Understanding CLIL as an innovation
PDF

Keywords

CLIL
communication
cognition
language development

How to Cite

Kiely, R. (2011). Understanding CLIL as an innovation. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2011.1.1.9

Number of views: 778


Number of downloads: 598

Abstract

Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) initiatives in schools have become widespread across Europe and beyond in the last decade or so. Drivers for this include the role of English as the language of international economic activity, media and culture, belief in the value of early start and meaning-focussed instruction in foreign language learning, and a policy position which promotes a multilingual Europe. In many contexts, CLIL initiatives are local: teachers and educational leaders with assistance from teacher educators and experts in universities establish programmes, which are then shaped by available resources, human and material. While the commitment, enthusiasm and energy for CLIL at classroom and school levels are essential requirements for educational innovation, they may not, in the longer term be enough for sustainability and ongoing development. This paper examines the implementation of CLIL as an innovation and identifies some issues where wider policy support and coordination may be useful. It draws on the findings of an evaluation study of a CLIL project implemented in four countries, and identifies issues and ways forward for an effective strategy for CLIL in terms of foreign language learning, subject learning, and positive learning experiences for every child.

https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2011.1.1.9
PDF

Funding

The Comenius fund

References

Beretta, A., & Davies, A. (1985). Evaluation of the Bangalore Project. English Language Teaching Journal, 39, 121-127.

Clegg, J. (2007). Education in a multilingual society: Policy for developing second languages as media for learning. Paper presented at British Council Conference, Berlin.

Coyle, D. (2000). Meeting the challenge – the 3Cs curriculum. In S. Green (Ed.), New Perspectives on Teaching and Learning Modern Languages. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Coyle, D. (2005). Developing CLIL: Towards a theory of practice. APAC Monograph 6, Barcelona: APAC.

Coyle, D. (2007a). Content and language integrated learning. In Encyclopaedia for Language Learning (Vol. 4). Springer-Verlag Berlin: Germany.

Coyle, D. (2007b). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 543-562.

Crabbe, D. (2003). The quality of language learning opportunities. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 9-34.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Outcomes and processes in CLIL: Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy, & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Future perspectives for English language teaching. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.

Dalton-Puffer, & Nikula, C. T. (2006). Current Research on CLIL (Introduction). In View, 15(3) Special Issue, 1-7. Retrieved from http://www.univie.ac.at /Anglistik/views15_3_clil_special.pdf.

Fullan, M. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. London: Cassell.

Karavas-Doukas, E. (1996). Using attitude scales to investigate teachers’ attitudes to the communicative approach. ELT Journal, 50, 187-198.

Kennedy, C. (1988). Evaluation of the management of change in ELT projects. Applied Linguistics, 9, 329-342.

Kiely, R. (2008). Evaluation of Pro-CLIL. Paper presented at IATEFL Conference, Cardiff, April 2008.

Kiely, R. (2009). CLIL – the question of assessment: Developingteachers.com. Retrieved from http://www.developingteachers.com/articles_tchtraining/clil1_richard.htm

Kiely, R., & Rea-Dickins, P. (2005). Programme evaluation in language education. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kiely, R., & Rea-Dickins, P. (2009). Evaluation as learning. In K. Knapp, B. Seidlhofer, & H. Widdowson (Eds.), Handbook of foreign language communication and learning, Vol 6 (pp. 663-94). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Kramsch, C. (2008). Towards a theory of symbolic competence. Applied Linguistics, 29, 645-671.

Lamie, J. (2005). Evaluating change in English language teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in CLIL courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 31-42. Retrieved from http://www.benthamscience.com/open/toalj/articles/V001/30TOALJ.pdf

Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J, M. (2009). Language attitudes in CLIL and traditional EFL classes, European CLIL Research Journal, 1, 4-17.

Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Little, D., & Perclova, R. (2000). European language portfolio guide for teachers and teacher trainers. Strasbourg: Modern Languages Division.

Markee, N. (1993). The diffusion of innovation in language teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 229-243.

Markee, N. (1997). Managing curricular innovation. Cambridge: CUP.

Massler, U., & Burmeister, P. (2010). CLIL und immersion: Fremdsprachlicher Sachfachunterricht in der Grundschule. Braunschweig: Westermann Verlag.

Massler, U., Ioannou-Georgiou, S., & Steiert, C. (2010). CLIL teaching: Good practice. In S. Ioannou-Georgiou, & P. Pavlou. Guidelines for CLIL Implementation in Primary and Pre-primary Education (pp. 67-98). Cyprus: Pedagogical Institute.

Massler, U., & Steiert, C. (2010). Implementierung von CLIL-Modulen – die Perspektive von Lehrenden, Kindern, Eltern. In U. Massler, & P. Burmeister (Eds.), CLIL und immersion: Fremdsprachlicher Sachfachunterricht in der Grundschule (pp. 11-29). Braunschweig: Westermann Verlag.

Mehisto, P., Frigols, J.-M., & Marsh, D. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. London: Macmillan.

Michaeloudes, G. (2009). Formative assessment in CLIL: An observational study in Cypriot primary schools. Unpublished MSc TESOL dissertation. University of Bristol.

Miller, J. (2009). Teacher identity. In A. Burns, & J. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 172-181). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Perrin, B. (2002). How to – and how not to – evaluate innovation. Evaluation, 8, 13-28.

Serra, C. (2007). Assessing CLIL in primary school: A longitudinal study. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 582-602.

Schmitt, N. (2008). Review article: Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12, 329-363.

Spolsky, B. (1989). Conditions for second language learning: Introduction to a general theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stoller, F. A. (1994). The diffusion of innovation in intensive ELT programmes. Applied Linguistics, 15, 300-327.

Waters, A. (2007). ELT and the spirit of the times. ELT Journal, 61, 353-359.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business School Press: Boston.

Wolff, D. (2009). Content and language integrated learning. In K. Knapp, B. Seidlhofer, & H. Widdowson (Eds.), Handbook of foreign language communication and learning, Vol 6, (pp. 545-572). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.