740417

Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is a teaching model that uses an additional language (often a foreign language) as a tool in the learning of other subjects, such as Biology or History. Through this methodology, students learn both the content of the subject and the language in which it is taught .

This method is used differently in different countries and even regions within the same country. Its principles are broad enough to allow each context to adapt it to its needs, but also specific enough to differentiate it from other bilingual approaches.

Learning a language through content

One of its fundamental characteristics, when applied in classes of a certain subject, is that the language to be learned is determined by the discipline being taught; that is, it is the content of the subject that determines how the second language is learned. In other words, the same terms, the same syntax or the same expressions in English are not learned in History class as in Biology class.

For example, if you are working on the topic of cell division, you will pay attention to language to express the types and processes of cell division. In this way, by using the second language in cognitive processes such as defining or explaining, you can achieve a deeper learning of the language you are learning in.

The implementation of bilingual education in Spain and Europe

In monolingual communities in Spain (and in most European countries), the main additional language of instruction is English. Bilingual communities in Spain (such as the Valencian Community or the Basque Country) have also introduced official languages ​​as vehicular languages, so that some subjects are also taught in Valencian or Basque.

Instruction through English begins at the Primary level through to the end of Compulsory Secondary Education, but the degrees of exposure and the subjects selected vary from one programme to another. In some programmes, the subjects taught in English are more academic, such as Biology or History, and in others, subjects such as Art or Physical Education are taught, where the forms of expression are less discursive and more artistic or physical. This implies differences in the ability of students to express their knowledge in the second language .

Which model helps us learn the language better?

Naturally, the more exposure students have to English, the more they are expected to become fluent in it. When comparing students who study different subjects in English with those who only study English as a subject, the former have an advantage over the latter in most language skills .

However, some skills, such as the ability to express interpersonal relationships, are not always acquired more quickly .

Do we learn less history if we study it in English?

This does not mean that CLIL learners’ language development necessarily reaches native-like standards. And just as studying Biology in English does not automatically make us bilingual, there is also no evidence that studying through a foreign language negatively affects academic performance.

Our comparative analysis of 6th grade students’ definitions of History content in English (second language) and Spanish (native language) shows that, despite having received instruction on this subject in English since 1st grade, these students are equally capable of defining academic terms in Spanish and also show the same difficulties as in English. That is, they used the same patterns (correct or incorrect) to define the French Revolution in English and in Spanish.

This result, therefore, goes against some public beliefs that bilingual education can affect the expression of academic content in students’ native language.

The fundamental role of teachers

Although student performance will vary depending on exposure to the language outside the classroom, the role of teachers is of utmost importance. It is teachers who can facilitate students’ mastery of both the subject content, reflected in technical-scientific concepts and terms (e.g. mitosis and meiosis), and the academic language to describe related scientific processes (e.g. cell division).

To achieve this, activities are carried out in class that make students articulate the meaning of these terms and processes. For example, follow-up questions are used so that students can elaborate their answers, thus consolidating learning of both the content and scientific language in English in a reflective and critical way.

Once students have answered the what, where, how, and when questions, it is beneficial for teachers to take it a step further by asking questions that demonstrate the student’s ability to critically reflect on the content. For example:

Why do you think uncontrolled cell division leads to problems like cancer?

What do you think would happen if DNA were replicated between the first and second meiotic divisions?

The role of research

In this area, it is essential that teacher training is based on the results of research, such as that carried out by our group in collaboration with teachers of academic content in English.

One of the most recent studies we conducted to understand their assessment criteria has shown unexpected results. One of them is that, despite not being English language specialists, content teachers (History, Biology, Art) tended to rate more grammatically complex language better than language that was more functionally appropriate for expressing content in their subject.

An illustrative case is that of a student who used the structure because if not to justify why it is important to protect the environment. One of the teachers praised this usage as exceptionally clever from a grammatical point of view, without giving the student credit for having provided a justification in the answer, or relating the grammatical structure to its function in expressing reasoning and justification.

But it is this last aspect of language (the ability to explain and argue in it) that the content teacher should value primarily given its importance for the correct expression of knowledge by students.

It is probably the content teachers’ own experience in learning English that leads them to focus on grammar and vocabulary per se, rather than on the role they play in constructing good definitions, arguments, explanations, etc.

This shows the need for teacher training to work more on the functional use of language in relation to the content and texts that students must master in each subject. These findings also highlight the importance of creating spaces for collaboration between researchers and educators from different subjects to improve learning of both content and foreign languages.

Author Bios: Nashwa Nashaat-Sobhy is Professor in Applied Linguistics at the Polytechnic University of Valencia and Ana Llinares is Professor of Applied English Linguistics – Bilingual Education Specialist at the Autonomous University of Madrid