Embedding English in the tertiary curriculum: Engaging with content through writing. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Embedding English in the tertiary curriculum: Promises, problems, and what is implied
Issues in English Language Teaching and Learning at Tertiary Level.Chapter: Embedding English in the tertiary curriculum: Engaging with content through writing.Publisher: Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Eds: Zhongshe Lu, Weimin Zhang and Aaron Crippen, 2011
There have been recent moves in European universities towards integrating English instruction (and language instruction more broadly) with the teaching of core curriculum. This has been advocated in Australia and New Zealand for many years, by professional bodies as well as by (some) educationists and (some) applied linguists. The concept has its roots in the move towards Content Based Instruction (CBI) in tertiary level English teaching. However, CBI has largely been replaced in Europe by ‘CLIL’: Content and Language Integrated Instruction. Unlike CBI, CLIL has a “dual focus” whereby L2 skills and content knowledge are developed simultaneously. However, these initiatives have encountered a variety of problems. I here suggest that this ambitious project has been inadequately conceptualised, due to widespread misunderstandings, in the community in general and among academics in particular, about the nature of language, language use and the complexity of disciplinary and professional discourses.
Integrating content and language in higher education
AILA Review, 2012
Introducing the topic The research developments of the last 15 years are a good indicator that Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has established itself as a widely used research framework for applied linguistic interests into educational undertakings that use a foreign or additional language for the teaching of curricular content. While content areas, such as geography, accounting, agriculture or aerodynamics, are highly diverse, the common denominator of CLIL scenarios is that the respective learners are engaged in a joint learning practice of subject matter and foreign language (e.g. Coyle, Hood and Marsh 2010; Dalton-Puffer 2011; Marsh & Wolff 2007). In view of the growing realities of such teaching and learning settings that distinguish themselves from foreign language educational practices (where the main focus is reaching proficiency in the target language), CLIL has shown wide applicability across regional and national contexts as well as all educational levels (e.g. Dafouz & Guerrini 2009; Dalton-Puffer, Nikula & Smit 2010; Ruiz de Zarobe, Sierra & Gallardo del Puerto 2011). Initiated in Europe and stimulated by the European Union's general policy to enhance individual and societal multilingualism (e.g. European Commission 2012), CLIL, or mainstream education in a foreign or additional language, has rapidly gained in popularity in many countries with a tradition of exclusively using the dominant or national language(s) for educational purposes. Whether this recent trend towards enlarging the circle of medium languages will finally result in a paradigm shift away from what Gogolin (1994) fittingly called the 'monolingual habitus' of formal education towards a bi/multilingual one is too early to say, not least because the language chosen for instruction is first and foremost English. In any case, CLIL education raises questions about immutable principles and established practices in formal education. Given the novelty and urgency of these educational changes, a vibrant research scene has established itself, for which CLIL seems to function well as an umbrella term for a myriad of bi/multilingual educational settings that nevertheless partially reflect different contextual parameters and are approached from diverse research interests (Dalton-Puffer 2007; Llinares, Morton & Whittaker 2012; Ruiz de Zarobe, Sierra & Gallardo del Puerto 2011; Smit 2010a). While the resulting conceptual openness might be in need of clarification, it reflects the dynamic developments of this recent phenomenon and, furthermore, provides researchers with a common point of reference in analysing their specific educational scenarios.
Academic Languages and Literacies in Content-Based Education in English-as-an-Additional-Language Contexts , 2020
From the 1960s to the early 21st century, different terms have arisen in diverse research traditions and educational contexts where teachers and researchers are interested in exploring and researching ways of helping learners to learn both language and content at the same time. These terms include content-based instruction (CBI), immersion, sheltered instruction, language across the curriculum (LAC), writing across the curriculum (WAC), and content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Common to all these traditions, however, is the monoglossic and monolingual assumption about academic language and literacy. The dynamic process turn in applied linguistics has changed our view of the nature of language, languaging, and language learning processes. These new theoretical insights led to a transformation of research on LAC toward research on academic languages and literacies in the disciplines. A paradigm shift from monoglossic to heteroglossic assumptions is also particularly important in English-as-an-additional-language (EAL) contexts. Keywords: academic literacies, translanguaging, access paradox, genre and register theory, plurilingualism, plurilingual education, content and language integrated learning, content-based education, English medium instruction, critical pragmatic approaches, English as an additional language, heteroglossia Language Across the Curriculum and Academic Literacy In the 1970s in Britain, educators first used the notion of language across the curriculum (LAC) as a whole-school approach to addressing the academic language and literacy needs of students studying in different curricular areas. The LAC approach focuses on understanding the academic language demands of content subjects and advocates the need for all teachers (not just language teachers) to teach students appropriate academic language for successful participation in academic literacy tasks across the curriculum. As stated in a key document in the movement, the Bullock Report, "Each school should have an organized policy for language across the curriculum, establishing every teacher's involvement in language and reading development throughout the years of schooling" (Bullock, 1975). A key tenet underpinning LAC is that academic language should be given due attention by teachers across all subject areas and that native-English-speaking children need to be taught academic English because everyday English is not the same as academic English. Thus, unlike content-based instruction (CBI) Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education reached a major milestone this month by publishing our 500th article! For more information visit our News page.
Innovative language teaching and learning at university: enhancing participation and collaboration, 2016
T his paper looks at the teaching of subject discipline content through the medium of a second language. It begins by looking at the globalisation of discipline content teaching through second languages, whereby increasing numbers of academics and students are either teaching or learning in universities across the globe in a language other than their mother tongue. It then looks at the ways in which questions about the language of subject content delivery are being addressed by departments of languages in UK universities. The paper argues that practice is differentiated along up to 3 main and several sub-dimensions of both comprehension and communication. The third section sets out some of the research evidence into the effectiveness of subject content teaching in the target language, in particular, for developing students' academic writing skills. It concludes with recommendations about the future direction of language and content teaching in the UK.
Teaching Language through Content in English for Academic Purposes
Teaching English for Academic Purposes (EAP) is becoming an increasingly important aspect of English Language teaching (ELT) as more and more people require support to study, teach and communicate research through the medium of English. The field has matured as a discipline and, in the UK, it now has its own institution (BALEAP: the global forum for EAP professionals), well-established centres in most further and higher education institutions and an active research base with a dedicated journal. Nevertheless, training for EAP teaching remains largely ad hoc and informal. Partly this is because of its specificity: there is no one-size-fits-all EAP. But it is also a result of teacher misconceptions about what EAP involves and how it compares with communicative language teaching. Some extremely well-qualified and experienced teachers report feeling 'deskilled' when they begin to teach EAP. In this article I will consider one particularly challenging aspect of EAP teaching: working with content from students' subject disciplines. I hope to show that although this can seem daunting at first it can also turn out to be the most rewarding aspect of EAP teaching. A common misconception about EAP is that it involves teaching study skills, e.g., skim reading, taking notes in lectures, giving oral presentations. This probably reflects the influence of exams such as IELTS and TOEFL, which test these skills, and many teachers consider that they are teaching EAP when they are preparing students for these gate-keeping language exams. In fact, EAP involves much more than skills teaching or exam preparation and it is these additional aspects that are potentially more motivating for students and rewarding for teachers. EAP can be defined as the language and study competence required to function autonomously in an academic community in order to achieve academic goals but also to continue learning language in that environment. Once students are on their degree programmes they are unlikely to have time for language classes, even if these are available. However, they need to continue to develop their understanding of the language of their discipline in order to use it to complete coursework, sit exams and communicate research. EAP classes need to provide students with the means to understand discourse processes and structures in their disciplines and identify key language to learn and use. Teaching EAP is like teaching someone to drive because both aim to support performance as far as practicable in the target context. Learner drivers practice on real roads while EAP learners practice with authentic texts and tasks drawn from their subject disciplines. This helps them to understand how the skills they are learning will transfer to the authentic situation. Both performances are supported with guidance and feedback from the teacher. In both cases, the teachers need thorough understanding of the criteria for acceptable performance in order to guide learners effectively. For EAP teachers, this requires a degree of engagement with the content and practices of their students' fields of study. The constraints of their teaching situation will determine to what extent content and language learning can be linked or integrated.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2018
The dominance of English-medium instruction (EMI) programmes in tertiary education is growing around the world, given the internationalisation of higher education (HE) and globalisation, 'which influences both language use and the economics of HE' (Coleman 2006, 1), and the resulting spread of English as a lingua franca. According to a study carried out in 2014 by the Academic Cooperation Association, devoted to the theme of EMI in Europe, '27% of the higher education institutions addressed in the study offered at least one ETP [English-taught programme] and about 6% of all study programmes estimated are provided exclusively in English' (Maiworm and Wächter 2015, 23). Some programmes started in the 1990s and even as early as the 1980s but the years 2009 and 2010 saw a peak in the creation of new ETPs. However, even if those numbers may seem quite limited, there is still 'plenty of evidence for bilingual or multilingual programmes where some courses are offered in an additional language' (Valcke and Wilkinson 2017, 15). Recent years have seen a substantial rise in the implementation of EMI programmes that come in many shapes and sizes. There are different types that range from the full integration of content and language in HE (ICLHE) to a split between content and language in courses such as English for specific purposes (ESP) and English for academic purposes (EAP), although attempts to find a common ground between both content and language in these programmes will be further explored in this special issue. What cannot be denied in HE research, and also in the contributions presented here, is that the spread of English as the medium of instruction, the Englishisation of HE, is an evident fact. Not only is it the language that many students need academically and professionally, but it 'is increasingly also the only language the students and teachers share, i.e. their lingua franca' (Smit 2013, 17). The interest in content and language integration in HE has opened up new lines of research that are emerging and developing, with the genuine intention of improving language learning in our multilingual world. Some of the challenges that integrating content and language face in HE have often been linked to questions related to how to foster teacher development and incorporate and improve instructional practices following this integrated approach. This special issue looks at HE with this perspective in mind, following different lines of discussion. The first two contributions present a conceptualisation of CLIL in HE. In her article, Barbara Unterberger explains the 'English-medium paradigm,' inspired by Räsänen (The Language Network for Quality Assurance [LANQUA] 2010), and created to identify prevalent instructional types in English-taught programmes at universities in non-English-speaking countries. The paradigm is based on conceptual and terminological considerations: English-medium teaching in HE is classified into five distinct categories, namely, Pre-sessional ESP / EAP, Embedded ESP / EAP, Adjunct ESP, EMI and ICLHE. Theoretical concepts are matched with the realities of programme and curriculum design in HE in the hope of raising awareness among programme designers for the implementation
In the last decade, there has been a major interest in content-based instruction (CBI) and content and language integrated learning (CLIL). These are similar approaches which integrate content and foreign/second language learning through various methodologies and models as a result of different implementations around the world. In this paper, I first offer a sociocultural view of CBI-CLIL. Secondly, I define language and content as vital components in CBI-CLIL. Thirdly, I review the origins of CBI and the continuum perspective, and CLIL definitions and models featured in the literature. Fourth, I summarise current aspects around research in programme evaluation. Last, I review the benefits and challenges of this innovative approach so as to encourage critically context-responsive endeavours.
2016
This paper offers the results of a study on two English-taught first-year modules at a Spanish Faculty of Economics. Analysing 2010-2015 results allows measuring the impact of the methodological interventions performed on student grades, thus allowing comparisons between their effectiveness. Findings reveal the influence on grades of student-centred, hands-on methodologies and language remedial interventions, which suggests studying Content-and-Language Integrated Learning and English-as-a-Medium-of-Instruction in terms of their pedagogical practice and not as separate approaches. Ultimately, the study stresses the need to promote language adaptation, student-centredness and independent-learning within bilingual contexts. Keywords: CLIL, achievement control, didactic use of computer.