CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL)

FINAL ESSAY

Index:

The objective ----------------------------------------------------------------------- pg. 3

CLIL and Political Domination------------------------------------------------- pg. 3 and 4

CLIL and the Role of Teachers------------------------------------------------ pg. 4

CLIL and Content ------------------------------------------------------------------ pg. 5, 6 and 7

CLIL and Materials ---------------------------------------------------------------- pg. 7

Conclusion --------------------------------------------------------------------------- pg. 7 and 8

Bibliography ------------------------------------------------------------------------- pg. 9

The objective

This final essay has the purpose of analyzing some possible disadvantages that might arise in the CLIL application. By doing that, I expect to go further than just make a list of problems but also present a fair trial where both local and international settings are taken into account. It has the aim of looking closer the caveats presented in our reading material (Unit 5) so as to establish the veracity of the arguments and the extent of their implications. Also, it will allow an honest overview of CLIL application in my language center where I teach and coordinate. It doesn’t intend to convict or absolve CLIL as a method but expose its advantages and disadvantages as well as its applicability in my context.

“CLIL, or Content and Language Integrated Learning, is an umbrella term covering teaching contexts in which subject content is taught through another language. (Kay Bentley, 2009:9)1

CLIL and Political domination

It is said that CLIL can be used for non-orthodox linguistic purposes serving as an agent to impose political domination through language. This argument is sustained when more traditional languages are the only ones to consider, especially English. However, CLIL can also be a tool for teaching non-dominant languages, spoken by minority groups, such as Sorbian in Germany or Breton in France that are geographically minoritarian languages. An example of this, is the use of Turkish in Germany technical-professional schools, in subjects such Economics. In Switzerland, other national languages are taught through CLIL. 2

Each country or school has a clear objective when defining a language teaching program. According to Hugh Beardsmore3, no one version of CLIL is “exportable”. It may sound as a disadvantage but this argument just reinforces the notion that CLIL serves as a purpose which is previously designed by a board of Education or school coordination and should reflect the thought of a National Educational Program. Each country has its own needs, deals with its own reality and will establish its own way of implementing CLIL as a methodology or not. Which language can be taught by CLIL? Which subjects can be taught through CLIL? Which ones will be taught through their mother tongue? How important is this language to our nation? How successful a person is when mastering this language?

So, CLIL can be applied taking into account a local reality and it will fit into a particular school context, which is surely an advantage. The possibilities of building an exclusive material are enormous, even the possibility of choosing a weak or strong version of it.

Thus, from my point of view, the Trojan Horse argument isn´t totally valid once CLIL doesn´t intend to squeeze out any “unwanted” language but offer the chance to teach relevant content through the use of a relevant language, expanding students´ knowledge.

In Brazil, the access to private language centers is predominantly a privilege for more fortunate students, who can afford high tuitions. Therefore, schools, especially private ones, offer a poor English program. This contradictory idea can be explained by the fact that schools rely on the thought that students will eventually enroll at English courses because they are able to afford it. The courses become responsible for students’ success in their language learning. CLIL is a chance to enhance the level of school teaching in many aspects: cultural, social and linguistic. So, implementing CLIL at schools in Brazil would transfer the responsibility of teaching high quality English from courses to schools and would definitely set to public schools higher standards in terms of results. Considering Brazil an emerging country, knowing English doesn´t mean domination but instead preparation for internalization, future studies, working life as well as the

growth of confidence and the development of multilingual interests and attitudes. As pointed out by David Graddol 4 : “…we are a major step closer to creating a world in which English is expected of every global citizen and those without English will form a new social class, socially and economically excluded”. CLIL can be right tool to give students the chance they need to “open the gates of the future”, as far as learning English as global language goes.

CLIL and the role of teachers

CLIL cannot be seen a threat to English teachers. Language teaching and learning represent an important discipline indeed however CLIL can also free teachers from “talking about language” to a new teaching dynamics, where students are engaged in real, meaningful content. CLIL not only makes students learn something meaningful but also connects English to a pedagogic reality, as the others subjects. English would stop being the curricular “odd man out” to be led by more substantial content objectives.

Teachers can finally have a relevant role in the pedagogic scenario. They would gradually stop being a slave of disposable content - as our reading material suggests. Instead of saying CLIL is a serious threat to teachers, I´d say as Graddol 4: “it (CLIL) comes to transform the role of teachers and their relationships to learners and institutions.”

CLIL and Content

When analyzing all benefits from CLIL, one must not forget the level of proficiency students need to have in order to digest some subjects that are part of basic curriculum. As an example, I´ll refer to my daughter’s age group from her school, which I myself coordinate. When preparing for a History test, I can see the amount of vocabulary and complex linguistic structures she needs to know as to succeed. So, after reading the caveats regarding CLIL, I could not be indifferent to the one that mentions how absurd it is to teach a culturally “iconic” topic in other language rather than L1. A 9 year-old student in Brazil, already has a vast vocabulary and must master many verbs so as to be prepared for a discursive test, where she´ll be asked questions that will demand proficiency. CLIL might not work as it should, and in consequence students can even experience retrograde – sustained as “the backsliding theory”.

Nevertheless, teachers must be aware that CLIL is not a subject lesson transmitted in a foreign language. According to the 4Cs curriculum (Coyle 1999), a successful CLIL lesson should combine elements of the following:

• Content - Progression in knowledge, skills and understanding related to specific elements of a defined curriculum

• Communication - Using language to learn whilst learning to use language

• Cognition - Developing thinking skills which link concept formation (abstract and concrete), understanding and language.

• Culture - Exposure to alternative perspectives and shared understandings, which deepen awareness of otherness and self.

So, the idea of progression in knowledge is part of CLIL basis and must be profoundly immersed in its application since first school years. A 9 year-old can understand a History class once he/she is exposed to language gradually. It seems that students should evolve in language as they evolve in the subjects, which is clearly an essential element in CLIL: “Using language to learn whilst learning to use language”.

As far as Mathematics goes, it seems to be linguistic limited however it can create proximity between students and the language.

Every 7 year-old student, learning the 4 basic operations of arithmetic can use his/her knowledge of English to solve problems relating objects, colors and numbers. According to a study5, “the advantages of this choice can be found in the fact that mathematics to a large extent, excludes the possibilities of various interpretation/misinterpretation of particular problems. On the other hand, its exact character does not allow for the “holistic” approach to the English language – it cannot show the wealth of idioms and ambiguity of its vocabulary (regardless of its sources). Also, “Mathematics is a discipline where non-verbal communication, visual and graphic materials are used in a considerable extent. Its language has a typical grammatical structure and is rich in words that are only found in this specific field. The mathematical vocabulary is similar across many languages.”

Using a foreign language for subject teaching makes the teachers adapt his/her teaching style towards the use of interactive strategies, the stress being put on the learners comprehension and feedback. The result is dual benefit: the development of both L2 (foreign language) and Math language and receptive and productive skills. In practice the teacher uses the variety of verbal and non-verbal means to illustrate the meaning, such as: repetition, rephrasing, gestures, body language, exemplification, analogies, representation and visualization, using L1 as the last resort.

Considering the language context I work in as reference, I cannot say CLIL would be easily received. The feeling of condescension toward kids might impede the use of CLIL, as if children are unprepared to face the implicit obstacles for not mastering the language. From many parents point of view, language has to provide comfort and protection and students should have this environment to learn successfully. Parents have only limited experience or no experience at all with CLIL. They voice concerns in particular with regard to their children’s L1 development and CLIL’s effectiveness as regards the learning of content. Notwithstanding, these are the same parents who long to see their children prepared for future challenges.

Schools that offer immersion programs are more efficacious as parents prioritize the study of a foreign language and are fully aware of the importance of overcoming possible difficulties and frustrations. It´s a paradigm and in my opinion, should be broken. CLIL could be the key.

Still reflecting upon content and the level of proficiency, another important issue to be considered is the fact that it is still unknown how well a student can transfer knowledge from a second language to his/her mother tongue.

It´s unknown if students, when transferring that knowledge are able to do it conceptual-linguistically correct. Without a doubt, one of the main advantages of CLIL is to promote students awareness of the value of transferable skills and knowledge, which is the result of an intense acclimatization work. In order to have it successfully done, I must say students would have to slowly get used to the teaching approach before “traditional” CLIL can be introduced.

I believe it is impossible to transfer existing content subject lesson plans across without modifying these to take into account pupils' ability in the target language, and therefore the planning and training process is vital. It is likely that, especially to begin with, lessons will need to be challenging cognitively, with comparatively light linguistic demands. The result is that students become more confident if they are provided with the opportunity to realize that they can manage to learn and do tasks in another language. CLIL can provide a boost to that person’s linguistic self-confidence.

CLIL and Materials

Lack of suitable published material is undoubtefuly a true concern. The thought of producing personalized material is time-consuming and overload teachers who will eventually need to design materials to suit the needs of their learners, so as to enable them to develop until they are working at high levels of cognitive and linguistic challenge.

In times where technology rules, it´s inadmissible depending exclusively on publications, discarding all available resources posted on the web. The teacher will find not only materials but forums, tips, visual aids among other resources. Teachers must get used to building up plannings, not only counting on his/her own expertise but gathering knowledge and ideas from many teachers around the globe.

As for my experience as a coordinator, I constantly seek for information and recourses on the internet that meet my expectations, adapting when necessary.

Conclusion

Will CLIL enable me to teach language better?

The implementation of CLIL has both advantages and drawbacks. In my context I would still faces some dilemmas, in spite of absolutely trust in the benefits of CLIL.

A very common concern among those who have been developing CLIL projects is to gather enough and solid theoretical background on CLIL projects to support and inspire their own teaching. The lack of CLIL teacher training courses leaves up to the coordinators and teaching staff the task of identifying the theoretical foundations for CLIL projects and fight for those against erroneous ideas about what CLIL really is. Besides, in Brazil the rationale for implementing a CLIL project isn´t explicitly found in the present Curriculum Guidelines, nor in most teacher training courses, either. This explains why many teachers don´t feel familiar enough with the rationale for CLIL, ignoring most of the teaching techniques and strategies generally associated with content-based teaching, not knowing how to cope with the evaluation procedures. That leads us to second dilemma: Because CLIL is not still supported by the Brazilian National Educational Program most teachers feel they do not qualify for a CLIL job. Indeed, this is a major concern among teachers since they seem to fear invading other teacher's field. Therefore, there is this awkward feeling of being an intruder, trespassing the limits of their discipline, which is for me one of the strongest paradigms we deal with. This is an extremely serious problem that MEC (Brazilian Ministry of Education) should consider and answer by finding ways to train CLIL teachers who can master “the teaching of subjects in a different language from the mainstream language of instruction” where, “the non-language subject is not taught in a foreign language but with and through a foreign Language”6.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1 Bentley, K (2009). Primary Curriculum Box. CLIL lessons and activities for younger learners. Cambridge University Press

2 (web reference) Wolff, Dieter (Goethe Institute website)

http://www.goethe.de/ges/spa/dos/ifs/en2747558.htm

3 Beardsmore, Hugh (CLIL subject written material)

4 Graddol. D (2006): English Next. British Council Publication

5 (web reference) Novtoná, Jarmila and Hoffmanová, Marie (Clil and the mathematics education)

http://math.unipa.it/~grim/Jnovotna.PDF

6 Marsh, David – Language awareness and CLIL (Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2008)