1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 7, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 7, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2211-7245
  • E-ISSN: 2211-7253
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This small-scale observational study explores how Dutch bilingual education history teachers (BHTs) focus on the L2 component in their CLIL-lessons. We observed and rated eight BHTs on five language teaching categories. Results show that Dutch BHTs focus more strongly on using the L2 to teach subject content and that they tend to be less engaged in teaching specific second language topics, such as focus on form or language learning strategies. Further results and suggestions for improving the BHTs’ L2 focus are discussed together with a plea for a CLIL definition that is more in line with the everyday reality of the CLIL classroom.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dujal.18003.oat
2019-01-10
2024-12-14

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/dujal.18003.oat
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Andrews, S.
    (2001) The language awareness of the L2 teacher: Its impact upon pedagogical practice, Language Awareness, 10(2–3), 75–90. doi:  10.1080/09658410108667027
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410108667027 [Google Scholar]
  2. Achugar, M., & Schleppegrell, M.
    (2006) Beyond connectors: The construction of cause in history textbooks. Linguistics and Education, 16, 298–318. 10.1016/j.linged.2006.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aiello, J., Di Martino, E., & Di Sabato, B.
    (2017) Preparing teachers for CLIL in Italy: Reflections on assessment, language proficiency and willingness to communicate. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(1), 69–83. 10.1080/13670050.2015.1041873
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1041873 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bertaux, P., Coonan, M., Frigols-Martin, & Mehisto, P.
    (2010) The CLIL teacher’s competence grid. Retrieved from ccll-eu.eu
  5. Bonnet, A., & Breidbach, S.
    (2017) CLIL teachers’ professionalization: Between explicit knowledge and professional identity. InA. Llinares, & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp.269–286). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.47.16bon
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.16bon [Google Scholar]
  6. Butzkamm, W.
    (1998) Code-switching in a bilingual history lesson: The mother tongue as a conversational lubricant. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1(2), 81–99. 10.1080/13670059808667676
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670059808667676 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cambridge English Language Assessment
    Cambridge English Language Assessment (2015) ICELT: Syllabus and assessment guidelines 2015. Cambridge, United Kingdom: University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES).
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D.
    (2012) Balancing content and language: The experience of immersion teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251–269. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2012.01330.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01330.x [Google Scholar]
  9. Coffin, C.
    (2006) Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). Strasbourg: Language Policy Unit.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D.
    (2010) CLIL – Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Creese, A., & Blackledge, A.
    (2010) Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: A pedagogy for learning and teaching?The Modern Language Journal, 94(1), 103–115. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2009.00986.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00986.x [Google Scholar]
  13. Cummins, J.
    (2007) Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics / Revue Canadienne de Linguistique Appliquee, 10, 221–240.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dale, L., Oostdam, R., & Verspoor, M.
    (in press). Juggling ideals and constraints: The position of English teachers in CLIL contexts. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2).
     [Google Scholar]
  15. De Graaff, R.
    (2013) Language for learning: Pedagogy and outcome of bilingual education [Taal om te leren. Didactiek en opbrengsten van tweetalig onderwijs] [Oration]. Utrecht: Utrecht University.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. De Graaff, R., & Van Wilgenburg, O.
    (2015) The Netherlands: Quality control as a driving force in bilingual education. InP. Mehisto & F. Genesee (Eds.), Building bilingual education systems: Forces, mechanisms and counterweights (pp.167–179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. De Graaff, R., Koopman, G.-J., Anikina, Y., & Westhoff, G.
    (2007) An observation tool for effective L2 pedagogy in Content and Language Integrated Learning CLIL. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 603–624. 10.2167/beb462.0
     https://doi.org/10.2167/beb462.0 [Google Scholar]
  18. De Oliveira, L.
    (2011) Knowing and writing school history: The language of students’ expository writing and teachers’ expectations. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Euridyce
    Euridyce (2006) Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice Unit.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Eurydice
    Eurydice (2012) Key data on education in Europe 2012. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Europees Platform
    Europees Platform (2011) Standaard tweetalig onderwijs: Engels – havo/vwo. Haarlem: nr58/total communication.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Gierlinger, E.
    (2015) ‘You can speak German, sir’: On the complexity of teachers’ L1 use in CLIL. Language and Education, 29(4), 347–368. 10.1080/09500782.2015.1023733
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2015.1023733 [Google Scholar]
  23. Koopman, G.-J., Skeet, J., & De Graaff, R.
    (2014) Exploring content teachers’ knowledge of language pedagogy: A report on a small-scale research project in a Dutch CLIL context. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 123–136. 10.1080/09571736.2014.889974
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889974 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lasagabaster, D.
    (2013) The use of the L1 in CLIL classes: The teachers’ perspective. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 6(2), 1–21. 10.5294/laclil.2013.6.2.1
     https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2013.6.2.1 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2017) Integrating content and language learning. What do CLIL students believe?Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 5(1), 4–29. 10.1075/jicb.5.1.01las
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.1.01las [Google Scholar]
  26. Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J.-M.
    (2010) Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64(4), 367–375. 10.1093/elt/ccp082
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp082 [Google Scholar]
  27. Lin, A.
    (2015) Conceptualising the potential role of L1 in CLIL. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 74–89. 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000926
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000926 [Google Scholar]
  28. Llinares, A.
    (2015) Integration in CLIL: A proposal to inform research and successful pedagogy. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 58–73. 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000925
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000925 [Google Scholar]
  29. Llinares, A., & Peña, I.
    (2015) A genre approach to the effect of academic questions on CLIL students’ language production. Language and Education, 29(1), 15–30. doi:  10.1080/09500782.2014.924964
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.924964 [Google Scholar]
  30. Lo, Y.
    (2017) Development of the beliefs and language awareness of content subject teachers in CLIL: Does professional development help?International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. doi:  10.1080/13670050.2017.1318821
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1318821 [Google Scholar]
  31. Long, M.
    (2009) Methodological principles for language teaching. InM. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp.373–395). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Lorenzo, F.
    (2007) An analytical framework of language integration in L2 content based courses: the European dimension. Language and Education, 21, 503–516. 10.2167/le708.0
     https://doi.org/10.2167/le708.0 [Google Scholar]
  33. (2013) Genre-based curricula: Multilingual academic literacy in Content and Language Integrated Learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 375–388. 10.1080/13670050.2013.777391
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777391 [Google Scholar]
  34. Monte-Sano, C.
    (2008) Qualities of effective writing instruction in history classrooms: A cross-case comparison of two teachers’ practices. American Educational Research Journal, 45(4), 1045–1079. 10.3102/0002831208319733
     https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208319733 [Google Scholar]
  35. Moore, P., & Nikula, T.
    (2016) Translanguaging in CLIL classrooms. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit, (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.211–234). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑013
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-013 [Google Scholar]
  36. Morton, T.
    (2010) Using a genre-based approach to integrating content and language in CLIL: The example of secondary history. InC. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp.81–104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aals.7.05mor
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.7.05mor [Google Scholar]
  37. (2017) Reconceptualizing and describing teachers’ knowledge of language for content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Advance online publication. doi:  10.1080/13670050.2017.1383352
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1383352 [Google Scholar]
  38. Nel, N., & Muller, H.
    (2010) The impact of teachers’ limited language proficiency on English second language learners in South African schools. South African Journal of Education, 30(4), 635–660. 10.15700/saje.v30n4a393
     https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v30n4a393 [Google Scholar]
  39. Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., & Lorenzo, F.
    (2016) More than content and language: The complexity of integration in CLIL and multilingual education. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.1–25). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑004
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-004 [Google Scholar]
  40. Nikula, T., & Moore, P.
    (2016) Exploring translanguaging in CLIL. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Advance online publication, 1–13. doi:  10.1080/13670050.2016.1254151
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1254151 [Google Scholar]
  41. Oattes, H., Oostdam, R., De Graaff, R., & Wilschut, A.
    (2018) The challenge of balancing content and language: Perceptions of Dutch bilingual education history teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 165–174. 10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.022
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.022 [Google Scholar]
  42. Papaja, K.
    (2013) The role of a teacher in a CLIL classroom. Glottodidactica, 40, 147–154. 10.14746/gl.2013.40.1.11
     https://doi.org/10.14746/gl.2013.40.1.11 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., & Cenoz, J.
    (2015) Way forward in the twenty-first century in content based instruction: Moving towards integration. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 90–96. 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000927
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000927 [Google Scholar]
  44. Schleppegrell, M., & De Oliveira, L. C.
    (2006) An integrated language and content approach for history teachers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 254–268. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.08.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  45. Schuitemaker-King, J.
    (2012) Teachers’ strategies in providing opportunities for second language development (Unpublished PhD dissertation). Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.
  46. Westhoff, G. J.
    (2004) The art of playing a pinball machine. Characteristics of effective SLA-tasks. Babylonia, 12, 58–63.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/dujal.18003.oat
Loading
Content and Language Integrated Learning in Dutch bilingual education
Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 7, 156 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.18003.oat
/content/journals/10.1075/dujal.18003.oat
/content/journals/10.1075/dujal.18003.oat
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): bilingual education history teachers; CLIL; focus on form; focus on meaning; second language pedagogy; subject specific language

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error