1887
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2212-8433
  • E-ISSN: 2212-8441
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes
Preview this article:
Zoom in
Zoomout

Teacher education and professional development for immersion and content-based instruction, Page 1 of 1

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/jicb.00004.cam-1.gif

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.00004.cam
2018-10-23
2019-12-05
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Allen, M.
    (2004) Reading achievement of students in French immersion programs. Education Quarterly Review, 9, 25–30.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bonnet, A., & Breidbach, S.
    (Eds.) (2004) Didaktiken im dialog:Konzepte des lehrens und wege des lernens im bilingualen sachfachunterricht. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bournot-Trites, M., & Reeder, K.
    (2001) Interdependence revisited: Mathematics achievement in an intensifi ed French immersion program. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 27–43. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.58.1.27
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.58.1.27 [Google Scholar]
  4. Broner, M.
    (2001) Impact of interlocutor and task on first and second language use in a Spanish immersion program (CARLA Working Paper Series #18). Minneapolis, MN: The Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Broner, M., & Tedick, D. J.
    (2011) Talking in the fifth-grade classroom: Language use in an early, total Spanish immersion program. InD. J. Tedick, D. Christian, & T. W. Fortune (Eds.), Immersion education: Practices, policies, possibilities (pp.166–186). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cammarata, L., & Haley, C.
    (2018) Integrated content, language, and literacy instruction in a Canadian French immersion context: a professional development journey. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 332–348. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2017.1386617
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1386617 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J.
    (2012) Balancing content and language in instruction: The experience of immersion teachers. Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251–269. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2012.01330.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01330.x [Google Scholar]
  8. Cammarata, L., Cavanagh, M., Blain, S., & Sabatier, C.
    (2018) Enseigner en immersion française au Canada: synthèse des connaissances sur les défis et leurs implications pour la formation des enseignants. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 74(1), 101–127. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.3889
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.3889 [Google Scholar]
  9. Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2007) Discourse in content and language Integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms: Language learning and language teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.20
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.20 [Google Scholar]
  10. (2008) Outcomes and Processes in Content and Language Integrated (CLIL) Learning: Current Research in Europe. InW. Delanoy & L. Volkmann, (Eds.), Future perspectives in English language teaching (pp.7–23). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (2011) Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principles. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204. doi: 10.1017/S0267190511000092
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000092 [Google Scholar]
  12. Fortune, T.
    (2001) Understanding students’ oral language use as a mediator of social interaction (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Genesee, F.
    (1987) Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Genesee, F., & Lindholm-Leary, K.
    (2013) Two case studies of content-based language education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 3–33. doi: 10.1075/jicb.1.1.02gen
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.1.1.02gen [Google Scholar]
  15. Gierlinger, E.
    (2007) Modular CLIL in lower secondary education: Some insights from a research project in Austria. InC. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on classroom discourse (pp.79–118). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gilleece, L., Shiel, G., Clerkin, A., & Millar, D.
    (2011) The 2010 national assessments of English reading and mathematics in Irish-medium primary schools. Main Report. Dublin: Educational Research Centre.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Harley, B.
    (1984) How good is their French?Language and Society, 10, 55–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. (1992) Patterns of second language development in French immersion. French Language Studies, 2, 159–183. doi: 10.1017/S0959269500001289
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959269500001289 [Google Scholar]
  19. Harris, J., Forde, P., Archer, P., Nic Fhearaile, S., & O’ Gorman, M.
    (2006) Irish in primary schools – Long term national trends in achievement. Dublin: Government Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Isidro, S.
    (2010) An insight into Galician CLIL: Provision and results. InD. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz De Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain. Implementation, results and teacher training (pp.55–78). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Jäppinen, A. K.
    (2006) CLIL and future learning. InS. Björklund, K. Mård-Miettinen, M. Bergström, & M. Södergård, (Eds.), Exploring dual-focussed education: Integrating language and content for individual and societal needs (pp.22–38) Retrieved from www.uva.fi/materiaali/pdf/isbn_952-476-149-1.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Klippel, F.
    (2003) New prospects or imminent danger? The Impact of English medium instruction on education in Germany. Prospect, 18(1), 68–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lasagabaster, D.
    (2008) Foreign language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 31–42. doi: 10.2174/1874913500801010030
    https://doi.org/10.2174/1874913500801010030 [Google Scholar]
  24. Lyster, R.
    (1999) La négociation de la forme: La suite…mais pas la fin. La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 55, 355–384. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.55.3.355
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.55.3.355 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2007) Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/lllt.18
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.18 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lyster, R., & Mori, H.
    (2006) Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 269–300. doi: 10.1017/S0272263106060128
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060128 [Google Scholar]
  27. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L.
    (1997) Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 37–66. doi: 10.1017/S0272263197001034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lyster, R., & Tedick, D.
    (2014) Research perspectives on immersion pedagogy looking back and looking forward. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 2(2), 210–224. doi: 10.1075/jicb.2.2.04lys
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.2.2.04lys [Google Scholar]
  29. Marsh, D., Hau, K., & Kong, S.
    (2000) Late immersion and language of instruction in Hong Kong high schools: Achievement growth in language and non-language subjects. Harvard Educational Review, 70, 302–346. doi: 10.17763/haer.70.3.gm047588386655k5
    https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.70.3.gm047588386655k5 [Google Scholar]
  30. Morton, T.
    (2018) Reconceptualizing and describing teachers’ knowledge of language for content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 275–286. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2017.1383352
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1383352 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2016) Conceptualizing and investigating teachers’ knowledge for integrating content and language in content-based instruction. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 4, 144–167. doi: 10.1075/jicb.4.2.01mor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.4.2.01mor [Google Scholar]
  32. Mougeon, R., & Rehmer, K.
    (2001) Acquisition of sociolinguistic variants by French immersion students: The case of restrictive expressions, and more. The Modern Language Journal, 85(3), 398–415. doi: 10.1111/0026‑7902.00116
    https://doi.org/10.1111/0026-7902.00116 [Google Scholar]
  33. Mougeon, R., Nadasdi, T., & Rehner, K.
    (2010) The sociolinguistic competence of immersion students. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. doi: 10.21832/9781847692405
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692405 [Google Scholar]
  34. Navés, T., & Victori, M.
    (2010) CLIL in Catalonia: An overview of research studies. InD. Lasagabaster and Y. Ruiz De Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain. Implementation, results and teacher training (pp.30–54). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Ní Chróinín, D., Ní Mhurchú, S., & Ó Ceallaigh, T. J.
    (2016) Off-balance: The integration of physical education content learning and Irish language learning in English-medium primary schools in Ireland. Education 3–13, 44(5), 566–576. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2016.1170404
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2016.1170404 [Google Scholar]
  36. Nikula, T.
    (2005) English as an object and tool of study in classrooms: Interactional effects and pragmatic implications. Linguistics and Education, 16(1), 27–58. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2005.10.001.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2005.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  37. Ó Ceallaigh, T. J.
    (2013) Teagasc foirm-dhírithe i gcomhthéacs an tumoideachais lán-Ghaeilge: Imscrúdú criticiúil ar dhearcthaí agus ar chleachtais mhúinteoirí [Form-focused instruction in Irish-medium immersion education: A critical examination of teachers’ perspectives and practices] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation University). College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Ó Ceallaigh, T. J., & Ní Shéaghdha, A.
    (2017) Critéir aitheantais cuí um dhearbhú cáilíochta agus dea-chleachtais do bhunscoileanna agus iarbhunscoileanna lán-Ghaeilge ar bhonn uile Éireann. Baile Átha Cliath: Gaeloideachas [All-Ireland quality and best practice indicators for elementary and post primary Irish-medium schools]. Dublin: Gaeloideachas.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Ó Ceallaigh, T. J., Ní Mhurchú, S., & Ní Chróinín, D.
    (2016) Balancing content and language in CLIL: The experiences of teachers and learners. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 5(1)58–86. doi: 10.1075/jicb.5.1.03oce.
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.1.03oce [Google Scholar]
  40. Pawley, C.
    (1985) How bilingual are French immersion students?Canadian Modern Language Review, 41, 865–876. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.41.5.865
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.41.5.865 [Google Scholar]
  41. Potowski, K.
    (2004) Student Spanish use and investment in a dual immersion classroom: Implications for second language acquisition and heritage language maintenance. The Modern Language Journal, 88, 75–101. doi: 10.1111/j.0026‑7902.2004.00219.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.00219.x [Google Scholar]
  42. Ruiz de Zarobe, Y.
    (2011) Which language competencies benefit from CLIL? An insight into applied linguistics research. InY. Ruiz de Zarobe, J. M. Sierra, & F. Gallardo del Puerto (Eds.), Content and foreign language integrated learning: Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp.129–153). Bern: Peter Lang. doi: 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0171‑3
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0171-3 [Google Scholar]
  43. Salomone, A.
    (1992) Student-teacher interactions in selected French immersion classrooms. InE. Bernhardt (Ed.), Life in language immersion classrooms (pp.97–109). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Spilka, I.
    (1976) Assessment of second language performance in immersion programs. Canadian Modern Language Review, 32, 543–561. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.32.5.543
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.32.5.543 [Google Scholar]
  45. Swain, M., & Lapkin, S.
    (2008) Lexical learning through a multitask activity: The role of repetition. InT. W. Fortune & D. J. Tedick (Eds.), Pathways to multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp.119–132). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Sylvén, L. K.
    (2004) Teaching in English or English teaching? On the effects of content and language integrated learning on Swedish learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition (Unpublished PhD dissertation). University of Gothenburg.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Tarone, E., & Swain, M.
    (1995) A sociolinguistic perspective on second language use in immersion classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 79, 166–178. doi: 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.1995.tb05428.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05428.x [Google Scholar]
  48. Tedick, D. J., & Cammarata, L.
    (2012) Content and language integration in K-12 contexts: Student outcomes, teacher practices and stakeholder perspectives. Foreign Language Annals, 45(s1), s28–253. doi: 10.1111/j.1944‑9720.2012.01178.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2012.01178.x [Google Scholar]
  49. Tedick, D. J., & Young, A. I.
    (2014) Fifth grade two-way immersion students’ responses to form-focused instruction. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 784–80.10.1093/applin/amu066
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu066 [Google Scholar]
  50. Tedick, D. J., & Wesely, P. M.
    (2015) A review of research on content-based foreign/second language education in US K-12 contexts. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 28(1), 25–40. doi: 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000923
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000923 [Google Scholar]
  51. Turnbull, M., Lapkin, S., & Hart, D.
    (2001) Grade 3 immersion students’ performance in literacy and mathematics: Province-wide results from Ontario (1998–99). Canadian Modern Language Review, 58, 9–26. doi: 10.3138/cmlr.58.1.9
    https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.58.1.9 [Google Scholar]
  52. Wiesemes, R.
    (2007) Developing a methodology for CLIL classroom research: A case study of a CLIL classroom where the Holocast is taught. InC. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit, (Eds.) Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (pp.275–290). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Wode, H., Petra, B., Angelika, D., Kai-Uwe, K., & Maike, K.
    (1996) Die erprobung von deutsch-englisch bilingualem unterricht in Schleswig-Holstein: Ein erster zwischenbericht. Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung, 7(1), 15–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Yip, D., Tsang, W., & Cheung, S.
    (2003) Evaluation of the effects of medium of instruction on the science learning of Hong Kong secondary students: Performance on the science achievement test. Bilingual Research Journal, 27(2), 295–331. doi: 10.1080/15235882.2003.10162808
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2003.10162808 [Google Scholar]
  55. Ziegelwagner, M.
    (2007) Chancen und probleme des CLIL-geschichtsunterrichts. InC. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (pp.291–326). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Zydatiss, W.
    (2007) Deutsch-Englische zu ge in Berlin (dezibel). Eine evaluation des bilingualen sachfachunterrichts in gymnasien: Kontext, kompetenzen, konsequenzen [German-English education in Berlin. An evaluation of bilingual education in upper secondary school: Context, competences, consequences]. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.00004.cam
Loading
  • Article Type: Introduction
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