CLIL in FL communication

Introduction

Part 1.Theoretical implications of using CLIL in FL communication.

1.1. Development of CLIL. Notions, dimensions and outcomes.

1.2. Dual focus of CLIL: Content in CLIL. Language in CLIL.

1.3.  CLIL: A multifaceted learning environment that strengthens motivation and enhances the development of mental processes.  

Part 2.Intercultural aspects of using CLIL in teaching FL communication.

2.1. Competences and CLIL.

2.2. CLIL and interactive technologies.

2.3. Learning strategies in CLIL.

2.4. Teacher-learner relationship in CLIL.

Part 3. Practical implementation of CLIL.

3.1. CLIL: History and language.

3.2. CLIL: Geography and language.

3.3. CLIL: Literature and language.

Conclusion

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                          Introduction

Actuality of work. Recently, the market of educational technologies abounds with various methods of FLT, and a question of a technique used in training becomes more and more actual. Obviously, there were big changes in methods of teaching English at the end of the XX century. Earlier all priorities were given to grammar, mechanical mastering a lexical material, reading and translation, and tasks were monotonous (reading and translation of the text, storing of new words, retelling, exercises in the text), recently, studying of language had become more functional. Huge number of experts in different areas of science, culture, business, equipment and other areas of activity, demanded training in foreign languages as to an instrument of production. They are not interested neither  in the theory, nor history of English language.  It is required exclusively functionally, for usage in different spheres of social life, as means of real communication with people from other countries. Teaching language has gained applied character, while earlier it was rather abstract and theoretical.

Considering modern techniques of FLT, we will see that the list significantly extended and includes communicative, project based, intensive, activity based and distance technique. The communicative technique becomes prevailing, since it satisfies inquiries of learners, and directed on possibility of communication. Among four language aspects, on which any language is trained (reading, writing, speaking and listening), attention is paid to speaking and perception (listening) the most.

However, it should be noted that the communicative method is intended not only for a small talk. Those who wants to be a professional in concrete area, regularly read publications on the subject in foreign editions. Possessing a big lexicon, they easily are guided in the text, but supporting conversation with the foreign colleague on the same subject required them to make enormous efforts.

Due to abovementioned facts, there was such term as an integrated approach to training in a foreign language (Integrated Teaching Approach). However, the concept of the ITA is suggested variously by different authors. According to one group of scholars, it is "integration of functional and methodical aspects of FLT". Others consider that a basis of the ITA is "the communicative technique with integration of practical bases and classical methods".

In the last 20-30 years much attention has been paid to FLT at earlier age. When teaching 5-10-years old children is used the technique of primary education, which has functional aspect, i.e. children study, carrying out various actions. The same approach can be used in teaching older children, when formal and functional aspects of language are integrated, and learners use language for mastering and learn to use the language, i.e. the foreign language is used for production of any functional task.

Mr. Peeter Mehisto mentioned one of his hottest new projects in Kazakhstan. He has had recently worked as an independent consultant with Cambridge International Examinations and the Autonomous Educational Organisation, Nazarbayev Intellectual Schools (AEO-NIS) in Kazakhstan. AEO-NIS is working in a highly systematic manner to establish a network of trilingual schools where Kazakh, Russian and English are used as media of instruction.   
 
AEO-NIS supports schools: by organising professional development for teachers and managers/leaders; by developing curricula and learning materials; by commissioning independent research into student achievement and programme management; by creating for a for discussion; by developing public information materials; and, by managing knowledge from the entire programme development process.  
 
To achieve its goals AEO-NIS has been working with numerous Kazakh and international partners. International partners include Cambridge University, John Hopkins University, Pennsylvania State University and Cito.

This kind of integration satisfies learners' inquiries, who interested in applied aspect of a foreign language, and here Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) represents a great interest.

The object of this research work is the process of teaching/learning a foreign language.

The subject of paper is a method of formation of Intercultural Communicative Competence on the basis of Content and Language Integrated Learning technology in secondary school.

The aim of diploma paper is to analyze, describe and expose different aspects of CLIL technology in the field of teaching and learning a foreign language in secondary school. The aim of research has distinguished the following tasks, such as examining the dual focus of CLIL, and its implications; to describe the difficulties and challenges of the CLIL technology implementing in secondary school.

The primary objective of this paper is to articulate the development of Content and Language Integrated  Learning  (CLIL)  as an educational approach  which brings together complementary educational  initiatives  and socio-political requirements. The period 1990-2012 has seen considerable changes in Kazakhstany society and demands for change  in respective  educational  systems. Through selected  reports this work tracks certain  features of  these developments as  they affect curricular integration in respect to languages and non-language subjects.

Methods of research were used to realize given tasks:

1. Interpretation of pedagogical and methodological literature;

2. Analysis and synthesis of experiments and experiences of foreign scholars;

3. Critical study of the literature on the problems of implementation of CLIL;

4. Generalization scientists advanced experiences in the given field of study.

Methodological basis. The work of the following authors were used to realize the basic objectives of the diploma paper : Laletina L.T., Marsh D., Kunanbayeva S.S, Pistorio M.I., Bentley K., Vlachos K., Luksha T.G., Gerakopoulou O., etc.

The scientific novelty of the work is determined by the attempt to study CLIL technology, the ways and problems in its implementation, since teaching/learning a foreign language through integration of language and content is still new technology in methodology of FLT, especially the usage of the technology in secondary schools of Kazakhstan.

The theoretical significance of the diploma paper lies in the attempt to throw the light on the study of CLIL. In this work is given range of characteristics and features of CLIL to clarify the importance and ways of implementing CLIL. Also to clarify that the CLIL approach is more effective means of language learning that intensive language programmes.

The practical significance lies on that the scientific structure can be used during the seminar on methodology of teaching English as FL and teaching subjects through English.

The paper consists of an introduction, three parts, conclusion, references and appendix.

 

 

Part 1.Theoretical implications of using CLIL in FL communication.

1.1. Development of CLIL. Notions, dimensions and outcomes.

There is a variety of theories related to teaching and learning a foreign language. Their analyses proved information about the way people the language in general, as well as methods that are most suitable for teaching the language successfully. As the theory of scaffolding is highly related to interaction and a socio-cultural view of language, there will be a reference to the communicative approaches on which teaching and learning of a foreign language are based in our days.

The Communicative Approach

Changes in socio-political scenery of Europe and North America in the early 1970's (for example, high immigration and population movement) led to linguistic and pedagogical changes as well. Classes adopted a more communicative behaviour, with interaction being the central point of language teaching and learning. The focus was now on the learner and notions such as "negotiation of meaning" came to the surface. All these elements are the concrete characteristics of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), an approach with significant implications for the science of language pedagogy among others. According to Savignon, "communicative language teaching derives from a multidisciplinary perspective that includes, at the least, linguistics, psychology, philosophy, sociology and educational research"[1savignon].

Basic in CLT is the theory of Communicative Competence introduced by sociolinguist Dell Hymes. Hymes developed this theory as an answer to Chomsky's idea of linguistic competence. In his theory Chomsky made a distinction between "competence, speaker-hearer's knowledge of his language" and "performance, the actual use of language in concrete situations", considering the first an innate process [2 Chomsky]. Hymes, on the other hand, spoke about learner's competence to combine grammatical and socio-cultural knowledge as well.

This theory was further enhanced by Canale and Swain, who stressed the division of communicative competence into strategic, grammatical and sociolinguistic. This division did not underestimate the importance of grammar, it just put grammatical competence into a more widely defined communicative competence model [1]. Later on, discourse competence was added to comprise with the other three components of learner's communicative competence [1]. Today CLT includes a variety of activities, games, use of songs and movies, use of the internet, among others, so that the learner will be able to expand most effectively his/her communicative competence of a FL.

The Natural Approach

The Natural Approach was developed in 1977 by a teacher, Tracy Terrell, in cooperation with the famous linguist, Stephen Krashen.  Their communicative views on teaching and learning FL immediately found many supporters. Terrell and Krashen claimed that there is a natural way of learning foreign language. In the field of language acquisition, Krashen distinguishes between the terms acquisition a language and learning a language. He asserts that the competence of acquiring a language is a subconscious process that applies both to children and adults, while the learning of a language, is a conscious procedure that is accompanied by a series of rules. Krashen developed five hypotheses and characterize FL acquisition. He talked about "the acquisition/learning distinction" which was previously explained, the "monitor hypothesis", which refers to the way the already acquired input is monitored by learning and "the natural order hypothesis", which claims that there is an order in the way grammar rules are learned. Furthermore, the idea that language is better acquired if it is offered one level beyond

the existing linguistic level of the learner belongs to the "input hypothesis", while "the affective filter hypothesis" posits the FL acquisition is affected by different factors, as for example, of the psychological state of learner. Krashen's views, although they were questioned by many scholars, have highly contributed to FL teaching and learning and "influenced the development of integrated instruction at all levels", as it will be discussed immediately after [3Crandall].

Content-based instruction

Under the umbrella of Communicative Language Teaching lies the approach of Content-based instruction. CBI is defined is the integration of content and language in FL teaching  and learning with special emphasis on the subject matter. "CBI is a teaching method that emphasizes learning about something rather than learning about language" [4davies]. Although, the idea of integrating content and language existed many years ago, for example in immersion in Canada and the USA, it has been in the last few years that this new approach applies in the FL classes of other countries' as well.

In CBI classes the focus is mainly on the content area rather than on the language. Genesee observes that "language serves as a vehicle for discussions of academic matters and is only a secondary focus of instructional attention" [5]. However, the acquisition of language come forth from the constant contact of the learner with language as s/he is taught the subject matter, but at the same time learns and practices in the target language. "They (the students) learn about this subject (a subject they are interested in) using the language they are trying to learn, rather than their native language, as a tool for developing knowledge and so they develop their linguistic ability in the target language" [6 Peachey]. Cummins, Grabe and Stoller claim that CBI is supported by Krashen's comprehensible input hypothesis which, as Krashen and Terrell state, says that "we acquire by understanding a language a bit beyond our current level of competence. This is done with the help of context". The academic input as new material to be learned, offers to the student the opportunity to practice and acquire a language in a level above the comprehension level s/he already has. On this topic Snow, Met and Genesee argue that there is more effective language acquisition when language learned in meaningful and important situations for communication, such as the subject matter content offered at school. The main point is that the integration of content and language in CBI offers to the student along with the content knowledge also the opportunity for the FL acquisition in a communicative environment that s/he might not find in a class  of a solid language instruction. In the last years a variety of content-based approaches have been issued for more effective language pedagogy, such as sheltered content instruction, sustained content teaching, theme based, adjust language instruction, and content and language integrated learning.

Definitions

The entry of Content and Language Integrated Learning in the educational system of the European schools started as a prerequisite in order to assist the scheme of multilingualism that characterizes the European Union. On this go, the parallel teaching of language and subject matter in a language different from the mother tongue was proposed. In 2006 a report on the European Union’s educational system on bilingualism was issued defining CLIL as follows:

"The acronym CLIL is used as a generic term to describe all types of provision in which a second language (a foreign, regional or minority language and/or another official state language) is used to teach certain subjects in the curriculum other than the language lessons themselves" [7Eurydice]

There is not a limitation in the second language chosen for instruction in CLIL. Due to the internalization and expansion of the English language, though, most students in the European schools that attend a CLIL programme are instructed in English. However, there are some cases in which a regional or minority language has been selected. Besides, one of the scopes of the European Committee is the preservation of languages, especially the minority ones, and the promotion of multilingualism at the same time. The integration of content and language was again chosen as the most adequate educational paradigm. CBI and immersion programmes had already built the ground for the integration of content and language teaching and learning in the school curriculum. Pérez-Vidal (2009: 6) explains that “CLIL is essentially the natural development of communicative approaches, updated with the incorporation of the effects of recent developments” and on the go, she sets three factors that seem to have strengthened the emergence of CLIL:

Factor 1: The European Union political project and increasing globalisation and mobility, which Union policies promote.

Mobility of young people in the European Union became an important feature for the expansion of multilingualism and cross-cultural attitudes. Mobility was expressed through exchange programmes such as Erasmus, Comenius and Leonardo, among others.

Factor 2: New pedagogical insights such as the key role played by individual differences, attitude and motivation in the development of autonomy in language learning.

The new pedagogical perspectives created teaching strategies which set as target the language learner’s autonomy that is translated as the learner’s development of cognitive and linguistic abilities in order to become responsible for his/her own learning.

Factor 3: Technological progress.

The incorporation of new technologies in language education, firstly with Computer Assisted Learning (CALL) and later on with Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), contributed to the development of CLIL which, as a modern approach to language learning, depends on new technologies for the promotion of the language learner’s autonomy.

Content  and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)-is a dual-focused educational  approach in which an additional language is used for the learning and teaching of content and language with the objective of promoting both content and language mastery to pre-defined levels. Since  1990 CLIL has emerged as an example of interdisciplinary educational  convergence that requires multi-faceted research approaches  (Coyle,2007; Dalton-Puffer & Smit 2007;Lyster2007; Mehisto 2011; Bonnet 2012). Eurydice observes that: "One  of  the first pieces  of legislation  regarding cooperation in CLIL is the 1995 Resolution of the Council. It refers to the promotion of innovative methods and, in particular, to the teaching of classes in a foreign language for disciplines other than languages, providing bilingual teaching". 

The European Commission White Paper which followed this in 1995 also noted that mainstream schools (Secondary) should consider teaching subjects in the first foreign language of the school, as in the ‘European Schools’ which exist primarily to serve the children of personnel working for the European Institutions. From 1995 to the present, European programmes, educational  legislative actions and other drivers such as professional initiatives have resulted in CLIL further establishing itself in education. "The debate on CLIL is very much alive. Fresh initiatives to promote this still novel methodological  approach will be undertaken in  the  years ahead, probably within the next generation of education and training programmes  for 2007-2013 (Eurydice 2006:8). This has been the case, and  the extent  to which the position of CLIL has changed  since the full European study carried out by Eurydice in 2005-2006 is to be  found in a follow-up study to be reported in 2012. 

Baetens Beardsmore observes  that, "the social situation in each country in general and decisions in educational policy in particular always have an effect, so there is no single blueprint of content and language integration that could be applied in the same  way  in different  countries – no model  is for export".   

In 2006, Eurydice  found  that the provision of  CLIL could be found  in the majority of  European  member  states. The length of  experience varies considerably, as does the means by which CLIL was introduced. The status of languages used is complex to determine  because of a range of terms  being used to  designate CLIL-type provision. National, regional, heritage languages may be taught  using  an integrative method, but termed in different ways. The most notable issue relates to terms like bilingual education and immersion. The  levels of education are the most commonly reported but this does not include  pre-schooling,  which,  in turn, may not  be  administrated  by regional educational  administrative  infrastructure.  Whilst  most  activity  is  reported at Secondary level the emergence of integrated methodologies at earlier  stages  remains  commonplace  (Eurydice  2006:  20).  The  organisation and evaluation  of  CLIL  across  Europe varies considerably from use of language tests, tests  on languages  and  other  subjects, a  combination of  both, and open systems where students are allocated places in CLIL streams according  to application and availability. The subjects taught depend largely on educational sector with creative subjects and environmental sciences prominent at primary level, and science and social science being  reported as common  to secondary level (Eurydice 2006: 24).

Dimensions and outcomes

Working towards a cohesive conceptual tool, and influenced by the early work of Mohan and his Knowledge Framework (1986), Coyle (1999) developed the 4Cs Framework (Figure 1). This Framework differs from the standards-based world languages education strategy Standards for Foreign Language Learning in the 21st Century (1999) published by ACTFL (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages), which focuses on the language curriculum. Although some interesting links can be made (e.g. communication, cultures and connections), there is a difference in emphasis since the starting point is language education. The 4Cs framework for CLIL starts with content (such as subject matter, themes, cross-curricular approaches) and focuses on the interrelationship between content (subject matter), communication (language), cognition (thinking) and culture (awareness of self and ‘otherness’) to build on the synergies of integrating learning (content and cognition) and language learning (communication and cultures). It unites learning theories, language learning theories and intercultural understanding:

1. Subject matter is not only about acquiring knowledge and skills, it is about the learner constructing his/her own knowledge and developing skills (Lantolf, 2000; Vygotsky, 1978);

2. Acquiring subject knowledge, skills and understanding is related to learning and thinking (cognition). To enable the learner to construct an understanding of the subject matter, the linguistic demands of its content must be analysed and made accessible (Met, 1998); 
3. Thinking processes (cognition) need to be analysed for their linguistic demands (Bloom, 1984; McGuiness, 1999); 
4. Language needs to be learned in context, learning through the language, reconstructing the subject themes and their related cognitive processes e.g. language intake/output (Krashen, 1985; Swain, 2000); 
5. Interaction in the learning context is fundamental to learning. This has implications when the learning context operates through L2 (Pica, 1991; van Lier, 1996); 
6. The relationship between cultures and languages is complex. Intercultural awareness and learning is fundamental to CLIL (Byram, Nicols, and Stevens, 2001). 
The 4Cs Framework holds that it is through progression in knowledge, skills and understanding of the subject matter, engagement in associated cognitive processing, interaction in a communicative context, developing appropriate language knowledge and skills as well as acquiring a deepening intercultural awareness through the positioning of self and ‘otherness’, that effective CLIL takes place whatever the model. From this perspective, CLIL involves learning to use language appropriately whilst using language to learn effectively. The 4Cs Framework is a tool for mapping out CLIL activities and for maximising potential in any model, at any level and any age.

 

Figure 1.

CLIL Dimensions and Focuses

In the CLIL Compendium there are 5 dimensions based on issues relating to culture, environment, language content and learning. Each of these includes a number of focus points realized differently according to 3 major factors: age-range of learners, socio-linguistic environment, and degree of exposure to CLIL.