There is a widely shared understanding that language is not considered a skill to be learnt first and only then used as a means to communicate content, but rather language and content objectives should be integrated (e.g. Bunch 2013). Thus, engagement in disciplinary practices and interaction with peers and teachers in joint activities are regarded as key elements for both content and language learning (Walqui 2006; Gibbons 2007). Therefore, language-related expertise is required from all teachers. However, subject teachers’ role in language and literacy teaching has been recognized in line with the increasing linguistic and cultural diversity in classrooms although subject teachers are disciplinary language teachers to all students (e.g., Gibbons 2007).

In Finnish schools, teachers are largely unprepared to encounter and deal with plurilingual students in their classrooms, and it is clear that some students are not provided with the support needed for quality learning. There is research evidence that lower educational achievement of children of immigrants in comprehensive school tends to have a large effect on their final educational attainment (e.g., Kilpi-Jakonen 2011; Kuusela et al. 2008). It is, therefore, crucial that subject teachers’ are able to adjust their teaching according to their students’ proficiency and provide adequate linguistical support for content learning.

Research shows that both language and content learning are optimized when the interactions within the learning community expands students’ opportunities for identity investment and cognitive engagement (see The Academic Expertise Framework, Cummins 2001). Thus, the classroom should work as a learning community where everyone’s voice can be heard and knowledge is generated in interaction. This means that optimally, the pedagogical approach adopted by the teacher builds on students' cultural and linguistic knowledge, activates their prior knowledge and learning experiences and supports their participation, engagement and ability to function both linguistically and academically in learning cognitively demanding contents. Effective pedagogy provides opportunities for active communication of meanings and raises awareness of the language use and efficient learning strategies (Cummins 2001). In order to provide optimal learning conditions to all learners and support both the disciplinary and language knowledge development, subject teachers need knowledge and understanding of how language is used to construct meanings in their discipline and how to scaffold learning progress. This knowledge of language directly related to disciplinary teaching and learning can be called pedagogical language knowledge (Galguera 2011; Bunch 2013).

In this paper, we focus on the student teachers’ pedagogical language knowledge. We are interested particularly on how they see language in relation to content knowledge and how their pedagogical language knowledge shows in their pedagogical practices.

The study focuses on the following questions:

• How do student teachers treat language knowledge in relation to content knowledge during the process of pedagogical planning?
• How is both language and content learning supported in their pedagogical choices?
• How do student teachers reflect their collaborations and shared understanding during process?

Bunch, G. C. 2013. Pedagogical Language Knowledge: Preparing Mainstream Teachers for English Learners in the New Standards Era. Review of Research in Education 37: 298–341. Cummins, J. 2001. Negotiating identities: Education for empowerment in a diverse society. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: California Association for Bilingual Education. Galguera, T. 2011. Participant Structures as Professional Learning Tasks and the Development of Pedagogical Language Knowledge among Pre-service Teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 38: 85–106. Gibbons, P. 2007. Mediating academic language learning through classroom discourse. In International Handbook of English Language Teaching, edited by J. Cummins, and C. Davidson, 701–718. New York: Springer. Kilpi-Jakonen, E. 2011. Continuation to Upper Secondary Education in Finland: Children of Immigrants and the Majority Compared. Acta Sociologica 54 (1): 77–106. Patton, M. Q. 2002. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Walqui, A. 2006. Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 9 (2): 159–180. Yin, Robert K. (2003a). Case study research, design and methods (3rd ed., vol. 5). Thousand Oaks: Sage.