Clil free essay sample

These weak points have caused the search for a new approach. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is the new approach that tries to provide innovative solutions to the current problems language teaching approaches face. The purpose of this assignment is to analyse if CLIL can be considered the approach for the future. This analysis will consist of the following sections. The first section looks at the definition of CLIL. Section 2 deals with the context where CLIL takes place that is an international and a local perspective. The third looks at the problems for implementing this approach in our context: Peru. Section 4 looks at the advantages of CLIL. Finally, some conclusions about the CLIL’s situation for the future will be provided. According to David Graddol in Ball (2012, p. 17), CLIL is â€Å"an approach to bilingual education in which both curriculum content and English are taught together. It differs from simple English-medium education in that the learner is not necessarily expected to have the English proficiency required to cope with the subject before beginning study. Graddol states that the focus on learning is on the content (subjects such as history or science) as well as English which is considered a vehicle for learning content. He also emphasizes the fact that students do not need to be language proficient to learn the content because they will pick up the language when studying the subject in a meaningful, contextualized and natural way. We consider that by learning language through content, students will benefit as they do not have to worry consciously about the structures and grammar. Sometimes being too aware of structures can demotivate students. In this way, CLIL offers a new way of learning English through content; however we believe it is important to consider the context where it takes place because it will have an impact on how successful students will be at learning the foreign language. For the purpose of this assignment, we have considered 2 contexts: the international context focusing especially on the European Union (EU) and our country: Peru. We believe that the EU is the ideal place for CLIL for its linguistic policy, the exposure to English and socioeconomics and geographical features. In 1995, a new linguistic policy based on plurilingualism was adopted. All European citizens should speak 2 foreign languages by the time they finish their compulsory studies. (Ball: 2012). This policy caused the improvement of foreign language teaching and methods. In such a context, students are encouraged to study foreign languages by the State which also worries about the methods used and the teachers’ training. In addition to the linguistic policy, students are exposed to English everywhere: in the streets, in the schools, etc, which helps them not only reinforce what they are learning at school but also learn new language features. Finally, the EU is a context where all countries are closely connected by geography and economics. In a context like this, students and teachers feel comfortable using CLIL because they have the necessary tools to take advantage of this new approach: easy access to the language everywhere and the linguistic policy which fosters learning foreign languages. We believe that the State plays an important role when implementing this new linguistic policy as it provides the necessary resources for its implementation such as teachers’ training as well as the funding. In the EU, CLIL can work well and can be considered the future for the future mainly because of its linguistic policy. Whereas plurilingualism is fostered in the EU, the reality in Peru about linguistic policy is completely different. In Peru, there is an enormous difference in the quality of education between the public and private schools. In the former, it is mandatory to teach English only 2 hours per week in the high school whereas in the latter, students are exposed to more than 2 hours per week and in some cases, the schools are bilingual. In addition to the difference of teaching hours, there is also a huge difference in other topics such as materials, infrastructure, methodology, teachers’ proficiency and training, teachers’ salary among others. These differences have an impact on students’ learning. While the implementation of CLIL in the EU is imminent, there are some issues to consider regarding Peruvian educational context. First, culture is an important issue to contemplate. We agree with the idea that there? s a cultural bias in every culture. There are some expressions in the L2 that can be a barrier in the process of teaching or learning as they cannot be translated easily into the other language. There are cultural aspects in both languages that can be problematic to define or comprehend due to subjective and contextual interpretations. For that reason, some people think that teaching a subject through an L2 language that has its own cultural baggage is unnatural and that it may influence students’ national identity; it may change their attitudes and ways of thinking. An example of this could be teaching Peruvian History in English. There is another issue to be mentioned and it refers to this idea found in the European Commission Survey â€Å"Eurydice† (2006) in Ball (2012:34) that says that â€Å"any subject may be chosen for CLIL from among those on offer, meaning that in theory, no subject on the standard curriculum is considered inappropriate or unworkable†. We think that â€Å"in theory†, it is possible to believe that all subjects can be taught through CLIL; however, some of them are too linguistically limited and don’t allow students to express themselves as critically as other subjects do. Therefore, the number of vocabulary and of structures learned by the students will be limited as well. Science based subjects like Chemistry; Physics and Biology are poorer in language than social sciences like History, Geography and literature. Social sciences offer a variety of opportunities for communicative activities that promote analysis and critical thinking. These subjects offer a wide array of contextualized language. In CLIL, the content of subjects should show thematic continuity and conceptual sequencing. The next issue we should think about is the CLIL teacher. There is a controversy on deciding which teachers are the best for teaching CLIL. Is it the subject teacher or the language teacher? One of the main problems of CLIL is that language teachers lack knowledge on the subjects while subject teachers have minimal knowledge of foreign languages. Probably in some ‘English-rich’ sociolinguistic contexts the best answer will be the subject teacher. As being exposed to the target language daily, not only the teachers, but also the students will feel more confident and comfortable with the use of CLIL in the class. But even in these cases that can sound easier and more accessible, proper CLIL training is the key to achieve the goals and objectives required for the subject. In Europe some CLIL training programs are being implemented, there are few specifically designed teacher training programs and not many can have access to them. Unlike the European context, most Peruvian subject teachers lack proficiency or have little knowledge about English, which prevents them to become CLIL teachers. How about language teachers? Can they teach CLIL? Again, proper training is the answer. In Peru, CLIL programs are commonly taught by non-native subject teachers or by language teachers. Most English teachers who work in public schools are not proficient English speakers. In order to overcome this situation, we believe teachers should be given regular opportunities to maintain and improve their English skills. Because the methodology, techniques, materials and task design used in CLIL are new to teachers, they may feel reluctant to try a new teaching approach. We should also consider parents ‘opinions; they may not feel comfortable having an English teacher teaching History or Geography as those subjects are not the area of expertise of a language teacher (Ball, 2012). To solve these inconveniences, compulsory training must be provided. Teachers need to be trained in how CLIL works, in its basic principles (The Holy Trinity), the correct use and design of materials, and proper assessment. According to Ball and Lindsay (2010), this training should take place at the beginning of the academic year to give teachers a general background of the methods and materials to be used during the academic year. During the meetings in the academic year, teachers will observe a class so that they can observe a specific technique and discuss about it. Teachers will also be observed and they will receive appropriate feedback to improve their teaching. Another way of training teachers is the use of ‘adjunct courses’ where there is cooperation between departments. Language and subject teachers develop good practices by working together to build the content and the language to be studied. In addition to training, finding the right materials is another problem CLIL teachers face. Educational books are designed for specific contexts. Many subjects, like the social sciences and the arts, require cultural content which relates directly to the local context. Many language teachers worry about using CLIL materials because they feel they do not have the background knowledge of the subject, and even though the material is only a vehicle for the language, it has to be interesting and relevant to students. As there are not many materials available to teach and there isn’t a book specifically designed to suit each country and each subject according to a precise curricula and culture, teachers have to adapt their own materials that can enhance students’ learning by promoting critical thinking and analysis and enable them to develop their high order skills. Ball (2012) emphasizes learning needs to be significant; people learn languages more efficiently and faster when the materials being used are engaging and authentic. These materials should reflect their environment, their culture and context. This is natural language development which builds on other forms of learning. If the students are involved, then the discussion constitutes real communication. Within this process the language used (functional and topical) will automatically be relevant. Also, there even seems to be a problem to develop materials that can foster the two types of language highlighted by Cummins (1979): BICS or ‘Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills† which is the language required to interact socially with other people, and CALP or ‘Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency’ which is the formal academic learning using the subject content material and considering the four language skills (reading, listening, speaking and writing). BICS are usually neglected by teachers. BICS refer to the day-to-day language needed to interact socially with other people, and both are equally important. Learners require knowing and developing these skills, so they can engage themselves in meaningful interactions. In order to avoid this to happen effective training is the key to succeed in the use of CLIL. In CLIL, more emphasis is put on meaning rather than on form. The possibilities of creating exclusive material in our context would imply time and money. It could be a great solution, but only thinking in the very long term. One of the main problems in CLIL is the assessment. It has to be fair and objective, and what will the teacher grade? CLIL is a content-based approach in which learners use the language as a tool for learning, so the focus is on the content and how the students were able to grasp that content using high order skills. The teacher is being fair when assessing the understanding on the content applied to different contexts and pays less attention to the cognitive language level of the students. The language is assessed as the vehicle for expressing the conceptual material. In the case of soft CLIL, the objectives are still based on the content, so we believe that students will be assessed in both language and content, but content will still be the main focus. Furthermore, we believe that in every subject taught in CLIL, BICS and CALP should be given equal importance, teachers should assess both of them. In spite of these difficulties for implementing CLIL in Peru, this new approach does have positive aspects to offer. First of all, CLIL promotes the â€Å"Holy Trinity† that is content, procedure and lexis and structures are integrated and equally important in the learning process. In a task, students work on these 3 aspects in a natural and meaningful way. Students are engaged in the learning process as they are working on a process-led task which makes them responsible of their own learning process. While they are discovering by their own, they are learning content using specific structures and lexis. This new approach of learning will benefit students as they do not have to be too conscious and worried about the language. Ball (2012, p. 57) states that â€Å"the language is not the objective. It does not subordinate the thematic content†. CLIL can help especially some Peruvian students who are too consciously aware of structures which prevent them from learning meaningfully. Moreover, pre-teaching language will not be necessary as the language occurs in its conceptual and functional context promoting inference among students. As CLIL gives students the opportunity to be in charge of their own learning process, it promotes the use of high order skills. According to Ball (2012), when students make use of high order skills such as comparing, criticizing, analyzing, differentiating among others, it is more likely that learning is significant and as consequence students will learn. For this reason, it is important the use of materials which contain process-oriented tasks as they engage students in learning. We believe that CLIL will help Peruvian students to develop and improve their cognitive skills as they are used to memorizing, recognizing, ordering and listing which are low order skills. In this way, CLIL will not only help students become English proficient but it will also help them to become more cognitive skillful in general. Students make use of low order skills mainly due to the use of the traditional grammatical syllabus which is synthetic. Unlike the synthetic syllabus which is based on the analysis of the language to be learned, CLIL is based on the analysis of the learning process. According to Ball (2012), in this new approach, learners are exposed to the language holistically so that the learners will assimilate the input while doing the task and develop an implicit knowledge of rules. As a consequence, students will discover by themselves and will not become too dependent on the teacher’s explanation of grammatical rules as they will learn them implicitly while being exposed to the language and doing the tasks. Another important advantage of using CLIL is the increase of exposure to English. In Peru, English is considered a foreign language so students do not have much exposure except in the classrooms. As it has been mentioned, the hours of English per week in public schools are reduced to a minimum of 2 hours. While in private schools, it can vary depending on the quality of education provided by the school. For this reason, it is important that students are exposed to English in many situations as possible in the school. Using CLIL will not only help solve the problem of lack of exposure but it will also help solve the curriculum constraints. These 2 problems are closely related as there are too many subjects to teach, English suffers a minor presence in the curriculum which is especially the case in public schools. We believe that the ideal subject to introduce CLIL in the school is Computing as students are accustomed to using computers every day, they are familiar with its language which includes many English words. Computing will introduce the students and teachers to the CLIL world smoothly. While students get used to it, teachers can receive appropriate training so that they can teach other subjects in English. To sum up, after having discussed the weaknesses and strengths of this new approach, we do not think that a strong version of CLIL will be the approach for the future in our context; however, a weak version of this approach will be more feasible. In order to succeed, CLIL should be language driven-oriented as students need to develop their content and social skills. We consider that a weak form of CLIL is the best option for our country based on its reduced exposure to the foreign language, difficulties in the educational system and lack of teachers’ training. In order to implement it, we believe that communication among the different areas is essential so that planning of the curriculum is integrated and meaningful for students. In the future, it is likely that this version of CLIL would not be so weak, but training and educational reform are strongly needed so that there would not be much difference regarding the quality of education between the public and the private school. A good CLIL teacher should be competent in the target language as well as in the subject to be taught. Materials also play an important role as they should reflect the students’ context and needs. We believe that CLIL provides certain qualities that prepare students for globalization such as improving language competence, raising awareness of L1 and L2, promoting intercultural knowledge and understanding and increasing learners’ motivation which will prepare students for their future studies and working life. Finally, we expect CLIL to consolidate as the new approach for the future as it considers English a â€Å"core skill†, which is the current way to perceive English. Bibliography BALL, P (Eds) (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning. FUNIBER. BALL, P LINDSAY, D. (2010). CLIL in Spain. Teacher training for CLIL.