1887
image of Using cognitive discourse functions and comparative judgement to build teachers’ knowledge of content and language
integration for assessment in a bilingual education program
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper reports a study carried out in the context of a seminar designed to build teachers’ knowledge of content and language integration for assessment in a bilingual education program in Madrid, Spain. The participants were seven teachers (two primary, five secondary) of English and science (primary), and art, history, Spanish language arts and English (secondary). The teachers were introduced to the concept of (CDF) and assessed samples of students’ work expressing the functions , and , using comparative judgement. In sharing and justifying their assessments, they articulated the criteria they used to take their decisions. The findings show that participants emphasized content quality over quantity and language form over function. There was also evidence that the concept of CDFs enabled them to express new understandings of the content-language relationship in assessment. The study has implications for building the knowledge base for content and language integrated assessment across CBLE programs.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21017.mor
2022-07-04
2022-08-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R.
    (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives: Complete edition. Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J.
    (2015) Putting CLIL into Practice. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Beacco, J. C., Fleming, M., Goullier, F., Thürmann, E., Vollmer, H., & Sheils, J.
    (2016) The language dimension in all subjects: A handbook for curriculum development and teacher training. Council of Europe.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Biggs, J., & Tang, C.
    (2011) Teaching for quality learning at university. McGraw-Hill and Open University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bloom, B. S.
    (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook 1: The classification of educational goals: Cognitive domain. McKay.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. deBoer, M., & Leontjev, D.
    (2020) Assessment and learning in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms: approaches and conceptualisations. Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑54128‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54128-6 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J.
    (2012) Balancing content and language in instruction: 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]
  8. Christodoulou, D.
    (2017) Making good progress? The future of assessment for learning. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Coyle, D.
    (2018) The Place of CLIL in (Bilingual) Education. Theory into Practice, 57(3), 166–176. 10.1080/00405841.2018.1459096
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1459096 [Google Scholar]
  10. Coyle, D., & Meyer, O.
    (2021) Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies teaching for deeper learning. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108914505
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108914505 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2013) A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253. 10.1515/eujal‑2013‑0011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011 [Google Scholar]
  12. Evnitskaya, N., & Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2020) Cognitive discourse functions in CLIL classrooms: Eliciting and analysing students’ oral categorizations in science and history. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1804824
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1804824 [Google Scholar]
  13. Genesee, F., & Hamayan, E.
    (2017) CLIL in context:Practical guidance for educators. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Leontjev, D., & deBoer, M.
    (2020) Conceptualising assessment and learning in the CLIL context. An introduction. InM. DeBoer & D. Leontjev (Eds.), Assessment and Learning in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms (pp.1–27). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑54128‑6_1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54128-6_1 [Google Scholar]
  15. Lin, A. M. Y.
    (2016) Language across the curriculum & CLIL in English as an additional language in (EAL) contexts: Theory and practice. Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑10‑1802‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1802-2 [Google Scholar]
  16. Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R.
    (2012) The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Lyster, R.
    (2007) Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach (Vol.18). John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/lllt.18
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.18 [Google Scholar]
  18. Mohan, B. A.
    (1986) Language and content (Vol.5288). Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Mohan, B., Leung, C., & Slater, T.
    (2010) Assessing Language and Content: A Functional Perspective. InA. Paran & L. Sercu (Eds.), Testing the untestable in language education (pp.217–240). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847692672‑013
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692672-013 [Google Scholar]
  20. Morton, T.
    (2020) Cognitive discourse functions: A bridge between content, literacy and language for teaching and assessment in CLIL. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 3(1), 7–17. 10.5565/rev/clil.33
    https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.33 [Google Scholar]
  21. Nashaat-Sobhy, N., & Llinares, A.
    (2020) CLIL students’ definitions of historical terms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1798868
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798868 [Google Scholar]
  22. Tedick, D. J., & Lyster, R.
    (2019) Scaffolding language development in immersion and dual language classrooms. Routledge. 10.4324/9780429428319
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429428319 [Google Scholar]
  23. Troyan, F. J.
    (2016) Assessing what matters within content-based foreign language teaching through integrated performance assessment. InL. Cammarata (Ed.), Content-Based Foreign Language Teaching (pp.161–184). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Troyan, F. J., Cammarata, L., & Martel, J.
    (2017) Integration PCK: Modeling the knowledge(s) underlying a world language teacher's implementation of CBI. Foreign Language Annals, 50(2), 458–476. 10.1111/flan.12266
    https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12266 [Google Scholar]
  25. Wheadon, C., de Moira, A. P., & Christodoulou, D.
    (2020, September7). The classification accuracy and consistency of comparative judgement of writing compared to rubric-based teacher assessment. 10.31235/osf.io/vzus4
    https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/vzus4 [Google Scholar]
  26. Whittaker, R., & McCabe, A.
    (2020) Expressing evaluation across disciplines in primary and secondary CLIL writing: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1798869
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798869 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21017.mor
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21017.mor
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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