journal, 85, 244-258.
26.
SchwarzerD.PetrónM. (2005). Heritage language instruction at the college level: Reality and possibilities. Foreign Language Annals, 38, 568-578.
27.
TseL. (2000). Student perceptions of foreign language study: A qualitative analysis of foreign language autobiographies. The Modern Language Journal, 84, 69-84.
28.
WilliamsM.BurdenR. (1997). Psychology for language teachers: A social constructivist approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
