Integration in CLIL: a proposal to inform research and successful pedagogy

Language, Culture and Curriculum

Volumn 28, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 58-73

  Llinares, Ana ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

integration; interaction; subject literacies; systemic functional linguistics

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937239011     PISSN: 07908318     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000925     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. B.Bernstein, (1990). The structure of pedagogic discourse. London: Routledge.
2. S.Breidbach,, G.Bach,, & D.Wolff, (Eds.). (2002). Bilingualer Sachfachunterrricht: Didaktik, Lehrer-/ Lernerforschung und Bildungspolitik zwischen Theorie und Empirie. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
3. L.Cammarata,, & D.Tedick, (2012). Balancing content and language in instruction: The experience of immersion teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251–269.doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01330.x
4. J.Cenoz,, F.Genesee,, & D.Gorter, (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262.doi:10.1093/applin/amt011
5. J.Cenoz,, & D.Gorter, (2011). Focus on multilingualism: A study of trilingual writing. The Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 356–369.doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01206.x
6. F.Christie, (2002). Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. London: Continuum.
7. F.Christie,, & J.R.Martin, (Eds.). (1997). Genre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school. London: Cassell.
8. C.Coffin, (2006). Historical discourse. London: Continuum.
9. B.Cope,, & M.Kalantzis, (1993). The powers of literacy. A genre approach to teaching writing. London: Falmer.
10. D.Coyle,, P.Hood,, & D.Marsh, (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. C.Dalton-Puffer, (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
12. C.Dalton-Puffer, (2008). Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W.Delanoy & L.Volkmann (Eds.), Future perspectives for English language teaching (pp. 139–157). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
13. C.Dalton-Puffer,, A.Llinares,, F.Lorenzo,, & T.Nikula, (2014). “You can stand under my umbrella”: Immersion, CLIL and bilingual education. A response to Cenoz, Genesee & Gorter (2013). Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 213–218.doi:10.1093/applin/amu010
14. C.Dalton-Puffer,, & T.Nikula, (2006). Pragmatics of content-based instruction: Teacher and student directives in Finnish and Austrian classrooms. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27, 241–267.doi:10.1093/applin/aml007
15. C.Dalton-Puffer,, T.Nikula,, & U.Smit, (2010). Charting policies, premises and research on content and language integrated learning. In C.Dalton-Puffer, T.Nikula, & U.Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 1–19). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
16. C.Dalton-Puffer,, & U.Smit, (2007). Introduction. In C.Dalton-Puffer & U.Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (pp. 7–23). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
17. B.Derewianka, (2007). Using appraisal theory to track interpersonal development in adolescent student writing. In A.McCabe, M.O'Donnell, & R.Whittaker (Eds.), Advances in language and education (pp. 166–168). London: Continuum.
18. A.Doiz,, D.Lasagabaster,, & J.M.Sierra, (2014). CLIL and motivation: The effect of individual and contextual variables. Language Learning Journal, 42, 209–224.doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.889508
19. S.Eggins,, & D.Slade, (1997). Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell.
20. R.Ellis, (2003). Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. European Commission. (1995). White paper on education and training: Teaching and learning. Towards the learning society. http://europa.eu/documents/comm/white_papers/pdf/com95_590_en.pdf
22. J.R.Firth, (1957). Papers in linguistics, 1934–1951. London: Oxford University Press.
23. F.Gallardo del Puerto,, E.Gómez Lacabex,, & M.L.García Lecumberri, (2009). Testing the effectiveness of CLIL in foreign language contexts: The assessment of English pronunciation. In Y.Ruiz de Zarobe & R.M.Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 63–80). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
24. M.P.García Mayo, (Ed.). (in press). Learning language and content through tasks: Exploring the interfaces [Special issue]. System.
25. M.A.K.Halliday, (1989). Spoken and written language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. M.A.K.Halliday, (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5, 93–116.doi: 10.1016/0898-5898(93)90026-7
27. M.A.K.Halliday, (1994/2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
28. M.Haneda,, & G.Wells, (2008). Learning an additional language through dialogic inquiry. Language and Education, 22, 114–136.doi:10.2167/le730.0
29. R.Hasan, (1996). Ways of saying: Ways of meaning. London: Cassell.
30. J.C.Hüttner,, C.Dalton-Puffer,, & U.Smit, (2013). The power of beliefs: Lay theories and their influence on the implementation of CLIL programmes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16, 267–284.doi:10.1080/13670050.2013.777385
31. A.K.Jäppinen, (2005). Thinking and content learning of mathematics and science as cognitional development of mathematics and science in the Finnish mainstream education in content and language integrated learning (CLIL)-teaching through a foreign language. Language and Education, 19(2), 147–168.doi:10.1080/09500780508668671
32. J.P.Lantolf, (2000). Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33. A.Llinares,, & C.Dalton-Puffer, (in press). The role of different tasks in CLIL students’ use of evaluative language. System.
34. A.Llinares,, & T.Morton, (2010). Historical explanations as situated practice in content and language integrated learning. Classroom Discourse, 1(1), 46–65.doi:10.1080/19463011003750681
35. A.Llinares,, T.Morton,, & R.Whittaker, (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. A.Llinares,, & T.Nikula, (in press). Teacher-student co-construction of evaluative practices in CLIL: Integrating SFL and pragmatic approaches. In T.Nikula, E.Dafouz, P.Moore, & U.Smit (Eds.), Charting integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
37. A.Llinares,, & I.Pascual, (2015). A genre approach to the effect of academic questions on CLIL students’ language production. Language and Education, 29, 15–30.doi:10.1080/09500782.2014.924964
38. A.Llinares,, & R.Whittaker, (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. 125–144). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
39. F.Lorenzo, (2013). Genre-based curricula: Multilingual academic literacy in content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 375–388.doi:10.1080/13670050.2013.777391
40. F.Lorenzo,, S.Casal,, & P.Moore, (2010). The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 418–442.doi:10.1093/applin/amp041
41. R.Lyster, (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
42. R.Lyster,, & S.G.Ballinger, (2011). Content-based language teaching: Convergent concerns across divergent contexts. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 279–288.doi:10.1177/1362168811401150doi: 10.1177/1362168811401149
43. D.Marsh,, & G.Langé, (Eds.) (1999). Implementing content and language integrated learning. A research-driven TIE-CLIL foundation course reader. Jyväskylä: Continuing Education Centre, University of Jyväskylä.
44. J.R.Martin, (1989). Factual writing: Exploring and challenging reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
45. J.R.Martin,, & P.R.R.White, (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
46. R.J.Marzano, (2010). Formative assessment & standards-based grading. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
47. U.Massler,, D.Stotz,, & C.Queisser, (2014) Assessment instruments for primary CLIL: The conceptualization and evaluation of test tasks. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 137–150.doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.891371
48. A.McCabe,, & R.Whittaker, (in press). Genre and appraisal in CLIL history texts: Developing the voice of the historian. In A.Llinares & T.Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL: A space for dialogue. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
49. J.Moate, (2010). The integrated nature of CLIL: A sociocultural perspective. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(3). Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/13/article4.html
50. T.Morton, (2010). Using a genre-based approach to integrating content and language in CLIL: The example of secondary history. In C.Dalton-Puffer, T.Nikula, & U.Smit (Eds.), Language use in content-and-language integrated learning (CLIL) (pp. 81–104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
51. T.Nikula, (2007). The IRF pattern and space for interaction: Observations on EFL and CLIL classrooms. In C.Dalton-Puffer & U.Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (pp. 179–204). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
52. T.Nikula, (2008). Learning pragmatics in content-based classrooms. In E.Alcón & A.Martínez-Flor (Eds.), Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching, and testing (pp. 94–113). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
53. T.Nikula,, C.Dalton-Puffer,, & A.Llinares, (2013). European research on CLIL classroom discourse. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 70–100.doi:10.1075/jicb.1.1.04nik
54. A.Pastrana,, I.Pascual,, & A.Llinares, (in press). Students’ meaningful co-construction of knowledge in CLIL classrooms: A comparison of CLIL and L1 settings. In M.Sato & S.G.Ballinger (Eds.), Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
55. Y.Ruiz de Zarobe, (2011). Which language competencies benefit from CLIL? An insight into applied linguistics research. In Y.Ruiz de Zarobe, J.M.Sierra, & F.Gallardo del Puerto (Eds.), Content and foreign language integrated learning: Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp. 129–154). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
56. Y.Ruiz de Zarobe,, & M.Jiménez Catalán, (Eds.). (2009). Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
57. J.Seikkula-Leino, (2007). CLIL learning: Achievement level and affective factors. Language and Education, 21, 328–341.doi:10.2167/le635.0
58. T.Somers,, & J.Surmont, (2012). CLIL and immersion: How clear-cut are they? ELT Journal, 66(1), 113–116.doi:10.1093/elt/ccr079
59. L.K.Sylvén, (2004). Teaching English or English teaching? On the effects of content and language integrated learning on Swedish learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition (PhD dissertation). University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg.
60. I.Villarreal,, & M.P.García Mayo, (2009). Tense and agreement morphology in the interlanguage of Basque/Spanish bilinguals. In Y.Ruiz de Zarobe & R.M.Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 157–175). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
61. H.Vollmer, (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 pedagogical perspectives (pp. 225–287). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
62. G.Wells, (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a socio-cultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63. M.Wesche, (Ed.). (2001). French immersion and content-based language teaching in Canada [Special issue]. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(1), 1–8.doi: 10.3138/cmlr.58.1.1
64. R.Whittaker,, & A.Llinares, (2009). CLIL in social science classrooms: Analysis of spoken and written productions. In Y.Ruiz de Zarobe & R.M.Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning. Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 215–234). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
65. R.Whittaker,, A.Llinares,, & A.McCabe, (2011). Written discourse development in CLIL at secondary school. Language Teaching Research, 5, 343–362.