Written discourse development in CLIL at secondary school

Language Teaching Research

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 343-362

  Whittaker, Rachel ^a   Llinares, Ana ^a   McCabe, Anne ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b St Louis University (Madrid Campus)   (Spain)

Author keywords

coherence; content and language integrated learning (CLIL); development; nominal group structure; register; second language writing; secondary school

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958851765     PISSN: 13621688     EISSN: 14770954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1362168811401154     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Bae, J. (2001). Cohesion and coherence in children's written English: immersion and English-only classes. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 12, 51-88.
2. Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Byrnes, H. (2009). Emergent L2 German writing ability in a curricular context: A longitudinal study of grammatical metaphor. Linguistics and Education, 20, 50-66.
4. Chiang, S. (2003). The importance of cohesive conditions to perceptions of writing quality at the early stages of foreign language learning. System, 31, 471-84.
5. Christie, F. (2002). The development of abstraction in adolescence in subject English. In M. Schleppegrell & C. Colombi (Eds.), Developing advanced literacy in first and second languages (pp. 45-66). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Christie, F. (2010). The ontogenesis of writing in childhood and adolescence. In D. Wyse, R. Andrews and J. Hoffman (Eds.) The Routledge international handbook of English, language and literacy teaching (pp. 146-58). Oxford: Routledge.
7. Christie, F. & Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse: Learning to write across the years of schooling. London: Continuum.
8. Christie, F. & Martin, J. (Eds.) (1997). Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London: Pinter.
9. Coetze-Lachmann, D. (2009). Assessment of subject-specific task performance of bilingual geography learners: Analysing aspects of subject-specific written discourse. Osnabrück: Osnabrück University. Retrieved from: http://webdoc.sub.gwdg.de/ebook/dissts/Osnabrueck/Coetzee-Lachmann2009.pdf (March 2011).
10. Coffin, C. (2000). Defending and challenging interpretations of the past: the role of argument in school history. Revista Canaria Estudios Ingleses, 40, 135-53.
11. Coffin, C. (2006a). Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London: Continuum.
12. Coffin, C. (2006b). Learning the language of school history: The role of linguistics in mapping the writing demands of the secondary school curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38, 413-29.
13. Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.) (1993). The powers of literacy: A genre-based approach to teaching literacy. London: Falmer Press.
14. Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 543-62.
15. Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: issues in assessment and pedagogy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
16. Cumming, A. (1994). Writing expertise and second-language proficiency. In A. Cumming (Ed.), Bilingual performance in reading and writing (pp. 173-221). Ann Arbor, MI: Language Learning /John Benjamins.
17. Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
18. Dalton-Puffer, C. & Smit, U. (Eds.) (2007). Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
19. Eggins, S. (2004). An introduction to systemic functional grammar. 2nd edition. London/ New York: Continuum.
20. Eggins, S., Martin, J.R., & Wignell, P. (1993). The discourse of history: distancing the recoverable past. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register analysis: Theory and practice (pp. 75-109). London: Pinter.
21. Escobar, C. & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2004). Teacher education for the implementation of a Content and Language Integrating Learning approach (CLIL) in the school system. In R. Wilkinson (Ed.), Integrating content and language: Meeting the challenge of a multilingual higher education (pp. 402-15). Maastricht: Maastricht University Press.
22. Eurydice (2006). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/education/eurydice/thematic_studies_archives_en.php#2006 (April 2011).
23. Fang, Z., Schleppegrell, M.J., & Cox, B.E. (2006). Understanding the language demands of schooling: Nouns in academic registers. Journal of Literacy Research, 38, 247-73.
24. Favart, M. (2005). Les marques decohésion: leur rôle fonctionnel dans l'acquisition dela production écrite detexte [Cohesion markers: Their functional role in the acquisition of written text production]. Psychologie française, 50, 305-22.
25. Gallagher, C. & McCabe, A. (2001). Academic register and the nominal group. Language Research Bulletin, 16, 53-67.
26. Haan, P. de(1994). The noun phrase in English: Its structure and variability. Anglistik & Englischunterricht, 29, 85-106.
27. Halliday, M.A.K. (1989). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. First published by Deacon University Press (1985).
28. Halliday, M.A.K. (1996). Literacy and linguistics: A functional perspective. In R. Hasan & G. Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society (pp. 339-71). London: Longman.
29. Halliday, M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
30. Halliday, M.A.K. & Martin, J.R. (Eds.) (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.
31. Hasan, R. & Williams, G. (Eds.) (1996). Literacy in society. London: Longman.
32. Heine, L. (2010). Problem solving in a foreign language: A study in content and language integrated learning. Sola studies on second language acquisition. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
33. IGCSE mark schemes and examiner report (2008). Available online. Retrieved from: http://www.cie.org.uk/qualifications/academic/middlesec/igcse/subject?assdef_id=864 (April 2011).
34. Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 30-41.
35. Lasagabaster, D. & Sierra, J.M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64, 367-75.
36. Llinares, A. (2007). Classroom bilingualism at the preschool level: towards a more natural EFL context. In C. Pérez Vidal, M. Juan-Garau, & A. Bel (Eds.), A portrait of the young in multilingual Spain (pp. 85-199). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
37. Llinares, A. & Whittaker, R. (2006). Linguistic analysis of secondary school students' oral and written production in CLIL contexts: Studying social science in English. Vienna English Working Papers, 15, 28-32.
38. Llinares, A. & Whittaker, R. (2010). Writing and speaking in the history class: Data from CLIL and first language contexts. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 125-44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
39. Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
40. Manchón, R., Roca deLarios, J., & Murphy, L. (2009). The temporal dimension and problem-solving nature of foreign language composing processes: Implications for theory. In R. Manchón (Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching and research (pp.102-29). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
41. Marshall, S. (2006). Guiding senior secondary students towards writing academically valued responses to poetry. In R. Whittaker, M. O'Donnell, & A. McCabe (Eds.) Language and literacy: Functional approaches (pp. 249-65). London: Continuum.
42. Martin, J.R. (1992). Nominalization in science and humanities: Distilling knowledge and scaffolding text. In E. Ventola (Ed.), Functional and systemic linguistics (pp. 307-37). Berlin: Mouton deGruyter.
43. Martin, J.R. & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse. London: Continuum.
44. Martin, J.R. & Veel, R. (Eds.) (1998). Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. London: Routledge.
45. Martín-Úriz, A., Blanco, S., Hidalgo, L., & Whittaker, R. (2005). Desarrollo y complejidad del sintagma nominal en composiciones en lengua inglesa deestudiantes debachillerato [Development and complexity of the nominal group in compositions in English by secondary school students]. In A. Martín-Úriz & R. Whittaker (Eds.), La Composición como comunicación: una experiencia en las aulas delengua inglesa en bachillerato [Composition as communication: An experience in secondary school English classes] (pp. 99-114). Madrid: Ediciones dela Universidad Autónoma deMadrid.
46. Matthiessen, M.I.M. (2009). Meaning in the making: Meaning potential emerging from acts of meaning. Language Learning, 59 (Supplement1), 206-29.
47. McCabe, A. & Gallagher, C. (2008). The role of the nominal group in undergraduate academic writing. In C. Jones & E. Ventola (Eds.), New developments in the study of ideational meaning: From language to multimodality (pp. 189-208). London: Equinox.
48. Moore, N. (2008) Bridging the metafunctions: Tracking participants through taxonomies. In C. Jones. & E. Ventola (Eds.), New developments in the study of ideational meaning: From language to multimodality (pp. 189-29). London: Equinox.
49. Murphy, T. (2001). The emergence of texture: An analysis of the functions of the nominal demonstratives in an English interlanguage corpus. Language Learning and Technology, 5, 152-73. Retrieved from: http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num3/pdf/murphy.pdf (March 2011).
50. Perera, K. (1984). Children's writing and reading: Analysing classroom language. Oxford/New York: Blackwell.
51. Piriyasilpa, Y. (2009). Genre and discourse in online discussions: A study of online discussion postings in a Thai EFL writing course. Unpublished PhD thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.
52. Ruiz deZarobe, Y. (2010). Written production and CLIL: An empirical study. In C. Dalton Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 191-210). AALS Series. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
53. Ryshina-Pankova, M. (2006). Creating textual worlds in advanced learner writing: The role of complex theme. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning (pp. 164-83). London: Continuum.
54. Schleppegrell, M.J. (2004). The language of schooling. Norwood, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
55. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In Cook, G. & Seidlhofer, B. (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honor of H.G. Widdowson (pp. 125-44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
56. Unsworth, L. (1999). Developing critical understanding of the specialised language of school science and history texts: A functional grammatical perspective. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 508-21.
57. Unsworth, L. (2000). Researching language in schools and communities: Functional linguistic perspectives. London: Continuum.
58. Veel, R. & Coffin, C. (1996). Learning to think like an historian: The language of secondary school history. In R. Hasan & G. Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society (pp. 191-231). London: Longman.
59. Weissberg, R. (2006). Connecting speaking and writing in second language writing instruction. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
60. Whittaker, R., O'Donnell, M., & McCabe, A. (2006). Language and literacy: Functional approaches. London: Continuum.
61. Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H-Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy and complexity. Honolulu, HI: SLTCC, University of Hawaii.