The effects of using cognitive discourse functions to instruct 4th-year children on report writing in a CLIL science class
PDF

Keywords

school genres
cognitive discourse functions
writing
CLIL
children

How to Cite

Roca de Larios, J., Coyle, Y., & García, V. (2022). The effects of using cognitive discourse functions to instruct 4th-year children on report writing in a CLIL science class. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(4), 597–622. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.4.4

Number of views: 457


Number of downloads: 764

Abstract

The present study analyzed how a group of young Spanish-speaking English as a foreign language (EFL) learners in a content and language integrated learning (CLIL) science class responded to an instructional unit integrating attention to functional language and an inquiry-oriented approach to science. Working in cooperation with the researchers, a year 4 primary school teacher implemented a teaching sequence on levers with 48 9-10-year-olds over three weeks. The sequence, which was intended to raise the children’s awareness of the demands involved in understanding (content goals) and expressing as written reports (rhetorical goals) how levers work, scaffolded their activity from item-based writing to the production of full texts. On completing the unit, each child independently wrote a report on levers, all of which were analyzed from the perspective of cognitive discourse functions and ideational meaning. The results of these analyses are discussed in terms of their significance for CLIL writing with young learners.

https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2022.12.4.4
PDF

References

Accurso, K., Gebhard, M., & Selden, C. (2016). Supporting L2 elementary science writing with SFL in an age of school reform. In L. C. de Oliveira & T. Silva (Eds.), Second language writing in elementary classrooms: Instructional issues, con-tent-area writing and teacher education (pp. 126-150). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137530981_8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137530981_8

Artieda, G., Roquet, H., & Nicolas Conesa, F. (2017). The impact of age and exposure on EFL achievement in two learning contexts: Formal instruc-tion and formal instruction + content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(4), 1-19. https://doi.org/10/1080/13670050.2017.1373059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1373059

Brisk, M. E., Hodgson-Drysdale, T., & O’Connor, C. (2011). A study of a collabo-rative instructional project informed by systemic functional linguistic theory: Report writing in elementary grades. Journal of Education, 191(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741119100102 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741119100102

Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why … and why not. System, 41(3), 587-597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.001

Christie, F., & Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse: Learning to write across the years of schooling. Continuum.

Coetzee-Lachmann, D. (2007). Assessment of subject-specific task performance of bilingual geography learners: Analyzing aspects of subject-specific written discourse (Doctoral dissertation, Osnabrück University). http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/ebook/dissts/Osnabrueck/Coetzee-Lachmann2009.pdf

Coyle, Y., & Cánovas Guirao, J. (2019). Learning to write in a second language. The role of guided interaction in promoting children’s interaction from model texts. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 2(1), 21-30. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.22 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.22

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009024549 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009024549

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2004). Academic language functions in content and language integrated classrooms: Defining and hypothesizing. Vienna English Work-ing Papers, 13, 23-48.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptual-izing content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Euro-pean Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 1-38. 216-253. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011

Dawes, L., Dore, B., Loxley, P., & Nicholls, L. (2010). A talk focus for promoting enjoy-ment and developing understanding in science. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 9(2), 99-110. http://nectar.northampton.ac.uk/id/eprint/3444

de Oliveira, L. C., & Lan, S. W. (2014). Writing science in an upper elementary classroom: A genre-based approach to teaching English language learn-ers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 25, 23-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.05.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.05.001

de Oliveira, L. C., Jones, L., & Smith, L. C. (2020). Interactional scaffolding in a “first-grade” classroom through the teaching-learning cycle. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798867 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798867

Evnitskaya, N., & Dalton-Puffer, C. (2020). Cognitive discourse functions in CLIL classrooms: Eliciting and analyzing students’ oral categorizations in sci-ence and history. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilin-gualism https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1804824 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1804824

Fang, Z., & Wang, Z. (2011). Beyond rubrics: Using functional language analysis to evaluate student writing. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 34, 147-165. http://doi.org/school.discoveryeducation.com/schrockguide/assess.html

Fernández-Sanjurjo, J., Fernández-Costales, A., & Arias Blanco, J. M. (2017). Analyzing students’ content-learning in science in CLIL vs. non-CLIL programmes: Empir-ical evidence from Spain. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bi-lingualism. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1294142 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1294142

Forey, G. (2020). A whole school approach to SFL metalanguage and the explicit teaching of language for curriculum learning. Journal of English for Aca-demic Purposes, 44, 100822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100822 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100822

Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5(2), 93-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(93)90026-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(93)90026-7

Hermansson, C., B. Jonsson, M. Levlin, A. Lindhé, B. Lundgren, & Shaswar, N. A. (2019). The (non)effect of joint construction in a genre-based approach to teaching writing. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(4), 483-494. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1563038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1563038

Hodgson-Drysdale, T. (2014). Concepts and language: Developing knowledge in science. Linguistics and Education, 27, 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2014.07.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2014.07.004

Hu, J., & Gao, X. (2021). Understanding subject teachers’ language-related pedagogi-cal practices in content and language integrated learning classrooms. Lan-guage Awareness, 30(1), 42-61. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2020.1768265 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2020.1768265

Humphrey, S., & MacNaught, L. (2015). Functional language instruction and the writing growth of English language learners in the middle years. TESOL Quarterly, 50(4), 792-816. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.247 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.247

Klein, P., Haug, K., & Arcon, N. (2017). The effects of rhetorical and content subgoals on writing and learning. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(2), 291-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1143795 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1143795

Lahuerta, A. (2020). Analysis of accuracy in the writing of EFL students enrolled on CLIL and non-CLIL programmes: The impact of grade and gender. The Language Learning Journal, 48(2), 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2017.1303745 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2017.1303745

López-Ramón, M. J. (2015). Exploring the dialogic classroom interaction and development of content knowledge in a CLIL and L1 primary science classroom (Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Murcia).

Madrid, D., & Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2018). Innovations and challenges in attend-ing to diversity through CLIL. Theory into Practice, 57(3), 241-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1492237 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1492237

Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox.

McCabe, A., & Whittaker, R. (2016). Genre and appraisal in CLIL history texts: Developing the voice of the historian. In A. Llinares & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp. 105-124). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.07mcc DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.07mcc

Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Schuck, K., & Ting, T. (2015). A pluriliteracies ap-proach to content and language integrated learning: Mapping learner pro-gressions in knowledge construction and meaning-making. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 41-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000924 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000924

Moore, J. (2019). Choice and constraint: Using SLF genre theory to teach primary-grade students to write arguments about literature. Journal of Writing Re-search, 10(3), 429-464. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2019.10.03.02 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2019.10.03.02

More, C. M., Spies, T. G., Morgan, J. J., & Baker, J. N. (2016). Incorporating Eng-lish language learner instruction within special education teacher prepa-ration. Intervention in School and Clinic, 51(4), 229-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451215589183 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451215589183

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), 7-27. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.33 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.33

Nashaat-Sobhy, N., & Llinares, A. (2020). CLIL students’ definitions of historical terms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798868 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798868

Parkin, B. M. (2014). Scaffolding science: A pedagogy for marginalized stu-dents (Doctoral dissertation, University of Adelaide, Australia). https://hekyll.ser-vices.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/bitstream/2440/91443/3/02whole.pdf

Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2016). Are teachers ready for CLIL? Evidence from a Euro-pean study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 202-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104

Polias, J. (2010). Pedagogical resonance: Improving teaching and learning. Spe-cial Issue of NALDIC Quarterly, 42-49.

Polias, J. (2016). Apprenticing students into science: Doing, talking & writing scientifically. Lexis Education.

Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge, and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Equinox.

Santiago Schwarz, V., & Hamman-Ortiz, L. (2020). Systemic functional linguis-tics, teacher education, and writing outcomes for U.S. elementary Eng-lish learners: A review of the literature. Journal of Second Language Writing, 49, 100727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100727 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100727

Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610317 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410610317

Smagorinsky, P. (2008). The method section as conceptual epicenter in con-structing social science research reports. Written Communication, 25(3), 389-411. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088308317815 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088308317815

Valverde Caravaca, R. (2019). Effective questioning in CLIL classrooms: Empowering thinking. ELT Journal, 73(4), 367-376. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccz030 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccz030

Veel, R. (1997). Learning how to mean: Scientifically speaking: Apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school (pp. 161-195). Continuum.

Vollmer, H. J. (2008). Constructing tasks for content and language integrated learning and assessment. In J. Eckerth & S. Siekmann (Eds.), Task-based language learning and teaching: Theoretical, methodological, and ped-agogical perspectives (pp. 227-290). Peter Lang.

Whittaker, R., & McCabe, A. (2020). Writing on history in a content and language integrated learning (CLIL) context: Development of grammatical metaphor as evidence of language learning. In R. Manchón, (Ed.) Writing and language learning: Advancing research agendas (pp. 309-332). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.56.13whi DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.56.13whi