Modernizing Educational Practice : Perspectives in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) [1 ed.] 9781443888639, 9781443885355

Citation preview

Modernizing Educational Practice

Modernizing Educational Practice: Perspectives in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Edited by

Katarzyna Papaja and Artur Świątek

Modernizing Educational Practice: Perspectives in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Edited by Katarzyna Papaja and Artur Świątek This book first published 2016 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2016 by Katarzyna Papaja, Artur Świątek and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-8535-5 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-8535-5

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword .................................................................................................. viii Contributors .............................................................................................. xvi Chapter One ................................................................................................. 1 The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL Hasan Bedir Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 17 Arithmetic Facts and Language of Acquisition Effect in Primary School Children Luisa Canavesio, Simone Sulpizio and Remo Job Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 37 Bilingual Education Project in Poland: A Summary Anna Czura and Katarzyna Papaja Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 56 Tertiary Students’ Perceptions of CB/CLIL Language Courses: A Case Study in a Psychological English Course Maágorzata ForyĞ Chapter Five .............................................................................................. 76 Cultural Awareness: CLIL in a Japanese Medical University Context Chad L. Godfrey Chapter Six ................................................................................................ 98 Elements of CLIL in Course Books for EFL Young Learners: An Overview Adrian Golis

vi

Table of Contents

Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 116 Revisiting CLIL Unreflective Practice: CLIL Consultancy as a Tool towards a More Effective CLIL Initiative and a More Efficient Use of Human Resources—The Case of a Private Primary School in Rovereto, Italy Sandra Lucietto Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 149 Longitudinal Study of Two CLIL Classrooms in Spain: Results from Written and Spoken Data Anne McCabe and Tom Morton Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 170 Models of Bilingual Education Programmes and their Implementation in Europe Barbara MuszyĔska Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 193 Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education within the Field of Public Health Maja Nowak-BoĔcza Chapter Eleven ........................................................................................ 199 An Insight into CLIL Motivation: A Questionnaire Study in Austria, Poland, Turkey and the Netherlands Katarzyna Papaja, Cem Can and Arkadiusz Rojczyk Chapter Twelve ....................................................................................... 221 In Search of CLIL… A Review of CLIL Textbooks used in Polish Secondary Schools Katarzyna Papaja and Artur ĝwiątek Chapter Thirteen ...................................................................................... 235 Code-switching and Translanguaging in CLIL: Are We Challenging Our Learners Sufficiently? Janet Streeter Chapter Fourteen ..................................................................................... 257 Practise what you Preach Zarina Subhan-Brewer

Modernizing Educational Practice

vii

Chapter Fifteen ........................................................................................ 271 Can Language Inhibit Learning? The Reflections of Polish Trainee Teachers on CLIL Tatiana Szczygáowska Chapter Sixteen ....................................................................................... 298 The Cognitive Classroom: Improving Learning Outcomes through an Understanding of How the Brain Works Alex Thorp Chapter Seventeen ................................................................................... 318 Polylingual Geography: Theorising Polylingual CLIL for a Geographical Perspective Astrid Weißenburg Chapter Eighteen ..................................................................................... 340 CLIL History: History of Canterbury Cathedral Aleksandra Zaparucha

FOREWORD

Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is an innovative approach which refers to educational settings where a language different from the learners’ mother tongue is used as a medium of instruction. The other language is found to be used from kindergarten to tertiary level, and the extent of its use may range from occasional foreign language texts in individual subjects to covering the whole curriculum. The changes in political, technological, economic and social realities of the modern world have led and still lead to more frequent contact between people of different linguistic and cultural backgrounds. Globalization has made the world interconnected. The world is rapidly becoming a mixed global village where the role of languages is extremely important. In an integrated world, integrated learning is viewed as a modern form of educational delivery. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) which is often referred to as Content-based Instruction (CBI), Immersion Education, Bilingual Education has been a very popular approach to language teaching / language learning not only in Europe but also in other countries such as Japan, Malaysia, China, United Arab Emirates, etc. Even though CLIL is not of a uniform nature (lots of variations of CLIL exist all over the world), one of the main arguments for introducing it is that it creates conditions for naturalistic language learning (Snow et al. 1989, Snow and Brinton 1997). According to Wolff (2003: 211), there are at least three important points which should be mentioned in the context of CLIL, namely: a) CLIL should not be perceived as an approach to language teaching and learning; it is important to pay attention to both content and language, b) In CLIL content and language are learnt in an integrated way. The two subjects are related to each other and dealt with as a whole, c) In CLIL another language is used to teach and learn content subjects, i.e. it is the medium of instruction. Maljers, Marsh, Coyle, Hartiala, Marsland, Pérez-Vidal & Wolff (2002) claim that there are 5 dimensions or reasons for introducing CLIL in schools and universities in order to strengthen the teaching and learning

Modernizing Educational Practice

ix

at these institutions. The 5 dimensions of CLIL are based on issues related to culture, environment, language, content and learning. Each of these includes a number of focal points realised differently according to three major facts: age-range of learners, socio-linguistic environment and degree of exposure to CLIL (Maljers, Marsh, Coyle, Hartiala, Marsland, PérezVidal & Wolff, 2002: 65): a) The Culture Dimension – CULTIX -Build intercultural knowledge & understanding -Develop intercultural communication skills -Learn about specific neighbouring countries/regions and/or minority groups -Introduce the wider cultural context b) The Environment Dimension – ENTIX -Prepare for internationalisation, specifically EU-integration -Access International Certification -Enhance school profile c) The Language Dimension – LANTIX -Improve overall target language competence -Develop oral communication skills -Develop plurilingual interests and attitudes -Introduce a target language d) The Content Dimension – CONTIX -Provide opportunities to study content through different perspectives -Access subject-specific target language terminology -Prepare for future studies and/or working life e) The Learning Dimension – LEARNTIX -Complement individual learning strategies -Diversify methods & forms of classroom practice -Increase learner motivation The above mentioned dimensions are good reasons for introducing CLIL into formal education as they are based on the assumption that building intercultural knowledge through content and language learning should be an indispensable part of our life.

x

Foreword

This publication results from selected presentations given at the UstroĔ CLIL 2013 conference. The main focus of this event was to reflect the internationality of CLIL by bringing the academicians, researchers, teachers and educational authorities from all over the world together and providing them with the opportunity to exchange an interdisciplinary dialogue on CLIL methodologies as well as purely practical consequences of implementing CLIL pedagogies in institutional educational practices at primary, secondary or tertiary level. This collection embraces original contributions in different areas of CLIL, namely: x CLIL-focused theory and research: experiences and future perspectives, x CLIL in SLA theories (productive and receptive skills, linguistic and communicative competences), x psychological and psycholinguistic perspectives on CLIL (attitudinal patterns, motivations, individual learner differences, cognitive and hermeneutic strategies), x sociolinguistic theories and discourses (bilingual and multilingual education, international language policies, institutional implementation of CLIL initiatives), x CLIL classroom discourse and management (classroom discourse, classroom interaction analysis, curriculum design, qualitative/quantitative assessment and evaluation, code switching), x socio-cultural considerations (intercultural competence development, multiculturalism in theory and practice, ethnic/language minority classrooms), x socio-economic contexts of CLIL implementation initiatives (labour market modelling, human resources management). The article entitled The perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL by Hasan Bedir is an attempt of raising the awareness of ELT student teachers on CLIL, which will shed light on the current attempts to improve the quality of language education in Turkey. There has been a great amount of research indicating the usefulness of CLIL in different education levels, yet the role of it has generally received less attention in Turkey although it has made great strides in order to be a member of European Union. CLIL is not officially included in Language Teaching Programmes in Turkey although CLIL modules have been introduced in initial teacher training courses for language teachers. The main reason for this reluctance is due to the fact that teachers are not trained at Faculties to implement CLIL programmes.

Modernizing Educational Practice

xi

The second article entitled Arithmetic Facts and Language of Acquisition Effect in Primary School Children by Maria Luisa Canavesio, Simone Sulpizio, Remo Job is devoted to the presence of interference and Language of Learning Arithmetic (LoLA) effects in mental arithmetic when the language of acquisition is not the native tongue but a foreign language. The sample under investigation are CLIL classes, in which children (9-10 years old) have been taught and trained in Mathematics with English as a medium of instruction since their first year of formal schooling. The next article Bilingual Education Project in Poland: A Summary by Anna Czura and Katarzyna Papaja exposes four large-scale research studies exploring CLIL sections with English, German, Spanish and French as a medium of instruction and provides a comprehensive overview of practices as well as a number of operational features of this type of education in Poland. Tertiary students’ perceptions of CB/CLIL language courses. A case study in a psychological English course by Maágorzata ForyĞ is a presentation of a practical application of CLIL principles to teaching at the tertiary level in the form of a course in psychological English offered to a group of second-year psychology students. The main aim of the paper is to discuss some practical implications for designing content-embedded language courses in the context of tertiary education. The fifth article entitled Cultural Awareness: CLIL in a Japanese Medical University Context by Chad L. Godfrey is an attempt to present better ways to promote learning outcomes in the CLIL classroom by creating an awareness of students’ learning styles, and by attempting to merge the students’ learning culture with one`s own teaching style. What is more, the implications for CLIL educators, teaching students that may have learning backgrounds different from their own are discussed. The next article entitled Elements of CLIL in course books for EFL for young learners - an overview by Adrian Golis aims to present an overview of the ways course books for primary students approved by the Polish Ministry of Education deal with simple CLIL topics. Both a quantitative and a qualitative analysis will be provided, demonstrating how much CLIL is present, as well as what topics and methods are exploited by the course book authors. The examples of both successful and poor content and language integrated learning in EFL classroom will be described in detail. Revisiting CLIL unreflective practice: CLIL consultancy as a tool towards a more effective CLIL initiative and a more efficient use of human resources. The case of a Catholic primary school in Rovereto, Italy by Sandra Lucietto is an illustration of the CLIL consultancy model applied

xii

Foreword

by a team of two consultants in a CLIL initiative where several subjects are taught through English in a Catholic primary school (Y1-5) in Rovereto (Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Northern Italy). The initiative started in school year 2009-10, in a Year 1 class, and will continue to the end of lower secondary education (Y8). The article Models of bilingual education programmes and their implementation in Europe by Barbara MuszyĔska is a description of bilingual programmes in private schools, particularly in Holland, Spain, and Sweden and a presentation how these schools have implemented the dual-focused programmes and whether they find them effective. Recent overviews indicate relative success in the evaluations of the efficiency of bilingual schools’ programmes so therefore the author of the article makes an attempt to present the possibilities of implementing these programmes in schools in Poland. The next article Longitudinal Study of Two CLIL Classrooms in Spain: Results from Written and Spoken Data by Anne McCabe and Tom Morton is a report on the UAM-CLIL project. The attempt was to answer the following questions: 1) what is the nature of the language that children produce in secondary CLIL classrooms? 2) how does that language change/develop over time? The researchers analysed the data (classroom discussions, interviews and written texts) gathered from two schools over a four-year-period using tools from Systemic Functional Linguistics to focus on the language children use in expressing content knowledge in English. Drawing on the results of the research, implications for teachers including suggestions for activities to scaffold learners into ageappropriate ways of talking/writing about history are discussed in details. The article entitled Integrating content and language in higher education within the field of Public Health by Maja Nowak-BoĔcza is a description of the methodological implications that arise from the implementation of EMI as well as the attempt to show the great potential of CLIL methods in the curriculum of Public Health Studies. Public Health is an interdisciplinary field that encompasses numerous areas of study, linking professionals from various health related areas through the means of establishing a common language. Academic trends in higher education in the field of Public Health demonstrate that specific initiatives have to be put into place in order to meet the requirements of the global academic environment. Knowledge and language acquisition, curriculum with international content, English-medium programs and degrees, increased mobility of students and scholars are integral to the European educational process in which English language proficiency is crucial in professional and specialized public health communication.

Modernizing Educational Practice

xiii

The eleventh article entitled An insight into CLIL motivation: A questionnaire study in Austria, Poland, Turkey and the Netherlands by Katarzyna Papaja, Cem Can and Arkadiusz Rojczyk discusses the role of the CLIL Austrian, Polish, Turkish and Dutch learner in understanding the motivation to learn subjects through a foreign language. Motivation is an important affective variable to consider in the CLIL classroom, especially when pupils originate from different historical and economic backgrounds. In order to determine motivation of Austrian, Polish, Turkish and Dutch CLIL learners from the perspective of specific requirements imposed by a CLIL curriculum in these countries the research was conducted among young CLIL learners coming from these countries. Unlike regular English courses, CLIL provides additional learning challenges resulting from the fact that language is not a sole concern, but it is a tool whereby CLIL learners study content subjects. This fact is predicted to shape learners' motivation that will differ from the one measured for regular English learners. The article entitled In search of CLIL... a review of ‘CLIL’ coursebooks used in Polish Secondary Schools by Katarzyna Papaja and Artur ĝwiątek aims at presenting and examining two books used in Polish secondary CLIL education during geography and history classes. The books are evaluated according to the standardised criteria used by Crystal Springs Books as well as the 4Cs dimensions of CLIL (Coyle 2006). The authors of the article strongly believe that content, cognition, communication and culture must be an inseparable part of each CLIL lesson and therefore of each CLIL course book. The article Code-switching and translanguaging in CLIL – are we challenging our learners sufficiently? Scholar and learner perceptions and the implications for classroom practice by Janet Streeter aims at exploring the relationship between the L1 and the L2 in the CLIL classroom and the implications of this for CLIL teachers and teacher educators. It draws upon some of the existing research and literature on code-switching and also includes the views and observations of Primary and Secondary CLIL teachers and students in two different national contexts. In the next article entitled Practise what you preach by Zarina SubhanBrewer it is outlined why CLIL is useful in order to bring about the behavioural and attitudinal change in teachers through intercultural competence, classroom interaction in the target language, improvement in language teachers’ personal productive and receptive skills. Consequently, promoting the updating of English language educational practices, that is sought by so many education ministries around the world, rather than

xiv

Foreword

simply offering language improvement courses for language teachers. For most of the world, the need to enter the global economy is well recognised. Thus successful English language education is seen as a prerequisite to socio-economic success. – Not only for an individual, but also for a country. If the teacher is at the heart of educational practice, then it is also given that the teacher is at the heart of its modernisation. The author supports the view that CLIL is the best way to assist teacher development for English language teachers and, therefore it is beneficial to focus on aspects of English that may not have been tackled in initial teacher training. The subsequent article Can Language Inhibit Learning? The reflections of Polish trainee teachers on CLIL by Tatiana Szczygáowska is a report on the attitudes and beliefs of 160 students concerning the use of CLIL in their future teaching career. By analysing the respondents’ views on numerous CLIL-related issues, an answer is being sought to the question whether they are well-equipped to do the job adequately. The Cognitive Classroom: Improving learning outcomes through an understanding of how the brain works by Alex Thorp explores how outcomes in the CLIL classroom, or indeed any learning environment, can be considerably enhanced through a greater understanding of how learning happens. Calling on the findings of current cognitive neuroscience, language acquisition research and Evidence-based Teaching, the vital role of cognition in the classroom is considered. The ultimate objective is to consider a functional approach detailing practical steps to creating a ‘cognitive classroom’, albeit with language or content. The article entitled Polylingual Geography – Theorizing Polylingual CLIL for a Geographical Perspective by Astrid Weißenburg focuses on the description of a plurilingual CLIL approach to Spatial Orientation, as only one dimension of the complex field of Geography Education. The theoretical basis of this approach is viewed, discussed and linked through numerous concepts of multi- and plurilingualism and Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) as well as Spatial Orientation. In conjunction with these findings, hypotheses as well as a theoretical concept of skills being acquired through a plurilingual CLIL approach are stated and briefly described. The last but not least, Focus on CLIL Teacher Training by Aleksandra Zaparucha is a presentation of the mini history lesson which includes the following parts: whole-class brainstorming, group matching pictures with the vocabulary items and arranging them chronologically, listening for confirmation and for extra information, constructing a time line and, finally, group production – guided speaking and writing supported by

Modernizing Educational Practice

xv

visual aids. The aim of this article is to help the reader reflect on the necessity of the specific CLIL teacher training, indispensable irrespectively of the high level of the target language on the part of the teacher. The articles included in the present collection were reviewed by specialists in the field. We are grateful to Prof. Mirosáaw Pawlak and Prof. Olivier Mentz for their suggestions and comments on earlier drafts of the papers. Katarzyna Papaja and Artur ĝwiątek

References Coyle, D. (2006). Developing CLIL: Towards a Theory of Practice. In: Monograph 6. Barcelona: APAC. Long, M.H. (1991). Focus on form: A design feature in language teaching methodology. In: K. de Bot, R. Ginsberg and C. Kramsch (eds.). Foreign Language Research in Cross-cultural Perspective. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath, pp. 309–320. Maljers, A., Marsh, D., Coyle, D., Hartiala, A.K., Marsland, B., PérezVidal, C. & Wolff, D. (eds.). (2002). CLIL/EMILE The European Dimension – Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential. Finland: The Continuing Education Centre of the University of Jyväskylä, 65-69. Snow, M.A., Met, M. & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly 23: 201-17. Snow, M. A. & Brinton, D.M. (eds.) (1997). The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. White Plains, NY: Longman. Wolff, D. (2003). Content and language integrated learning: a framework for the development of learner autonomy. In: D. Little, J. Ridley & E. Ushioda, (eds.). Learner Autonomy in the Foreign Language Classroom: Teacher, Learner Curriculum and Assessment. Dublin: Authentik, 211-222.

CONTRIBUTORS

Hasan Bedir (MA, PhD, Çukurova University) is currently teaching courses entitled Reading and Study Skills, Critical Thinking in ELT, Learning Strategies, Research Methods, Educational Technology and Material Development, Approaches and Methods in ELT at English Language Teaching Department, Faculty of Education, Çukurova University. He has been studying cognitive and metacognitive strategy usage in language learning and infusing critical thinking skills into content area teaching. Maria Luisa Canavesio is currently leading a PhD at the Department of Cognitive Sciences and Education, University of Trento, Italy. Her main research interests include L2 acquisition, numerical cognition and quality assessment of bilingual educational programs. She received a Degree in Philosophy from the University of Torino in 1996 and a Master in Language and Culture in teaching Italian as a foreign language from “Ca’ Foscari”, Venezia in 2007. Since 1995 she has worked as a primary school teacher. From 2004 to 2009 she was teaching Italian to foreigners in Amsterdam, The Netherlands (Ministry of Foreign Affair assignment). Cem Can has been teaching at the ELT department of Faculty of Education, Çukurova University since 1989. He received his PhD in Applied Linguistics, more specifically speaking in adult second language acquisition from generative linguistic perspective. He has conducted research studies on SLA from generative linguistic perspective, learner corpora, and English Language Teaching. He has coordinated and participated in many EU educational projects including one project on CLIL. He has also compiled Turkish International Corpus of Learner English and has been coordinating VESPA and LONGDALE Turkish subcorpus in Turkey. Anna Czura is an assistant professor in the Institute of English Studies at the University of Wrocáaw. In her research she is mainly interested in CLIL, language assessment, learner autonomy, intercultural communicative competence, mobility and teacher training. She was a member of a

Modernizing Educational Practice

xvii

research team and a co-author of the Profile Report. Bilingual Education (English) in Poland. Chad Godfrey is an assistant professor at Saitama Medical University, where he teaches CLIL, presentation skills and foreign exchange programs. He has a Masters Degree in Applied Linguistics from the University of Birmingham, and has been an educator in Japan for over 12 years. He is currently interested in researching CLIL methodology in Japanese context, and gender-based language particularly in the field of medicine. Adrian Golis is an English and German philology graduate from the Jagiellonian University, the University of Silesia and the Maria CurieSklodowska University. I am also an active language teacher at primary and secondary level. My main academic interests include language teaching materials for young learners and CLIL. I work as an expert for course book evaluation for the Polish Ministry of Education. Currently I am preparing a doctoral thesis on elements of CLIL in course books for English as a foreign language on primary level. Maágorzata ForyĞ (M.A.) is a doctoral student at the Institute of English Studies at the University of Warsaw and an MA student at the Faculty of Psychology at the same university. Her research interests revolve around implicit and explicit learning of foreign languages, CLIL and ESP in tertiary education and cognitive neuropsychology. She also designs and runs courses in English for psychologists. Remo Job is Dean of the Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science at the University of Trento. His research interests are in many areas of psycholinguistics as lexical access, word meaning, bilingualism, syntax, language and technology, neuropsychology of language. Ana Llinares is Associate Professor at Universidad Autónoma in Madrid, where she teaches in the Department of English. Her current research interests include CLIL, classroom discourse, interlanguage pragmatics and SFL applications to second language learning. She has recently coauthored the book The Roles of Language in CLIL (2012) and currently coordinates a research project on interpersonal language use and development in CLIL.

xviii

Contributors

Sandra Lucietto is a CLIL consultant and researcher. She is the headteacher of a primary and lower secondary school in Trentino (Italy), and a contract professor of Didattica L3 - English language analysis and acquisition at the University of Bolzano, Faculty of Education. I have been involved in CLIL since 2002. She has published several articles and a book on CLIL. She often presents papers / give workshops at national and international conferences. Anne McCabe is Associate Dean for Arts & Sciences and Coordinator of the English Department at Saint Louis University’s Madrid Campus, where she teaches linguistics, ESL and writing pedagogy. She has published articles on writing in history, CLIL, and media discourse, as well as on the teaching/learning of writing in university first-year composition programs. Her book publications include Language and Literacy and Advances in Language and Education, co-authored with Rachel Whittaker and Mick O’Donnell and published by Continuum, and An Introduction to Linguistics and Language Studies, with Equinox Publishers. Barbara MuszyĔska is an educational psychologist and an ESL teacher with hands-on experience of teaching children and adults. She was the coauthor of the Footprints series for younger learners for Pearson Longman. Currently, she teaches the 'methodology of English language teaching to younger learners' at the University of Lower Silesia in Wroclaw. She also cooperates with the International House Teacher Training Centre in Wroclaw, Poland, where she has developed a CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) online course for content and language teachers. Her main interests CLIL and the multilingual and intercultural education programs in Europe are related to her PhD research at the University of Cordoba in Spain. Maja Nowak-BoĔcza has a BA in English Literature and Creative Writing from Bard College, NY. She received her MA in Comparative Literature at the Jagiellonian University, and has postgraduate training in translation studies and teaching methodology. Currently she works at the Institute of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, JU MC as a lecturer, researcher and coordinator of Specialized English in Public Health courses.

Modernizing Educational Practice

xix

Katarzyna Papaja works in at State University of Applied Sciences in Konin, Poland. She received her PhD degree in Applied Linguistics. She specialises in Methods of Teaching English as a Foreign Language and Bilingual Education. She has taken part in many conferences abroad and in Poland. She has published widely on bilingual education methodologies (mainly Content and Language Integrated Learning – CLIL). She was part of the team which conducted groundwork leading to the publication of Profile Report - Bilingual Education (English) in Poland. She was also awarded a few scholarships and as a result was able to gain teaching experience in countries such as Great Britain, the USA, Germany and Switzerland. At the moment she is working on the development of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) syllabus. Arkadiusz Rojczyk works in the Institute of English at the University of Silesia. He received his PhD degree in Applied Linguistics. He is the author of more than 30 articles and recently has published a book entitled Temporal and Spectral parameters in perception of the voicing contrast in English and Polish. He has taken part in many conferences in Poland and abroad. He specialises in phonetics, acoustics, psycholinguistics and neurolinguistics. He is the member of The International Phonetic Association, the Acoustical Society of America, Polish Phonetic Society and PAN. At the moment he is involved in a project on the role of motivation in CLIL. Janet Streeter has taught in many different educational settings over the past 30 years. Trained as a Modern Languages (German & French) and EFL teacher, she has worked in schools, adult education, vocational education and universities in the UK and abroad. Janet also has a research degree in Modern French History. Her previous employment was in the Faculty of Education at the University of Cumbria (formerly St Martin’s College) where she worked as International Coordinator and teacher trainer in Modern Foreign Languages and CLIL for 13 years. During this time Janet coordinated the TEL2L EU project and was UK coordinator of the MOBIDIC – a Comenius project that produced training materials for CLIL teachers. Janet now runs her own independent organisation: Cumbria CLIL, working with a group of associates to deliver residential and in-house CLIL training in the UK and abroad. She is particularly interested in teaching methods for the CLIL classroom and a key part of her work involves coaching CLIL teachers – particularly subject specialists, but also linguists - in school.

xx

Contributors

Zarina Subhan-Brewer teaches at the University of Chichester, in the UK, on teacher development courses and is a freelance teacher trainer and materials writer. The lack of useful resources led her to developing and writing materials for a number of uses from health in rural communities for literacy purposes, to improving English language usage in good governance in conflict affected areas. Through such organic methods, her interest and awareness of CLIL have led her to putting it to effective use in her work in both development and teacher education in over 10 countries. Simone Sulpizio is an experimental psychologist at the Department of Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Trento. He received his PhD in 2011 and currently works as a postdoc fellow at University of Trento. His research is main in the field of word reading and word production, and electrophysiology of language Tatiana Szczygáowska is a university teacher with over 10 years of teaching experience. Currently, she is a lecturer at the University of Bielsko-Biaáa, specializing in linguistics, and recently also in translation studies. Her research interests include corpus linguistics, English as a lingua franca and contrastive discourse analysis, with special focus on written academic discourse. Artur ĝwiątek works in the Institute of Neophilology at Pedagogical University of Cracow. He received his PhD degree in Applied Linguistics. He specializes in semantics of English article system. He participated in many conferences in Poland. Currently he tries to combine his participation in Polish as well as in foreign conferences, where he presents his papers revolving around miscellaneous issues, including contrastive and cognitive linguistics, language of gender, semantics of function words, intercultural awareness, first language acquisition, second language acquisition among L2 subjects at different proficiency groups and psycholinguistics. Recently he has discovered that any challenging issue concerning a foreign language is exciting and worth further empirical investigations. Alex Thorp is the Head of Teacher Training at the English Language Centre, Brighton, UK and has worked on the development and delivery of CLIL Teacher Training courses for the last 8 years. Working with CLIL teachers from around the world and also running courses in countries including Italy, Spain and Thailand, he is particularly interested in the relationship between modern cognitive neuroscience and the practical

Modernizing Educational Practice

xxi

CLIL classroom. Alex has over 15 years’ experience in ELT and Teacher Training and is also a Senior Examiner for Trinity College London. Astrid Weissenburg, M.A. has studied at the University of Education Karlsruhe, Germany where she majored in European Bilingual Education for primary and lower secondary schools. After finishing off her studies with the exam thesis on the ability to work with maps in a bilingual CLIL classroom, she now works as a research assistant in the Geography department of the University of Education Karlsruhe. Her research interests focus on Geography Education and its didactics, Content and Language Integrated Learning as well as plurilingual education. Rachel Whittaker is a lecturer in the English Philology Department of the Madrid Universidad Autónoma. She works in the areas of reading and writing in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and EFL, and in discourse analysis. She has co-written -with Ana Llinares and Tom Morton, colleagues at the UAM- a book on language use and development in CLIL classes, to come out in CUP in March 2012: The Roles of Language in CLIL. With Anne McCabe and Mick O'Donnell she edited two collections on literacy published by Continuum: Language and Literacy: Functional Approaches, (R. Whittaker, M. O’Donnell and A. McCabe eds. 2006 and Advances in Language and Education, (A. McCabe, M. O’Donnell and R. Whittaker eds. 2007). A number of studies on writing in EFL in Spanish secondary schools on which she has worked with Ana Martín Úriz based on the UAM Corpus of Written Interlanguage have been collected in La composición como comunicación: una experiencia en las aulas de bachillerato (A. Martín Úriz and R. Whittaker eds 2005). She has published a number of different studies on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) with Ana Llinares in the framework of the UAM-CLIL Project, of which she is co-founder. She coordinates the Masters Programme in English Applied Linguistics at the UAM, and previously was in charge of the UAM Doctoral Programme in Applied Linguistics (which received the Mención de Calidad), for many years. She is on the editorial board of the Journal of Second Language Writing, and reviews for a number of other journals. Aleksandra Zaparucha has an MSc in Geography and MA in English from the Nicolas Copernicus University, ToruĔ, Poland. For 25 years she has been engaged in Geography and ELT teaching, teacher training, translating and materials writing, including 10 years of CLIL. She has co-

xxii

Contributors

operated with the Field Studies Council, Geographical Association, British Council and Macmillan and is a regular contributor to two magazines in Poland: Geografia w Szkole and The Teacher. She is preparing her PhD dissertation on CLIL at the University of Education, Karlsruhe, Germany. Recently she has delivered teacher training in Uzbekistan, the Czech Republic and Qatar and is a CLIL teacher trainer for Pilgrims, UK.

CHAPTER ONE THE PERCEPTIONS OF ELT PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS ON CLIL HASAN BEDIR

1. Introduction Reviewing the past experiences and requirements of language learning and teaching alongside the constraints, researchers have introduced Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) based on integrating subject and language learning in the same content. The literature research carried out for this study revealed the terms used for CLIL were language immersion, content based teaching, and bilingualism. According to Marsh et al (2005:5), CLIL is a generic term referring to “diverse methodologies which lead to dual-focussed education where attention is given both to topic and language of instruction”. CLIL promoted by the EU to develop multilingual citizenship has spread rapidly throughout Europe since its implementation and led to multilingualism in many countries. Coyle (2002:27), studying the relations between CLIL and European Commission (EU) Language Learning objectives, states that, “CLIL is central to this diversity whilst remaining constant in its drive to integrate both subject and language learning. Integration is a powerful pedagogic tool which aims to ‘safeguard’ the subject and language learning”. CLIL is considered an educational approach beneficial for both content and language subjects (Coyle et al., 2010). It is widely accepted that CLIL provides a more integrated approach to both teaching and learning in that teachers are expected to devote special thought not just to how languages should be taught, but to the educational process in general. According to CLIL, successful content learning can be achieved through language learning, which can be supported by content learning. Mehisto et al. (2008:11) state that the “CLIL strategy involves using a language that is

2

Chapter One

not a student’s native language as medium of instruction and learning for primary, secondary and/or vocational-level subjects such as math, science, art or business.”

1.1. The current status of language teaching in Turkey World War II had a great impact on the popularity of English as a foreign language (EFL) teaching in Turkey. It replaced the French language, which had been dominant since the late 18th century. Globalisation is the main reason for the rapid spread of English language teaching and learning. The need to keep up with the innovations in education, technology, social life, etc. has made English the most preferred foreign language course taught in most of the primary and secondary schools and the higher education institutions. Turkey has been restructuring its educational system in order to improve its ability to fulfil the needs of the country and comply with the decisions, developments and practices in the international context, in particular in the European Union (EU). The effects of the reforming have especially been felt in language education. Language teaching programmes have been integrated into the world and especially EU standards. According to Krkgöz (2009), the Turkish Ministry of National Education (MoNE) has reconstructed foreign language curricula, provided new course books and employed foreign language teachers in order to meet the demand for language learning. However, the effects of restructuring and innovations have not been felt in language classrooms, and the constraints of foreign language teaching and learning have taken the interest of researchers (Demircan, 1988; Gomleksiz, 1993; Harman, 1999; Demirel, 2003; Soner, 2007; Isk, 2008). Iúk (2008:15) states the main reasons for unqualified language education being “the ever-existing traditional method, language teaching/learning habits and the defects in language planning.” MoNE has realised that the traditional approaches and materials used in English language classrooms were the main problems for English language learners, meaning they could not reach a satisfactory proficiency level accepted by the EU, even after 10 years of formal education. Thus, Turkey has recently enacted changes in the law to bring about a sustainable educational system in line with the European Union (EU) language policy as part of the ongoing attempts to join the EU. MoNE has shifted language education to the second year of elementary schools within the new education system, termed “4+4+4” (4 years of primary education,

The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL

3

first level, 4 years of primary education, second level, and 4 years of secondary education). These attempts cause inevitable changes in language teaching/learning habits, the materials/method used and language planning. The new curriculum is especially aimed at improving the quality of English language education in schools in such a way that students with high school educations would be able to improve their communicative competence. Thus, CLIL as an alternative approach may respond to the questions Turkey has been facing for many years, since it is “widely seen as a kind of language bath which encourages naturalistic language learning and enhances the development of communicative competence” (Dalton-Puffer, 2007:3).

1.2. The current status of CLIL in Turkey There has been a great amount of research indicating the usefulness of CLIL at different education levels, yet its role has generally received less attention in Turkey. CLIL is not officially included in Language Teaching Programmes in Turkey, although CLIL modules might be introduced in methodology courses of initial teacher training programmes for language teachers. The Ministry of National Education, on the other hand, does not regularly conduct in-service teacher training programmes in which teachers can become aware of CLIL and develop their methodological knowledge and skills on how to use it. Thus, it becomes difficult to find teachers who can teach both language and content. Currently, such issues as who a CLIL teacher will be and what model can be implemented are not certain. The educational system based on examination seems to be an important constraint ahead of CLIL implementation. In addition, many teachers and parents believe that CLIL cannot promote pedagogical innovation to improve the students’ knowledge required in the examinations they have to give or take. Turkey has not been involved in any of the projects aiming to use CLIL in language classrooms. Teacher training institutions, mainly Faculties of Education, do not yet systematically prepare teachers for CLIL. However, foreign language teachers play a major role in the integration of language and content via authentic materials in order to make learning a language meaningful. By doing so, they can provide the content yet they do not exactly teach it, instead teaching the language. It seems that CLIL elements have been practised in language classrooms unrecognizably. According to Darn (2006), while there is no exact formula for CLIL, the concept of a simultaneous dual focus on language and

4

Chapter One

content may be a realistic way forward for English-medium institutions in Turkey, as it is proving to be in a number of other countries. What is required, however, is both awareness raising and training for teachers from both the language and content fronts, and the development of materials appropriate for this approach. In the present study, the concept of perception was used to refer to whether ELT prospective teachers favour or disfavour CLIL and its principles. In this sense, it is accepted that human beliefs influence perceptions; hence, teachers’ beliefs influence their perceptions on teaching practices (Johnson, 1994; Pajares, 1992). The mainstream studies have revealed that there is a close relation between beliefs and perceptions, which in turn is passed on to classroom implications. Johnson (1994:439) argues that the consensus on teacher beliefs is on three assumptions: (1) teachers' beliefs influence perception and judgment; (2) teachers’ beliefs play a role in how information on teaching is translated into classroom practices; (3) understanding teachers' beliefs is essential to improving teaching practices and teacher education programs. Teachers’ beliefs play a great role in teacher training and development programmes since a change in instructional practices can result from changes in the beliefs (Richards, 1998). As Calderhead (1996:719) emphasises, “such terms as beliefs, values, attitudes, judgments, opinions, ideologies, perceptions, conceptions, conceptual systems, preconceptions, dispositions, implicit theories, personal theories, and perspectives have been used almost interchangeably”. Thus, ELT teacher education programs in Turkey should provide opportunities for prospective teachers to revise and change their beliefs as well as have more experience in CLIL. The related literature on CLIL has presented satisfactory findings both for and against CLIL, yet only a modest amount of research relevant to (especially pre-service) teachers’ perceptions on teaching language and content can be found in the literature. As for Turkey, it seems that no study has investigated ELT prospective teachers’ perceptions on CLIL, which are central to the successful implementation of any educational reform. However, CLIL practice depends on teachers who can “embrace a new paradigm of teaching and learning” in order to understand how to put the innovative approach into practice in their classrooms (Meyer, 2010). Marsh et al. (2010) state that CLIL teachers must accomplish the following qualifications involving the cognitive, social and affective dimensions of teaching:

The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL

5

1. To explore and to articulate their own understanding of and attitudes towards, the principles of teaching and learning; 2. To explore and to articulate their perception of and attitudes towards content and language learning, as well as learning skills development in CLIL; 3. To define their own pedagogical and content competences; 4. To set their level of language competence according to the Common European Framework of Reference; 5. To explore and to articulate ways of working with learners to identify, in cooperation with the students, socio-cultural, personal and vocational learning needs; 6. To cooperate with colleagues and other CLIL partners, and to describe mechanisms for cooperation; 7. To expand and to renovate their own professional development plan; 8. To investigate and to deal with the multiple roles and identities of a CLIL teacher; 9. To explore and to manage the impact of their own attitudes and behaviour during the learning process. Thus, it is vitally important that ELT prospective teachers develop their awareness and understand the purpose of CLIL in order to enhance their motivation and positive attitudes towards CLIL, which will become beliefs and reflect on their instructional approaches (Mattheoudakis, 2007; Borg, 2011). In the words of Van Lier (1996:69), “such awareness-raising work, which turns the classroom from a field of activity into a subject of enquiry, can promote deep and lasting changes in educational practices.” This study, therefore, aims at investigating the ELT teacher candidates’ perceptions on CLIL. The research questions of the study were the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

What is CLIL? What does CLIL provide? What does CLIL require? Who should implement CLIL? Where should CLIL teachers be trained?

2. Method The study employed mixed methods research techniques, which involved both collecting and analysing quantitative and qualitative data.

6

Chapter One

Quantitative data included a questionnaire administered after the introduction sessions. Qualitative data consisted of the responses to the open-ended questions and the semi-formal interviews conducted after the administration of the questionnaire. “Mixed methods research is defined as research in which the investigator collects and analyzes data, integrates the findings, and draws inferences using both qualitative and quantitative approaches or methods in a single study or a program of inquiry” (Tashakkori & Creswell, 2007b:4).

2.1. Participants The participants of this study were prospective teachers attending the English Language Teaching Department. They were among those who responded to the questionnaire from a larger population of teachers. In all, 244 participants responded to the open-ended questions, and 233 to the structured questions. Eleven were excluded since they did not participate in the introduction session. The ages of the participants ranged between 22–24 and the majority were female (78.2 % female and 21.8 % male). They had already taken the methodology courses, such as approaches and methods to language teaching, skills teaching, teaching English to young learners and materials evaluation and adaptation. They were also provided with the opportunity of teaching experiences in almost all methodology courses given at the university to blend theory and practice. When the questionnaires were administered they were attending primary and secondary schools for teaching practice in which they had the chance to practise what they learnt at the university. They also had the opportunity to experiment and see what was working best in different classes.

2.2. Data Collection An open-ended questionnaire, consisting of six questions that did not require too much effort to answer, was administered, comprising the first questions on the topic. The participants were expected to express their general attitudes and opinions about CLIL. The responses helped the researcher to develop the structured (Likert Scale) questions. The Likert scale questionnaire consisted of 30 statements scored from 5 to 1, representing: “strongly agree, agree, no idea, disagree and strongly disagree.” The statements were based upon the Underpinning CLIL features given in the CLIL Teacher’s Competence Grid by P. Bertaux, C. M. Coonan, M. J. Frigols-Martín, and P. Mehisto (2010). The Likert scale questionnaire was completed soon after an introductory session on CLIL.

The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL

7

It was presented in the form of a 90-minute session, twice a week. It was based on theoretical and methodological aspects of what CLIL is, CLIL methodology and materials, and a CLIL lesson plan. A semi-formal interview session, which allowed the researcher and the respondents to lead the questioning, was conducted one day after the ELT prospective teachers completed the questionnaire. The researcher formulated several key questions to define areas to be explored. This was done to confirm the indications obtained from the questionnaire data. We aimed to pursue a line of thought developed during the conversation that may not have come to light from the questionnaire.

2.3. Data Analysis For open-ended questions, a content analysis method was used. It was thought that the answers to open-ended questions could provide a systematic analysis of textual data, which could shed light on detailed data. The data obtained from the structured questionnaire were analyzed for Mean and Standard deviation through SPSS version 13. The analysed data were grouped under four themes and presented in the tables. The first set of 15 statements sought to investigate the perceptions on the benefits of CLIL (Table 2.3-1), the second set of 10 statements was on the requirements of CLIL (Table 2.3-2), the third set consisted of three statements on who should implement CLIL (Table 2.3-3), and the last two statement responses were on where CLIL teachers should be trained. The content analysis of open-ended questions revealed that almost all of the teacher candidates were not aware of CLIL. The overall responses to teaching English through subject and subject content in English revealed that almost no participant had any ideas on these issues. Very few participants attributed CLIL to teaching and learning subject courses through the medium of English. Two of them, who had studied in European countries within the framework of the Erasmus student exchange programme, reported that they experienced the CLIL lessons, and one even said that he taught Geography in English. The following statements were identified as the common ones associated with the aim of the open-ended questions: It is an approach for learning content through a second language. I remembered the content-based approach that I have learned. CLIL means both the subject and the language are taught together.

8

Chapter One Mean

1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10

11

12

13

14 15

CLIL helps students develop only their language skills. CLIL helps students develop only their subject knowledge. CLIL helps students develop both their language skills and subject knowledge. CLIL can increase students’ motivation to learn. CLIL can make a significant contribution to learners’ personal and cultural development as well as promoting progress in language learning and use. CLIL enables students to gain a healthy appreciation of four skills (reading, writing, listening, speaking). CLIL provides learning contexts relevant to the needs and interests of learners. CLIL offers direct opportunities to learn through language and to make meanings that matter. CLIL supports the integration of language into the broader curriculum. CLIL helps to focus on the interconnections between cognition and communication, and between language development and thinking skills. CLIL offers genuine opportunities to interact face-toface and through the use of new technologies, e.g. the Internet, video-conferencing, international projects. CLIL is an appropriate vehicle for exploring the links between language and cultural identity, examining behaviours, attitudes and values. CLIL involves contexts and content that enrich the learners’ understanding of their own culture and those of others. CLIL strengthens intercultural understanding and promotes global citizenship. CLIL can erode the quality of English language education.

2,12

Std. Dev. 1,113

2,04

,941

4,52

,941

4,03

,947

4,35

,673

4,16

,849

4,07

,779

4,06

,866

4,04

,913

4,32

,728

4,09

,815

4,04

,930

4,24

7,66

3,93

,875

2,79

1,223

Table 2.3-1. The perceptions on what CLIL provides The overall examination of Table 2.3-1demonstrates that the prospective teachers’ responses to almost all the items were either agree or strongly agree, suggesting they favour the objectives that CLIL can provide. For example, the low mean of items 1 and 2 supported by the high mean of almost all of the items reveal that they seemed to be aware of the advantages of CLIL. However, item 15 shows that they were worried

The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL

9

about whether it would negatively affect English language education in Turkey. The common preferences regarding the benefit of using CLIL were expressed as: CLIL makes language learning meaningful and offers the possibility for learners to really communicate about something. CLIL creates real communication opportunities in the classroom. CLIL implements most of the principles of communicative language teaching that we appreciate but cannot use appropriately. In the CLIL classroom the curricular subject and new language skills are taught together. CLIL increases both students' language learning and cultural awareness. CLIL uses authentic materials and contexts that can help make inputs comprehensible, rather than abstract as in the traditional classes. CLIL seems to provide a good opportunity for students to practise English in real contexts. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8

9 10

CLIL requires more subject knowledge than teachers of English possess. CLIL requires more methodology knowledge than teachers of English possess. CLIL requires a lot of time (both lesson preparation and teaching). CLIL requires new teaching materials. CLIL requires large administrative support. CLIL requires cooperation with subject teachers. CLIL requires the collaboration of subject area specialists and language specialists to design the course. CLIL can be achieved by a team working collaboratively to choose an appropriate theme and to identify key concepts and processes. CLIL is possible only with intermediate students of English. CLIL is possible with both young learners and older students.

Mean 3,76

Std. Dev. 1,032

3,70

1,053

3,91

,982

4,02 3,85 4,36 4,09

,871 ,998 ,705 ,938

3,93

,875

2,67

1,102

3,64

9,69

Table 2.3-2. The perceptions on what CLIL requires Table 2.3-2 shows that although a substantial number of participants indicated that they had no idea of the requirements of CLIL application

10

Chapter One

before the introduction of CLIL, the majority developed an awareness of the principles. In addition, item 9 demonstrates that the participants did not favour the idea of limiting CLIL to intermediate language classrooms. The participants’ expressions on this topic are as follows: It is difficult to implement in classrooms but not impossible. If it is implemented, students will be not only be bilingual but also experts in a subject. One of the main problems of CLIL is that language teachers lack knowledge on the subjects while subject teachers lack English language teaching. My main concern is that CLIL application in our schools will take time, effort and money. I am not sure whether it is worth it. I can teach history and geography but not maths or physics, because I have no idea about maths. If we can solve some problems, for example lack of teacher training and insufficient level of L2 on the part of the teacher, CLIL can be implemented successfully in TEYL classes. It is difficult for teachers who do not like planning and preparing the materials they use since it takes a lot of time and requires great effort. I think we should put an end to the grammar translation method and pay attention to communicative approaches and make the students explain themselves fluently. CLIL’s teaching materials should be different from those of the traditional classes and they should be prepared by experts.

1 2 3

CLIL should be implemented by subject teachers. CLIL should be implemented by language teachers. CLIL should be implemented by language teachers in collaboration with subject teachers.

Mean 3,08

Std. Dev. 1,105

3,33

1,101

4,22

,847

Table 2.3-3. The perceptions of who should implement CLIL In Table 2.3-3, the respondents seem not to be in conflict on who should implement CLIL. Their responses to item 1 and 2 were mostly “disagree” and “strongly disagree”, implying that they were certain about who should not implement CLIL. They were also certain that CLIL

The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL

11

teachers need to be content specialists with a high level of English, or that cooperation between language and subject teachers needs to happen, as they are highly beneficial for students. Some critical highlights of the interviews are as follows: I first thought that the language teacher should implement it, yet now I see it's more complex than I thought. Thus, I think an English teacher can implement CLIL using cross-curricular content or the subject teacher using English as the language of instruction if they are proficient in English. It is highly important that it be implemented by professional teachers who are well-trained in CLIL. The teachers should know not only the subject but also the language very well. I think that CLIL can be implemented in TEYL classes with the help of experienced teachers who are good at both language and subject. However, it is difficult to find subject teachers equipped with enough knowledge of English. Subject teachers’ approaches to students and the materials they use might be different from those of the ELT teachers. I think CLIL cannot be implemented in public schools where we are not encouraged by administrative support. Language teachers should cooperate with subject teachers in order to implement CLIL in classrooms. We as ELT teachers should improve ourselves in every branch, such as history and geography, so that we implement CLIL in our classes. To implement our CLIL in our classrooms, we should cooperate with other teachers, such as geography and maths teachers. Mean 1

2

CLIL teachers should be trained via inservice teacher trainings conducted by the Ministry of National Education. CLIL teachers should be trained at universities

3,69

Std. Dev. 1,025

4,06

1,015

Table 2.3-4. The perceptions of where CLIL teachers should be trained

12

Chapter One

As demonstrated in Table 2.3-4, a substantial number of participants seemed to not favour in-service teacher training programmes; hence, they indicated no idea of the training. However, the majority believed that their universities should offer or run courses in CLIL methodology. The common expression obtained in the interviews was as follows: It is highly important that CLIL teachers be trained at universities, since I believe we cannot get qualified training in in-service training sessions conducted by the Ministry of National Education.

3. Discussion The current study examines what ELT teacher candidates’ perceptions regarding the aims, benefits and requirements of the approach were, and explores who should implement it and where teachers should be trained. The findings reveal that although ELT teacher candidates were not aware of CLIL and the principles before the introductory session, they developed their awareness and believed in the numerous benefits of the innovative CLIL approach. They seemed to have recognised the values of CLIL and developed the idea that CLIL is an innovated approach integrating content and language learning. The finding supports the role of in-service teacher education on language teachers’ beliefs. The review of the related literature revealed that student teachers’ beliefs, which can change during teacher education, are important in their decision making on instructional practices (Williams and Burden, 1997; Mattheoudakis, 2007; Borg, 2011). Foreign/second language learning/teaching requires meaningful learning situations where learners can communicate about something. The results indicate that ELT prospective teachers seemed to be favouring the principles of CLIL providing more intense exposure and more meaningful opportunities to use the target language. However, they also believe that this could not be achieved in traditional language learning and teaching classrooms (as in the Turkish context) where the main focus is on the formal features of language. Marsh (2008:238) states that it is difficult to provide meaningful opportunities for using the target language where, “the main focus is on doing things with words and not using words to achieve things”. “CLIL refers to situations where subjects, or parts of subjects, are taught through a foreign language with dual-focused aims, namely the learning of content, and the simultaneous learning of a foreign language." (Maljers, A., Marsh, D., Wolff, D., Genesee, F., Frigols-Martín, M., and Mehisto, P., 2010). However, the participants of this study do not favour

The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL

13

this principle since the responses revealed that they were uncertain who should implement CLIL. They believed more should be done to implement CLIL methodology, which is beyond the capacity of both subject teachers and language teachers. Thus, they state that language teachers should implement CLIL principles in collaboration with subject teachers. The overall examination of the responses and interviews indicated that the teacher candidates believe CLIL could be implemented when teachers are trained in innovative methodology, material evaluation and development, and administrative support. Thus, CLIL teachers should be trained at pre-service teacher training programmes requiring special courses at universities. According to Hillyard (2011:7), “because CLIL is such a complex approach and so different from traditional ELT methods, although many new ELT techniques are included in CLIL, teachers must be thoroughly trained in lesson planning and have knowledge of lesson preparation, translating plans into action, ensuring outcomes, understanding of second language attainment levels, promoting cultural awareness and interculturality, applying knowledge about secondlanguage acquisition in the classroom, and having knowledge and awareness of cognitive and metacognitive processes and strategies in the CLIL environment.”

4. Conclusions and implications This study, which was encouraged by the current attempts to improve the quality of language education in Turkey, aimed at analyzing EFL prospective teachers’ perceptions of CLIL and its principles. The results revealed that almost all of the ELT prospective teachers were not aware of CLIL, and had not participated in any kind of training or lectures. However, after the awareness raising sessions, many of the prospective teachers indicated that CLIL is an innovative teaching approach with a strong impact on language learning. They also indicated the theoretical and methodological competences required for effective CLIL teaching. They stated that teachers would implement CLIL if they had a special training, which should be conducted on the methodology courses run at university to learn more about CLIL principles and methodology, development, and use of suitable materials. The data of this study reveal a few implications that should be taken into consideration. Turkey has renewed its educational system, particularly language teaching education, to catch up with the principles stated by the EU Language Learning Objectives. CLIL is becoming increasingly common all over the world. It requires teachers and school administrators

14

Chapter One

to rethink the traditional concepts of language teaching in Turkey. Turkey should adapt CLIL to meet its specific needs since students seem to be struggling in the language classrooms where they do not use foreign languages for authentic communication. The system is still based on competitive student selection and placement examination. These examinations can affect teachers’ choice of different teaching methods and approaches. Bedir (2011:75) states that English language “classes are highly constructed to transfer knowledge from teacher to students”, which means teachers mostly prefer traditional teacher-centered instruction. However, Coonan (2007: 633) argues that, “CLIL has made teachers realize that students’ comprehension cannot be taken for granted, and it has made CLIL teachers apply more interactional teaching methods that get students more involved during lessons”. CLIL teachers also need to develop their methodological knowledge and skills in order to create a challenging teaching/learning environment that can motivate the students. They therefore need to link the content to the community within and outside the classroom (Mehisto et al. 2008; Marsh et al. 2010). Thus, ELT prospective teachers require CLIL training since its rapid spread has outpaced the current initial teacher education provision. Education faculties should reconstruct their curriculum to include CLIL training. In addition, there should be coordination between language and subject teachers to improve the quality of language learning and teaching.

References Bedir, H. (2011). Teaching and learning styles in EFL classes of Turkish young adolescents. In Jurczyk, E, Wojtaszek, A., and Jackiewicz A. (Eds). The Dialogue of Language, the Dialogue of Culture (pp. 64–78), Poland: Zabrze. Borg, S. (2011). The impact of in-service teacher education on language teachers’ beliefs. System 39(3), 370–380. Calderhead, J. (1996) Teachers’ beliefs and knowledge. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. New York: Simon & Schuster, Macmillan. Coonan, C. M. (2007). Insider Views of the CLIL Class Through Teacher Self-Observation-Introspection. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 625–646. Coyle, D., P. Hood, and D. Marsh. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Coyle, D. (2002). “Relevance of CLIL to the European Commission’s Language Learning Objectives”. In D. Marsh (ed.). CLIL/ EMILE. The

The Perceptions of ELT Prospective Teachers on CLIL

15

European Dimension. Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä. Accessed October 8, 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/languages/documents/doc491_en.pdf. Dalton--ǦPuffer, C. (2007). Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Demircan, O. (1988). Dünden bugüne Türkiye’de yabanc dil. Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi. Demirel, O. (2003). Yabanc dil o÷retimi. østanbul: Pegem Yaynclk. Dern, S. (2006). CLIL: A Way Forward for Turkey. Accessed March 16, 2013 http://www.stevedarn.com/?Writings::CLIL%3A_A_Way_Forward_fo r_Turkey. Gömleksiz, M. N. (1993). Yüksek ö÷retimde yabanc dil ö÷retimi ve sorunlar (Frat Üniversitesi örne÷i), Unpublished MA Thesis, Elaz÷: Frat University, Social Sciences Institute. Harman, K. (1999). Sanlurfa ilko÷retim okullarnda yabanc dil dersi program uygulamalarnda karúlaúlan sorunlar. Unpublished MA Thesis: Urfa: Harran University, Social Sciences Institute. Hillyard, S. (2011). First steps in CLIL: Training the teachers. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4 (2), 1–12. doi:10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.1 ISSN 2011-6721. Accessed October 4, 2013. http://unisabana.academia.edu/LACLIL Isk, A. (2008). Yabanc dil e÷itimizdeki yanlslklar nereden kaynaklanyor? Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 4 (2), 15–26. Johnson, K. E. (1994). The emerging beliefs and instructional practices of pre-service English as second language teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10 (4), 439–452 Krkgöz, Y. (2009). Globalization and English language policy in Turkey. Educational Policy, 23 (5), 663–684. Maljers, A., Marsh, D., Wolff, D., Genesee, F., Frigols-Martín, and M., Mehisto, P. (2010). Diverse Contexts Converging Goals: CLIL in Europe. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Marsh, D., Coyle, D., Kitanova, S., Wolff, D., and Zielenko., B. (2005). Project D3 – CLIL Matrix. The CLIL quality matrix. Central Workshop Report 6/2005. Accessed September 23, 2013. http://archive.ecml.at/mtp2/clilmatrix/pdf/wsrepD3E2005_6.pdf. Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., and Frigols Martin, M. J. (2010). European Framework for CLIL Teacher Education: A framework for the professional development of CLIL teachers. Graz: European Centre for Modern Languages.

16

Chapter One

Marsh, D. (2008). Language awareness and CLIL. In J Cenoz and N. H. Hornberger (Eds), Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Knowledge about Language, (2nd Edition) Volume 6. New York: Springer Science and Business Media LLC. Mattheoudakis, M., (2007). Tracking changes in pre-service EFL teacher beliefs in Greece: a longitudinal study. Teaching and Teacher Education. 23: 1272–1288. Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., and Frigols, M. J., (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Oxford: Macmillan. Meyer, O. (2010). Towards quality-CLIL: successful planning and teaching strategies. Puls, 33: 11–29. Pajares, M. F. (1992) Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62: 307–332. Richards, J. C. (1998). Beyond training. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Soner, O. (2007). Türkiye'de yabanc dil e÷itimin dünü bugünü. Journal of Marmara University Social Sciences Institute, Oneri, 7 (28): 397–404. Tashakkori, A., and Creswell, J. (2007). The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1 (1): 3–8. Van Lier, L (1996). Interaction in the Language Curriculum: Awareness, Autonomy & Authenticity. New York: Longman Group Ltd. Williams, M., and R.L. Burden (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CHAPTER TWO ARITHMETIC FACTS AND LANGUAGE OF ACQUISITION EFFECT IN PRIMARY SCHOOL CHILDREN LUISA CANAVESIO, SIMONE SULPIZIO AND REMO JOB

1. Introduction In the last few decades a large amount of studies and research have addressed the mechanisms and the cognitive processes that underlie mental calculations. Models of cognitive architecture for numerical processing (Campbell, 1994; Dehaene & Cohen, 1995; McCloskey, 1992) and theories of mental arithmetic (Ashcraft, 1982, 1992; Siegler & Shrager, 1984) share the assumption that the results of basic arithmetic calculations, such as additions with single-digit operands and multiplications of the timetables, are retrieved through a direct access to the arithmetic facts stored in the long term memory in which they are represented as nodes in a network of associative links. This means that upon the presentation of an arithmetic problem (e.g., 5+2), the activation of the number nodes (5 and 2 in the example) spreads automatically along associative links from these nodes to the related nodes, such as the sum and the product (7 and 10 in the example). In a developmental perspective, Siegler (1988) has proposed a model in which the practice and the feedback about the correctness of the answers are the crucial elements for the development of a stable number network in which the associative relations are established and strengthened with the practice of arithmetic problems. A strong network of arithmetic facts is indeed crucial for the acquisition of a skilled arithmetic competence. There is much evidence that individual differences in arithmetic facts retrieval are closely related to individual differences in general measures of arithmetical performance.

18

Chapter Two

Of course, facts retrieval is not the only factor associated with arithmetic performance but has been proved that arithmetically skilled people tend to be better than others at arithmetic facts retrieval (Gray & Mulhern, 1995). In the arithmetical domain, automaticity (e.g. Tzelgov, Yehene and Naveh-Benjamin, 1997) has been investigated focusing firstly on interference effects, such as the cross-operation (Winkelman & Schmidt, 1974; Zbrodoff & Logan, 1986) and the within-operation (Stazyk, Ashcraft & Haman, 1982) interference in verification task experiments. With simple additions and multiplications, the cross-operation effect shows up with longer response times (RT) for false arithmetic problems when the proposed solution is the correct solution of another operation (e.g., 3x2=5 has slower RTs in refusing than 3x2=7), while the withinoperation effect shows up with longer response times in rejecting the stated result of a problem when it is a multiple of the first operand (e.g., 3x4=9 has slower RTs than 3x4=10). Therefore, these interference effects represent a behavioral evidence of the presence of associative processes in mental arithmetic and it has been interpreted as a measure of the automatic activation of the arithmetic facts. However, recent discussions (e.g., Rusconi, Galfano and Job, 2007) have questioned that an effect observed in a task in which the participants are asked to judge the correctness of arithmetical problems can be considered a measure of automaticity. In fact, obligatory activation might not be the only criterion to be considered in pinning down automaticity. An automatic process is defined as an autonomous process that does not demand attention resources and intentional processing (Zbrodoff & Logan, 1986). In this perspective, the verification task activates in itself an arithmetic “mode” and, therefore, it seems not fully appropriate to test the automaticity because it does not fulfill all the automaticity criterions. Moreover, it seems even to affect some of the distinguishing features of automaticity, namely the autonomy and the lack of intention, since the participants are explicitly required to perform arithmetic calculations. In this perspective, the automaticity criterions seem to be better fulfilled with the use of an indirect task that neither implies any arithmetical knowledge nor requires any calculation competence. An example is the paradigm introduced by LeFevre, Bisanz and Mrkonjic (1988) in order to investigate the existence of associative processes in mental arithmetic through a number matching task. A sequence of numerical stimuli is shown to the participants. In each trial a pair of numbers appears (e.g., 2 3) shortly followed by the target, which is a single number (e.g., 5). The participants have to press the “yes” key if the target matches one of the numbers in the pair (matching) or the “no” key

Language of Acquisition Effect in Primary School Children

19

in the other case (non-matching). This paradigm is a modified Stroop procedure in which arithmetic is clearly irrelevant and unnecessary in performing the task, since the participants are only required to match numerical symbols. The results of LeFevre et al. (1988) show that for the no response (non-matching) the rejecting RTs are significantly longer when the target is the sum of the initial pair of numbers than the RTs when the target is not the sum. The presence of this sum-based interference effect supports the hypothesis that obligatory activation of arithmetic facts is triggered by the mere visual presentation of a pair of numbers that activate the related sum node. Therefore, if the target matches a number, namely the sum, activated by the presented pair via associative links, the decision of rejecting the sum is more difficult and extra-processing and longer time is needed to inhibit the activated sum node. The findings confirm also the prediction that this type of interference effect is mostly or only detectable at some relatively short stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the pair of numbers and the target. Interestingly, the results of other two experiments (LeFevre et al., 1988) show also that the effect is not influenced by the format of the pair. In fact, the sum-based interference effect is obtained both when the numbers in the pair appeared in word format and when the plus sign is missing. Another study (Thibodeau, LeFevre and Bisanz, 1996) employed the same paradigm to investigate the interference effect in the multiplication network. Based on the same pattern of results, but still keeping the multiplication sign in the pair of numbers, a multiplication-based interference effect has been proven when the target is the product of the numbers in the initial pair. More recent studies (Galfano, Rusconi and Umiltà, 2003; Rusconi, Galfano, Speriani and Umiltà, 2004) have found the same effect regardless of the presence of the multiplication sign (e.g., 4 3) and also when the target is a multiple adjacent to the product, namely the nodes above (e.g., 16) or below (e.g., 8) the product. From a developmental perspective, the role of retrieval processes in basic mental arithmetic in children and the question whether the associative network structure is already strong enough to lead to automatic activation have been extensively investigated using verification task experiments aimed at testing associative confusion effects (e.g. Ashcraft, 1987; Lemaire, Fayol and Abdi, 1991; Svenson & Sjoberg, 1982, 1983). Only a few studies (LeFevre, Kulak and Bisanz, 1991; Lemaire, Barret, Fayol and Abdi, 1994) have addressed the issue whether and when the network of arithmetic facts is mature in Primary school children using the number matching task. Even omitting the discussion about some relevant methodological issues about the proposed stimuli (e.g., pair with the plus

20

Chapter Two

sign in LeFevre et al., 1991, all the single digit numbers preceded by a zero in Lemaire et al., 1994), the results are rather controversial and definitely not straightforward to interpret, ranging from a weak and unstable sum-based interference effect found only in accuracy at 120ms SOA in Year 3 children in the LeFevre’s study to a significant effect found in latencies at 150ms SOA in Year 3, 4 and 5 children in the other study. Moreover, another crucial and controversial issue concerning the cognitive arithmetic is the relationship between language and number cognition (e.g. Noel, Fias and Brysbaert, 1997; Campbell, 1998; Noel, Robert and Brysbaert, 1998; Gelman & Butterworth, 2005) and particularly the question about the possible role of the language in the representation of the arithmetic facts in the long term memory. The different models of cognitive architecture for number processing assign different roles to the language in the domain of numbers. In this respect, the Abstract Code Model proposed by McCloskey (1992) foresees that the arithmetic facts are stored, like any other arithmetic knowledge, in an abstract, amodal format which is totally independent from the different numerical formats (Arabic digits, word numbers, spoken numbers). It follows that all the numerical stimuli are transcoded into an amodal representation before being processed and that these processes operate independently of the surface formats. In this way, the model denies that language can somehow influence the number processing. On the contrary, the Triple Code Model (Dehaene et al., 1995) proposes three representations of numbers and one of these is the verbal code that is in charge of simple counting and retrieving the results of the arithmetic facts in the long term memory. This is due to the point that arithmetic facts are learned by rote repetition and stored as verbal associations. It follows that if the presented numbers are not in a verbal format, the retrieval of arithmetic facts implies that firstly the numerical stimuli need to be transcoded in the verbal code. Therefore, the model predicts language effects on counting and simple calculations but not in other tasks that do not require verbal representations, such as magnitude comparison and approximate calculations. A third model is the Encoding Complex Model (Campbell, 1994) which assumes the existence of multiple codes for number processing (e.g., Arabic, auditory, written) which are specialized to do specific tasks but it also foresees a lot of interaction between the codes and the crucial roles played by the practice and the familiarity in a particular task-format combination in improving the retrieval efficiency. It follows also that language effect can be found in any tasks. The studies that firstly investigated the specific role of language in the arithmetic facts retrieval have adopted a between-group design, comparing

Language of Acquisition Effect in Primary School Children

21

arithmetical performance between groups of monolingual and bilingual participants with the main aim of disentangling the issue whether the bilinguals have only one store (arithmeticon) for the arithmetic facts or two language-marked stores (Ellis, 1992; Geary, Cormier, Goggin, Estrada and Lunnhave, 1993). The results have been somehow controversial and not so straightforward. A second wave of studies have adopted a withingroup design, comparing the performance of bilingual participants in arithmetic tasks carried out both in their first language (L1) and in their second language (L2). These studies have employed production tasks (McClain & Shih Huang, 1982; Campbell, Kanz and Xuè, 1999; Campbell, 2004), verification tasks with single-digit additions and multiplications (Frenck-Mestre and Vaid, 1993; Bernardo, 2001) and a number matching task (Rusconi, Galfano, Rebonato and Umiltà, 2006). In order to disentangle the language specificity of the processes involved, in these studies the numbers have been presented both in Arabic digits and in words, in L1 and in L2. Summing up the results, this line of research has underlined that, besides the effects related to the different formats in which the numbers are presented, associative confusion effects and interference effects are triggered also by written word numbers in L1 and L2. These results can be interpreted as an evidence of the presence of associative links between the representations of number words in different languages. This is a perspective that supports Dehaene’s and Campbell’s assumptions about the fact that the representations of arithmetic facts include a linguistic component. Moreover, the results show patterns of relative advantage for the performance in the different languages that are consistent with performance costs that are higher when associated with an unfamiliar numeral format than with a familiar one. Very interestingly, the results also show advantages in the performance not always related to the L1 but instead to the so called preferred language that is the language of formal schooling instruction, namely the language used for learning and practicing arithmetic tasks, referred to as LoLA (Language of Learning Arithmetic).

2. Experimental Studies The following experiments have been planned with Italian Primary school children in order to investigate: a. the presence of interference effects in mental arithmetic as evidence for the automatic activation of the arithmetic facts

22

Chapter Two

b. the presence of LoLA effects and LoLA influence in the automatic activation of the arithmetic facts when the language of acquisition is not the mother tongue but a foreign language.

2.1. Experiment 1 This study has been planned in order to investigate the activation of addition facts in a developmental perspective. If generally it can be assumed that children are in the process of developing knowledge and skills about the arithmetic facts, due to biological factors but more due to educational inputs (formal teaching and practice at school), it is also true that in children the network in which the arithmetic facts are stored might be not mature yet and the associative links are not so strong. Since the results of previous studies about children are rather controversial (see the introduction), this experiment investigates the presence of sum-based interference effect in Year 4 Italian children (9-10 year old), employing a number matching task in which the stimuli (Arabic digits) are visually presented. In this study, half of the classes of the sample are CLIL classes, in which children have been taught and trained in mathematics with English as the language of instruction since their first year of formal schooling. Participants: Two classes of Italian Primary school children: Twentythree Year 4, CLIL class pupils (12 males, mean age= 9:8 months (years:months), ranging from 8:6 to 10:5), nineteen Year 4, control class pupils (10 males, mean age= 9:8, ranging from 9:3 to 10:7). The study was conducted in March. Materials: following LeFevre’s paradigm, each trial consists of a pair of numbers followed by a target. Both the pairs and the targets are made of single-digit numbers and all the digits from 1 to 9 have been used. The participants are requested to press the “yes” button on the response box if the target is one of the numbers already seen in the pair (matching) or the “no” button otherwise (non-matching). Half of the trials are non-matching, the other half are matching.. Twenty-four pairs have been created (a list of 12 pairs plus another list that is the reverse of the other, e.g., “6 3” and “3 6”), with the exclusion of ties (e.g., “3 3”) because they have an easier access to the memory store than do other problems (Graham and Campbell, 1992). From these 24 pairs, one type of “yes” target (matching) and two types of “no” targets (non-matching) have been created. For the non-matching, there are two conditions: “the sum” and “the neutral” targets. For the sum, the target is the sum of the numbers in the pair (e.g., pair “2 3”, sum target “5”), for the neutral the target is the sum ± 1 or ± 2

Language of Acquisition Effect in Primary School Children

23

(e.g. pair “2 3”, neutral target “4” or “7”). There are no targets that are the products of the pair. The distance between the target and the pair has been controlled for each non matching trial by calculating the average difference between each number in the pair and the target, resulting in 3.33 and 3.4 mean value of distance, respectively for the sum and the neutral trials. For the matching trials one half of the targets matches the digit on the right side of the pair and the other half the digit on the left side. For the second matching condition a new list of 24 pairs has been created in order to balance in the matching trials the range of digits used in the nonmatching trails. The order of the stimuli has been pseudo-randomized with the following constraints: the same condition (sum vs. neutral vs. matching), the same response, the same position of a number in the pair do not appear more than twice in a row. The list of the trials is fixed within each block and the order of the blocks was counterbalanced across the participants. All the 96 stimuli, divided in 4 blocks of 24 trials each, have been presented once with a SOA of 150ms. The decision regarding the use of only one SOA has been made based upon the results of some pilot experiments with 9 year old participants in which two SOAs (100ms and 150ms) were employed. Most of the children reported that they couldn’t detect the pair presented for 100ms. The use of two SOAs heavily hampered their performance and the task in general resulted in being too long and too demanding. Procedure: the sequence of events on each trial is shown in Fig. 2.1-1.

Fig. 2.1-1. The sequence of events on a single trial in Experiment 1.

Firstly a fixation point appears centered on the screen for 1000 ms. Then a pair of numbers is presented for 150 ms. After the pair offset, the target is presented, centered, lasting for 1000 ms. After this, a mask lasts for other 2000 ms, allowing a maximum of 3000 ms for responding. A

24

Chapter Two

centered picture then appears, lasting 2000ms, to signal the InterStimulus Interval. Half of the participants have to press the “yes” button that is the rightmost of the five buttons of the response box for the matching trials and the “no” button that is the leftmost for the non-matching trials. The other half performs the task with the reversed response assignment. Response times and accuracy are recorded. Before the experiment, each participant performs 12 practice trials with the researcher and 12 practice trials by him/herself. Practice trials include items that are similar to the experimental trails. The instructions stress both speed and accuracy. Results and discussion Data analyses were carried out only on non-matching targets, as the matching targets did not address our hypothesis. Correct RTs and percentages of correct responses were both analyzed. Errors comprise incorrect responses and the responses given beyond the deadline. The data from one participant were not included in the analysis because the pupil had 80% errors. Percentage of correct responses and mean correct RTs (see Table 2.11) were analyzed in a 2 (target type: sum, neutral) x 2 (class: CLIL, control) repeated-measure ANOVA. Target type was a within factor and class a between factor. The main effect of target type and of class did not reach significance neither for accuracy (F