Identidad docente y formación inicial. El maestro generalista, el especialista de lengua extranjera y el maestro AICLE en un proyecto lingüístico de centro

Higher Education Perspectives on CLIL University of Vic - Central University of Catalonia Vic, 27 and 28 March 2014 http://mon.uvic.cat/hepclil

Universities are offering more and more courses and programmes in an additional language. At HEPCLIL, therefore, we would like to debate the methodological implications of these changes, giving voice to practical classroom experiences and initiatives. We would also like to act as a platform for cutting-edge research on CLIL in higher education. What impact does teaching in an additional language have on content or language learning? What are the effects on teachers and students in higher education?

Scientific committee Marcos Canovas (UVic-UCC) Llorenç Comajoan (UVic-UCC) Emma Dafouz (Complutense University of Madrid) Lucrècia Keim (UVic-UCC) Elisabet Pladevall (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) Anne Räsänen (University of Jyväskylä) Bob Wilkinson (Maastricht University)

Organising committee Sarah Khan (UVic-UCC) Núria Medina (UVic-UCC) Àngels Pinyana (UVic-UCC) Antoni Portell (CIFE, UVic-UCC) Àngel Raluy (UVic-UCC) Richard Samson (UVic-UCC) Anna Vallbona (UVic-UCC) Montse Vancells (UVic-UCC) Research Group on Learning and Communication – GRAC (UVic-UCC) Research Group on Education, Language and Literature – GRELL (UVic-UCC)

Collaborators Centre for Innovation and Training in Education – CIFE (UVic-UCC)

Papers 5. Syllabus Design 120. Content Learning 171. Language Learning 220. Assessment 242. Theoretical Framework The language of each title indicates the language used in that paper.

Syllabus Design

6. Ali-Lawson, Debra & Christine Beck (Bern University of Applied Sciences) It’s not just about English!

17. Alsina, Montserrat (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - BarcelonaTech) Asignaturas de Electrónica en la EPSEM: Planificación de la impartición en inglés 28. Mira, Sara & Fernando San José Martínez, Chiquinquirá Hontoria, Angeles Adán, María Blanco, Fernando Calderón, Victoria Carbonell, Carolina Chaya, Guillermo Fondevila, Trinidad González, Carmen Marín, Antonio Molina, David Pereira, Miguel Quemada, Luis Ricote, Leonor Rodríguez Sinobas, Rosa Sánchez Monje, Alberto Sanz Cobeña (Universidad Politécnica de Madrid) Estudio para la implantación de Programas en Inglés en los títulos de grado de la ETSI Agrónomos de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid 39. Niemelä, Nina & Heidi Jauni (Tampere University of Technology) Content and language integration as a part of a degree reform at Tampere University of Technology 54. Romero Alfaro, Elena & Francisco Zayas Martínez (Universidad de Cádiz) Identidad docente y formación inicial. El maestro generalista, el especialista de lengua extranjera y el maestro AICLE en un proyecto lingüístico de centro 67. Soler Ortínez, David & María González-Davies, Anna Iñesta Codina (University Ramon Llull) Implementing CLIL: essential factors from the perspective of leadership 84. Toffle, Mary Ellen (University of Messina) Teaching cross-cultural competence and CLIL: A CLIL approach in International Relations university courses 97. Torra, Imma & Araceli Adam (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya – BarcelonaTech), Alexandra Vraciu (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) Ian Stephens & Ian Stephens (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya- ICE) CLILing at university: Insights from the lecturer training programme at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya 109. Valdés, Laura & Mariona Espinet (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona) CLIL FAQ’s: Orientacions per a introduir l’anglès a l’aula universitària

Content Learning 121. De las Heras, F. Xavier C. & Conxita Lao, Jordi Fortuny, Montserrat Alsina (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTech) Students’ viewpoint on engineering subjects taught in English 131. Ginesta, Xavier & Emma Hitchen (University of Vic – Central University of Catalonia) Learning journalistic opinion genres using CLIL methodology 148. Marta Pey Pratdesaba (Institut Jaume Callís) The eTwinning Experience: Beyond the Classroom 159. Antonio J. Tallón-Ballesteros (University of Seville) An experience on Content and Language Integrated Learning in University lessons of Operating Systems in the Computer Science Area.

Language Learning 172. Bijeikiene, Vilma & Daiva Pundziuviene (Vytautas Magnus University) English as a medium of instruction in teaching other languages: attitudes and practices 183. Jauni, Heidi & Nina Niemelä (Tampere University of Technology) Language Learning in Task Management and Task Accomplishment 204. Pastor Cesteros, Susana & Ana María Gil del Moral (Universidad de Alicante) Investigación en docencia por contenidos (español como segunda lengua) en el proceso de internacionalización de la Universidad de Alicante

Assessment 221. Belda, Rosa Maria & Fernando Fornes, Consuelo Monerri, Sergio Nebauer, Milagros del Saz, Penny MacDonald, Debra Westall (Universitat Politècnica de València) Evaluación simultánea de las actividades de laboratorio de Biología Celular y de expresión escrita en Inglés I de alumnos de Biotecnología 232. Nalan Kenny (Freelance) Assessment in CLIL

Theoretical Framework 243. Alsina, Montserrat (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTech) Com explicar un sistema CLIL: un model dinàmic newtonià 256. Martín del Pozo, Mª Ángeles (Universidad de Valladolid) A framework for the analysis of CLIL lecturers’ discourse from a genre perspective 266. Pinyana, Àngels & Sarah Khan (Universitat de Vic – Universitat Central de Catalunya) A review of second language acquisition research in CLIL contexts in European higher education

Syllabus Design

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. It’s not just about English! Debra Ali-Lawson Lecturer in Intercultural and International Management, former Head of the International Office i Christine Beck Present Head of the International Officeii This article addresses the issues which arose when offering an undergraduate degree with English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) at the Bern University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland. It focuses on a number of challenges for three particular stakeholder groups: students, lecturers and administrative staff. In addition, it depicts how challenges in earlier phases led to adaptations of both content and the overall concept at later stages. It is a work-in-progress case study.

1.

The context

Our organization, the Fachbereich Wirtschaft (FBW), was fully integrated into Bern University of Applied Sciences (BFH) in 2005. We offer degrees in business administration and business information systems. As a member of a university of applied sciences, we had to address the challenge of achieving one of the goals set by the Federal Government, namely, to become ‘international’. At that time, we did not have a network of partner institutions with which we could engage in student and staff mobility – generally seen as one of the first stages of internationalization strategies in higher education institutions (HEI). In other words, we were starting from scratch.

Although Switzerland has a high ranking in the field of education, the question we had to address was how an institution like ours, offering a generalist degree in business administration in German could become an attractive partner for other HEIs in Europe and further afield. We realized that we had to find a way to provide sufficient modules in English, if we wanted to attract students from not only German speaking countries. As a state-funded, not-for-profit institution, we could not simply set up a new degree programme

in English, “flying in” mother-tongue lecturers and financing the undertaking through student fees. Further, our limited financial resources forced us to start small.

This article reports on the approach we adopted when we decided to introduce English as a medium of instruction (EMI), step by step, into our Bachelor in Business Administration (Bsc.BA) degree. Here, we wish to present some of the challenges we encountered and the decisions and actions we undertook to address these challenges. The report focuses on three stakeholder groups: students, staff (in particular lecturing staff) and the organizational unit, the FBW itself. Our approach is not representative of the BFH as a whole and can still be very much seen as ‘work-in-progress’.

2.

The approach taken to introduce EMI

Switzerland is clearly not the USA. Here, grand ideas and large, ambitious plans are viewed with a sense of scepticism. Therefore, it was clear to us that we could not just forge ahead and try to sell the idea of a complete degree programme in English to the decision makers. As a result, we adopted a ‘Salami tactic’ (in Swiss terms) - presenting and implementing a large programme of change in “bite-sized” slices.

We initially suggested offering 30 ECTS points in English to help us establish a network of partner universities.

then proposed increasing our offer to 60 ECTS, 30 per semester, in order to double the number of incoming students.

then suggested offering our first year students the option of completing their second and third (final) year of studies in English.

finally recommended testing the student market in Bern to discover if there were enough students interested in doing a full BSc.BA degree in English.

This whole process of incremental change took some five years and resulted in the creation of our “International Program (IP)”. The challenges we encountered and mastered in the implementation of the above stages provided supporting arguments to move on to the next stage.

The implementation of the four stages above helped us to achieve, amongst other objectives, the following four goals linked to our overall internationalization strategy:

Attract a larger number of international and exchange students to our institution, and thus provide our Swiss students with increased opportunities to develop their intercultural competency – especially those who were not able to undertake an exchange semester abroad.

Prepare students for their future professional careers in business were cross-cultural interaction is omnipresent and unavoidable and the lingua franca is English.

Provide opportunities for our teaching (and administrative) staff to develop or improve their language skills and intercultural competence.

Prepare for future demographic changes (drop in number of Swiss students) by being able to offer, in the medium term, a degree programme for an international student population (not only exchange students).

As Swiss federal constraints prevented us from establishing a completely new EMI bachelor degree, our BSc.BA IP is not a totally new degree programme. It matches the content of our BSc.BA offered in German, with minor adaptations such as new law

modules and elective specialization modules in the final level of the programme. Students completing the IP are to acquire the same knowledge, competence and skills as those taking the regular German BSc.BA degree programme. One institutional concern was that we should maintain the ‘Swissness’ of our degree, and not simply offer an ‘Anglo-Saxon’ style degree.

3.

Decisions, challenges and action taken 3.1

The first ‘slice of salami’: 30 ECTS in English

Here, the focus was on increasing student mobility. Our Head of Studies simply selected modules deemed attractive to incoming exchange students. Higher semester modules were selected and many were related to international activities such as international management or banking and finance.

However, this also obliged our Swiss-German speaking students to take the modules we had decided to offer in English, as they were, most often, mandatory modules. The lecturers delivering the selected modules could decide to either accept the decision taken or reduce their teaching load while the organization recruited new lecturers prepared to offer the course in English. They were obliged to take up the challenge of delivering their course in English. The organization as a whole, and the administration in particular, now had to interact with non-German speaking, international students, chiefly via our intranet platform, the major channel of communication between the administration and students.

To address these challenges, we first presented “the bigger picture” (i.e. the pressure to ‘internationalize’), highlighting the potential benefits for each of the stakeholder groups.

For students, this meant access to an increasingly larger network of universities as exchange semester destinations. We also emphasised the opportunity this gave our

students to maintain or even improve their English skills for when entering the job market. Third, we applied a flexible approach: if no exchange student enrolled for a particular course offered in English, then the lecturer could revert to lecturing and examining in German, even though the course materials were in English.

Similarly, in discussions with the lecturers affected by the switch to EMI, we emphasised the potential benefits of using and improving their English. A higher level of competence in English, we argued, would provide them with the skills necessary for a successful lecturing exchange or for presenting papers at international conferences so helping us to achieve our set institutional aims. The flexible approach mentioned above i.e. reverting back to German also applied for lecturers. The lecturers who were not mother-tongue English speakers also received a higher reimbursement for their EMI modules.

At an organizational level, crucial documents (information regarding examinations, enrolling for modules, transcripts of records, etc.) were selected for translation by international department staff. A “buddy system” was also introduced. This was designed not only to help incoming students to feel less isolated, but also to ensure they had someone to guide them through the intranet and translate important emails and notifications from the administration.

3.2

The second ‘slice of the salami’ – upgrading to 60 ECTS points

Increasing the EMI offer to 60 ECTS points was the next, natural step towards reaping the benefits of the initial investments made by lecturers who had agreed to deliver in EMI, as well as a payoff for the considerable investment in translation work for our administration. Lecturers were able to offer their course each semester, thus ensuring a sense of continuity and economy of delivery, because their teaching assignments in English were increased. Two groups of exchange students per year benefitted from the considerable

investments in translation and proof-reading efforts (scripts, slides, intranet platform etc.). The move also increased our attractiveness as a host destination for partner institutions, allowing us to enter into other, new partnerships.

3.3

The third ‘slice of salami’: the (partial) International Programme (IP)

Three insights supported the decision to move on to a higher level of EMI as part of our internationalization process and the start of our ‘International Programme’ (IP). First, many Swiss students did not accept that some of their mandatory modules were in English. Our argument, that EMI would benefit them later on in their professional life, did not influence them positively, as their competence in English was not adequately evident in the final transcript of their study records or diploma. The fact that they could operate adequately in English (in an academic environment) had to be made more visible to prospective employers. We had gathered evidence that offering only 60 ECTS in EMI over two semesters was not enough to attract the number of exchange students we were aiming for. This led to a decision to offer Swiss students the opportunity to decide, after their assessment level, when they had received confirmation that they would have no problems succeeding academically, to take on the additional challenge to continue their degree course completely in English. This was to be clearly recorded in the final diplomas with the introduction of the degree programme title: BSc in Business Administration – International Program.

We were then challenged by the fact that students opting for the IP expected their lecturers to have almost English mother-tongue proficiency. Some students who had experienced the IP staff lecturing in German in earlier semesters compared their teaching ‘style’, fluency, use of humour etc. in both programmes. They noticed and commented on the fact that the lecturers’ performance was ‘weaker’ in the EMI programme.

As mentioned above, the IP was not a new degree, but a replica of our BSc.BA in German. This allowed lecturers who were not happy with the changes being made, and who had reluctantly joined the EMI programme, to use this argument to continue using the Swiss/German textbooks and case studies already in use. They required that these texts be translated into English. As they had taken on the extra challenge of teaching in English, they wanted to reduce any extra work needed, for example, to accommodate the introduction of new course readers or case studies.

At an organizational level, critical comments were heard from administration and lecturing staff regarding the amount of money and effort being invested to communicate with a mere 20+ international students. These observations can be seen in the context of comparing the number of non-German speaking students with the 1,000 strong German speaking student community. A constant dialogue with individuals was necessary to explain the medium and long-term benefits an EMI program would have for the organization. One example given was how the research department benefitted from having an English language version of our intranet which allowed research staff to better engage with international partners on research projects. Another argument used related to the fact that we needed to be ready to attract more international students when the number of Swiss students dropped due to demographic developments. Interestingly enough, once our intranet was made available in English, there was an unwritten rule that all future communication from the administration to the students had to be effected in English, too. It was greatly encouraging to see how many administrative assistants rose to the challenge and applied their skills in English.

3.4

The fourth ‘slice of salami’: The complete BSc.BA programme in English

Stage 4 of the EMI implementation programme began in 2011, when the FBW decided to offer their BSc.BA course in English, provoked chiefly by difficulties experienced in achieving the goal of maintaining a balanced ratio of international and Swiss students in the IP. Many international applications had to be declined, as the 60 ECTS points they had been awarded by their former university towards their FBW studies could not be recognised. One reason for this was that their university they had previously visited was not on the Swiss list of accredited institutions. A further reason was that they had not taken modules considered by the FBW as fundamental for further studies in our degree programme. In addition, we perceived a growing interest amongst Swiss students to do their complete degree course in English. Other opportunities, such as developing jointdegree programmes, supported this move.

We now had IP classes comprising Swiss students, international students enrolled for the whole degree course, as well as exchange students entering each semester. These groups varied greatly with regard to motivation, the functioning of project teams and the importance of adhering to deadlines, to mention but a few of the new parameters. Basically, we had a group of students who wished to study in English, but who lacked a common understanding of what this entailed. Even though language was sometimes an important issue, the bigger issue was dealing with the different mind-sets of the disparate groups.

With our limited resources we focused on sensitizing incoming exchange students, during our Welcome Week, to the issue of cultural differences. In the autumn semesters, the fullprogramme international and Swiss students participated in this event prior to the commencement of their first IP semester. All were given study guides on how our

organization functioned, as well as input sessions on ‘Swiss culture’. Their Swiss peers gave talks about how they worked and what was important to them in their studies. Higher semester international and exchange students in their second semester were called upon to talk about the challenges they experienced and gave tips about how to study and behave in Bern. When Swiss student groups complained during the semester about problems working with their international/exchange students, for example on projects, we emphasised that an integral aspect of the IP was to learn how to deal with associates from other cultures and that the IP provided them with hands-on experience which would benefit them later on in their profes

Despite the fact that new lecturers with the required English skills were being recruited for our IP, we soon realized that good skills in English do not guarantee good lessons. Even though many of our lecturers hold or have held managerial positions where English was the lingua franca, they were nonetheless challenged when trying to transfer this experience into the classroom setting. Their HE didactic courses rarely addressed the impact which culture has in the classroom and, as a result, they were ill-prepared for some of the problems confronting them and their student groups inherent in cultural differences.

As a result, intercultural coaching sessions, focusing on how culture impacts on the classroom environment, were offered. As attendance is currently not mandatory for IP lecturers, only those lecturers who perceive this issue as a problem participate, whilst those sorely in need of the insights to be gained are largely unaware of the cause of some of their problems and stay away. In addition to the in-house courses offered, intensive language courses in an English-speaking environment together with lecturers from universities in Spain, Austria and Italy are organised in cooperation with the University de Leon, Spain. This offer has enabled our teaching staff the possibility to discuss issues

related to EMI at HEI with peers. It has also functioned as a great confidence booster with regard to their English skills.

A further strategy employed was to encourage lecturer mobility in order to give staff more experience in teaching in another culture and the possibility to discuss didactics and EMI matters with colleagues abroad.

At an organizational level we have an ongoing marketing challenge. The school management is still focused on providing mixed IP classes (ideally with a 50:50 ration of Swiss to international full programme students). However, there are not sufficient funds to promote and recruit sufficient international students, and we have not yet gained the enviable reputation which many HEI in Scandinavian countries have earned for offering EMI programmes. However, as was stated at the outset, this article is reporting on ‘work in progress’, not on a complete or ideal situation. This is where our work continues.

4.

Conclusion

We have experienced the introduction of EMI as a very demanding task, but not purely from a language perspective, even though language has played an important role in what we have reported above. We found other factors such as cultural differences, organizational limitations, as well as the mind-sets of both groups of students (Swiss and international) and of lecturers as extremely challenging. We would also like to emphasise that what we have reported on above is but a selection of some of the challenges we have experienced. The International Office of the FBW is also aware that there are still many more challenges waiting to be addressed.

We have cut up the salami and served the slices, but we are still in the process of digestion.

i [email protected]

ii [email protected]

Primer Congreso Internacional HEPCLIL (Perspectivas de Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extranjeras en la Enseñanza Superior) Asignaturas de Electrónica en la EPSEM: planificación de la impartición en inglés M. Alsina, R. Argelaguet, I. Martínez, J. Vicente Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Resumen: Al objeto de garantizar la calidad del aprendizaje de la Electrónica en los estudios de Grado impartidos en la EPSEM, es necesario planificar de manera adecuada las asignaturas impartidas en inglés. En este trabajo se muestran los resultados del análisis realizado a los estudiantes que cursarán estas asignaturas, en el que se ponen de manifiesto las dificultades observadas y las expectativas generadas, motivando la elaboración de material de soporte específico. Abstract: In order to ensure the quality of learning of Electronics for graduate studies offered at the EPSEM, it is needed to plan properly the subjects taught in English. In this paper the results of the students analysis who will attend these courses are shown. These results reveal the difficulties encountered and the expectations generated. This analysis motives the development of specific support material.

1.

Contexto

En el actual contexto de los Grados universitarios, para mejorar la competencia plurilingüe se ha optado por impartir asignaturas en inglés. En particular, el presente trabajo se sitúa en el área de la Electrónica, que juega un papel fundamental en el Grado de Ingeniería en Electrónica Industrial y Automática, y en el Grado de Ingeniería de Sistemas TIC, impartidos ambos en la Escola Politècnica Superior d’Enginyeria de Manresa (EPSEM).

Para situarnos en el contexto de los grados de la EPSEM, en la figura 1, pueden observarse las asignaturas básicas del área de Electrónica, clasificadas según el grado del que forman parte. Por un lado, la asignatura de Sistemas Electrónicos, que es común a los cuatro grados de la rama industrial; por otro lado, las asignaturas de Sistemas Digitales y Sistemas Analógicos, impartidas en el Grado de Ingeniería de Sistemas TIC. Además se imparten otras asignaturas de especialización en electrónica en el grado específico de Ingeniería en Electrónica Industrial y Automática.

SISTEMAS

GRADOS DE INGENIERÍA INDUSTRIAL:

ELECTRÓNICOS (2º curso)

Asignatura común grados

• Grado en Ingeniería Eléctrica • Grado en Ingeniería Electrónica Industrial y Automática • •

SISTEMAS DIGITALES (1º curso)

Grado en Ingeniería Mecánica Grado en Ingeniería Química

GRADO en INGENIERÍA de SISTEMAS TIC

SISTEMAS ANALÓGICOS (2º curso)

Asignaturas de especialización (3º i 4º curso)

Fig. 1. Asignaturas básicas de Electrónica en la EPSEM.

La motivación principal es garantizar la calidad del aprendizaje del contenido de electrónica, en las asignaturas impartidas en inglés, durante los próximos cuatrimestres. Aunque ya se disponía de estudios sobre el nivel de inglés de los estudiantes que iniciaban un grado en la EPSEM (cf. Alsina, Fortuny, Giralt, 2012), dada la diversidad de grados impartidos en la misma, se ha realizado un análisis específico de los estudiantes que van a cursar estas asignaturas concretas, con el objetivo de conocer el punto de partida para conseguir un mejor desarrollo futuro de la docencia.

1.1

Punto de partida

Las hipótesis de partida determinan, por un lado, una previsión de estudiantes con un nivel de inglés bajo (cf. Alsina, Fortuny, Giralt, 2012) y, por otro, la preocupación del profesorado por mantener la calidad del aprendizaje de la Electrónica (cf. Alsina,

Argelaguet, Martínez, Vicente, 2012). Para armonizar ambos condicionantes, es necesario establecer unas determinadas pautas de trabajo.

1.2

Herramientas

Para conjugar los aspectos comentados en el párrafo anterior, es necesario realizar una buena planificación de las asignaturas, así como del material que se va a utilizar para impartirlas. Otra herramienta que ayudará a conseguir los objetivos marcados es efectuar un buen análisis de los estudiantes a los que van dirigidas estas asignaturas, para determinar no sólo su nivel de inglés sino su predisposición a seguir las asignaturas impartidas en inglés y las actividades necesarias.

2.

Método

Para realizar el análisis, se han diseñado encuestas que recogen datos sobre: nivel de inglés, aprendizaje de la lengua, aprendizaje del contenido, recursos, actividades para ser desarrolladas por los estudiantes, actividades para ser desarrolladas por el profesorado y valoración. En la figura 2, se aprecia una muestra de las encuestas, que se han administrado a los estudiantes de tercer curso (quinto cuatrimestre) y a los alumnos de cuarto curso (séptimo cuatrimestre).

Fig. 2. Encuestas administradas a los estudiantes

3.

Resultados del análisis

A modo de resumen, los resultados de las encuestas justifican fijar como objetivo inmediato la elaboración de más material de soporte, ya que más de un 60% de los encuestados cree que el hecho de que la asignatura se imparta en inglés va a dificultar el aprendizaje del contenido.

En particular, se valoran muy positivamente las propuestas de recursos referentes a vocabulario técnico del contenido de las asignaturas en catalán y en inglés.

A continuación, se desglosan los resultados obtenidos en las encuestas.

3.1

Nivel de inglés y predisposición

Se confirma que el nivel de inglés es bajo, dado que más del 60% de los encuestados no posee ningún tipo de certificado oficial que acredite el aprendizaje de un determinado

nivel de la lengua inglesa. Asimismo, más del 90% no ha realizado ningún tipo de inmersión lingüística en inglés.

Sin embargo, más de un 75% de los estudiantes encuestados tiene buena predisposición a cursar asignaturas en inglés, ya que piensa que es beneficioso para su formación.

3.2

Aprendizaje del inglés

Respecto a las bondades de realizar asignaturas en inglés, más del 70% cree que mejorará la comprensión en esta lengua.

La figura 3, pone de manifiesto que, en cuanto a los aspectos que piensan que van a mejorar al estudiar asignaturas impartidas en ingles destacan: la mejora del vocabulario técnico, el aumento de la naturalidad al escuchar el inglés y una mayor habilidad para buscar información en lengua inglesa.

Aspectos a mejorar Vocabulario técnico Perder el miedo a hablarlo Más natural al escuchar Habilidad para buscar info en inglés Otros

Fig. 3. Aspectos lingüísticos que van a mejorar

3.3

Aprendizaje del contenido

En este apartado, más del 65% de los estudiantes encuestados cree que la impartición de las asignaturas en lengua inglesa va a dificultar el aprendizaje del contenido.

Dificultades para aprender el contenido SI, vocabulario demasiado diferente SI, el professorado explica peor SI, tenemos un nivel de inglés bajo SI, supodrá demasiado esfuerzo NO, misma dificultad NO, motiva más aprender contenido en inglés NO, oportunidad para practicar y mejorar inglés

Fig. 4. Dificultades para aprender el contenido

La figura 4, ilustra un resumen de las dificultades que prevén encontrar los estudiantes, entre ellas destacan: el bajo nivel de inglés de los propios estudiantes, que el profesorado explicará peor el contenido de la asignatura al hacerlo en una lengua que no le es propia y que supondrá un esfuerzo excesivo para los mismos estudiantes.

El resto de los encuestados opina que la dificultad para el aprendizaje del contenido será la misma y que aprender en lengua inglesa es una oportunidad que motiva y favorece el aprendizaje.

3.4

Recursos propuestos

Las encuestas contenían también un apartado para que los estudiantes valoraran explícitamente los recursos de soporte al aprendizaje.

Según los estudiantes encuestados, entre los recursos más útiles para mejorar el rendimiento destacan las listas de vocabulario técnico, con los porcentajes de valoración que se observan en la figura 5.

Listas vocabulario específico catalán-inglés 80% 60% Estudiantes Q5

40%

Estudiantes Q7 20% 0% Mucho

Bastante

Poco

Nada

Fig. 5. Valoración de las listas de vocabulario técnico específico

Así mismo, en las figuras 6 y 7, puede apreciarse el nivel de importancia que los estudiantes conceden a la utilización de material audiovisual y material complementario, respectivamente, como soporte para mejorar en el aprendizaje del contenido.

Fig. 6. Valoración de la utilización de material audiovisual

¿Ayuda el material de soporte complementario al contenido? 80% 60% Estudiantes Q5

40%

Estudiantes Q7 20% 0% Mucho

Bastante

Poco

Nada

Fig. 7. Valoración de la utilización de material complementario

La figura 8, ilustra la valoración de los estudiantes respecto a la idea de que las actividades obligatorias favorecen el aprendizaje de la lengua inglesa. La comparación entre los estudiantes de quinto y séptimo cuatrimestre pone de manifiesto que en el curso inferior predomina esta idea.

¿Ayudan las actividades obligatorias para practicar inglés? 60% 40% Estudiantes Q5 Estudiantes Q7

20% 0% Mucho Bastante Poco

Nada

Otros

Fig. 8. Valoración de la importancia de actividades obligatorias

4.

Aplicaciones y conclusiones

Los resultados obtenidos en las encuestas han motivado al profesorado a desarrollar nuevo material didáctico, para garantizar una mejor calidad de aprendizaje.

Así, se ha desarrollado material que permite visualizar e identificar, en catalán e inglés, instrumentos que se utilizan habitualmente en el Laboratorio de Electrónica.

Fig. 9. Aplicación para un generador de funciones

Por ejemplo, la figura 9 representa la aplicación para un generador de funciones, y la figura 10 muestra material elaborado para el estudio concreto del osciloscopio. La principal ventaja del uso de este tipo de material es que permite concentrarse en la parte técnica, que es la que presenta mayores dificultades para el estudiante.

Fig. 10. Aplicación para un osciloscopio

Como conclusión cabe destacar que el estudio realizado a través de las encuestas permite una planificación más adecuada de las asignaturas de electrónica que se van a

impartir. Teniendo en cuenta su nivel de inglés, es imprescindible disponer de material adicional de soporte, para garantizar un correcto aprendizaje del contenido en electrónica.

Finalmente, aparte de ofrecer al alumnado una buena oportunidad de practicar y mejorar su competencia lingüística, la experiencia ha permitido observar que el valor que el profesorado da al contenido, dada la dificultad que puede ocasionar la lengua utilizada, ha llevado a revisar y mejorar el material didáctico. En este sentido se confirma la afirmación de Ting (2011: 314): ‘CLIL…not only not immersion but also more tan the sum of its parts’.

5.

Bibliografía

Alsina, M., Fortuny, J. and Giralt, R., 2012. “Elaboració de recursos multimedia per a l’ensenyament/ aprenentatge en anglès en graus tecnològics”. Proceedings of CIDUI (Congrés Internacional de Docència Universitària i Innovació), ISBN: 978-84-695-4073-2. Alsina, M., Argelaguet, R., Martínez, I., Vicente, J., 2012. “Teaching materials for learning in English in the field of electronic”. In Innovation and Quality in Engineering Education 2012. Univ.Valladolid, DL-VA-398-2012. Ting, T., 2011. “CLIL…not only not immersion but also more tan the sum of its parts”, English Language Teaching Journal 65/3, 314-317. u-Linguatech, Grup de Recerca en Comunicació Científica i Tecnològica Multilingüe: https://www.upc.edu/rima/grups/linguatech

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Estudio para la implantación de Programas en Inglés en los títulos de grado de la ETSI Agrónomos de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid Sara Mira, Fernando San José Martínez, Chiquinquirá Hontoria, Angeles Adán, María Blanco, Fernando Calderón, Victoria Carbonell, Carolina Chaya, Guillermo Fondevila, Trinidad González, Carmen Marín, Antonio Molina, David Pereira, Miguel Quemada, Luis Ricote, Leonor Rodríguez Sinobas, Rosa Sánchez Monje, y Alberto Sanz Cobeña E.T.S. Ingenieros Agrónomos. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid/Agricultural Engineering School of Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid (Spain) Abstract: The ongoing convergence between European universities has promoted academic programs in English as a fruitful framework for internationalization. In this context, a study for the implementation of programs in English in the degrees of ETSI Agrónomos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, was performed. Different existing experiences in English Programs in Spanish universities were analyzed. The opinion of students and teachers of ETSI Agrónomos on three issues was evaluated: interest in participating in a program in English, preferred model of program and self-assessment of English proficiency. The interest in English Programs of high school students and companies and institutions in the food production sector was examined. The conclusions of the study highlight the disparate national offer of programs in English and language requirements for both teachers and students. There is great interest by both teachers and students of the ETSI Agrónomos and high school students to participate in such programs. Resumen: El proceso actual de convergencia entre instituciones universitarias europeas ha promovido los Programas Académicos en Inglés como un marco fructífero para su internacionalización. En este contexto, se realizó un estudio para la implantación de Programas en Inglés en los títulos de grado de la ETSI Agrónomos de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Para ello se analizaron las diferentes experiencias existentes en Programas en Inglés en las Universidades Españolas. Se evaluó la opinión de alumnos y profesores de la ETSI Agrónomos sobre tres cuestiones: interés en participar en un Programa en Inglés, tipo de programa en el que estaría dispuesto a participar y autoevaluación del nivel de inglés. Se examinó el interés de los alumnos de bachillerato y de empresas e instituciones del ámbito agroalimentario, en los Programas en Inglés. Las conclusiones del trabajo destacan la dispar oferta nacional en programas en inglés y en requerimientos lingüísticos a profesores y alumnos. Existe un gran interés tanto por parte de profesores y alumnos de la ETSI Agrónomos como de alumnos de Bachillerato por participar en este tipo de programas.

1.

Introducción

Las instituciones universitarias han promovido Programas Académicos Universitarios en Inglés (Programas en Inglés en adelante)como un marco fructífero para su

internacionalización con el fin de desarrollar la movilidad de estudiantes y la cooperación institucional dentro y fuera del EEES. Estas iniciativas de las instituciones académicas del EEES están inequívocamente alineadas con la decidida apuesta de la Unión Europea por el multilingüismo, tal como lo ha expresado el Parlamento Europeo. El objetivo de los Programas en Inglés es alcanzar la Internacionalización de la Universidad a través de dos ejes de actuación. Primero, la mejora del nivel de inglés de los alumnos egresados y segundo, la captación de alumnos extranjeros.

La respuesta de España a este proceso está lejos de ser homogénea y solo recientemente

las

universidades

españolas

han

empezado

a

considerar

la

internacionalización como una de sus prioridades (Lasagabaster, 2012). En el año 2008, 20 universidades públicas (Dafouz y Núñez, 2009) sobre un total de 71 centros ofrecía Programas en Inglés. Desde entonces el ritmo de crecimiento ha sido muy rápido. Así, para el curso 2013-14 la práctica totalidad de las Universidades Públicas Españolas ofrecen en mayor o menor medida algún tipo de Programa en Inglés.

En la Comunidad de Madrid, el gobierno local inició hace unos años un cambio profundo de la enseñanza de las lenguas extranjeras en la Educación Primaria y Secundaria, promoviendo programas bilingües basados en la metodología de Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos en Lengua Extranjeras (AICLE; CLIL en inglés). El objetivo es mejorar el nivel de inglés de los jóvenes estudiantes españoles a la vista de las diferencias observadas con otros países europeosii. En el curso 2013-2014, 120.000 alumnos de la CM (30 % del total) participaron en estos programas en la Enseñanza Primaria. En el mismo curso, 91Institutos de Educación Secundaria comenzaron el Programa Bilingüe, con 40.000 alumnos (30 %) (Consejería de Educación, 2014). Esta cohorte de estudiantes llegará a la universidad en el curso académico 2016-2017. Por lo tanto, es de esperar que un número cada vez mayor de estudiantes con un conocimiento de inglés comparable a

los estándares europeos elija Programas en Inglés que les permitan satisfacer mejor las demandas de las empresas nacionales e internacionales que compiten en un mercado mundial globalizado. Esta nueva situación, sin duda, va a imponer nuevos retos a las instituciones universitarias.

En este contexto, un estudio para la implantación de Programas Académicos Universitarios en Inglés en la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingenieros Agrónomos (ETSIA) de la Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) fue impulsado por un grupo de profesores de la Escuela. Bajo el acrónimo de AgroInglés el grupo desarrolló un Proyecto de Innovación Educativa financiado por la UPM. Con el objetivo de identificar y evaluar modalidades para la implantación de un Programa Universitarios en Inglés se examinaron las diferentes experiencias existentes en Programas en Inglés en las Universidades Españolas, y se evaluó la opinión de los alumnos y profesores de la ETSI Agrónomos, de alumnos preuniversitarios y del mundo laboral donde se integrarán los futuros egresados.

Presentamos aquí una parte de los resultados más destacados, pudiéndose encontrar un informe completo realizado en Adán et al. 2014.

2.

Metodología y Resultados 2.1

Programas en Inglés en los grados de la educación pública universitaria

Se estudiaron los Programas en Inglés ofertados en los grados por las 48 universidades públicas españolas. La información se recopiló principalmente a través de las páginas web de los centros universitarios y de consultas directas por medio de teléfono o correo electrónico. También se ha consultado la publicación “Degree Programs in English Language in the Spanish University System“ editada por el MECD en 2013.

Se establecieron seis categorías según el nivel de desarrollo de la oferta en inglés: muy alto (número elevado de grados en inglés o bilingües); alto (200 asignaturas); medio alto (100 - 200 asignaturas); medio (al menos dos grados bilingües y más de 50 asignaturas); medio-bajo (de 1 a 2 grados bilingües y entre 25 y 50 asignaturas); incipiente (1 grado bilingüe y/o número reducido de asignaturas); previsto a corto plazo o sin oferta (incluye aquellos casos en los que la oferta está prevista a futuro o bien la oferta de existir es muy poco visible). Cabe señalar que esta clasificación es tentativa y es sensible a los posibles errores derivados de fallos en la recogida de información. Otra observación destacable es que al tratarse de un criterio cuantitativo de carácter absoluto, las universidades grandes, lógicamente, debido a su tamaño tendrán más posibilidades de acoger e impulsar Programas en Inglés. Aunque sería deseable utilizar un indicador de carácter relativo, la dificultad de obtener la oferta global de cada universidad nos lo impide.

Según esta clasificación, 5 universidades (10 %) presentan un nivel muy alto o alto de desarrollo (tres de la Comunidad de Madrid, una del País Vasco y una de Asturias), 8 universidades (17 %) se catalogan como nivel medio alto (pertenecientes a Navarra, Cataluña, Comunidad Valenciana y Andalucía), 8 universidades (17 %) presentan un nivel medio de desarrollo, otras 10 (21 %) un nivel medio-bajo, 13 de ellas (27 %) tienen un nivel incipiente y, por último, 4 (8 % del total) poseen el nivel más bajo de oferta, está prevista a futuro o apenas resulta visible (Figura 1).

Figura 1. Número de universidades según su nivel de oferta de enseñanzas en lengua inglesa.

Respecto al nivel de inglés requerido por los docentes para impartir clases de inglés en los grados, la situación es desigual (Figura 2). En lo que respecta al nivel de inglés exigido a los alumnos, la situación es aún más desigual puesto que hay variedad dentro de una misma universidad. Por ejemplo, la U. Carlos III no exige ningún nivel en el caso de los grados impartidos completamente en inglés, pero exige un B2 para los grados bilingües. Como conclusión, puede decirse que la situación es dispar pero parece que los grados con una alta demanda tienden a exigir un nivel B2 a los alumnos.

Figura 2. Nivel de inglés requerido por los docentes para impartir docencia en inglés en los 48 centros universitarios públicos.

2.2

El profesorado y el alumnado de la ETSI Agrónomos ante los Programas en Inglés

Se planteó la necesidad de recabar información sobre el interés, las preferencias, y la formación en lengua inglesa del profesorado y el alumnado de la ETSI Agrónomos (UPM). Para ello se diseñaron encuestas y se gestionó su envio utilizando la herramienta LimSurvey (http://www.limesurvey.org/es).

En la encuesta participaron 125 profesores (40 % del total) y 305 alumnos (35%). El 73% de los profesores respondieron que estaban dispuesto a participar en un grado universitario en inglés en los próximos 4 cursos académicos (Figura 3), siendo el 54% los que estarían dispuestos en los próximos 2 cursos. Además, el 76 % de los alumnos respondieron que tenían interés en cursar un grado universitario, total o parcialmente, en inglés. Un nivel intermedio alto de inglés (B2 o superior) fue el que mostraron el 62 % de los profesores y el 48 % de los alumnos que respondieron a la encuesta. Sin embargo, sólo un 39 % de los alumnos creía que sería capaz de comprender una clase totalmente en inglés y un 36 % estaría dispuesto a realizar los exámenes en inglés.

Figura 3. Interés del profesorado y el alumnado de la ETSI Agrónomos (UPM) por participar en un grado en inglés.

Respecto a las modalidades de implementación del programa de educación superior en inglés en la ETSI Agrónomos, los alumnos coincidieron en preferir un grado bilingüe impartido parcialmente en inglés (82 %), con clases impartidas completamente en inglés pero evaluadas en español (54 %), mientras que sólo el 5 % prefería un plan de estudios completamente en inglés (Figura 4). Sin embargo, mientras que el 13 % prefería el plan de estudios completamente en español, cuando se les preguntaba respecto al modo de impartición de cada asignatura, hasta el 19 % elegiría clases impartidas y evaluadas en español (Figura 4). En cuanto a los profesores, el 46 % prefería un grado bilingüe impartido parcialmente en inglés, mientras que el 15 % completamente en inglés, con clases impartidas y evaluadas en inglés (46 %).

Respecto al impacto esperado de un programa de educación superior en inglés, un alto porcentaje de los alumnos (94 %) esperaba un efecto positivo o muy positivo en su futuro profesional. Sin embargo, el 30 % creía que tendría un efecto negativo o muy negativo en

la adquisición de conocimientos sobre la materia, y el 50 % un efecto negativo o muy negativo en sus calificaciones.

Figura 4. Preferencias del alumnado de la ETSI Agrónomos (UPM) en la implantación de un grado en inglés.

2.3

El alumnado preuniversitario ante los Programas en Inglés

El objetivo de este apartado del proyecto fue obtener información, mediante encuestas realizadas a estudiantes de bachillerato, sobre su interés por cursar enseñanzas universitarias impartidas en inglés y su nivel de inglés. Se distribuyó una encuesta impresa en cinco centros de la Comunidad de Madrid, a los estudiantes de primero de bachillerato de las orientaciones de ciencias, en el horario lectivo y bajo la supervisión de un profesor. Respondieron un total de 191 estudiantes.

La mayoría de los estudiantes, al autoevaluarse, consideran que tienen un nivel B1 (42,6 %) o B2 (31,9 %). A la respuesta general sobre cursar un grado total o parcialmente en

inglés, un promedio del 50 % demuestra tener interés. Hay que tener en cuenta que la encuesta no ha sido de respuesta voluntaria, a diferencia de lo ocurrido con los alumnos de grado, ya que se hizo en formato impreso, a la totalidad de los estudiantes y en el horario lectivo. Cuando esta pregunta se desglosa sobre la modalidad de enseñanza en inglés que recibirían, un porcentaje promedio del 63 % estarían dispuestos a recibir clases en inglés, aunque bastantes menos estudiantes consideran que pueden comprender totalmente la clase (34 %) o que podrían participar activamente en ella (40 %). Otro aspecto a considerar es que tan sólo un 3 % desea cursar un grado totalmente en inglés y son casi el doble (41 %) los que prefieren una oferta de créditos en inglés inferior al 50 % que los que la prefieren superior (28 %). Añadir que se observan dos grupos de respuesta muy claros entre los centros escolares. La respuesta de los que llevan más tiempo reforzando el aprendizaje en inglés (5 y 8 cursos académicos, respectivamente) es mayor, tanto en lo relativo a su nivel de inglés como a su interés por una enseñanza superior impartida en ese idioma.

A pesar de que mayoritariamente consideran que no será positivo para sus calificaciones ni para la adquisición de conocimientos, el 80 % de ellos considera que sería muy positivo o positivo cursar un grado con enseñanza en inglés en su futuro profesional.

2.4

Análisis del uso y valoración de la lengua inglesa en el mercado laboral de las ingenierías agronómicas y alimentarias

El objetivo era conocer la percepción, la valoración y el posible interés del mercado laboral acerca de una mejora de las competencias en el uso del inglés de los titulados en ingenierías agroalimentarias, así como conocer las necesidades del mercado laboral en este ámbito con la finalidad de utilizar esta información en el diseño de la estrategia formativa más adecuada. Para ello se diseñó una encuesta que se realizó a una muestra representativa de los profesionales de tipo medio-alto. En total se eligieron 80

profesionales de los cuales respondieron a la consulta 26, lo que supone un 33 %. De ellas, el 70% eran empresas internacionales con más de 50 empleados.

El 46 % de los encuestados valora la importancia del inglés en la actualidad como muy alta y un 34 % como alta. Estas cifras se elevan hasta respectivamente el 77 % y el 23 % (que totalizan el 100 % de las respuestas) cuando se pregunta acerca de la importancia futura. De acuerdo con lo anterior, un 35 % del conjunto de los encuestados considera que para el acceso al mercado laboral es imprescindible un nivel alto de inglés y otro 35 % que es imprescindible un nivel medio. Frente a ellos, tan sólo un 4 % considera que el inglés aporta un valor añadido, pero que los criterios de selección son otros.

La importancia de que, al menos parte de la formación profesional se realice en inglés, es valorada como muy alta por el 65 % de los encuestados; a los que se añade un 27 % que le atribuye una importancia alta. Los métodos preferidos para valorar estos conocimientos en los procesos de selección de personal son: la realización de entrevistas o pruebas prácticas en los procesos de selección seguido de la realización de estancias en el extranjero.

3.

Conclusiones

La oferta de Programas Académicos Universitarios en Inglés en los títulos de grado está generalizada en mayor o menor medida en las 48 universidades públicas españolas, con mayor intensidad en el área económica y en las ingenierías. En torno a un 30 % de las universidades públicas españolas oferta Programas en Inglés con un nivel destacable (muy alto, alto y medio-alto). Además, existe una gran heterogeneidad al respecto de los requerimientos lingüísticos demandados al profesorado y al alumnado.

Existe una gran coincidencia en las preferencias tanto de profesores y alumnos de la ETSI Agrónomos, como de alumnos preuniversitarios respecto a la implantación de enseñanzas en inglés. Los tres grupos mostraron un gran interés en los estudios superiores en inglés, siendo la preferencia por la implantación de un grado bilingüe impartido parcialmente en inglés.

Para las empresas del sector agroalimentario la formación de profesionales de perfil medio alto pasa necesariamente por facilitar, a lo largo de su vida docente, la formación en inglés. También puede afirmarse que el interés que tiene la formación en idiomas para el mercado laboral es muy elevado.

4.

Bibliografía

Adán A., Alvir M., Blanco M., Carbonell V., Chaya C.,González T., Hontoria C., Marín C., Mira S., Pereira D., Quemada M., Ricote L., Rodríguez L., Sánchez-Monje R., San José F., Sanz A., 2014. Estudio para la implantación de Programas en Inglés en los títulos de grado de la ETSI Agrónomos. Proyecto Agroinglés. Madrid. (ISBN 13: 978 84 695 9764 4). Consejería de Educación, Juventud y Deporte de la Comunidad de Madrid, 2014. Datos y Cifras de la Educación 2013-14. Madrid: Dirección General de Mejora de la Calidad de la Enseñanza Dafouz, E. y Núñez, B., 2009. ‘CLIL in Tertiary Education: Devising a new Learning Landscape’. Eds. E. Dafouz and M. Guerrini. pp. 101-112. Lasagabaster, D., 2012. ‘El papel del inglés en el fomento del multilingüismo en la Universidad’. Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Aplicada (ELIA) 12, 13-44.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Content and Language Integration as a part of a degree reform at Tampere University of Technology Nina Niemelä and Heidi Jauni Tampere University of Technology, Finland Tampere University of Technology is undergoing a degree reform that started in 2013. One of the major changes in the reform was the integration of compulsory Finnish, Swedish and English language courses to substance courses at the bachelor level. The integration of content and language courses aims at higher quality language learning, more fluency in studies, and increased motivation toward language studies. In addition, integration is an opportunity to optimize the use of resources and to offer courses that are more tailored to the students' field of study and to the skills needed in working life. The reform also aims to increase and develop co-operation between different departments at the university and to develop scientific follow up. This paper gives an overview of the integration process conducted at TUT and gives examples of adjunct CLIL implementations in three different languages.

1.

Background

Tampere University of Technology (TUT) is a university of 10,500 undergraduate and postgraduate students and 2,000 employees. TUT is an attractive institution for international students and staff, and there are currently roughly 1,500 foreigners from more than 60 countries at the university (TUT 2014). The internationalization of working life sets high demands on language skills in Finland. The educational system must respond to the needs of the changing world, and provide education that will give graduates skills with which they can succeed in the multilingual and multicultural reality, especially in small countries with substantial volumes of international trade.

The Finnish society has become increasingly diversified linguistically. According to the constitutional law, Finnish and Swedish have the status of national languages, making Finland officially a bilingual country. The state language policy has evolved since the 1980s when the Finnish government aimed to diversify and improve the language skills of the citizens. The 1980s was a decade when opportunities for new language choices were

introduced at the primary level of education. This was followed by an increase in English medium instruction, and in the 1990s CLIL was introduced as a way to improve the language proficiency in the Finnish educational system both in comprehensive schools and at university level (Leppänen et al, 2008).

Due to the bilingual status of the country, students have compulsory second language studies at primary, secondary, and tertiary levels of education. Besides Swedish (at CEFR levels B1-B2), the students have another compulsory foreign language course in their degree requirements at CEFR level B2. For the majority of the students, the compulsory language is English, although it can also be, e.g., German or French, depending on earlier studies at primary and/or secondary levels.

Finnish university degrees underwent a reform in 2005 as part of the Bologna process. One of the aims of the reform was to shorten the study time, while another aim was to adjust the degrees to meet the demands from the working life. At TUT the reform included the development of degree programs so that the Bachelor degree programs became broader in scope, and specialization at Master’s level became more flexible. Since fall 2013, TUT has six degree programs. Appendix 1 shows the different degree programs TUT offers.

The aim of this paper is to present the process of implementing content and language integration at Tampere University of Technology. The paper will describe the planning stages and give an overview of integration to content courses in the Finnish, Swedish and English languages. Three of the degree program implementations from fall 2013 will be presented and discussed in more detail.

2.

CLIL in Higher Education

CLIL can be defined in many ways, depending on the depth and width of integration. According to Marsh et al (2010: 3) the definition of CLIL in Finland has been quite wide, and it has been used as an umbrella term to describe many different kinds of implementations. Recently, attempts have been made to capture different degrees of CLIL. Greere & Räsänen (2008) use the terms partial CLIL and adjunct CLIL to describe different degrees of integration. Appendix 2 shows the steps from non-CLIL to CLIL courses in higher education (Räsänen, 2011).

The term partial CLIL refers to courses that are offered by subject specialists, and in which language learning is expected to take place due to exposure. In partial CLIL the outcomes are not specified, and the aims and criteria remain implicit. Adjunct CLIL, on the other hand, refers to contexts in which language studies are coordinated with or integrated in subject studies. This definition also emphasizes the importance of coordinated planning between content and language teachers. It also stresses the fact that specified outcomes and criteria for both content and language must be provided.

In situations where integration is implemented as partial or adjunct CLIL, there are advantages that help develop skills that are needed in working life, especially the awareness of field specific discourses, intercultural competence, and other skills needed in multicultural professional encounters (Räsänen, 2011; LanQua, 2010).

Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) in higher education has been a growing trend to answer to the needs and demands in the globalised working life. In Europe, the development of multilingualism, which is one of the main targets of European integration, is one reason for implementing CLIL, along with other economic, political, and social

reasons (Bologna Declaration, 1999; EU action plan, 2004-2006).

CLIL has been

implemented progressively at universities all over the world (Fortanet-Gómez, 2013).

The integration of content and language in higher education in Finland started with short university courses in the 1980s, while today approximately 5-10% of the university courses in Finland are taught in English (Ludbrook, 2008). The pioneers in implementing CLIL in higher education were the University of Vaasa and the University of Jyväskylä.

In the next chapter, which presents the implementation process at TUT, we will show how integration is based on language policy. According to Marsh et al. (2013: 13) language policy is the formal statement of the university on the language use. The language policy is not only a formal statement linked to the strategy, but it also functions as grounds for a language plan, which describes the use of languages from a practical point of view. Marsh et al (2012: 14) remark that English-taught degree programs are not necessarily based on any explicit policy or plan, and this is true in different implementations of CLIL courses in higher education. Pavón Vasquez (2013: 11) points out that sometimes reform initiatives that are made in one context can also function well in another. Keeping this in mind, the process that has been implemented at TUT could be copied to other universities successfully.

3.

CLIL at Tampere University of Technology

At TUT, the head of the Language Center made an initiative to integrate language and content courses in connection with the degree reform. This initiative became a part of the university’s language policy, and in 2010 an internationalization plan was crafted at Tampere University of Technology, followed by a language plan, which was written in 2011. At TUT, the language policy and the language plan were put into effect as a topdown model, meaning that the initiative decision making was first done at the university

level. According to Marsh et al. (2012: 14), this is crucial for the success of implementing the plan because the administration needs to be the underlying force that works with central level actors.

The language objectives in the mandatory languages were clearly presented, and the administration saw the relevance and benefits for an extensive reform in the language plan. There was hardly any resistance towards integration as a whole in the different planning groups in each faculty. One reason for this might be that top-down decision making and acting accordingly is a widely accepted culture at TUT. It is clear that this will not be the case with all universities. The Language Center also adopted an active role in informing different levels of actors (from administration to teachers) to reduce the concerns towards integration.

Marsh et al. (2012: 15) claim that the language specialists should have the leading role in the design of the language plan. This was the case at TUT, since the Language Centre (LC) was involved in the planning stages together with the planning groups of the different degree programs since 2012, which led to co-operation on faculty and department level in the whole university. The role of the Language Centre was crucial since it made the initiative to integration, reported on pilot studies and made initiative proposals on the structure of the integrated courses. As mentioned before, in the decision making it was agreed that Finnish, Swedish and English would be the languages integrated with content courses in the first phase. The planning groups of each faculty proposed which compulsory Bachelor degree content courses could be integrated with Swedish and English.

While the planning groups in different degree programs were choosing the content courses for integration, the LC started to prepare their teachers for the integration. The LC also

appointed a coordinator to act as a link between the planning groups/departments and the LC. During 2012 the coordinator and the vice director responsible for teaching organized pedagogical meetings, which addressed issues related to integration from theoretical and practical point of views. At this time the LC received university project funding for extending the piloting of integration, making materials and developing language teaching activities outside the classrooms.

The practical planning of the language courses was conducted by all the language teachers, coordinated in the different languages based on available human resources. In some degree programs all content teachers participated in the planning, while in some cases a representative/-s of a subject teachers group were involved in the planning. From the administrative point of view it was impossible to foresee how many working hours the reform would demand from each teacher. As shown in appendix 1, the planning of different courses was done both simultaneously and in succession. This relieved the work load since all courses did not start in fall 2013.

Based on the individual needs in each degree program, there was variation in the design of CLIL implementations. The majority of integrated courses are what Räsänen (2010) refers to as adjunct CLIL courses since language is coordinated and supported on the basis of subject studies, and teaching is designed to take place simultaneously.

4.

The Integration of Bachelor Seminar and Finnish language

An example of the integration of content and language studies at TUT provides a way for Finnish students to complete their mandatory first language requirement in connection with writing their Bachelor’s thesis. The figure below illustrates the organization of the Finnish language component. This model is used by almost all the degree programs. The model

increases students’ possibilities to receive individual feedback and help with their use of language during the writing process.

Figure 1. Finnish language and Bachelor seminar integrated course design.

The ability to produce academic text in Finnish was earlier mainly the students’ own responsibility. The learning opportunities in the earlier system were scarce, because the language they used in their Bachelor’s thesis was checked by the language teacher only after the students had completed their thesis. Therefore it was natural to integrate language teaching with the seminars. In this way the students receive feedback on their language use during the writing process instead of after the thesis was completed.

5.

The integration of Swedish and Natural Sciences

The content course which the degree program chose for integration with Swedish is the first mandatory course the first year students take when they begin their university studies in Natural Sciences. Several content teachers were involved in the teaching of the course, and the first author of this article was one of the two Swedish teachers who taught this course.

The content course is a course where students are taught how to manage their studies and how to become active university students. Because of the practical nature of the course, both content and language teachers felt it would be fruitful to design a closely linked integrated course where the language course would follow tightly the thematic units of the content course. Table 1 below presents the contents of the first period. The language teachers planned teaching materials which were strongly linked to the content course. For successful results, this kind of course design requires good co-operation between the language and content teachers. The design also sets high demands on the communication between the teachers, e.g., in the case of changes in timetables and weekly contents.

Table 1. Teaching themes in an adjunct CLIL course (SWE).

WEEK Career Paths in Natural Sciences

Written and Spoken Communication in Swedish

0

Orientation week

1

Basics of studying at a university

Course introduction and studying at a university

2

Introduction to major

Examples of university studies in Sweden

3

4

Internationalization

and

language Internationalization

proficiency

proficiency

Engineering skills

Working life

and

language

5

6

Library visit (arranged by Swedish teacher)

Learning and study techniques

Summary of the lecture by the study councellor

( a lecture by study councellor)

7

Exam week

In the planning it was crucial to bear in mind what the objectives of the two course contents were, especially from the language point of view, since the language course depended on the content course. One mandatory assignment was to write a summary (home assignment) which was linked to the content course in such a way that the students wrote the summary about one of the content lectures. One objective of the content course was to visit the university library, especially to learn about the services provided. The library visit was fully organized by the language teachers together with a librarian, who volunteered to give a tour and guidance in Swedish. This was one of the few possibilities offered for the students to use Swedish outside the classroom.

6.

The integration of English and Strategic Management

An example of an adjunct CLIL course is a pilot course combining Academic Writing in English with a course in Strategic Management. The courses ran parallel to each other, and the Strategic Management content course was also taught entirely in English. This is an example of a course that could possibly be taught as a full CLIL course.

In the Strategic Management course there were 3 written assignments with which it was possible for the students to earn bonuses towards the course grade. In the assignments students were asked to provide informed arguments on different aspects of strategic

management. These three written assignments were also used as the academic writing course assignments. In practice this meant that the first version was submitted to the language teacher, who read and commented on the paper. Students could then revise their papers based on the teacher comments before submitting them for evaluation. Integration aimed at improvement in argumentation by, e.g., using appropriate style, and more effective organization on textual, paragraph, and essay level. The core elements of the academic writing course included inputs on different aspects of academic writing, inclass exercises, class discussions together with writing, and revising the assignments.

7.

Conclusion

Multilingualism is acknowledged in the Finnish universities’ language policies. At Tampere University of Technology the answer to the language demands of today’s society is an adapted model of CLIL. The reform in the TUT language plan and the degree reform stating a multilingual language policy were conducted as a top-down process involving the whole university at the same time. In our opinion, this was one of the main reasons why integration on such a large scale, concerning all degree programs, could be implemented successfully. As far as we know, other universities in Finland have not explicitly modelled a fully dual approach of CLIL in their language plans.

There are reasons why the model has taken the shape it is now presented in. As a result of the many agents in the process; decision makers together with planners, as well as content and language teachers, TUT is not adopting a unified model of CLIL (see Räsänen, 2010). As a result, all the degree programs have their own adaptations of the CLIL model in Finnish, Swedish and English. This was not a preplanned aim, but the results serve TUT students in the best possible way, taking into account the different needs.

At this point we can argue that in Finnish, integration has created opportunities for support during the writing process of the Bachelor’s thesis. With Swedish, we can say that it is not realistic to aim at full integration of content and language at university level which Räsänen (2012) defines as (full) CLIL because of the students’ lower level of language skills. It is not even necessary, since the status of Swedish is different when compared to, e.g., English. In English, the situation we have at TUT at the moment can also be defined as adjunct CLIL (Räsänen, 2011). However, with English, it is realistic and possible to develop syllabus design towards full CLIL.

At TUT, the top-down process has functioned effectively in the sense that all the degree programs throughout the university, in three compulsory languages, have implemented adjunct CLIL at the same time, starting from fall 2013. This is the first time a degree reform has brought content and language teachers together to improve the offered studies at the Bachelor’s level. A reform of this extent, after being conducted for less than one academic year, has raised several issues that need to be addressed in the next phase. In the future even closer co-operation is needed between teachers, e.g., in the curriculum planning, so that success can be ensured. Close co-operation between teachers is essential in defining even better and more precise learning objectives for the subject content and for the language, especially in the courses that aim to become full CLIL. The diversity of implementations of courses in different degree programs causes a need to carefully evaluate the needs for professional development of teachers. Hopefully the Language Center will provide CLIL training for both content and language teachers.

The new language plan at TUT and its practical development in the next phase will be followed scientifically by a survey directed to students, staff, and administration. Nikula, Dalton-Puffer and Llinares (2013) point out the need for CLIL research in higher education. As far as we know there is no previous empirical CLIL research that focuses on language

skills needed in working life in Finland at the university level in English and Swedish. This need is addressed by Jauni & Niemelä (2014; forthcoming) who focus on interactive practices used in SL/FL courses that are integrated with content courses.

8.

References

Bologna Declaration. 1999. Towards the European Higher European Area. Conference of Ministers responsible for Higher Education in 29 European countries (June), Bologna, Italy EU Action Plan. 2004-2006. Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity: An Action Plan 2004 – 2006 http://eur‐lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0449:FIN:EN:PDF Fortanet-Gomez, I. 2013. CLIL in Higher Education: Towards a Multilingual Language Policy. UK: Multilingual Matters. Greere, A. and A. Räsänen, 2008. LanQua Subproject on Content and Language Integrated Learning: Redefining ‘CLIL’ – towards multilingual competence. Year One Report. Southampton: LLAS. Available at: http://www.lanqua.eu/sites/default/files/Year1Report_CLIL_ForUpload_WithoutAppendices _0.pdf. Accessed 2014, March 17 LanQua, 2010. Language Network for Quality Assurance: Content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Available at: http://www.lanqua.eu/theme/content-languageintegrated-learning-clil. Accessed 2014, March 17. Leppänen, S., T. Nikula & L. Kääntä eds. 2008. Kolmas kotimainen: Lähikuvia englannin käytöstä Suomessa (“The Third Domestic Language: Close-ups on the Use of English in Finland”). Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. [Tietolipas 224]. Ludbrook, G. 2008. CLIL: The potential of multilingual education, in DOS ALGARVES, vol. 17, pp. 19-27.

Marsh, D. Mehisto, Wolff et al, European Framework for CLIL Teacher Education. A Framework for the Professional Development of CLIL Teachers. http://clil‐cd.ecml.at/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=C0kUO%2BvEc6k%3D&tabid=2254&languag e=en‐GB. Accessed 2013 August 14. Marsh, D., V. Pavon Vazquez & MJ Frigols Martin, 2013. The Higher Education Landscape: Ensuring Quality in English Language Degree Programmes. Valencia: Valencian International University. Nikula, T., C. Dalton-Puffer & A. Llinares, 2013. CLIL classroom discourse: research from Europe. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 1, 1: 70-100. Räsänen, A. 2011. The Promise And Challenge Of CLIL (Content And Language Integrated Learning) As A Mediator For Internationalisation. A Paper presented at Multilingual Competences for Professional and Social Success in Europe Warsaw, 28 – 29 September 2011. Available at: http://www.celelc.org/archive/speeches/Speeches__etc_/rsnen__warsaw_0.pdf?13702535 29; Accessed 2014, April 6. TUT homepage. http://www.tut.fi/en/ Accessed 2014 March 19.

Appendix 1

Appendix 2

Primer Congreso Internacional HEPCLIL (Perspectivas de Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extranjeras en la Enseñanza Superior) Identidad docente y formación inicial. El maestro generalista, el especialista de lengua extranjera y el maestro AICLE en un proyecto lingüístico de centro Elena Romero Alfaro Universidad de Cádiz Francisco Zayas Martínez Universidad de Cádiz Resumen: Resumen: Considerando que el maestro de Educación Primaria se encuentra en una posición crucial en el proceso de construcción de la ciudadanía, en particular de la ciudadanía europea, la formación inicial del maestro ha de asumir una visión transnacional específica, que se caracteriza principalmente por una formación en lenguas-culturas sólida y diversa. La reflexión sobre los contextos de “apropiación” de lenguas-culturas y las orientaciones metodológicas actuales nos ha conducido hacia tres perfiles docentes: el maestro generalista, el especialista en lengua extranjera y el maestro AICLE. Sus respectivas competencias profesionales se aproximan -¿se solapan, se complementan?- y necesitan nuevas estrategias articuladoras, ya que añaden, a su vez, nuevas dimensiones a la educación desde la perspectiva del proyecto lingüístico del centro. Se trata de dimensiones fundamentales e ineludibles para el maestro del siglo XXI: las representaciones y creencias sobre las lenguas-culturas, así como los procesos de internacionalización en los que vive inmersa la sociedad en general y los centros educativos en particular, hacen necesarios un trabajo cooperativo y una dinámica de reflexiones compartidas que permitan revisar el desarrollo de la conciencia profesional de estos maestros y de su identidad docente. En el presente trabajo analizamos estas dimensiones desde la perspectiva plurilingüe y pluricultural adoptada en el Plan de Lenguas de Centro de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación de la Universidad de Cádiz.

1.

Introducción

Hace ahora 5 años que un grupo de profesores de lenguas extranjeras de la Universidad de Cádiz, ciertamente entusiasmados por lo que en aquel momento venía aconteciendo en materia de lenguas en los centros públicos de Educación Primaria y Secundaria de Andalucía, nos reunimos en torno a un proyecto de innovación educativa para, como habían hecho desde la Junta de Andalucía, considerar las posibilidades de mejora de las capacidades lingüísticas de los estudiantes de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación. Pensábamos que, una vez implantado el Plan de Fomento del Plurilingüismo en los

niveles educativos preuniversitarios, llegaba el momento de ofrecer continuidad a este fenómeno desde la formación universitaria. Y, en este contexto, la formación de maestros debía estar entre las primeras titulaciones que lo afrontaran, pues los egresados serían naturalmente demandados por el sistema para los muchos colegios bilingües que estaban ya funcionando en Andalucía. A esta perspectiva había que sumar el hecho circunstancial de que los estudiantes universitarios, por primera vez, habrían de afrontar la acreditación oficial de unas determinadas capacidades idiomáticas para las que, sin embargo, no se les ofrecía demasiada ayuda, con lo que cualquier movimiento que apuntara en esta dirección sería gratamente bienvenido por ellos. Y, no menos importante, esta coyuntura de necesidades y exigencias idiomáticas nos permitiría rescatar y poner en valor el hecho mismo de la diversidad lingüística y cultural, más allá de la mera exaltación teórica, como esencia de la ciudadanía europea.

Todo esto nos llevó al estudio de fórmulas para la adaptación del enfoque AICLE a la Educación Superior y ello a una inmensa cantidad de trabajo que viene resultando tan agotador como apasionante. En estos años hemos hecho cursos de actualización lingüística para profesores de áreas muy diversas en inglés y francés, hemos organizado seminarios y jornadas para el descubrimiento y la mejora de nuestras capacidades didácticas desde los principios metodológicos de AICLE, hemos participado en congresos y conferencias nacionales e internacionales sobre el tema, hemos logrado convencer a buena parte de la comunidad universitaria, hemos tutelado a profesores de áreas no lingüísticas, hemos organizado ensayos de clases universitarias con los mismos docentes como alumnos, hemos experimentado también con los alumnos de diversos títulos, hasta conseguir poner en marcha un Plan de Lenguas de Centro (Herrero et al.: 2012).

En la actualidad contamos con una mención especializadora en LE-AICLE (Lengua Extranjera – Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas) dentro del Grado en

Educación Primaria (GEP), donde impartimos varias asignaturas dedicadas a esta modalidad didáctica. Este año saldrá la primera promoción de estudiantes con esta mención, que han podido realizar sus prácticas en centros bilingües de inglés, francés y alemán de nuestro entorno. Y desde el pasado curso contamos también con un itinerario específicamente plurilingüe dentro de la titulación, esto es: un itinerario formativo concebido para cursar desde el primer semestre algunas asignaturas parcialmente adaptadas a la modalidad formativa AICLE en cualquiera de las lenguas, en el que, además, los estudiantes cuentan con actividades complementarias para la mejora de sus capacidades idiomáticas en inglés, francés y alemán.

El balance que hacemos de estos cinco años de intensísimo trabajo es, pese a los incontables escollos, positivo, si bien son muchas las dudas que constantemente nos asaltan. Al margen del apoyo institucional que este tipo de proyectos debiera tener y no tiene –una cuestión que debemos reclamar sin reservas aquí y en todos los foros científicos y académicos, quienes nos dedicamos a la formación de maestros-. Destacaremos entre ellas aquí la relativa al perfil profesional de nuestros egresados y al modo en que dicho perfil pueda encontrar acomodo en las organizaciones escolares de los centros bilingües actuales, previstas para un funcionamiento AICLE en el que, sin embargo, no hay más especialista para ello que el de Lengua Extranjera. Esta cuestión, aparentemente técnica, puede ser de más calado aún cuando percibimos que también el perfil del generalista actual podrá quedar desdibujado en pocos años frente al maestro AICLE, un nuevo perfil en Educación Primaria que estamos formando en la actualidad, capacitado técnicamente para atender esta modalidad metodológica. Y todo ello debe ser revisado entendiendo el ‘perfil profesional’ como una parte de la llamada ‘identidad docente’, un concepto mucho más amplio, complejo e impreciso, que habremos de tratar con algo más de detenimiento en las líneas siguientes.

2.

Precisiones terminológicas

En este trabajo hablaremos de ‘identidad docente’ para referirnos a la suma del perfil profesional, desarrollado durante la formación inicial universitaria a partir las capacidades técnicas demandadas desde el exterior (la sociedad, la administración educativa), incluyendo el título que capacita y las competencias propias de la profesión, por una parte, y el conjunto de experiencias, vivencias directas o indirectas, creencias y expectativas del individuo sobre la enseñanza, tanto individuales como culturalmente compartidas y a lo largo de toda su vida, por la otra. Cabe señalar que el germen de este conjunto de creencias y expectativas sobre la enseñanza está ya fuertemente arraigado en la persona cuando ésta elige la titulación universitaria requerida para ejercer como maestro. En palabras de Marcelo y Vaillant (2009: 35), la identidad docente:

“tiene su inicio en el periodo de estudiante, se consolida después en la formación inicial y se prolonga durante todo su ejercicio profesional. […] no viene dada sino que hay que ir creándola, […] hace referencia a cómo los profesores viven subjetivamente su trabajo y cuáles son los factores básicos de satisfacción e insatisfacción. La identidad docente es tanto la experiencia personal como el papel que se le reconoce al profesor en una sociedad.”

En segundo lugar, y aunque pueda resultar aparentemente innecesario para el lector especialista en Educación, hablaremos de “formación inicial” para referirnos a la etapa de capacitación universitaria para el ejercicio de la profesión. El concepto contrasta con el de “formación permanente”, presente ya en la vida profesional de cualquier ciudadano de los países desarrollados, pero más importante si cabe en el ámbito de la educación por su función en la vida de una comunidad. El contenido de la ‘formación inicial’ de los maestros de Educación Primaria, como expresa la ley en vigor, “se ajustará a las necesidades de titulación y de cualificación requeridas por la ordenación general del sistema educativo” (LOE, 2006).

Por último, también hacemos alusión al concepto 'proyecto lingüístico de centro' que denominamos Plan de Lenguas de Centro (PLC) de la Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación. Este plan se aprueba en 2011 por la Junta de Facultad y constituye el documento marco que recoge las estrategias académicas e institucionales vinculadas con los idiomas en la Facultad, con la finalidad de contribuir al desarrollo de una educación lingüística de calidad al alcance de todo el alumnado. El documento asume en este sentido el desafío de desarrollar la competencia plurilingüe y pluricultural de los miembros de nuestra comunidad universitaria, consciente de la importancia de los idiomas como parte esencial de la formación integral de las personas.

3.

Nuestras inquietudes

Nuestras inquietudes surgen al detectar contradicciones, lagunas y desajustes que observamos desde tres fuentes de información íntimamente conectadas: los perfiles profesionales que atendemos desde la Educación Superior, la realidad docente actual en los colegios de Educación Primaria, la incertidumbre denunciada por los estudiantes del GEP, confundidos no sólo por la identidad docente comúnmente compartida y heredada de anteriores sistemas organizativos, sino también por la vaguedad en la definición de los mecanismos previstos para el acceso al mercado laboral.

El perfil profesional, establecido por el BOE en los títulos universitarios de formación de maestros, será revisado por vez primera este año (en el 13/14 sale la primera promoción del nuevo GEP) y, para hacerlo, nos serviremos del SERA (Sistema de Evaluación de Resultados del Aprendizaje), aprobado en 2012 por la Junta de Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación en la UCA. Este documento garantiza la coherencia entre “objetivos generales”, “competencias” y “resultados de aprendizaje”. Sin embargo, al recoger lo que allí pudiera aparecer en relación a la enseñanza AICLE encontramos apenas lo siguiente:

Un único objetivo, definido en la ley (BOE: 2007), que con demasiada frecuencia se relaciona casi exclusivamente con procesos migratorios y de asentamiento de inmigrantes, la atención a la escolarización de niños de diferentes orígenes, con dificultades lingüísticas para integrarse en el aula, con diversidad cultural en la sociedad receptora y en la vida familiar: “Abordar con eficacia situaciones de aprendizaje de lenguas en contextos multiculturales y plurilingües”. Nada impide, sin embargo, que se pueda considerar también en el sentido en que expone el propio Consejo de Europa, más acorde con la formación de maestros plurilingües que intentamos poner en marcha.

También las competencias recogidas en el SERA hacen referencia de forma vaga e imprecisa a la capacidad para “conocer y abordar situaciones escolares en contextos multiculturales”, la una, y “afrontar situaciones de aprendizaje de lenguas en contextos multilingües”, la otra.

Los resultados concretos contemplados se vinculan exclusivamente con dos asignaturas, como son la ‘Didáctica de la Lengua Extranjera’ y la ‘Didáctica de la Lengua Materna’. La primera de ellas reúne resultados relativos al conocimiento del currículo de LE (inglés/francés) de Educación Primaria, las bases metodológicas para la enseñanza y evaluación de la lengua en cuestión, el desarrollo de recursos didácticos y la planificación y diseño de propuestas didácticas para contenidos concretos de esta área. Sí incluye también la expresión oral y escrita de la lengua extranjera en un nivel pre-intermedio, pero ello vinculado a la competencia de autonomía respecto de los saberes, los valores y las instituciones. Por su parte, la ‘Didáctica de la Lengua Materna’ es la que hace referencia expresa entre sus resultados al desarrollo del currículo en contextos de diversidad lingüística y sociocultural. No insistiremos en el análisis de detalles que todos los maestros conocen, siendo como es asunto establecido en BOE, pero sí destacaremos que es impreciso, ambiguo y, salvo que alguna universidad los haya completado o

matizado en otros niveles de concreción, resultan insuficientes y nada alentadores para los responsables de la formación en lenguas en Ciencias de la Educación.

El segundo foco de atención para nuestra reflexión son las dificultades observadas en la realidad docente de los centros de nuestro entorno, que, según memorias e informes de alumnos en prácticas, giran en torno a las figuras docentes que se dan cita en los centros, por una parte, y lo que abordaremos como obstáculos relativos a recursos o incidencias organizativas.

En cuanto a las figuras docentes corresponsables en el desarrollo de la educación bilingüe, creemos que en el proceso de cambio que se está dando en la educación actualmente pueden existir solapamientos y/o complementariedades no previstos, aunque ello no significa que haya que plantearlo en términos de carencias. La cuestión puede ser diferente en cada universidad, pero, aun con las variedades que pudieran darse, todos formamos maestros generalistas en el GEP. Y, en este contexto, existe la opción para las universidades de proponer fórmulas de una relativa especialización. Así, tenemos:

Maestros generalistas, orientados profesionalmente para la atención de los alumnos de EP, que no se forman para la atención a un área curricular específica, sino para un concepto educativo de enseñanza globalizada.

Maestros de LE, formados para atender específicamente el desarrollo de las capacidades idiomáticas en EP, pero sin formación específica para la coordinación de proyectos bilingües y/o sin formación metodológica AICLE. Esto es propio de los tiempos más recientes, como se observaba arriba en cuanto a los resultados del aprendizaje del SERA. Sin embargo, la formación en el enfoque AICLE es necesaria para este maestro porque generalmente son ellos los que coordinan los proyectos lingüísticos de los centros y tienen que apoyar a los generalistas.

Maestros AICLE, por último, que son responsables del desarrollo de capacidades vinculadas a su ANL mediante el uso vehicular de una LE. Estos son realmente los nuevos perfiles en el panorama de la EP. Observamos una evolución hacia estos nuevos maestros generalistas, que se nos presentan como una evolución natural del generalista anteriormente mencionado. Ellos son los que con mayor urgencia y en mayor medida deben tomar conciencia de la nueva realidad; son los que tienen que reconstruir la identidad docente y hacer evolucionar la cultura compartida de la enseñanza en general y de la enseñanza de idiomas en particular. Y no creemos que se trate de una tarea que tengan que asumir solos, sino conjuntamente con los especialistas de LE. A modo de vasos comunicantes, si algo no funciona, el conjunto se descompensa y terminará por no funcionar.

Los obstáculos vinculados a la capacitación profesional, los recursos o las regulaciones organizativas de los centros bilingües, por su parte, pueden concretarse como sigue:

Capacidad idiomática limitada de los docentes ANL que, en ocasiones, dependen del asistente lingüístico.

Competencia didáctica insuficiente para la aplicación de un enfoque AICLE a ciclos educativos concretos y áreas de conocimiento específicas.

Recursos insuficientes para la dotación de plazas específicas definidas según los criterios anteriores.

Inadecuada organización docente, que se regula desde la administración sin consideración de muchos de los problemas anteriores.

Por último, el tercer foco de interés para quienes formamos maestros de Educación Primaria en Andalucía, es el desconcierto o la confusión de los estudiantes del GEP sobre sus posibles contextos laborales futuros, el modo en que alcanzarán unas competencias instrumentales no incluidas en su plan de estudios, el modo en que harán valer sus méritos, sus cometidos y posibilidades en una u otra posible situación laboral, etc. En esta línea son fundamentalmente tres las inquietudes consideradas:

De un lado, los estudiantes dudan del valor práctico real de las ‘menciones’ como fórmula de especialización. Y ello porque, con la normativa actual en la mano, la especialización representa una parte de la Formación Inicial, aunque será efectiva según establezca la administración educativa tras la incorporación laboral. Siendo así, quienes quisieran apostar por las ‘menciones’ han de confiar en que éstas sí tendrán efectivamente consideración una vez se acceda a la función pública.

Por otra parte, las menciones ocupan un espacio muy limitado en un título de maestro generalista: una vez cubiertos los requerimientos de formación básica y didácticodisciplinar, teniendo en cuenta el módulo destinado a las prácticas y TFG, la mención ocupará entre 30 y 60 de los 240 créditos del título. En algunas universidades, las lógicas y tradicionales pugnas por consolidar departamentos, áreas o incluso docentes, pueden haber hecho que esta cifra tienda generalmente a la baja. Además, hay que contar con la posibilidad de que parte de la mención deba ser cubierto con asignaturas de carácter transversal. Sea como sea, la duda y la preocupación de este grupo de trabajo es si contamos con las condiciones necesarias para una especialización.

Por último, aunque muy directamente conectado con lo anterior, si incluimos en la capacitación técnica de los futuros maestros AICLE el dominio de lenguas, no se nos presentan muchas más opciones, sino proponer un plan formativo extracurricular, esto es,

un itinerario de formación complementaria con el que atender al menos la capacitación idiomática. Con todo, los estudiantes dudan sobre si vale la pena invertir más tiempo, si pueden hacer un mayor esfuerzo, si están dispuestos a asumir más riesgos. Pero la amenaza puede ser incluso mayor para los docentes que, estando ya en activo, deben buscar esta capacitación para mantener su competitividad desde los sistemas previstos en la formación permanente.

4.

Diagnósticos iniciales

Sabemos que el camino iniciado no admite una vuelta atrás y, sin embargo, el sistema parece no poder corregir fácilmente estos desequilibrios a día de hoy. Estamos participando en un proceso propio de los cambios educativos, que supone mover una maquinaria muy compleja. Es por ello por lo que planteamos el debate desde la perspectiva de la identidad docente, un ámbito en el que podemos actuar, y no desde la perspectiva administrativa o presupuestaria, donde nuestras inquietudes se topan con el ya clásico “no hay presupuesto, luego podemos hacer nada”.

Pensamos también que los variados grados de compromiso asumidos por unos y otros participantes en los procesos de cambio educativo dependen, sobre todo, de sus representaciones y creencias, de la parte vocacional de la identidad docente, en mayor medida que de la capacitación técnica o parte profesional de dicha identidad.

Sabemos que los contextos de apropiación de lenguas-culturas y las orientaciones metodológicas actuales nos obligan a reflexionar sobre tres perfiles docentes que se aproximan, sin poder determinar con precisión en qué medida se complementan o se solapan. Estamos asistiendo a un proceso de “profusión-fusión-confusión” que desdibuja los elementos del escenario para volver a dibujarlos inmediatamente después con una nueva apariencia o en un punto distinto del panorama.

Para constatar o matizar todos estos indicios, identificar sus causas y, llegado el caso, actuar a tiempo sobre ellas o sus consecuencias, debemos impulsar una dinámica de reflexiones compartidas que nos permita revisar la forma en que podemos incidir sobre la identidad docente de los futuros maestros y plantear estrategias y medidas que, por lo menos, reorienten la formación. Es lo que en la Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación de la Universidad de Cádiz intentamos hacer desde el Plan de Lenguas de Centro.

5.

El Plan de Lenguas de Centro

Para nosotros, al margen de las medidas que consideramos en el PLC, lo más importante es su perspectiva abiertamente plurilingüe y pluricultural. Podríamos decir que la revisión de creencias es en Educación más importante que en otras áreas de conocimiento, porque todas las personas, incluyendo lógicamente también a los estudiantes de educación con los que trabajamos, poseen un determinado acerbo de creencias a través de la experiencia individual y colectiva. Todos han y hemos pasado por las distintas etapas

del

sistema

educativo.

Nuestras

ideas

previas

sobre

estos

estudios

profesionalizantes son muy sólidas, por lo que su modificación ha de ser considerada desde la acción. Por esta razón proponemos desde el PLC diversos modos de experimentación que poseen un potencial fundamental en la modificación de las identidades docentes de nuestros estudiantes.

De manera general, el PLC prepara para la innovación educativa, para la investigaciónacción y contextualiza la competencia de ser educadores con un espíritu crítico, que tienen que sopesar qué significan los cambios en educación. En lo particular, prepara al alumnado para la escuela de los centros bilingües, una realidad numerosa que necesita una conciencia, una identidad docente, renovada. Y, en lo más específico, conlleva una mejor formación en idiomas y diversifica la experiencia formativa, enriqueciendo la visión del mundo de los participantes y, con ello, su trabajo futuro.

La ‘identidad docente’ a la que queremos poder contribuir desde el PLC debe atender a los tres perfiles señalados arriba. En este sentido, trabajamos actualmente para lograr que el perfil definido aquí como AICLE integre de manera natural el del generalista. Uno de los obstáculos son las inercias de los grados-menciones, fundamentadas en los perfiles docentes "tradicionales". En el PLC hemos partido de un pronóstico general y estamos atentos para completar un diagnóstico más preciso y verificar detalladamente los resultados y las posibilidades. Su finalidad no es otra que la de poder atender lo mejor posible este proceso de cambio.

6.

Bibliografía

Ávalos, B., 2006. ‘El nuevo profesionalismo: formación docente inicial y continua’. El oficio de docente. Vocación, trabajo y profesión en el siglo XXI. E. Tenti (ed.). Buenos Aires: UNESCO, IIPE y Fundación OSDE. BOE núm. 106, 2006. ‘Ley Orgánica 2/2006, de 3 de mayo, de Educación’. BOE del 4 de mayo de 2006. 17158-17207. BOE núm. 312, 2007. ‘ORDEN ECI/3857/2007, de 27 de diciembre, por la que se establecen los requisitos para la verificación de los títulos universitarios oficiales que habiliten para el ejercicio de la profesión de Maestro en Educación Primaria’. BOE del 29 de diciembre de 2007. Fernández Pérez, M., 1995. La profesionalización del docente. Perfeccionamiento, investigación en el aula, análisis de la práctica. Madrid: Siglo XXI. Herrero, F., C. Rodríguez, E. Romero, F. Rubio y F. Zayas, 2012. ‘Proyecto AICLE en la formación inicial de maestros en la Universidad de Cádiz’. A Didàctica de la llengua i la literatura experiències d’innovació docent a la universitat. A. Ambròs, J. Perera y M. Suárez (eds.). Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona. 61-70. Marcelo, C. y D. Vaillant, 2009. Desarrollo profesional docente. Madrid: Narcea.

Prieto-Parra, M. 2004. ‘La construcción de la identidad profesional del docente. Un Desafío permanente’. Revista Enfoques Educacionales 6:1. 29-49. Vaillant, D. 2007. ‘La identidad docente’, I Congreso Internacional “Nuevas Tendencias en la Formación Permanente del Profesorado”, Barcelona.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Implementing CLIL: essential factors from the perspective of leadership David Soler Ortínez University Ramon Llull María González-Davies University Ramon Llull Anna Iñesta Codina University Ramon Llull Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is currently expanding across various contexts and it is being integrated into different curriculums throughout Europe. As with all innovative practice, the way this educational approach is implemented needs to be carefully designed and reflected upon. Establishing educational innovation at any cost cannot guarantee that the expected results will take place, especially when dealing with an approach of such complexity as CLIL. However, there is still a lack of attention given to certain factors related to the implementation of CLIL such as organizational culture, its continuity, the teachers’ training or the length, stability and structure of this approach in a given institution. We argue that all these aspects can be promoted through an effective leadership. Research has shown that CLIL may fail to reach its inherent potential unless leadership and its implications regarding certain contextual and organizational factors are firmly taken into account. From our point of view, effective leadership can play a relevant role in the implementation and adoption of CLIL in higher education as well as in different settings and educational communities. This paper intends to explore the relation between leadership and educational innovation and how factors which can be promoted through leadership may contribute to the successful establishment of CLIL in any educational context.

1.

Introduction

The rapid expansion of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) across Europe and its adoption in diverse settings and educational communities has caused a great range of models and programmes to merge. Such models are naturally being developed in distinct ways so as to fit specific contexts (Ioannou, 2012). However, this diverse range of models has also led to some confusion as to how CLIL should be implemented. As 1

Ioannou (op.cit.) points out, it seems that CLIL, as an 'umbrella' term (Mehisto, Marsh and Frigols, 2008), might be leaving too wide a definition and, as a consequence, there may be the necessity to clarify what CLIL is and what the main principles of its implementation are.

It goes without saying that implementing educational innovation at any cost cannot guarantee that the expected results will take place, especially when dealing with an approach of such complexity as CLIL. Recent research (Navés, 2009; Navés and Victori, 2010; Florit, 2013) has shown that this innovative practice requires careful planning and ought to be implemented with stability and sustainability in order to achieve the expected results. Consequently, there should be a reflection upon the best way to implement CLIL in an educational institution and upon whether it is possible or not to establish certain principles and whether these principles should be tailored to suit different contexts.

From our point of view, effective leadership can play a relevant role in the implementation and adoption of CLIL in the different settings and educational communities. The relation between leadership and educational innovation has been studied by numerous authors (e.g. OECD, 2013; Pont, Nusche and Moorman, 2008; Hargreaves and Fink, 2006; Fullan, 2002) and research has pointed out that leadership actually has an impact on innovative processes. Therefore, certain factors such as the way the various members of an institution interact among themselves, the culture of the organization, or the way innovation and educational change are led in the school can be crucial when ensuring that the implementation of new innovative practices is successfully attained.

The present paper aims to draw out attention to the process of the implementation of CLIL in an educational organization and the basic factors involved in its success which, we argue, can be promoted through an effective leadership. Thus, in this paper we will 2

explore, first and foremost, the relation between educational leadership and educational innovation focusing on CLIL. Secondly, we will discuss the main factors which may be promoted through leadership that can have positive effects upon the implementation of CLIL.

2.

Educational leadership 2.1

Educational leadership: Why?

The capacity of an educational institution to innovate and evolve —especially in the present rapidly changing world— is a necessary condition to achieve educational success. For this reason, the involvement of the members of an educational organization in transformative processes —like CLIL— should be observed as a key factor in education nowadays. In such a context, we should assume that innovation is a basic element in the agendas and that leadership plays a relevant role by driving and sustaining the process.

When referring to educational leadership ―and by leadership we do not only mean the head teacher or the dean of the whole institution, we also refer to how teachers lead innovative processes―, there is a need to establish broad boundaries to define it due to the fact that leadership takes place at a variety of levels and settings and by different players. In our view, the OECD (2013) overall definition of educational leadership (also referred to as “learning leadership”) is appropriate:

Learning leadership is about actively contributing to the design, implementation and sustainability of powerful innovative learning environments. It is done through distributed, connected activity and relationships. It extends beyond formal players to include different partners, and may be exercised at different levels of the overall system. 3

Moreover, leadership is fundamental because it can have an impact on the promotion of educational innovation and change (Martínez, Badia i Jolonch, 2013) by driving and sustaining innovative processes; by establishing new ways of collaboration among professionals; by equipping students with the necessary competences to face today’s challenges or by facilitating the management of the expectations and the possible obstacles which may arise during its implementation. However, the main reason to justify the importance of leadership in education is, mainly, the fact that research (as pointed out by authors such as Pont Nusche and Moorman 2008; Khan et al, 2010 or the OECD report, 2013) has proved that leadership can have a huge impact on students’ learning outcomes. Therefore, leadership can create and sustain environments that are conducive to ‘deep learning’, which may allow students to develop 21st century competences (OECD, op.cit.).

2.2

Educational leadership: How?

Although the how question is not an easy topic to deal with due to the fact that issues such as the context or the variables exert an influence upon leadership and the organization, we believe there are certain common elements which need to be considered when leading innovative processes. Two of these common elements are a 'distributed perspective' and a 'collaborative culture'.

First, a ‘distributed leadership’ perspective seems to be relevant to carry out successful innovative processes. The main idea of distributed leadership is based on the assumption that ‘leadership is not only a function which results of the skills, cognition and charisma of one leader, but rather that leadership is articulated in the group of participants, tools and structures’ (Spillane, Halverson, and Diamond, 2001). Therefore, distributed leadership 4

‘takes shape in the interactions of leaders, followers, and their situation’ (Spillane, 2005) and proposes to expand the development of leadership tasks among different participants and contexts (Longo, 2008) by transferring responsibilities at various levels.

The study carried out by the National College for School Leadership, led by Bennett and others (2003), is an exhaustive review of the literature on the concept of ‘distributed leadership’. As reported in Pont, Nusche and Moorman (2008), this review showed that three of the main characteristics shared by different scholars who have researched on the conceptual paradigm of distributed leadership are those presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Common characteristics present in the conceptual paradigm of distributed leadership.

Distributed leadership is not something done 'by' or 'to' members of organizations, but rather an emergent property inherent in the social collective such that 'concerted action' responsive to situational needs and opportunities is carried out within a set of shared relationships where expertise and initiative are pooled.

The pool or 'boundaries of leadership' are not limited by formal role or position but defined by expertise and creativity in the context of specific situations.

The openness of concerted action to the varieties of expertise distributed across the organization makes possible the generation of a greater number of initiatives that can be taken on more broadly, improved upon and used as impetus for further change.

Source: Pont, Nusche and Moorman (2008)

5

The idea of a 'concerted action' becomes crucial in order to promote the implementation of innovative approaches such as CLIL. 'Concerted actions' empower teachers and make possible a better integration of innovative processes due to the fact that all members are taken into account and the projects are based on a joint effort involving collaboration and cooperation.

Second, there is a need to set a ‘collaborative culture’, through leadership, based on cooperation, collaboration and partnerships for learning in order to promote innovation and organizational learning. Collaborative culture aims at cooperating among professionals and, through this process of interaction which involves the sharing of information and experiences within the group, the members of an organization can learn from each other and have the opportunity to grow both personally and professionally (Lave & Wegner, 1991).

This type of learning within the organization, however, requires a high level of cooperation among its members in order to collectively construct knowledge and, at the same time, allow the organization to learn and evolve. CLIL, which is based on the integration of content and an additional languagei (henceforth AL), requires a highly collaborative culture among professionals (for example, a strong cooperation between content teachers and language teachers).

6

3.

Leading CLIL in an educational institution 3.1

The innovation process

CLIL is an innovative approach and, as such, involves many different innovative processes which should take place within the context of the educational organization. Among others, CLIL requires new ways of understanding, designing and approaching the teaching and learning of an AL to correctly adapt to the new 21st century socioeconomic educational demands. Table 2 shows some of these processes.

Table 2. Innovative processes which can be involved in CLIL

Curricular innovation: CLIL involves innovations in the curriculum, objectives, content, etc.

Methodological innovation and informed materials: CLIL demands new ways of presenting the subject content as well as changes in the strategies, the educational resources, the methodologies and the educational practices used to teach and learn.

Organizational innovation: CLIL can affect the redistribution and reorganization of the institution, the way it is led or its values.

Relational innovation: CLIL demands innovations in the way professionals collaborate among themselves within the organization as well as with the educational community, the school context or the administration.

Source: Own elaboration

7

Taking into account the diversity of innovations involved in CLIL, there is a need to think about ways to establish this innovative approach in an educational institution. In our perspective, when leading the incorporation of CLIL in a curriculum, there are some stages which should be taken into account. When establishing CLIL, we should think about the five stages presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Stages to take into account when leading CLIL

Stage

1.

Description

Setting This initial stage implies a reflection upon what the students, the school and

the context

the educational community are expected to achieve. The objectives and the educational needs should be clearly defined. Aspects such as the discussion on the type of CLIL programme as well as the availability of its implementation (regarding the resources and teachers available) may also take place at this stage.

2. Planning Planning should take into account the context of the school and should CLIL

allow for the design of the mechanisms which will be used to

obtain

feedback from the experience. Moreover, planning should also focus on the type of tasks, the materials and resources which will be used to teach and learn through CLIL.

3.

Implementation consists in putting planning into practise. Leadership at this

Implemen-

stage plays a key role, mainly due to the fact that there are many participants involved in the action. Leading the implementation means, 8

ting CLIL

among different aspects, ensuring that the design is carrying out correctly; that feedback from the students’ is being collected; or that the resources and materials are appropriate.

4.

Evaluation consists in a reflection of the approach and its results. There

Evaluating

should be a discussion on aspects such as the results obtained; the benefits

CLIL

for

the students; the difficulties faced when implementing CLIL or the

aspects which should be modified.

5. Institutio- This last stage aims at contemplating further improvements to help CLIL nalization

become part of the culture of the organization. Considering whether CLIL would work with other actors than those who initially implemented it or not, as well as the impact that CLIL may have had on the values of the organizations are some of the aspects which should be documented throughout this stage.

Source: Own elaboration based on Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010), Fullan (2002) and Gairín (2002)

3.2

Conditioning leadership factors

Having presented some steps which may be taken into account when establishing CLIL, we should consider some conditioning factors which can play a key role when leading CLIL in our educational institution. Needless to say, relevant researches on this topic have been studied by authors such as Navés (2009), Florit (2013) or Ioannou (2012). Taking all 9

that into account, and concerning the literature review as well as different aspects we are dealing with in our research, we consider that the five key presented in Figure 1 can and should be promoted through leadership in order to be effective.

Figure 1. Key factors which can be promoted through leadership

Source: Own elaboration based on Florit (2013); Ioannou (2012); Coyle (2012); Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010); Navés (2009); Coyle (2006).

Promoting teacher training Not all the organizations are ready to implement a CLIL approach. Finding teachers with adequate competence to lead CLIL is, probably, one of the main obstacles when implementing this innovative practice. The difficulty of this task lies in the fact that teachers need to have an adequate capacity to master the AL as well as sufficient knowledge to 10

teach the contents of the curriculum (Infante et al., 2009). Different studies (as reported in Mehisto, 2008) highlight the importance of teacher training and suggest that both lack of training and inadequate competence in the AL of the CLIL program are common factors related to the failure of CLIL (Ioannou, 2012).

Although the type of training may be diverse, there is a common agreement that training should be both pre-service and in-service. Regarding the possible benefits, training teachers is adequate to help them learn the tools, strategies and methodologies for carrying out a CLIL approach successfully. Table 4 shows some of the aspects that can be promoted through teacher training.

Table 4. Aspects that can be promoted through teacher training

Additional language competence

Strategies, tools and methodologies to integrate content and language correctly

Strategies of cooperation and collaboration with other professionals

Teaching skills (didactics)

Ways of raising social, cultural and value issues in their additional language teaching

Source: Own elaboration based on Coyle (2006); Figueras and Flores (2013) and Kelly and Grenfell (2004).

11

Organizational culture Despite the need for training teachers, the additional difficulty of effectively combining content subject and the additional language is a risk which may not lead to an adequate integration of both content and language. Coyle (2006: 22) suggests that one solution to this dilemma might lie in ‘professional collaboration through learning communities’. CLIL is a great opportunity for the language teachers and the content teachers to promote teamwork and work together as equal parties. Promoting organizational learning in communities of practice and learning (Lave and Wegner, 1991; Wegner, 2006) can be an effective way to increase participation, to develop networks of cooperation and collaboration, and to promote the understanding of knowledge and learning in a situated context. As Coyle (op.cit) points out, building communities of practice when working with CLIL involves:

Content and language teachers working together, subject and language trainers sharing ideas and supporting classroom enquiry, networks of CLIL teachers and their learners working on joint curricular links and genuine belief that for CLIL theory to guide practitioners, it must be ‘owned’ by the community, developed through classroom exploration and understood in situ - a theory of practice developed for practice through practice.

Communities of practice may help CLIL teachers construct their knowledge by the interaction in their environment as well as by the actively engagement in the ‘process of constructing knowledge for their learning community (communal)’ (Holmes, 2002 in Coyle, 2006). Therefore, factors such as ‘teamteaching’ —the collaboration among teachers from different disciplines (as described in Figueres, Flores and Gonzalez-Davies, 2011)— can provide sustainable solutions which can help to integrate content and language and, at the 12

same time, be useful to overcome any initial barriers that students and teachers may experience.

Structure, continuity and sustainability When establishing CLIL, we need to ensure that the structure of the approach allows students to have a minimum specified exposure to the AL (Ioannou, op.cit.). Therefore, a CLIL approach should be carefully planned and should guarantee that students have continuity (Navés, 2009) and relevant exposure to the additional language not only over an academic year, but also sustainably from year to year. Continuity may allow time for students to become familiar with the additional language and the CLIL approach. Moreover, sustainability promotes quality and helps the institution to integrate the values of CLIL into its organizational culture.

Methodologies and resources At a second level of leadership, the one which takes place in the classroom, teachers should be leaders exhibiting active teaching behaviour. Other relevant methodological aspects, which will not be discussed in this paper but which should be taken into consideration, are the importance of scaffolding, the informed inclusion of learners’ L1 in the learning process and the fact that teaching CLIL is not simply translating the content of the subject. It goes without saying that CLIL requires specific resources to support the methodology. Although resources are not clearly linked to leadership, it seems to be relevant to carefully design them in order to adequately respond to students' needs.

13

Coordination and involvement Not only professors need to be involved in the implementation of a CLIL program, but the different participants, as well as the educational community, are also relevant in order to succeed (Navés, 2009). CLIL is still an innovative process and, as such, it requires the support of all the stakeholders. This support, which, for example, can come from colleagues, the educational administration or the principals and deans of the institution, may play a key role and help alleviate possible initial resistances (Ioannou, 2012) or obstacles which may appear during the process of implementation. Leading the implementation of CLIL is a joint effort which should never be driven in isolation.

4.

Conclusions

The rapid adoption of CLIL and its expansion to different educational contexts makes it necessary to carefully reflect upon the ways to establish CLIL in our institutions. CLIL is still an innovative process which, among others, involves (1) Curricular innovations; (2) Methodological innovations; (3) Organizational innovations and (4) Relational innovation.

Taking into account the diversity of innovations involved in CLIL, we believe there are some stages which need to be considered. These stages, which should be driven through a distributed leadership and by setting a collaborative culture, tend to include (1) Setting the context; (2) Planning; (3) Implementation; (4) Evaluation and (5) Institutionalisation.

For successful CLIL programmes, different leadership aspects should be taken into consideration. In our view, factors such as (1) Teacher training; (2) Collaborative culture; (3) Structure, continuity and sustainability; (4) Methodologies and resources and (5)

14

Coordination and involvement can and should be promoted through leadership in order to be effective.

Further studies ought to be carried out to detect efficient educational scenarios, as well as successful models, that can show the relation between leadership and CLIL.

5.

References

Bennett, Nigel; Wise, Christine; Woods, Philip A; Harvey, Janet A., 2003. Distributed Leadership: A Review of Literature. National College for School Leadership. Retrieved from: http://oro.open.ac.uk/8534/1/bennett-distributed-leadership-full.pdf Coyle, D., 2006. Developing CLIL: Towards a Theory of Practice. CLIL in Catalonia, from theory to practice. APAC Monographs, 6. Coyle, D., Hood, P., and Marsh, D., 2010. Content and language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Corcoll, C., 2013. Translanguaging in the Additional Language Classroom: PedagogicallyBased Codeswitching in a Primary Education Context. Unpublished Phd. Barcelona. Universitat Ramon Llull. Figueras, S. and Flores, C., 2013. El repte de l’AICLE a l’educació universitària: una oportunitat d’internacionalització i de revisió metodològica. Temps d’Educació. 45, 97-114. Retrieved from: http://www.raco.cat/index.php/TempsEducacio/article/view/274638 Figueras, S., Flores, C. and González-Davies, M., 2011. Educació Física en anglès: Percepcions dels estudiants entorn d’una experiència metodològica en el marc universitari. Aloma. Revista de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport, 29, 61-80. Retrieved from: http://www.raco.cat/index.php /Aloma/article/ view/248382

15

Florit, C., 2013. Pràctica Docent Efectiva AICLE. Temps d’Educació. 45, 115-141. Retrieved from: http://www.publicacions.ub.edu/revistes/tempsDEducacio45/default.asp?articulo=940&mo do=resumen Gairin, J., 2002. "La innovación educativa, cultura y transformación permanente de las instituciones educativas". In: A.Medina (coord.). Diseño, desarrollo e innovación del currículo en las instituciones educativas. Madrid: Universitas. 117-175. Hargreaves, A. and Fink, D., 2006. El liderazgo sostenible. Madrid: Morata. Infante, D., Benvenuto, G., Lastrucci, E., 2009. The Effects of CLIL from the Perspective of Experienced Teachers. CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field. Retrieved from: http://www.icpj.eu/?id=20 Ioannou Georgiou, S., 2012. Reviewing the puzzle of CLIL. ELT Journal. 66 (4) 495-504. Khan, Aslam; Afzal, Hasan; Imran, Ali; i Hamid, Kashif, 2010. A Study of University Student’s Motivation and its Relationship with their Academic Performance. International Journal of Business and Management, 5, 80-88. Lave, J. and Wenger, E., 1991. Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press. Longo, F., 2008. Liderazgo Distribuido, un elemento crítico para promover la innovación. Capital Humano, 226: 84-91. Retrieved from: http://pdfs.wke.es/2/1/8/5/pd0000022185.pdf Martínez, M, Badia, J and Jolonch, A., 2013. Lideratge per a l’aprenentatge. Barcelona: Fundació Jaume Bofill. Marsh, D (Ed), 2002. CLIL/EMILE - The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential. European Commission. Mehisto, P., D. Marsh, and M. J. Frigols, 2008. Uncovering CLIL. Oxford: Macmillan. 16

Navés, T. 2009. Effective Content and Language Integrated Programmes. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe. Second Language Acquistion and CLIL. Clevedon, Multilingual Matters, 22-40. Navés, T. and Victori, M., 2010. CLIL in Catalonia: an Overview of Research Studies. In Ruiz de Zarobe and Lasagabaster (eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training, Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. OECD, 2013, Leadership for 21st Century Learning, Educational and Innovation, OECD Publishing. Pont, B., D. Nusche and H. Moorman, 2008. Improving School Leadership, Volume 1: Policy and Practice. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/44374889.pdf Spillane, J., 2005. Distributed Leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(2) Spillane, J.P., Halverson, R., and Diamond, J.B., 2001. Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher 30, 3: 23-28. Wenger, E., 2006. Communities of practice. A brief introduction. Retrieved from: http://www.ewenger.com/theory

i We are using the concept of “Additional Language” (AL) because “the term ‘additional’ underscores our belief that additional languages are not necessarily inferior nor superior nor a replacement for student’s first language” (Judd, Tan & Walberg, 2001:6, as cited in Corcoll, 2013)

17

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. TEACHING CROSS-CULTURAL COMPETENCE AND CLIL: a CLIL approach in International Relations University Courses Mary Ellen Toffle University of Messina

Abstract: International relations professionals need cross-cultural competence and English language communication skills to function in the international arena (Graddol 1997). English language communication skills are necessary not only to communicate with foreign colleagues (Bocanegra-Valle 2014) but also to access the vast amount of knowledge transmitted in English over the internet (Ku, Zussman 2010). This work reports the use of CLIL and cross-cultural training in the University of Messina International Relations Advanced Degree Program as a method to raise students’ level of English as quickly as possible while giving them the essential intercultural skills for work in the international field. The researchbased course program combined cross-cultural communication training (Storti, 1997; Lewis, 1999; Gannon, 2004, Harris and Moran, 2007; U.S Peace Corps Training Handbook 2012,) and intercultural competence skill development (Bennett, 1998). Two objectives were proposed: 1) develop cross-cultural communication competence; 2) bring students up to a B2 level as fast as possible. The final exam demonstrated significant growth in the areas of cross-cultural competence as well as an increase in European Common Framework level ranging from .5 to 1.0 depending on the student. Students expressed their belief that what they had learned would be useful for their future career. Combining CLIL with intercultural competence building seems to be effective in meeting two objectives: increasing English language fluency and developing cross-cultural communication competence. More research is recommended to further document this method for increasing English communication proficiency while developing interculturally competent international professionals. Key words: CLIL, cross-cultural communication training, intercultural skill development

Cross-cultural competence and the capacity to communicate effectively in the English language are currently considered to be a requirement for a successful international career. Any internationally-focused profession requires the ability to communicate across cultures, work successfully on multicultural teams, solve problems and resolve conflicts.

1.

Cross-cultural Competence and English

The following sections discuss the cross-cultural competence and English communication needs of international relations students.

1.1

Cross-cultural competence

International relations students need to begin developing cross-cultural competence in their university years. competence?

What is cross-cultural competence?

What is intercultural

There are many definitions but all of them point to the ability to

communicate effectively and achieve something with representatives from other cultures. It is necessary to examine the terms ‘cross-cultural’ and ‘intercultural’.

This author

chooses to utilize research under both titles as having equivalent value for the goal of the course. Many researchers use the terms interchangeably, whereas others define ‘crosscultural’ as being more comparative and involves contrasting one’s own culture, whereas ‘intercultural’ deals with the ability of individuals to communicate effectively with other individuals from other cultures.

Some would say that ‘cross-cultural’ comes first and

results in ‘intercultural’. But whatever one calls it, the goal is the same. The capacity to comprehend, act and react effectively in another culture is one well-rounded definition that has been proposed (Semeski, 2009). International professionals need to acquire cultural knowledge and develop cross-cultural skills, in order to interact effectively with members of other cultures (Zakaria, 2000). The ability to function in cultural contexts very different from the home culture is skill-based. These skills have been identified by many sources. Some of them include language acquisition, conflict resolution, coping with stress and ambiguity, to mention a few (Reid, Semelski, Abbe, et al 2012).

Byram (2000) identified five skill

areas: attitude, including curiousity; knowledge of how cultures function, including one’s own; interpreting and relating skills; discovery and interaction skills with real-life application; critical cultural awareness and political education (Byram, 2009). The ability to

function effectively and creatively on a team is also important for students of international relations.

Bhawuk and Brislin stated that “interculturally competent leaders are needed

not only in virtual global teams but also in the multicultural context of regional teams and organizations” (Bhawuk and Brislin, 1992). Intercultural competence is “the complex of abilities needed to perform effectively and create appropriately when interacting with others who are linguistically and culturally different from oneself” (Fantini, 2003).

The ‘complex of abilities’ was further defined by Deardoff (2006) “the development of knowledge and skill through experience and training that results in a complex schema of cultural differences, perspective-taking skills, and interpersonal skills, all of which an individual can flexibly (or adaptively) apply through the willingness to engage in new environments even in the face of considerable ambiguity, through self-monitoring and through self –regulation”. “It is the ability to step beyond one’s own culture and function with other individuals from linguistically and culturally diverse backgrounds” (Castle, Sinicrope, Norris, Watanabe, 2007).

In creating the European Language Framework

(ECF), the Council of Europe recognized a significant need for interculturalism in Europe (Council of Europe, 2001). Great importance was set on “intercultural skills and knowhow”; the ability to be a cultural intermediary, to be culturally sensitive and “deal effectively with intercultural misunderstanding and conflict situations”; and the capacity to go beyond stereotypes. “Intercultural know-how” was defined as openness towards new experiences, societies, peoples, cultures; the willingness to look at one’s own cultural and value system in a relativistic way; the capacity to recognize cultural difference apart from conventional attitudes (ECF part 5). This course was created with these competences in mind because all of them are important for international relations students.

1.2

English language communication needs

This work presents a course that assists in developing cross-cultural competence in the form of an English CLIL course.

It worked on cross-cultural skill development while

improving, and in some cases, introducing some sort of proficiency in the English language. It is common knowledge that the English language has become the global ‘lingua franca’. The significance of this phenomenon is being studied in various areas, including an ongoing study (VOICE 2013) which has identified and developed an entire corpus of English as an international language (lingua franca). International English now has a new name: ELF “English as a Lingua Franca” (Vienna, 2012). David Graddol (2006) wrote that English as a Second Language (ESL) and English as a Foreign Langage (EFL) are being replaced by English as a Lingua Franca (ELF). The meaning of this is very significant for students of international relations:

not only will they be speaking

English in their jobs, but they will be speaking it with people from many different countries and linguistic backgrounds. Hence, one more reason to acquire both English language capability as well as cross-cultural communication skills.

As early as 1997 David Graddol (Graddol, 1997:8) stated that English covered several major international domains including its role as the working language of international organizations.

Other domains include scientific publications, economics, international

trade, global advertising, tourism, international safety and security, international law, technology transfer and internet communication.

English continues to expand as the

lingua franca and there are no indications that this will change for at least fifty years (Graddol, 2004; Nickerson, 2005). Other studies have confirmed that English is the main language of communication in the international arena. (In Nickerson: Akar, 2002, Bilbow 2002). Gupta (2009) clearly identified the ability to use English as one of three elements necessary to access the internet effectively. Even in the academic world professionals

have to be able to communicate with colleagues in other countries and write effectively in English for publications (Bocanegra-Valle, 2014).

The Italian university system is challenged to meet the English communication needs of the students. Basic structural impediments exist: limited number of hours dedicated to English courses, English courses offered only as an elective and not a requirement, scheduling issues that indicate that English is not considered to be very important. Most of them come to the English course with an A1.5 –A2.5 level and are expected to pass an exam on the B2-C1 level, usually after an average of less than 40 hours of instruction, depending on the university degree program. This article pragmatically proposes a way of meeting two needs: English communication capacity and development of cross-cultural competence.

2.

The CLIL course

The following sections discuss the formation and implementation of the course.

2.1

Objectives

This CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) course had two objectives: develop cross-cultural competence and bring students up to ECF Level B2 as fast as possible. Frontal lessons emphasized speaking and listening proficiency while reading and writing were the primary goals for the independent projects and assignments may be of two types, depending on length.

2.2

Methods

The linguistics-based language instruction method was based on Multimodal Analysis (Baldry, Thibault, 2006). Although the actual use of multimodal analysis as a linguistic

analytical tool was quite limited, the students needed to begin with it in order to understand how texts demonstrate meaning in various ways.

This gave the students a basic

framework in the analysis of texts in order to extract meaning and set the stage for the next part. The course activities were based on multimodal analysis (Baldry, Thibault, 2006) and cross-cultural website analysis (Toffle, 2012). The cross-cultural training method was adapted from various sources including the U.S. Peace Corps Training Manual and other cross-cultural communication research (Storti, 1997; Lewis, 1999; Gannon, 2000; Harris and Moran, 2007) and intercultural competence skill development (Bennett, 1998).

Initial and final ECF English level test and cross-cultural competence test based on the DMIS by Milton Bennett (2003) were administered. The beginning results indicated that most of the students were in the ethnocentric area. (The Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) (Bennett, 1993/ Hammer et. al. 2003) is a model that identifies the stages of progression from ethnocentrism to ethno-relativism, or rather, the necessary steps for becoming interculturally competent.)

2.3

Activities and Procedure

Students were given the following diagram based on cultural orientations (Toffle, 2013, 2014). Interactive team exercises and cooperative learning assisted them in building their interactive skills and confidence.

Students studied multimodal analysis based on Halliday’s theories (Halliday,1978) and the method developed by Baldry and Thibault (2006) as mentioned above. Students learned to how to analyze a website, recognize its contents and interpret texts. The second part of the course consisted of cross-cultural competence training. They followed the generally accepted proto- type training adapted from the international management field for crosscultural communication training:

1) raising cultural awareness, 2) developing cultural

sensitivity 3) building cross-cultural communication skills.

(Storti, 1997; Lewis, 1999;

Gannon, 2004; Harris and Moran, 2007; U.S Peace Corps Training Handbook 2012), Various competences cited above were introduced as part of the interactive component of the course.

The final activities of the course focused on examining various websites and texts and applying the model of cultural orientations. Students were forced to think creatively and negotiate solutions together while applying the cultural principles and using English as the communication tool.

2.4

Final evaluation

The students produced a research-based PowerPoint presentation and delivered it in English. They completed the oral and written English exit exams to measure progress and level change. They also completed an exit exam on intercultural competence, based on a different set of questions with the same target.

3.

Results

Using the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) method combined with the techniques of multimodal analysis, cross-cultural website analysis and cross-cultural competence training produced results of a 0.5 average increase in level.

An attitudinal change towards different cultures as well as an increasing consciousness of their own cultural values and behaviour was noted through discussion and comments.

Final results showed an improvement of (.5) to almost (1.0) complete ECFR level. Upon administration of an exit test, the intercultural competence level that was initially found to be in the area of ethnocentrism ended in the area of ethno-relativism, mostly in the ‘acceptance’ zone. (Bennett, 2003). Apart from significant cognitive and linguistic growth, the students demonstrated a new eagerness to learn about new cultures. They also demonstrated the ability to view their own cultures in a more relativistic way and seemed more tolerant of cultural differences.

4.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The strategy of combining CLIL-type instruction, multimodal analysis and cross cultural training seems to be effective when the goal is to raise the ECF level and develop intercultural awareness. The final exam revealed that ECF level improved as well as the score on the intercultural competence scale. Future development should include more

targeted interactivities attached to various identified cross-cultural competencies.

In

order to better document the effectiveness of this method for improving English skills the assessment of ECF level should be more thoroughly documented in the areas of reading and writing.

5.

References

Ajar, R.M., 2010. A New Angle on the U.S. Military’s Emphasis on Developing CrossCultural Competence: Connecting In-Ranks’ Cultural Diversity to Cross-Cultural Competence. Armed Forces & Society, 36: 247-263. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 3 April 2014]. Baldry, A., Thibault, P., 2006. Multimodal Transcription and Text Analysis. London and New York: Equinox. Bennett, Milton, 1991. American Cultural Patterns: A Cross-Cultural Perspective Yarmouth: Intercultural Press. Bhawuk, D.P.S., Brislin, R. W., 1992. The measurement of intercultural sensitivity using the concepts of individualism and collectivism. International Journal of International Relations. Bocanegra-Valle, A., 2014. ‘English is my default academic language’: Voices from LSP scholars publishing in a multilingual journal. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 13, pp 65-77. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 4 April 2014]. Byram, Michael, 2009. ‘Intercultural competence in foreign languages: the intercultural speaker and the pedagogy of foreign language education.’ Handbook of Intercultural Competence Ed. Deardorff, Darla. Thousand Oaks: Sage 321-332. Council of Europe, 2012. Education and Languages, Language Policy. European Common Framework. Available at http://www.coe.int/lang-CEFR. Retrieved March 5, 2012. Council of Europe, 2001. Common European Framework of Reference for LanguagesLearning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Deardorff, Darla, 2009. The Sage Handbook of Intercultural Competence, Newbury Park: Sage. Eoyang, E.C., 2005. Two Way Mirrors: cross cultural studies in glocalization. Lanham MD: Lexington Books. European Directives of Lifelong Learning. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/education Retrieved: January 21, 2013. European Commission, 2012. First European Survey on Language Competences. European Commission, 2007. Communication from the Commission to the Council of 13 April 2007 entitled “Framework for the European survey on language competences” (Com 2007 184 final. Not published in the Official Journal). Fantini, A.E., 2006. 87 Assessment tools of intercultural competence. Brattleboro, VT: School for International Training. Retrieved June 20, 2007 from http://www.sit.edu/publications/docs/feil_appendix_f.pdf Fishman, Joshua. The New Linguistic Order. Foreign Policy 113, Winter 1998-99. Gannon, Martin, 2000. Cultural Metaphors. Sage: Newbury Park. Graddol, David, 2006. Why Global English may mean the end of the English language. English Next. London: British Council. Graddol, David, 2000. The Future of English. London: British Council. Gupta, 2009. ‘The Internet & the English Language. First Conference on Postcolonial Theory, University of Leeds.’ Available at: Retrieved 4 April 2014. Hall, Edward T., 1976. Beyond Culture. New York: Doubleday. Hall. Edward T., 1983. The Dance of Life: The Other Dimension of Time. New York: Doubleday/Anchor Books.

Halliday, Michael, 1978. Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold. Hammer, M.R.; Bennett, M.J., and Wiseman, R., 2003. Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27, 421-443. Hofstede, Geert, 1984. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Newbury Park: Sage Publications. Kluckhohn, Florence R., and Strodtbeck, Fred L., 1961. Variations in Value Orientations. Evanston, Illinois: Row, Peterson. Ku, H., Zussman, A., 2010. Lingua franca: The role of English in international trade. Original Research Article. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 75(2), pp 250260. Available at: [Accessed 3 April 2014]. Lewis, Richard, 1999. When Cultures Collide. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing. Hajro, A., Pudelko, M., 2010. An analysis of core-competences of successful multinational team leaders. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management. August, vol. 10(2), pp 175-194. [Online] Available at: < SAGE journals> [Accessed 3 April 2014]. Nickerson, C., 2005. English as a lingua franca in international business contexts. English for Specific Purposes 24(4), pp 367–380. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 3 April 2014]. Moran, Robert T., Harris, Philip R. and Moran, Sarah V., 2007. Managing Cultural Differences. Global leadership strategies for the 21st century (7th Edition) Burlington USA: Butterworth/Heinemann. Reid, P.; Steinke, J. C.; Mokuolu, F.; Trejo, B.; Faulkner, D.; Sudduth, M., and McDonald, D. P., 2012. A proposed developmental sequence for cross-cultural competence training in the Department of Defense. Report prepared by the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute for the Defense Language Office.

Roberts, B., 2007. Glocalization: How followers of Jesus engage in a flat world. Grand Rapids: MI, Zondervan. Selmeski, B.R., 2007. Military cross-cultural competence: Core concepts and individual development. Kingston: Royal Military College of Canada Centre for Security, Armed Forces, & Society. Sinicrope, C.; Norris, J. and Watanabe, Y., 2007. Understanding and Assessing Intercultural Competence: A Summary of Theory, Research, and Practice (Technical Report for the Foreign Language Program Evaluation Project). SLS working paper, 26(1), University of Hawaiʻ [Online] Available at: [Accessed 3 April 2014].) Stewart, Edward S., and Bennett, Milton, 1991. American Cultural Patterns: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. (Rev. ed). Yarmouth, Maine: Intercultural Press. Storti, Craig, 1997. Culture matters: The Peace Corps cross-cultural workbook (First ed.). Washington, DC: Peace Corps Information Collection and Exchange. Toffle, Mary Ellen, 2014. ‘Cross-Cultural Website Analysis as a method for teaching intercultural competence in the University English Program’. Procedia: Social and Behavioural Sciences, Fifth World Education Conference, Rome, Vol. 116 :3524-3535. Toffle, Mary Ellen, 2013. ‘Foodstills as a Cultural Artifact: a Multimodal Study’ in Cambria, M.V, Arizzi C. Magazzu, G (eds), 2013. Web Genres and Web Tools. Ibis, Como. Training Management Corp. (TMC), 1992. Doing Business Internationally: the Cross Cultural Challenges. Seminar and Course Book: Princeton NJ. Triandis, Harry. C.; Brislin, Richard W. and Hui, C. Harry, 1988. Cross-cultural training across the individualism-collectivism divide. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12(3), 269-289. Tuleja, Elizabeth, and Rourke, James S., 2009. Intercultural Communication for Business. Cengage Learning. Ohio: Mason. Available at

Retrieved April 2, 2014. Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English 2009/2013. Available at Retrieved April 3, 2014. Zakaria, N. 2000. ‘The effects of cross-cultural training on the acculturation process of the global workforce’. International Journal of Manpower 21, 6: 492-510.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. CLILing at university: Insights from the lecturer training programme at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Imma Torra Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya – BarcelonaTech (UPC) [email protected] Araceli Adam Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya – BarcelonaTech (UPC) [email protected] Alexandra Vraciu Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB) [email protected] Ian Stephens Contact [email protected] Julie Foale Contact [email protected] Abstract: The Institute of Education Sciences of the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya – Barcelona Tech (UPC) started a training programme in 2008 addressed at university lecturers wishing to prepare themselves in order to offer their content subjects in English. This training programme was an assignment from the vice rector for international relations and it was aimed at fulfilling the objectives of the Internationalisation Plan that the university approved for 2008-2015. In this paper, we wish to show the experience from three perspectives: the parameters of the institutional assignment and how the Institute of Education Sciences gave an answer to it, the methodological adaptations carried out all along the programme (this will be done by exemplifying them in one sample training course), and some of the lessons learned from the lecturer training programme that has been implemented for six years now.

1.

The institutional assignment

The story starts in 2008 when the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya – Barcelona Tech (UPC) approved the Internationalisation Plan for 2008-2015. With such an initiative, the university wished to more deeply involve the whole university community and all its academic activities in the internationalisation of the institution. One of the aims was to increase the opportunities for students to be immersed in international activities and in the

use of a third language (Catalan and Spanish being the first and the second) while at the university.

At the same period of time when the Internationalisation Plan was passed, Catalan and Spanish universities, as well as European ones, were immersed in revising their study programmes in order to adapt to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) requirements. In this context, the UPC decided to guarantee, for all of its degrees, that the graduates would reach a certain command of 7 transversal skills by the end of their studies, one of them being the command of a third language, preferably English.

So, both the Internationalisation Plan and the inclusion of the third language skill in all degrees were the levers that were at the origin of the assignment made to the Institute of Education Sciences (ICE), who is the academic unit in charge, within the university, of the professional development of lecturers by means of training opportunities, among other developmental activities.

1.1

Some decisions taken

At this stage, the ICE had to take some decisions regarding the new training programme to be put in place, and how it would be embedded in the already existing lecturer training programme. The following are the foundational elements that have permitted the programme to operate since 2008.

The programme is part of the lecturer programme for teaching, one more part of it, and does not have a specific treatment, strategic or other. And as such, it is free of charge for all attendants.

The general aim of the programme is to facilitate English-medium instruction at top quality standards.

A Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach was to be developed, but other approaches, such as increasing the level of the command of English were not to be put aside.

The programme had to include as many opportunities for microteaching and direct linguistic coaching as possible, with small groups to facilitate an interactive approach.

A certain level of English would be required from trainees (B2), but no placement tests would be run. The levelling was to be the responsibility of the trainees themselves.

The programme would be structured into short training courses in English (6 to 18 hours).

Trainees would not be forced to attend. On the contrary, an implication of the School/Faculty boards was sought, in order to facilitate agreements within the Schools/Faculties. Furthermore, trainees were free to repeat activities.

A constant contact with the Schools and Faculties was established in order to fine-tune training needs at any moment, and to guarantee a close follow-up both by the ICE and the School or Faculty.

All in all, the keyword was flexibility, facilitating that anyone (Schools and Faculties, and lecturers) could take their own decisions regarding instruction through English. The Institute would act as a facilitator to support all actors by means of training activities.

1.2

Trainers

To start and implement the programme, many contacts were established, with a great number of trainers from different backgrounds. The ICE worked with specialists with previous experience developed at the UPC, other universities, English language teaching

providers, and at the Catalan Ministry of Education, seeking the involvement of experienced senior trainers. This wide opening to several profiles of trainers permitted the programme to respond to a great diversity of demands from the Schools and Faculties, and from the lecturers themselves. The capacity to adapt to an academic setting and the previous experience in working with university lecturers turned to be a must for contributing to the training programme, and two of the qualities most required from the trainers.

1.3

General data

The main figures of the programme after six years of activity can be seen in Table 1. The size of the data, in the context of all lecturer training programmes at the university, shows the dimension of the programme, which has reached almost 20% of all academic staff of the university up to date.

Main characteristics of the programme

Duration of the programme (2008-2014), in years

6

Total amount of activities developed: mainly courses (average 17h) and some workshops or seminars (average 4h)

85

Participation

Number of certificates issued (after successful conclusion of the activities)

729

High average of participation (successful conclusion over inscription)

76%

Number of individuals that have successfully concluded the activities (19,41% of UPC teaching and research staff members)

472

UPC teaching and research staff members

2431

Trainees’ feedback: Average all years (Maximum mark is 5)

Academic value of the activities

4,41

The trainers

4,74

Organisation of the activities

4,21

Table 1. UPC lecturer training programme in English-medium instruction– Main figures

2.

Sample training course: “Skills and Strategies for Teaching Content Subjects through English at University”

We wish now to show the most relevant methodological adaptations that have been required of our trainers. We will do so by analysing a training activity that includes all the core elements of the programme.

The “Skills and Strategies for Teaching Content Subjects through English at University” (from now on “Skills and strategies”) is an 18-hour module in the lecturer training programme of the UPC, offered together with modules in English for Academic Purposes, Instrumental English and Linguistic Coaching. It was designed to provide UPC lecturers, who are generally non-native speakers of English, with hands-on strategies and tools for

an effective delivery of academic content in English to an equally non-native English speaker audience.

In the vein of CLIL models in primary and secondary education, the course has a double objective, namely to offer lecturers linguistic and methodological scaffolding for the preparation and implementation of their teaching programmes, at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. In what follows we wish to outline the process of syllabus design and the syllabus itself.

2.1

Syllabus Design Needs Analysis

An initial needs analysis was carried out among the lecturers enrolled in the course. We wanted to find out what the lecturers’ expectations were in relation to teaching their areas of expertise in a foreign language. Given that “Skills and strategies” was a needs-based course, we were interested to know which aspects of English-medium instruction lecturers expected to be easy and which difficulties they anticipated. Moreover, we wanted to find out what learning outcomes they wanted to achieve and whether these outcomes were content-related only or content and language-related. The needs analysis was systematically carried out during the first session of all the editions of the course (6 editions to date) and the syllabus of the course was adjusted accordingly.

Overall, the results of the needs analysis showed that expectations depended on the amount of previous experience lecturers had had teaching through English at university. While the majority of lecturers agreed that English would facilitate access to specialism vocabulary and bibliography, often available mostly in English, lecturers with no experience were mainly concerned about their proficiency in the target language and how to preserve the structure and content of their Catalan/Spanish teaching programmes while delivering them by means of a different instruction language. For this group of lecturers,

English-medium instruction felt like an individual challenge, the success of which hinged upon high proficiency in the target language. The learning objectives were content-related.

Lecturers who had already taught their subjects through English did not identify the lecturer’s proficiency in the target language as the main difficulty for English-medium instruction, mainly because most of them had spent time doing research and/or teaching in English-speaking countries and had experience doing conference presentations in English. What seemed to be more problematic were aspects related to student participation during the lecture, unplanned communication (e.g. questions from the students, unexpected requests for explanation or communicative breakdowns, etc.) and teacher idiosyncrasy, i.e. their specific rhetorical traits when lecturing such as jokes, spontaneous remarks, use of voice and intonation, etc. Experienced lecturers expressed their concern at “not being themselves” while lecturing in English. As for the learning outcomes, many of the experienced lecturers had both content and language-related objectives. They pointed out that, in their English-taught lectures, students did not feel the obligation to use English in class and often formulated questions or did pair/group work in their mother tongue. Lecturers wanted students to not only grasp the content but also use English for classroom communication, both with the lecturer and with their peers.

The needs analysis also revealed that a common desire among all lecturers, regardless of their previous experience, was to create a motivating learning environment for their students and a non-face-threatening experience for the lecturer. In other words, lecturers were looking for ways to turn the English-taught lecture into a “safe place” for all those involved.

Therefore, it seemed important to us to design a syllabus which would provide lecturers with the linguistic scaffolding for improving their English oral skills for lecture delivery and

classroom management, and with the methodological scaffolding for creating class activities that facilitate the learning of content through a foreign language and foster communication in the language of instruction. The course syllabus will be presented in 2.2.

2.2

Assumptions in syllabus design

The syllabus for “Skills and strategies” has four assumptions or statements at its core. They respond to certain preconceived ideas that university lecturers tend to have about English-medium instruction. These assumptions are: (1) university lecturers are experts in their subject matter, not in English; (2) when English is a foreign language, the language is a filter for content and communication which means that we teach through English; (3) English affects all the dimensions of the lecture, not just the class materials; (4) a lecture in English is not a conference presentation. We want the participants to be aware that English-medium instruction in a context such as Catalonia, where exposure to English outside the classroom is scarce, differs from instruction in contexts where exposure to English is readily available beyond class time.

2.3

Course Syllabus

The syllabus of the course covers three main areas, namely an introduction to the rationale and principles of English-medium instruction, a section on linguistic scaffolding and a section on methodological strategies for successful implementation of Englishmedium instruction in a foreign language context.

In the introduction section, we address some of the opportunities and challenges of teaching through English at university and the rationale of this type of instruction in a context such as Catalonia, with a focus on some of the learning and linguistic benefits of English-medium programmes. We also draw lecturers’ attention to the communicative

competence needed to deliver this type of programmes and some self-access tools available for language level detection.

The linguistic module of the course provides practice on language aspects relevant for instruction at university level. We deal with academic language functions (e.g. defining, classifying, describing processes, referring to visuals, cause-effect relations, hedging, etc.), signposting and other cohesive devices in lecture delivery, some pronunciation issues such as word stress and intonation, and classroom management language. This module is meant to increase lecturers’ awareness of those linguistic aspects which are necessary for a clear delivery of the subject-specific content.

The methodological module of the course is the most extended of the three, reflecting our belief that communicative and teaching strategies can make up for unavoidable linguistic deficiencies in English-medium instruction in a foreign language context. Lecturers receive practice on how to design cognitively and linguistically accessible tasks while integrating the four language skills, i.e. written expression and comprehension, oral expression and comprehension. We insist on the importance of diversifying the channels through which students receive information so as to maximize the learning opportunities. We also show lecturers ways in which they can incorporate authentic (oral and written) materials into their classes, bearing in mind that such materials should always be adapted. Additionally, the module comprises strategies to minimize the use of the mother-tongue in classroom interaction and to increase student production in English (e.g. oral presentations, written assignments, etc.).

Lecturers do volunteer micro-teaching sessions followed by peer and instructor feedback. For many of them, this micro-.teaching is their first contact with English-medium instruction and serves as a confidence booster.

The 6 editions of “Skills and Strategies” have strengthened our belief that English-medium instruction at university can be safely placed under the umbrella of CLIL in that it can (and should) lead to an integrative learning of content and an additional language. The difficulty is often to convince university lecturers that this integrative learning will not take place simply because the students are immersed in the target language, but that the change of language should go hand-in-hand with a deep renovation of the whole teaching approach. Effective English-medium instruction involves dealing with many aspects that go beyond the language proficiency of the lecturer. The lecturer needs to be aware that the class takes place in a multilingual environment in which English is a foreign language. The course syllabus should have the learner at its core, not the content – the content can find its way to the learner outside the class time, through readings. Finally, the lecturer needs to provide both cognitive and linguistic scaffolding for learning to be effective and affective.

2.4

Some lessons learned as regards to the lecturers’ language needs

There was an extremely positive attitude shown by the UPC lecturers. Participants came from a wide variety of different academic areas, from architects to mathematicians or physicists. They found the functional and practical aspects of the language input valuable in helping them give lectures. They were also keen to practise, perfect and internalize such language in the practical sessions in order to be able to make the transfer of the skills learnt to the lecture theatre.

Every lecturer who enrols on a course - due to present or future teaching roles - has usually achieved the required level of linguistic competence in order to benefit from the programme. Fluency will vary a little within the groups but this is not a detrimental factor. Overall, the levels tend to be homogeneous and extremely high.

Public speaking in a foreign language typically requires work on diction and intonation. For example, the ability to effectively emphasise key words within a lecture is an important element which aids understanding. Although the lecturers are able to express themselves clearly and elegantly in English, this aspect will usually require regular practice and finetuning. However, as motivation is high, this improves constantly throughout the course. Pronunciation of individual academic vocabulary also needs a special focus. Lecturers are extremely keen to improve this aspect of their language skills and are receptive to any help given.

In general, a lecturer is able to express him or herself very clearly, and any slight mistakes made do not impede student understanding. The level of grammatical accuracy is never an issue. Any particular correction given in individual feedback by the trainer is always noted and every effort is made not to repeat the mistake. Specific lexical knowledge for within the classroom may appear to be a weaker aspect at the beginning of a course. However, each session includes varied input on vocabulary and expressions used in academic situations, and so this gap is easily filled. Lecturers are always extremely keen to extend and revise this language in class. Motivation and a perceived need to take full advantage of the courses by each lecturer are a key factor in their success.

3.

Conclusions and recommendations

Since the beginning of the training programme, more than 400 members of the university have attended at least one of the training activities offered within the programme and more than 30 trainers have contributed to the implementation of the training activities. During this time, the structure and content of the programme have undergone continual change in order to adapt to the needs of the UPC schools and faculties. Yet, interest in the core of the programme remains alive among UPC lecturers and it is still one of the most sought

after training programmes, with some of the highest results in terms of satisfaction and attendance.

Both schools and trainers have been asked throughout the programme to be flexible and to adapt to the real needs of the lecturers when teaching their subjects through English as a foreign language. To us, this flexibility is at the heart of the success of the programme, a fact also well recognised among the community.

In general terms, participants in the programme value the dynamism of the classes, the quality of the trainers and the personalised feedback that they provide. Participants give value to the fact that the courses are run in small groups and that they are structured in such a way to provide strategies, vocabulary, language skills, and clear and easy-to-apply techniques for English-medium instruction.

The lecturer training programme at the UPC has also shown us that more work is needed to increase lecturers’ awareness of the methodological shift involved in English-medium instruction. The mix between experienced/non-experienced English-medium instruction lecturers in the same module is enriching and helps illustrate certain methodological issues with first-hand experience from the lecturers’ background. Participants in the programme do not enjoy theoretical classes – they want hands-on practice and tailored strategies that they can implement in their own teaching context. It is important that trainers take the time to explain why English-medium instruction is necessary in a foreign language context like Catalonia. Understanding the rationale of such programmes, not only their institutional parameters but also the learning and language learning benefits they bring, is absolutely necessary in getting university lecturers to believe in English-medium instruction.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. CLIL FAQ’s: Orientacions per a introduir l’anglès a l’aula universitària Laura Valdés, Mariona Espinet Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona “CLIL FAQs: Orientacions per a introduir l’anglès a l’aula universitària” és una publicació oberta dirigida als docents que assumeixen el repte d’introduir una llengua estrangera a l’aula. Es tracta d’un recull d’orientacions sorgides de la pràctica d’un equip interdisciplinari de professors de la Facultat de Ciències de l’Educació de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona en el marc d’un projecte de Millora de la Qualitat Docent (Ref. 2010MQD00132). La publicació exposa una sèrie de preguntes o FAQs (Frequent Asked Questions) que creiem que tot docent CLIL es podria fer abans d’introduir l’anglès a l’aula. El grup de docents implicats en el projecte, després de dissenyar coordinadament una sèrie d’activitats en anglès i d’implantar-les a les seves respectives assignatures, ha elaborat aquest llistat de FAQs que miren de respondre amb reflexions, suggeriments d’acció, estratègies didàctiques, exemples i recursos sorgits de la pròpia experiència. En aquest article situem el projecte en el context català, presentem com es va dur a terme i us expliquem què podeu trobar en la publicació que se’n deriva. A mode de conclusió oferim algunes reflexions del grup sobre el treball en equip interdisciplinari, la introducció del multilingüisme a l’aula, els contextos CLIL i la resposta dels alumnes. "CLIL FAQs : Orientacions per a introduir l’anglès a l’aula universitària " is an open publication for teachers who take on the challenge of introducing a foreign language in the classroom. It is a collection of guidelines that have emerged from the practice of an interdisciplinary team of professors from the Faculty of Education at the Autonomous University of Barcelona as part of a project on Improving Teaching Quality (Ref . 2010MQD00132 ). The publication presents questions or FAQs (Frequent Asked Questions) that could be done before introducing English in the classroom. The group of teachers involved in the project, after designing in a coordinated way some activities in English and introduce them to their respective subjects, prepared this list of FAQs that seek to respond with thoughts, suggestions for action, teaching strategies, examples and resources arising from their experience. In this paper we place the project in the Catalan context, present you how it worked and present you what you can find on the derived publication. In conclusion, we offer some thoughts on the interdisciplinary team work, the introduction of multilingualism in the classroom, CLIL contexts and the response of the students.

1.

CLIL FAQs: Orientacions per a introduir l’anglès a l’aula universitària

La publicació “CLIL FAQs: Orientacions per a introduir l’anglès a l’aula universitària” és un recurs per a docents CLIL que creiem que pot ser útil doncs sorgeix de la pròpia pràctica d’un grup de professorat que s’ha atrevit a introduir l’anglès a les seves aules i que s’han coordinat formant un grup interdisciplinari per a reflexionar sobre les seves experiències i

l’enfocament CLIL. La seva pretensió és servir d’ajuda o si més no d’inspiració a tot professional de l’educació que assumeixi aquest repte.

En aquest apartat situem el projecte realitzat per aquest equip de docents de la Facultat de Ciències de l’Educació de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona en el context CLIL català, exposem els objectius, els antecedents, la metodologia i els resultats del projecte, i presentem els objectius i l’estructura del llibre.

1.1

El repte CLIL

Com a resultat de la globalització econòmica i de la construcció d’una Europa plurilingüe, multicultural i competitiva les polítiques educatives europees de l’última dècada han promocionat el multilingüisme (Euridyce, 2006). La llengua es considera un factor clau per a la cohesió social, així com per al desenvolupament econòmic de les empreses i el desenvolupament professional, cultural i personal dels individus. L’aprenentatge de dues llengües no maternes per part dels ciutadans europeus s’ha convertit en un objectiu que ha donat impuls a un nou enfocament per a l’aprenentatge de la llengua estrangera: l’enfocament CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning).

A nivell de Catalunya, s’ha potenciat l’anglès com a tercera llengua, donada la seva consideració com a llengua franca de la Comunitat Econòmica Europea i dels negocis a nivell internacional, i l’enfocament CLIL, anomenat aquí AICLE (Aprenentatge Integrat de Contingut i Llengua Estrangera), ha agafat embranzida. El “Pla d’Impuls a les Terceres Llengües 2007-2015” elaborat per la Generalitat de Catalunya va fixar com a objectiu per el 2015 disposar de 12.200 mestres de primària i 3.000 docents de secundària capaços de impartir el contingut de les seves assignatures en anglès.

Queda palès que els professionals de l’educació haurem d’assumir el repte CLIL, aquest enfocament necessita de professionals capaços de dissenyar i posar en pràctica projectes CLIL de qualitat. Hem de considerar que el CLIL va més enllà de fer un canvi en la llengua en que s’imparteix una assignatura. Es tracta d’aconseguir un ensenyament integrat del contingut i de la llengua estrangera (Dalton-Puffer, 2007) i implica la cerca de nous recursos, l’adaptació de la metodologia i el treball interdisciplinari.

Hem de considerar també els beneficis que aquest nou enfocament suposa per a l’aprenentatge no només de la llengua estrangera sinó també del contingut. En el cas de les ciències, per exemple, una matèria que sovint és escollida per als enfocament CLIL, existeixen nombroses recerques que documenten aquests beneficis (Escobar-Urmeneta et al., 2011; Gajo, 2007; Valdés-Sánchez & Espinet, 2013). Moate (2011) defensa que aquest enfocament suposa un augment del diàleg i de la negociació que implica més focalització en el llenguatge, fet positiu per a l’ensenyament-aprenentatge de les ciències doncs, com defensen nombrosos autors (Edwards & Mercer, 1988; Lemke, 1997; Sanmartí, 2002; Mortimer & Scott, 2003) aprendre ciències significa aprendre a dominar el llenguatge de la ciència escolar.

1.2

Presentació del projecte de Millora de la Qualitat Docent

Entre 2010 i 2013 es va dur a terme a la Facultat de Ciències de l’Educació de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona el projecte MQD: “Desenvolupament de material didàctic en anglès per a la integració de les competències lingüístiques i científiques en assignatures dels graus d’Educació Infantil i Primària”. En aquest projecte varen participar 8 docents del Departaments de Didàctica de la Matemàtica i de les Ciències Experimentals i del Departament de Didàctica de la Llengua i a Literatura i de les Ciències Socials que imparteixen assignatures en els graus d’Educació Infantil i Educació Primària.

Els objectius que es va fixar el projecte van ser: (1) desenvolupar materials didàctics en anglès en els graus d’educació infantil i d’educació primària; (2) desenvolupar orientacions didàctiques per a la implementació de l’anglès a la docència universitària; (3) promoure una bona coordinació en l’equip de professorat; i (4) incorporar noves tecnologies en un context nacional i internacional.

Cal remarcar que, tot i que el professorat implicat tenia un nivell de competència suficient com per poder implementar una proposta didàctica en anglès a l’aula, en aquest projecte han treballat professionals amb històries i competències lingüístiques diverses. Aquest ha estat un element important a l’hora de reflexionar sobre les dificultats que poden sorgir de la implementació d’un projecte CLIL, sobre el multilingüisme i sobre la relació de cadascú amb la llengua.

1.3

Antecedents del projecte a la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB)

Durant la última dècada la UAB ha desplegat unes polítiques lingüístiques encaminades a estendre l’ús de l’anglès a les seves aules. La Facultat de Ciències de l’Educació ha anat ampliant les hores de continguts impartits en aquesta llengua. Així va passar d’oferir unes 40 hores de continguts en anglès a la Diplomatura en mestre en llengua estrangera durant el curs 2003-2004, a oferir cursos complerts en anglès durant els cursos 2004-2005 (un curs de Didàctica de les Ciències) i 2005-2006 (altres cursos com la Matemàtica, la Informàtica Educativa, etc), i diverses assignatures troncals i optatives del grau de Magisteri en aquesta llengua durant els cursos 2007-2008 i 2008-2009. Ecalada que va culminar amb la oferta del primer Grau de Magisteri íntegrament impartit en anglès de Catalunya, que es va iniciar durant el curs 2012-2013.

L’any 2005 es va posar en marxa també en aquesta facultat el primer projecte MQD relacionat amb la llengua estrangera, que es va tituar “Millora de les competències lingüístiques dels alumnes de la titulació de magisteri: llengües estrangeres, mitjançant la impartició d’assignatures troncals en anglès”. L’any 2007 es va iniciar el segon projecte MQD, “Estratègies docents pel desenvolupament de competències lingüístiques crítiques a la titulació de

mestre especialitat llengua estrangera mitjançant

assignatures en

anglès”.

El tercer projecte MQD, que presentem aquí, es va desenvolupar durant els cursos 20112012 i 2012-2013 amb alumnes del grau de Magisteri no especialitzats en llengua estrangera, i es va titular “Desenvolupament de material didàctic en anglès per a la integració de les competències lingüístiques i científiques en assignatures dels graus d’Educació Infantil i Primària”.

1.4

Metodologia del projecte

L’eina principal del projecte varen ser les reunions mensuals que va realitzar el grup durant els dos cursos que va durar el projecte. Aquestes reunions varen servir per compartir el procés de disseny de les activitats en anglès que cada docent impartiria a la seva assignatura, compartir el resultat de la posada en pràctica d’aquestes activitats i generar un espai on reflexionar sobre l’enfocament CLIL des de la pròpia pràctica i també mitjançant el comentari de lectures especialitzades proposades en reunions anteriors. A aquestes trobades també es van redactar col·laborativament documents que recollien la feina i les reflexions del grup, com la publicació que presentem en aquest article.

Una altra eina interessant que vàrem fer servir durant el projecte van ser les Biografies Lingüístiques (Zanatta, 2012). A l’inici de projecte es va demanar a tots el docents que escrivissin un text de no més de dues pàgines relatant la seva experiència en vers les

diverses llengües del seu repertori tant a nivell personal com professional. Aquest document va ser un punt de partida per a reflexionar sobre com aprenem les diferents llengües que usem i prendre consciència del nostre domini de la llengua estrangera.

Ens va semblar interessant també copsar las opinions dels alumnes i conèixer com s’havien sentit amb l’ús de l’anglès, i per això vàrem elaborar un qüestionari pels alumnes comú per a totes les activitats. A l’apartat final de reflexions recollim els resultats obtinguts amb aquesta eina.

Finalment, vàrem realitzar un Focus Group com a eina final de valoració del projecte. Algunes de les reflexions recollides durant aquesta reunió són les que presentem a l’apartat final d’aquest article.

1.5

Resultats del projecte

El primer objectiu, referit a desenvolupar materials didàctics en anglès en els graus d’educació infantil i d’educació primària, es va concretar amb l’elaboració de les activitats que es van posar en pràctica durant el projecte, així com la creació d’un blog amb un recull d’aquests materials i altres materials CLIL desenvolupats durant els projectes MQD anteriors (http://didacticsofscience.wordpress.com/).

Respecte al desenvolupament d’orientacions didàctiques per a la implementació de l’anglès a la docència universitària, el grup es troba en vies de publicar el llibre que presentem en el següent apartat, una publicació que serà oberta i es podrà consultar a través del web: http://didacticsofscience.wordpress.com/clil-faqs-for-clil-teachers/.

També s’ha assolit el tercer objectiu, doncs s’han establert entre el professorat eines de coordinació eficàcies gràcies a les reunions mensuals. Sobre la valoració que ha fet l’equip d’aquesta coordinació en parlem a l’apartat de reflexions.

Finalment, les noves tecnologies han estat també presents en el projecte, ja sigui mitjançant els recursos habituals, com és el Campus Virtual de la UAB com a eina de comunicació amb els estudiants, o mitjançant la cerca de nous recursos, doncs s’ha iniciat el procés de disseny de nous espais de comunicació virtual amb estudiants i professorat que formen part de graus de formació del professorat d’universitats de Grècia i Àustria a través del disseny d’una activitat d’e-twinning.

1.6

El llibre i els seus objectius i estructura

El llibre “CLIL FAQs: Orientacions per a introduir l’anglès a l’aula universitària” és un recurs obert que pretén oferir una sèrie de recomanacions al professorat CLIL. La seva utilitat radica en que ha sorgit de la pràctica i la reflexió conjunta d’un equip de docents, de diverses disciplines i amb diferents bagatges respecte a la llengua anglesa, que han assumit el repte d’introduir el multilingüisme a les seves aules. Ofereix les reflexions d’aquest equip sobre una sèrie de qüestions que tot docent es pot plantejar abans de començar a utilitzar una llengua estrangera, i també alguns recursos que el professorat té a l’abast per a poder oferir un ensenyament CLIL de qualitat.

Després d’una introducció sobre l’enfocament CLIL i la seva situació en el context europeu, català i de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, i d’una explicació sobre el projecte del que ha sorgit aquesta publicació, el llibre desenvolupa una sèrie de preguntes o FAQs (Frequent Asked Questions) que tot docent es podria fer abans d’introduir el multilingüisme a la seva aula. Aquestes preguntes són:

• Amb el meu nivell, puc fer classe en aquesta llengua?

• Quin nivell d’anglès puc exigir als meus alumnes?

• Com gestiono l’alternança entre les llengües?

• Com i en quina llengua avaluo?

• Com he d’adaptar la metodologia en aquest context de competències diverses?

• He revisat el llenguatge que faré servir a classe?

• Què pot aportar l’anglès a la meva assignatura i com la condicionarà?

• És la meva assignatura una disciplina favorable per introduir l’anglès?

• Quina relació estableixo amb el professor de llengua estrangera?

• Quines possibilitats de formació tinc per millorar la meva pràctica?

El gruix del llibre per tant segueix una estructura de pregunta – resposta. Després de cada qüestió i la reflexió que l’acompanya es poden trobar suggeriments d’acció o estratègies didàctiques i un llistat de recursos, tant de la UAB com externs, que poden ajudar a solucionar les qüestions que es plantegen. En alguns casos s’han afegit també exemples d’activitats o eines extretes del treball del grup.

Posteriorment, s’hi ha afegit un capítol que recull tots els recursos que s’han anat anomenant, per tal de facilitar la seva consulta.

Com a conclusió, s’ofereixen algunes reflexions sobre el projecte, els contextos CLIL i la introducció del multilingüisme a l’aula, i en els annexos s’hi poden trobar exemples de les activitats CLIL desenvolupades pel grup, exemples de biografies lingüístiques de docents implicats en el projecte, el qüestionari dissenyat per als alumnes i l’activitat d’e-twinning.

2.

Algunes reflexions 2.1

Sobre el treball en un equip interdisciplinari

El grup ha fet una valoració positiva del projecte, creient que s’han assolit els objectius marcats i remarcant l’enriquiment que suposa generar un espai on poder compartir experiències amb docents d’altres àrees. També es valora molt positivament el fet de podar innovar des de la docència i fer recerca mitjançant la posada en pràctica i l’estudi sistemàtic de casos.

2.2

Sobre la introducció del multilingüisme a l’aula i els contextos CLIL

La introducció de l’anglès a l’aula s’ha valorat molt positivament en base a l’experiència viscuda pel professorat, que es mostra disposat a seguir introduint aquesta llengua. A més, la diversitat de graus de competència multilingüe entre el professorat implicat ha ajudat a reflexionar sobre diferents models d’introducció d’una llengua a l’aula. La competència multilingüe inclou competències diverses que poden ser treballades de maneres diferents, i és important que cada docent trobi un model propi que s’ajusti a les seves potencialitats i a les dels seu alumnat. Tot i així, cal també no deixar d’assumir reptes i continuar en la formació en la llengua que es vol treballar. Hem de pensar quines són les finalitats de la nostra assignatura i com el multilingüisme les pot afavorir, tot generant contextos funcionals d’ús d’una llengua estrangera i aprofitant la riquesa que ens pot oferir l’accés a fonts d’informació en altres llengües i la comunicació amb persones d’altres parts del món.

Posar en marxa un projecte CLIL és certament un repte per a qualsevol docent. Un repte que exigeix: prendre consciència del propi domini de la llengua estrangera, adaptar la metodologia a un context de competències diverses, gestionar l’alternança de llengües a l’aula, trobar un model propi que s’ajusti a les potencialitats pròpies i dels alumnes, revisar

el llenguatge que es farà servir a classe, cercar nous recursos i generar contextos funcionals d’ús de la llengua estrangera, dur a terme un treball interdisciplinari i treballar en equip. Una de les potencialitats

que tenen els contextos CLIL, especialment en

l’ensenyament superior, és el pas a la internacionalització.

2.3

Sobre la resposta dels alumnes

L’alumnat no ha estat, contràriament al que havíem pensat en un principi, gens reticent a usar l’anglès sinó tot el contrari. Fins i tot aquells que s’hi mostraven reticents abans de fer l’activitat han expressat satisfacció en el qüestionari fet després de la lectura, referint-se a aportacions positives com: la pràctica de l’anglès, la oportunitat de conèixer les seves febleses i fortaleses en aquesta llengua, la valoració de l’anglès com a llengua molt important en l’àmbit professional o personal, la sensació de superació personal o el fet de que treballar l’activitat en anglès els hi ha permès aprofundir més en el seu contingut.

3.

Bibliografia

Dalton-Puffer, C. 2007. Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. (Vol. 20). Philadelphia: Jhon Benjamin’s Publishing Company Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. 1988. El conocimiento compartido: El desarrollo de la comprensión en el aula. Barcelona: Paidós Escobar Urmeneta, C.; Evnitskaya, N.; Moore, E. & Patiño, A. 2011. AICLE - CLIL - EMILE educació plurilingüe: Experiencias, research & polítiques. Bellaterra, Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Eurydice .2006. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Brussels: Eurodyce European Unit.[Consulta: maig de 2009]. Disponible a: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/ressources/eurodyce/pdf/0 integral/071EN.pdf

Gajo, L .2007. Linguistic knowledge and subject knowledge: How does bilingualism contribute to subject development? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10:5, 563:581. Disponible a http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/beb460.0 Lemke, J.L. 1997. Aprender a hablar ciencia: lenguaje, aprendizaje y valores. Barcelona: Paidós. Moate, J. 2011. ‘Using a sociocultural CLIL pedagogical model to develop CLIL.’ AICLE CLIL - EMILE educació plurilingüe: Experiencias, research & polítiques. Eds. Escobar Urmeneta, C.; Evnitskaya, N.; Moore, E. & Patiño, Bellaterra, Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. 101-110. Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. 2003. Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Sanmartí, N. 2002. Didáctica de las ciencias en la educación secundaria obligatoria. Madrid: Síntesis Educación. Valdés-Sánchez, L. & Espinet Blanch, M. 2013. La evolución de la co-enseñanza de las ciencias y del inglés en educación primaria a partir del análisis de las preguntas de las maestras. Enseñanza de las ciencias. Número Extra, 3588 – 3594 Zanatta, T. 2012. ‘Les cognicions del professorat en un context universitari AICLE: relats de vida lingüístics del professorat AICLE universitari’. TRICLIL 2012, Better CLIL: More opportunities in primary, secondary and higher education. Bellaterra: Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

Content Learning

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Students’ viewpoint on engineering subjects taught in English F. Xavier C. de las Heras1, Conxita Lao2, Jordi Fortuny3 and Montserrat Alsina4 Escola Politècnica Superior d’Enginyeria de Manresa (EPSEM) LINGUATECH, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC). Barcelona-Tech Av. Bases de Manresa 61-73, 08242-Manresa, Catalonia, Spain [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Abstract: The European Educational Institutions have the challenge and the commitment to enhance multilingual competence and teaching curricular subjects in a foreign language is seen as one of the most promising alternatives. In that context, professors teaching different engineering subjects at the School of Engineering of the UPC at Manresa (EPSEM) have been involved in projects aiming at analyzing the current linguistic situation and developing some on-line open access materials using CLIL as a strategy. They formed the u-Linguatech Research Group on Multilingual Communication in Science and Technology in order to provide such resources in an effective and efficient way. In this paper, we focus on students’ perception of the improvement of their multilingual competence throughout their Engineering degree, by means of subjects taught in English by non-native speakers. Data about the English level of current students are taken into account. We also describe the use of the above resources to improve the quality of subjects learning related to Chemical Engineering curricula.

1.

Introduction

Communication in several languages is a competence in engineering degrees that has become essential in the context of the European Higher Education Area, which seeks for an increasingly high level of internationalization. One of the recommended strategies to meet the challenge of improving multilingual competence, as it was proposed by the European Commission (Council of Europe, 1995), is learning curricula subjects in a foreign language.

Regulations for degrees at the Polytechnic University of Catalonia (UPC) allow and even promote the existence of subjects taught in English. In the School of Engineering at

Manresa (EPSEM), several faculty members actively involved in CLIL activities created the “Research Group on Multilingual Communication in Science and Technology” (uLinguatech), as a part of the Research and Innovation Framework Project in Learning Methodologies (RIMA) promoted by the Institute of Education Sciences (ICE) of the UPC.

The research group has been involved in different activities ranging from a broad study of prior knowledge of English (of students and faculty members) to the development of teaching and learning resources that can be used in a wide range of degrees related to science and technology. The results on the English level of freshmen students corresponding to the courses 2010-11 and 2011-12 already warned that their level of English was low (cf. Alsina, Fortuny and Giralt, 2012). The level of lecturers and their availability to teach in English was also analyzed (cf. Alsina, de las Heras, Lao and Gamisans, 2012) because this information was critical to develop a meaningful plan. The analysis of the results led us to develop interdisciplinary teaching resources to support both, teachers and students, such as “Class Talk”, an open access resource on the Internet (see Fortuny and Alsina, 2012). It is a multilingual university teaching phrasebook in Catalan, Spanish and English, including everyday wording for the university classroom.

This paper is a part of a wider study that aims at monitoring the performance and the results of actions such as those explained above. Namely, it corresponds to an early stage of the project which aims at gathering the views of the students.

2.

Method

In order to assess the performance of the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) project, some subjects that are completely or partially taught in English were studied. Specifically, the sample was made up of subjects corresponding to different years of the degree in Chemical Engineering. Thus the study focused on the subjects: Chemistry

(1st year, first semester), Business (2nd year, third semester) and Chemical Analysis (3rd year, fifth semester).

In this phase, the goal was to gather data on the students’ point of view in order to test the following hypotheses:

- The students’ level of English is low (with respect to the reference level B2).

- Learning engineering subjects in English encourages English proficiency.

- English does not hinder students from learning the content of the subject.

Students enrolled in the subjects taught in English were surveyed in order to know if their opinions supported the hypotheses.

Questionnaires were organized in different blocks. The first block corresponds to the initial knowledge of English. It asks about previous training courses conducted in English, travelling abroad and certificates obtained. Students are asked to state their level of proficiency according to their own perception. The second block refers to language learning, and willingness to learn the subject in English. The third block deals with the contents of the subject, one of the most concerning aspects for faculty members who wonder whether lecturing in English makes the comprehension of the lessons more difficult. The reasons for either response can be stated, as well as the difficulties that arose and the resources used to overcome them. Some questions asked the students to make proposals about resources and activities that might help them improve their English, to assess the motivation of teachers who lecture in English. Finally they were asked to make an overall assessment of their CLIL experience.

3.

Results

In next pages, we discuss the most significant results from the blocks described above.

3.1

Level of English

Our results show that our students’ English level is quite low (Figure 1). Only 20 per cent of the surveyed students have a certificate in English (corresponding to the European levels B1 or B2). The differences between different semesters are small and therefore not significant.

Amount of students (in percent)

Highest certificate in English achieved by students 100% 90% 80%

13

5

12

14 6

25

8

70%

C1

60%

B2 B1

50%

None 40%

81

86

Q1

Q3

75

80

Q5

Average

30% 20% 10% 0% Semester

Figure 1. Students' proficiency in English, measured according the highest level of the certificates in English achieved by the students

The survey also provides information on the percentage of students who have been involved in CLIL in primary or secondary school (Figure 2). The result, 20% on average across the three courses, can be considered low.

Amount of Percentatge students (in d'estudiants percent)

Experiència CLIL de l'alumnat prèvia a la universitat CLIL experiences before University 100% 90%

16

24

25

20

80% 70% 60% YES

50% 40%

84

NO

76

75

80

Q5

Average

30% 20% 10% 0%

Q1

Q3 Semester Curs

Figure 2. Amount of students (in percent) that had undergone CLIL experiences before University

3.2

Language Learning

The second group of questions assessed the aspects of language that improved as a result of the implementation of CLIL. Figure 3 shows the opinion of the surveyed students. Amongst different items, students highlight their learning of vocabulary and their improvement in listening.

Aspects of English that students improve through CLIL Skills Oral comprehension

Written comprehension

Average Q3 semester

Oral expression

Q2 semester Q1 semester

Written expression

Specific vocabulary

Overcome fear to speaking

Getting used to English

Research of information 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Amount of students (in percent)

Figure 3. Skills or aspects of English that improved due to CLIL

Students were asked to rate how useful the different resources ,from elements of English grammar to audio-visual aids, had been. Their answers (Figure 4) confirmed the usefulness of the resources provided by the lecturers. Since the list of resources includes multilingual technical glossaries and audio-visual aids -that reinforce listening-, the results are consistent with the aspects that were most valued by students in order to improve their learning of the language.

Educational materials that provide an easier understanding of subjects taught in English Meterials and resources Links to English grammar resources

5

Links to activities for practising English

22

Classroom English

22

Links to oral comprehension activities

23

Glossaries

55

Audio-visual aids for the classroom

77 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Amount of students (in percent)

Figure 4. Teaching and learning resources that students consider that provide an easier understanding of subjects taught in English

3.3

Content Learning

The third section of the questionnaire provides information on the relation between lectures in English and comprehension of the technical content of the subject, which is the aspect that lecturers are especially worried about. When students are asked whether the fact that the subject is taught in English hinders them from understanding the content of the subject, significant differences arise in their answers correlated to the semester, as it is shown in Figure 5. Nearly two thirds of the students in 1st year think so, but this proportion decreases amongst the 2nd year students, where a clear majority does not think so. Finally, only 12 per cent of 3rd year students believe that English adds a difficulty. If we consider the total amount of surveyed students, regardless of the course, the result is that 50 per cent are of the opinion that English deters them from learning the content of the subject. However, this overall result is misleading because the number of surveyed students per semester is not constant because there are more students enrolled in first

year than in second year and there are even less students in third year. Besides, lecturers can better cater for students’ needs in 3rd year classes with a small number of students than in 1st year crowded classrooms. In addition, the maturity, motivation and experience of students with both English and content, which increase through the years, contribute to explain the differences.

AmountPercentatge of studentsd'estudiants (in percent)

Does English make undertanding of subjects more difficult? 100

88

90 80 70

65

NO 50

50 40

YES

57

60

50

43

35

30 20

13

10 0

Q1

Q3

Q5

Average

Semester Curs

Figure 5. Answers to “Does English make understanding of subjects more difficult?”

3.4

Global Perception

In conclusion, the overall perception of the students about studying engineering subjects in English is positive. There is a positive correlation between the percentage of opinions in favor of CLIL and the semester, achieving a 100 per cent in the fifth semester (Figure 6).

Amount of students (in percent)

Positiva Positive assessment of CLIL at University 120

100 100

76

80 Average 65% 60

48 40

20

0

Q1

Q3

Q5 Semester

Figure 6. Students’ overall assessment on CLIL at University

4.

Teacher-generated Resources for CLIL

The positive rating of CLIL made by students is linked to the availability of teaching and learning resources that can make easier the comprehension of both English and technological content. Let us mention the task of the u-Linguatech research group, whose members have developed different resources, some of them intended to support specific subjects others conceived as interdisciplinary. The generation of learning resources is remarkable in the area of Chemistry, where we can find from a list of Periodic Table Elements sorted by name to specific glossaries and a visual dictionary on the Chemistry lab equipment, as seen in figures 7 and 8.

Figure 7. Fragments of a list of chemical elements and a glossary on chemical constants

Figure 8. Sample of the Visual Dictionary

5.

References

Alsina, M., Fortuny, J. and Giralt, R. 2012. “Elaboració de recursos multimedia per a l’ensenyament/ aprenentatge en anglès en graus tecnològics”. Proceedings of CIDUI 2012 (Congrés Internacional de Docència Universitària i Innovació), ISBN: 978-84-695-4073-2. Alsina, M., Heras, F.X., Lao, C. and Gamisans, X., 2012. "The challenge of plurilingual competence: Analysis and teaching tools from the chemical engineering". Innovation and Quality in Engineering Education. Universidad de Valladolid, DL-VA-398-2012. Council of Europe, 1995. “Teaching and Learning, towards the learning Society”, White Paper on Education and Training, COM(95) 590, November 1995, disponible a http://europa.eu/documents/comm/white_papers/pdf/com95_590_en.pdf Fortuny, J. and Alsina, M., 2012. "Class-Talk: Recurs en línia per a l’ensenyament d’assignatures en anglès". Proceedings of II International Round Table on CLIL Programmes, VI Colloquium on Clil in Catalonia, TRICLIL-2012, N. Evnitskaya et al (eds), Publicacions de la UAB, 2012, pp. 201-205.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Learning journalistic opinion genres using CLIL methodology Xavier Ginesta University of Vic Emma Hitchen University of Vic Abstract: The Faculty of Business and Communication recently started an internationalization process that, in two year’s time, will allow all undergraduate students (studying Journalism, Audiovisual Communication, Advertising and Public Relations, Business and Marketing) to take 25% of their subjects in English using CLIL methodology. Currently, Journalism is the degree course with the greatest percentage of CLIL subjects, for example Current Affairs Workshop, a subject dedicated to analyzing current news using opinion genres. Moreover, because of the lack of other subjects offered in English, ERASMUS students have to take some journalism subjects in order to complete their international passport, and one of the classes they choose is the Current Affairs Workshop. The aim of this paper is to explore how CLIL methodology can be useful for learning journalistic opinion genres (chat-shows, discussions and debates) in a subject where Catalan Communication students –with different levels of English- share their knowledge with European students of other social disciplines. Students work in multidisciplinary groups in which they develop real radio and TV programs, adopting all the roles (moderator, technician, producer and participants), analyzing daily newspapers and other sources to create content, based on current affairs. This paper is based on the participant observation of the lecturers of the subject, who have designed different activities related to journalistic genres, where students can develop their skills according to the role they play in every assignment. Examples of successful lessons will be given, in addition to the results of the course: both positive and negative. Although the objective of the course is to examine professional routines related to opinion genres, and students are not directly graded on their level of English, the Catalan students come to appreciate how they finally overcome their fear of working in a foreign language. This is a basic result of their experience.

1.

Introduction, objectives and methodology

This paper explores how CLIL methodology can be used in teaching journalistic opinion genres, using English as the language of instruction. The paper focuses on the participant observation of the lecturers of a CLIL course called Current Affairs Workshop taught in the Business and Communication Faculty at the University of Vic during the first semester of the academic year 2013-2014.

The students of the course were a mixture of Catalan journalism students1, a Catalan business student, and Erasmus students from different countries (mostly from Germany and the Netherlands) and from different academic disciplines (public relations, audiovisual communication, business administration, and journalism) One of the biggest challenges faced by the lecturers was the varying level of English of the students, with the international students generally having a higher level of English than the home students. This was reflected in the home students' initial reluctance to participate in oral activities. Another difficulty encountered was the differing academic backgrounds of the international students: only two were studying journalism, while almost all the home students were.

Table 1: Student information

Number Nationality

Undergraduate studies students

The Netherlands

Germany

1

2

Publicity and Public Relations

1

Marketing

1

Audiovisual Communication

4

Business Administration

2

Business Administration

Referred to as home students

Poland

2

Journalism

Spanish/Catalan (“home”)

17

Journalism

1

Business Administration

Total home students: 18

Total ERASMUS students: 12

Given the challenges presented by the idiosyncratic backgrounds of the students, great importance was given to the selection of the lecturers of the course. A previous paper (Ginesta, Coll-Planas, San Eugenio, 2013) highlighted the need for both content teachers and language specialists to co-teach the course, to give advice and guidance to students on both content and language. Although co-teaching requires a greater degree of coordination, and considerable effort on the part of the teachers, it was thought that the combination of content specialist and language specialist would be beneficial for the students. In this case, the teacher profiles were:

The content teacher is a journalist and has a PhD in Communication and Journalism, with 11 years’ experience working in media and 9 years’ experience of teaching journalismrelated subjects, with a C1 level of English. The classes led by the content teacher were both theoretical and practical.

The language specialist is a CELTA-qualified native English speaker, with a BA in International Business Studies, and seven years' experience of teaching English to

undergraduate students. The classes led by the language teacher were communication based, using different activities to discuss various current affairs topics.

It is clear that the requirements of the lecturers teaching this course were higher than those of lectures teaching their "normal" subjects: the content specialist had to have a proficient level of English, and the language teacher had to have some knowledge of journalism and current affairs. Of note here is the motivation of the two lecturers to coordinate and teach a course, which satisfied student expectations.

2.

Theoretical framework

In 1995, the Catalan Government promoted a plan in order to introduce foreign languages into primary schools (Vallbona, 2008). This was the beginning of content language integrated learning (CLIL) programs in Catalonia, which were also introduced in high schools and universities in 2012. However, a long-term study of the advantages of this methodology will not be possible until the original CLIL primary students reach university (Ginesta, Coll-Planas, San Eugenio, 2013).

CLIL has been considered by the University for two main reasons: on the one hand, with the aim of finding a more effective way to teach languages. On the other hand, as a result of the European integration process, which creates the necessity to improve the foreign language level of new students (Marsh and Largé, 1999; Marsh, Marsland and Maljers, 1998; Marsh, 2008; Coyle, Hood and Marsh, 2010).

Currently, most students learn formal aspects of foreign languages, but they still have a lot of problems when applying them in real situations. For this reason, Marsh (2008) establishes that we have to move beyond “formal education” to give more importance to the use of the language. The obsolete way of understanding foreign language learning is

evident in Spain when we take into account the ranking of English users in non-English speaking countries: Spain is 24th (EF EPI, 2009).

CLIL refers to any learning context where content and language are integrated in order to reach specific educational objectives (Marsh, 2008). CLIL methodology is used when a teacher of foreign languages teaches content, which is not linked to the language learning process. It is also used when a teacher uses a foreign language in order to teach content to his or her students (Marsh, 2008). In this paper, we present a case study where both situations can be identified. A language lecturer and a journalist are using English to lead a course based on the analysis of current affairs, which is offered, together, to the international students and home students of the Faculty of Business and Communication.

Coyle (2005) states that the implementation of CLIL lessons is based on the four “Cs”: “content”, refers to the working progress and techniques used to follow a curriculum in English; “communication”, because language is used to learn and communicate; “cognition”, because students develop techniques and capabilities in both their first and second language, in abstract and concrete contexts; “culture”, because culture is one of the most important elements of a bilingual program: learning a language also implies a knowledge of the language’s country of origin.

In CLIL evaluation, it is fundamental that lecturers focus on the communication and fluency skills of the students, not on grammar. For this reason, when evaluating CLIL it is important to reward communication skills, not those based on memory or grammar. According to Álvarez (in Álvarez et al., 2009), bilingual learning which integrates language and content has great potential, but we must not impose strict methodological principles: the application of the method must be adapted to the context. Vallbona (2008), in her PhD research, states that students who use CLIL methodology improve their listening and

fluency skills, but not accuracy. Other research has reached the same conclusion, such as Patsy and Lightbrown (in Vallbona, 2008) or Ginesta, Coll-Planas and San Eugenio (2013), analyzing the specific case of the University of Vic bilingual program in Journalism studies.

3.

Discussion

The objectives, or learning outcomes of the course “Current Affairs Workshop” (in the third year of Journalism), were three-fold: firstly, to gain an understanding of current affairs and their evolution in the news, using English; secondly, to produce a real journalistic product (a radio debate) with real social actors in English; finally, to provide a space where home and international students could discuss the topics they share an interest in.

From the lecturers' point of view, the main aim of the course was to provide an enjoyable and gratifying learning experience, guaranteeing that students would learn more about opinion genres and improve their English skills. At the end of the course, students were required to have produced real journalistic material (radio debate) and have used English to talk or write about a number of topics (opinion articles and press kits).

The course design and teaching methodology were largely determined by the students' background and the learning outcomes of the course. Special emphasis was placed on using expert groups. Students were divided into different groups concentrating on one topic in the press. The expert groups were politics, culture, gossip, sports, social affairs and the economy. During the first class, the students had to chose their groups and expert topic themselves. They were asked to give a brief introduction of themselves and to state which topic they were interested in to the rest of the class, and then they were given time to find other students with similar interests. The only constraints placed by the lecturers

were that the groups contained a mix of home and international students, and that each group had to focus on a different topic.

Over the course, each group was required to present a press kit and give a presentation of at least 10 stories from the previous week's news, all focusing on their topic. This was part of the continued assessment, and students had to generate debate among the rest of the students, either through posing questions or suggesting debate topics. In addition, each group gave a commentary of two articles previously chosen by the content teacher, which were not related to their area of expertise.

At the end of the course, each expert group invited real social actors to take part in a radio debate on their expert area, which was recorded in the university's radio studio. Each member of the group had a different role, including the anchorman or anchorwoman, journalists, the technician and producer. The aim was to product a real journalistic product, applying the student's knowledge of opinion genes, using English.

The course focused on working on opinion genres, rather than informative and interpretative genres, as opinion genres are those where journalists and non-journalists can participate more actively at the same time. For example, in a debate, the implication of journalists and experts is essential for its success. Examples of opinion genres are, in the press, personal columns, editorials, portraits or news analysis. In the audiovisual media, examples are radio or television chat shows, face-to-face, debates or discussions. In this particular case, the journalists were the home students, and the non-journalists were the international students. The international students were therefore not at a disadvantage, as they were able to use prior knowledge of their undergraduate studies or interests to enrich the tasks.

Although students had to develop real journalistic content for press, radio and television, students were also required to buy a dossier of reading material, which comprised recent articles from Time Magazine, and other international press. This material was important to improve students’ knowledge of some of the most important topics of recent times, such us the election of the new Pope, the economic crisis of Europe, the Catalan secession process, and other social affairs topics. It is important to understand that not all the students had the same previous knowledge of current affairs –they came from different countries, as said in the introduction of this text. Therefore it was important to fix some important topics, as the basic frames of this course. There were three sections in the dossier: one section of articles which were to be read and commented on each week, with a related activity; one section with similar articles which students analyzed, compared and presented to the rest of the class; and some grammar material to help students with their written assignments, such as linking words or phrasal verbs. The articles were all chosen by the content teacher, on the basis that they would generate discussion and other activities, and would be of interest to the whole group, both journalism and international students. It was intended that each student could apply their prior knowledge and schema when participating in classes and activities.

Taking into account all the structure and material of the course, CLIL methodology was used in each class in the following ways:

Ice breakers

At the beginning of classes students were asked to brainstorm topics, come up with lists and examples of topics, or give their opinions on homework from the previous week. The aim was to set the atmosphere for the next, related activity. The use of ice breakers was important in checking whether students had actually prepared the required material before

class, and to determine what students already knew about the topic. The ice breakers were all lower-level thinking skills designed to put the students at ease and welcome them to the class.

Prior knowledge

Students were required to work in groups and answer questions related to the topic studied in class (which were varied and from all fields of study), for example, articles on crowdfunding, human rights abuses in Qatar, or the Middle East conflict, among others.

At this point new language was introduced, to prepare students for the following activities. Techniques included providing students with a glossary, or matching words and their definitions.

Scaffolding

All higher-level thinking activities were carried out either in groups of mixed nationalities, as mentioned above, or larger groups with half of the class. The latter technique was used in classes with debates, with a question posed by the teacher, the class split in two, and time allocated to prepare arguments either for or against the question. Of interest here is that the students' position in the debate did not always reflect their real position on the topic. It was thought that asking the students to defend a different point of view would encourage critical thinking, and enable them to research and understand different points of view.

In addition, all activities were broken down into smaller tasks, for example, questionnaires, pair work, and quizzes. The students reported back to the rest of the class after each activity, before starting the following task. Hard copies of material were provided for each

activity, to give less proficient students more support and visual aids. In this way, the lecturers anticipated the possible language difficulties of the students.

Debriefing

Debriefing activities included reporting back to the rest of the group for discussion with the teacher, or debates which applied knowledge and new language acquired during the class.

3.1

Outcomes

T From both the lecturers' and students' point of view, the experience of learning about journalistic opinion genres has been positive. Informal consultation with the students at the end of the course has revealed that, from the home students' point of view (and who were the most linguistically challenged at the beginning of the course) they were satisfied with the course and will recommend it to fellow students next year. On the other hand, the international students also expressed satisfaction of the course, but not just academically. They stated that the Current Affairs Workshop was one of the only opportunities they had to mix with Catalan students, as many of the other courses they were taking were made up of entirely international students. This in itself is problematic: the international students who come to study at the University of Vic don't need any prior knowledge of Spanish, and can study the whole semester or year in English. While this is advantageous for attracting international students, the downside is that some students return to their home universities with only a basic grasp of Spanish, despite having spent a whole semester in Spain.

In fact, although the home students had to force themselves to speak English and the language most frequently used in class was English, the international students also enjoyed the chance to practice Spanish in class with their local classmates.

Using mixed-nationality groups "forced" the students to speak English as much as possible, while giving them a natural reason for doing so. Usually, in homogenous groups students will try to use L1, at least while the teacher isn't listening, but adding an international student changes the group dynamics and provides students with in incentive to use English in a more natural way, thereby increasing motivation to speak English. The students know that if they want to complete a given task, they must communicate with the other students in their group. Another reason for using mixed groups was that the most of the Catalan students were journalism students, whereas the most of the international students had no or little prior knowledge of journalism. Combining them created multidisciplinary groups. This gave the Catalan students the opportunity to be "experts" in the genres studied in class, and have a certain authority over the international students. In other words, what the Catalan students were lacking in confidence in their English skills, they made up for with their knowledge of journalism.

3.2

Advantages

The advantages of using CLIL methodology in a mixed-nationality class are:

Most importantly, using mixed-nationality groups gave the students a real reason to speak English in a professional situation. As mentioned above, students will automatically revert to using L1 when working as a group, and if the teacher also speaks L1, some students will try not to use English. This is completely normal and to be expected, so it was positive from a CLIL perspective for students to have the additional motivation to speak English. While students, especially home students, were initially reluctant to speak English at the beginning of the course, they overcame this obstacle to communicate with the rest of their working group. Moreover, in some cases home students came to realize that their level of English was higher than what they had previously thought. This course gave them the

opportunity to put into practice the English they had learned before, whether part of their degree or before starting university.

While the local students were mostly studying journalism, the international students came from many different disciplines (as shown in Table 1). Therefore, having the opportunity to learn about journalism, opinion genres and how to create a radio chat show was beneficial to the students, who perhaps wouldn't have had these opportunities to enrich their education had they taken a course more closely related to their chosen field of study.

It was noticed by the lecturers that the students were using social media, e.g. Facebook, to communicate in English among themselves. Each expert group had their own Facebook page, where they shared articles and activities. Given that one of the aims of the course was to help the students improve their English, this spontaneous use of English outside of the classroom was particularly gratifying, and a direct result of using mixed-nationality groups.

In line with the objectives of CLIL methodology, students were able to widen their range of vocabulary on a number of topics, all related to current affairs, for example, the political situation of Catalonia, religion affairs, drugs, education, entrepreneurship, euromyths, immigration, etc.

Informal conversation with the students at the end of the course revealed that they had enjoyed the Current Affairs Workshop. The home students told us that they were particularly satisfied with themselves, as they had been able to talk about a wide range of topics in English. One student even said that he had set himself a challenge by taking the course, and that he was pleased with the outcome. This positive feedback was encouraging for the lecturers, and perhaps in future editions of the course it would be desirable to survey the students to obtain positive and negative feedback.

3.3

Disadvantages

It is difficult to define any significant disadvantages of this course, as the students attended regularly, completed all or most of the assignments, and all passed the course. However, some students (mostly Catalan) found the classes hard to follow due to their low level of English. It was observed by the lecturers that this had a direct effect on motivation in class. Perhaps it would have been preferable for the students to have all passed their obligatory English classes (currently 15 ECTS credits) before taking the Current Affairs Workshop, so as to guarantee a minimum level of understanding and fluency in English.

Another possible disadvantage is related to the use of multidisciplinary groups (each group contained both home journalism students, and international students from different areas of study). The use of such groups meant that students weren't experts on some of the topics, for example, the politics students may have had little interest in sports topics, and vice versa, and found it hard to give their opinion in some activities. However, this isn’t a disadvantage of using CLIL methodology to teach this course, and resembles what students may encounter in their future professional careers: having to give their opinion on a topic which may be of little interest to them.

Finally, although home students improved their fluency, pronunciation and vocabulary, we did not perceive a notable improvement in grammatical accuracy. The reason for this lies in the original objectives of the Current Affairs Workshop, which was to gain an understanding of current affairs using English to produce journalistic products, especially, audiovisual products. For this reason, more importance and time was given in class to communicative skills and activities than grammar.

3.4

Example of a successful lesson

As mentioned previously, each expert group presented a press kit (10 articles from the previous week’s press, related to their topic) and a commentary (which was not related to their topic) to the class. This took place every two weeks. In preparation for the commentaries, students were required to read two related articles before class, to help them understand the topic and participate in the class discussion.

After the commentaries, the lecturer provided the students with exercises, quizzes, questions, debate topics, etc. to further develop the commentary topic. Here is an example of a lesson based on the economy and crowdfunding, and a related activity about investment.

Articles:

“The Case for Optimism”, by Bill Clinton in Time Magazine, 1 October, 2012 http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2125031,00.html

“The Kickstarter Economy”, by Harry McCracken in Time Magazine, 1 October, 2012 http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2125023,00.html

Commentary group:

Sports group.

Activity:

Firstly students were given a handout with vocabulary related to investment. Students matched the words and the definitions. All the vocabulary was general, e.g. shares, dividends, capital, to owe, etc.

Secondly, students worked in groups to play the “Inventors and Investors Game”. Each group designed a new product (the inventors), and pitched it to the rest of the group (the investors, or crowdfunders). The objective was to raise enough capital to cover production costs. In return for investment, the inventors had to offer something attractive, true to crowdfunding, such as a share of the profits or dividends. The groups took turns to pitch their new products, and were then given 10 minutes to confer and decide what their favourite products were. They had to spread their capital between at least two companies.

After reporting back with the whole class, the winning group was the one which had raised the most capital.

Language skills: vocabulary for investment, adjectives for describing products, first and second conditional sentences, listening and speaking.

4.

Conclusions

The University of Vic has shown its commitment to improving students’ English, especially home students, in order to adapt its education programs to the requirements of global society. For this reason, some degrees are incorporating CLIL methodology in order to achieve this objective. This is the case of the Journalism degree, where students not only have 15 obligatory ECTS in English for Journalism (including grammar, vocabulary, listening, reading, writing and speaking), but they can also take optional credits in English related to their degree specialization. This is where Current Affairs Workshop is situated.

After two years of co-teaching (using a content lecturer and a language lecturer), the academic results are satisfactory. Above all, home students recognize they improve their fluency, vocabulary and communication skills, while sharing working groups with international classmates. Moreover, mixed groups allow home and international students

to share knowledge and abilities, as well as different perspectives arising from their academic traditions. We believe that the synergies created by using mixed working groups are one of the most important factors in the success of the class. Another important factor is the practical structure of the course, where theory has been reduced and practical experience is the basis for the creation of knowledge.

While it has been noticed that home students do not improve their accuracy, we feel that improving grammar is not the most important objective of this course. Perhaps, the place for this would be English language classes. It is important to realize that given students’ varying levels of English it would have been impossible to establish a minimum grammar level for the classes, as levels ranged from B1 to C2.

5.

References

Álvarez Jimenez, Mercedes et al., 2009. Materiales didácticos de apoyo para secciones bilingües de enseñanza secundaria. Consejería de Educación y Ciencia. Oviedo. Coyle, Do; Hood, Philip & Marsh, David, 2010. CLIL: content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press. Nueva York. Coyle, Do, 2005. Developing CLIL: Towards a Theory of Practice, in APAC Monograph, nº 6, Pág. 5-29. EF EPI 2009. EF EPI. Índice de nivel de inglés. EF Education First. Barcelona. Eurydice, 2006. Key data on teaching languages at school in Europe. Eurydice. Bruselas. Florit i Ballester, Carme 2011. Caracterització de les pràctiques docents en AICLE: Una recerca en acció per a un ensenyament–aprenentatge integrat de continguts i llengua estrangera més efectiu. Effective Practical CLIL Teaching. Barcelona.

Ginesta, Xavier; Coll-Planas, Gerard; San Eugenio, Jordi de, 2013. “La aplicación del método AICLE en los estudios de comunicación de la Universidad de Vic”, in Estudios Sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, Vol. 19, Especial Abril, pp. 813-821. Ginesta, Xavier, et. al., 2012. Evaluación de las asignaturas impartidas en inglés en carreras de comunicación. El caso de la Facultad de Empresa y Comunicación de la Universidad de Vic, en PEÑA, Beatriz (coord.): Contendios docentes en el EEES. Visión Libros, Madrid. Marsh, David; Marsland, Bruce; Maljers, Anne, 1998. Future Scenarios in Content and Language Integrated Learning. Continuing Education Centre University of Jyväskylä. Jyväskylä. Marsh, David Y Langé, Gisella, 1999. Implementing Content and Language Integrated Learning. Continuing Education Centre University of Jyväskylä. Jyväskylä. Miguel, Roberto de, 2005. La entrevista en profundidad a los emisores y receptores de los medios, en Berganza y San Roman (coord.): Investigar en comunicación. McGraw Hill. Madrid. Navés i Nogués, Teresa, 2007. Does Content and Language Integrated Learinig and Teaching have a future in our schools? Universitat de Barcelona. Barcelona. Vallbona, Anna, 2008. Implementing CLIL in the Primary Classroom in Catalonia. MA Dissertation. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Bellaterra.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. The eTwinning Experience: Beyond the Classroom Marta Pey Pratdesaba Institut Jaume Callís, Vic (Spain) Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to give a presentation of the programme eTwinning, the use of CLIL methodology in eTwinning projects, give a glimpse of a successful project carried out by secondary students and present the future ahead regarding Higher Education. eTwinning offers the suitable environment to use the English language in a “real” context; it can be integrated in any subject due to its cross-curricular nature. In short, it prepares the student for the real world: international research, to get to know other cultures, to communicate and to learn content. I will start by giving a general view of what eTwinning is about. The second part will deal will eTwinning and CLIL. How CLIL methodology fits perfectly in the carrying out of eTwinning projects. In the third part, and drawn from personal experience, a project will be shown: “Addressing the Energy Crunch; Every Little Action Helps” as a good example of how to integrate content-learning in a collaborative project between different schools in Europe. The last part will deal with the future of eTwinning and Higher Education, within the new programme just approved by the European Parliament: Erasmus+ (2014-20).

1.

Introduction

“The eTwinning Experience: Beyond the Classroom”. This is the title of my presentation. “Experience” because eTwinning is a different way to teach and learn, but also because what I am going to talk about is based on my own experience of working with eTwinning for 7 years. “Beyond the Classroom” is because eTwinning goes beyond the classroom boundaries and it spreads throughout Europe.

2.

What is eTwinning?

The name eTwinning is made up of two words: “e” for “electronic” and “twin” for “reciprocal relation”. Therefore, it is a programme of the European Commission that offers a platform for schools to communicate, collaborate and carry out projects together on the internet and with two or more schools in different countries in Europe.

1

The official launching of eTwinning took place in January 2005. It became part of Comenius, the sectorial programme for schools under the Lifelong Learning Progamme (LPP) in 2007. In January 2014 it was incorporated as an important part in the new Erasmus+, the new EU programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport (2014-2020).

eTwinning was born with the need for the use of ICT tools to enhance cooperation between schools in Europe through the internet, to develop joint projects using the tools and internet spaces made available for that. These projects were to be based on three basic features: collaborative work, use of ICT and the fostering of a European identity. Currently, it is open to teachers and school staff members from nursery to uppersecondary schools.

eTwinning has grown, and now it has become the biggest community of teachers in Europe. Currently there are over 235,000 teachers registered, 322,000 projects running and 117,172 schools working in cooperation.

The scope of eTwinning is getting wider. It included 28 EU member states, plus former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Turkey. Moreover, eTwinning Plus includes six countries from the European neighbourhood – Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine and Tunisia. eTwinning offers teachers four main types of services:

a) Ideas, advice and a safe online platform (Twinspace) to set up and carry out projects with other European partners.

b) Professional networking in a European context: tools for finding partners for projects, forums and communities of practice (teachers’ rooms, etwinning groups...). 2

c) Education opportunities. These can be face-to-face such as PDW (Professional Development Workshops), which can be national, bilateral or multilateral, or online such as Learning Events, seminars and webinars.

d) Recognition through national and European quality labels and awards.

eTwinning does not offer any financing, but it offers support with the above-mentioned tools and services. It is, therefore, an easy and cost-effective way for schools to engage in international collaboration. It is also a safe environment: everyone registered in eTwinning is a teacher as it is checked by the NSS and what’s more, there is no spam or publicity. It is a flexible and versatile tool. There are no official dates or deadlines for registering, the duration and the activities can be self-tailored by partners and the initial plan can be revised and/or altered.

Coordination and support are catered through three basic organisations:

a) The Central Support Service (CSS) in Brussels (Belgium) which coordinates the whole action.

b) The National Support Services (NSS), responsible for promoting eTwinning in their countries, helping teachers to set up projects and organizing training sessions, among others.

c) A network of over 1,000 eTwinning ambassadors coordinated by the National Agencies. Ambassadors are teachers or former teachers, experienced in eTwinning projects, who advocate membership of the community, helping, supporting and guiding new eTwinners.

3

Let’s focus now on a publication by the European Commission and the DirectorateGeneral for Education and Culture: “Study of the Impact of eTwinning on Participating Pupils, Teachers and Schools”. The study gathered data and evidence over 21 months through 24 school case studies in 13 countries and a general survey in 25 languages of almost 6,000 registered eTwinning members, together with a literature review and data and document review. These were the conclusions:

a) Impact on teachers

Teachers felt that eTwinning had offered them the opportunity to network across Europe and a sense of being involved in an international teaching community. They also felt that they had acquired new or improved ICT skills, and also improved their foreign language skills.

b) Impact on students

Teachers noticed a change but also an improvement in their pupils’ abilities, knowledge and attitude to learning. What’s more, the communication between teachers and students had become much better and less formal, creating a suitable environment for teaching and learning. Teachers also observed that their pupils were enthusiastic about working in teams and collaborating with other pupils of the same age in other countries of Europe. Pupils were also keen on learning about other countries and cultures. All in all, taking part in eTwinning projects made pupils feel empowered and more independent.

c) Impact on schools

With eTwinning, schools got a more international outlook. Teachers in the same school become more involved, and one project led to another, integrating eTwinning in the 4

curriculum. In conclusion, we could say that eTwinning is a very successful means of motivating students in the use of the language for communicative purposes, the use of ICT and enhancing students’ understanding and knowledge of different European countries and cultures.

3.

etwinning & CLIL

It has been already stated that eTwinning is a very successful means of motivating students in the use of language for communication purposes. eTwinning perfectly combines language use and ICT skills and reinforces the idea that language skills cannot be learned and practised in isolation from other fields of competence. It is cross-curricular and it easily allows the implementation of CLIL methodology.

With eTwinning, students discover how to learn differently: learning is learner-centred as students can design activities in the project. Students also gather knowledge by doing, collaborating, sharing and learning from their peers. It is problem-based learning and it also allows gamification, let’s say the use of games in learning.

Any subject can be taught through eTwinning. As we can see from Table 1, drawn from a survey carried out to primary and secondary teachers, the most popular subjects for eTwinning projects are art, drama, natural sciences and physical education, most possibly because they do not need a high command of foreign languages, as these subjects have their own universal language. In lower secondary age groups, biology, geography, history, physics and religion are also among the most popular. And finally, economics, philosophy/logic and politics are covered in eTwinning projects. Any subject can be taught through eTwinning due to eTwinning’s cross-curricular nature.

5

Table 1. Subject coverage of respondents’ current projects: percentage of total projects by age of pupils involved in project (projects can cover multiple subjects).

4.

An eTwinning project

Let’s see an example of a successful eTwinning project: “Addressing the Energy Crunch: Every Little Action Counts”. This project was integrated in a Comenius Multilateral Partnership with 3 participating schools in Sweden, Lithuania and Spain. It focused on the topic of energy conservation and efficiency and around 200 students actively participated in it for 2 years (2010-12).

6

The project was awarded the National and European Quality Labels and it also received the Spanish 1st National Prize in 2013 in the category of 12-15 year-olds, and the Swedish 1st National Prize in the same year. It was also shortlisted for the eTwinning European Prizes in 2013 and labelled Star Project in the EST (European Shared Treasure), the European Commission Database.

The working language of the project is English and was actually used during the English language lessons, but with full participation of other teachers from other subjects such as Science, Technology and Art. One specific example of how the CLIL methodology is integrated is Activity 2.2. “Digging Deeper into Renewable Energies”. All students first had to answer a questionnaire about the use of renewable energies in the three partner countries:

1) What do you think is the source of energy used in your country? 


2) Which country (a) Lithuania, b) Spain c) Sweden has the largest production?: 
 • Solar 
 • Nuclear Energy 
 • Hydropower 
 • biomass energy 
 • Wind energy 


3) What country do you think uses as much energy per person?

4) What country do you think produces the largest amount of garbage per person?

5) Which country do you think that recycles the most? 


6) What country do you think has more green cars? 


The results were published in Twinspace and are then verified at the end of step 2.2.

7

Then students were put in transnational groups of 5-6 students from the three countries: 
 20 working groups on different topics: 
 1.Biofuels
 2.Green electricity: windpower 
 3.Green electricity: solar power 
 4.Green electricity: Hydro power 
 5.Green electricity: biomass 
 6.Biomass for heating plants (Firewood, wood chips, straw, biowaste, biogas), biofuels (ethanol and biodiesel) 
 7.Solar thermal heating 
 8.The energy we use every day in our men (the energy we use in our homes daily) 
 9. Nuclear power 10. How do hospitals, schools, churches in our towns (Dalby Lund, Marijampole, Vic) use energy? 
 11. What can be recycled and used for new things? 12. How do we take care of the waste that might be toxic or pollute our environment? 
 13. The use of composts by individuals and society 14. What happens with household garbage? What kind of garbage does not have a household and how is it taken care of? 
 15. What sort of labels are there for merchandisers in the shops, i.e. for ecologically produced products, from the vicinity and so on? 16. The energy use of an ordinary teenager. What activities require energy and how much? 
 17.Water and its way from tap to tap 
 18.Energy use over time, in a historical perspective, then, now, later.19. What do we do with our garbage, in a historical perspective, then, now, later. 20. Public transportation in our towns.

Students used different wikis in the TwinSpace to edit information about their own country: with text, pictures and links to related websites or videos. 
 After that, they prepared a graphic and oral presentation (web www.edu.glogster.com Webtool) on the subject about another country: 
 - Swedish students about Lithuania, Lithuanian students about Catalonia / Spain, Catalan students about Sweden. This activity is a good sample of a collaborative activity, using CLIL methodology and ICT.

8

5.

eTwinning & Higher Education

Erasmus+ is the new programme for Education, Youth, Culture and Sport of the European Commission for the period of 2014-1020. It supports 3 main types of key actions:

Key Action 1: mobility for individuals;

Key Action 2: cooperation for innovation and exchange of good practices;

Key Action 3: support for policy reform.

The aims are to boost skills and employability, to modernise education, training and youth work across Europe. The programme has decided to reinforce the role of eTwinning with the aims to promote collaborative learning, project-based pedagogy and European cooperation among schools, universities and other institutions. Moreover, it aims at supporting the use of digital technology in learning, teachers’ professional development and peer-learning. As said before, eTwinning is an important part in the development plan for KA2, and intended to be used as the digital platform for collaboration for all kinds of partnerships: schools, universities, NGOs and other kinds of institutions.

Regarding eTwinning and Higher Education, it is foreseen that there will be a slow transition before it becomes fully operative, during 2014 and even 2015. This is due to the needs for technical, administrative and management provisions in the platform.

Etwinning is also foreseen to be included in initial teacher training. In some Spanish universities they are already running workshops on eTwinning in the programme for the Master’s for Teachers of Secondary Education. In Primary Education, eTwinning is currently integrated in the curriculum. 9

The eTwinning Desktop is to be the meeting place for universities and schools to collaborate together, with a search engine for educational centres to offer training placements and job shadowing posts.

6.

Conclusion

To sum up, I only want to say that for sure you are all going to hear about eTwinning in the coming months/years, and most probably it is going to be an essential part in the teachinglearning activities in most schools and universities. Needless to say, eTwinning offers teachers and pupils the opportunity to teach and learn content in a foreign language in collaboration with other teachers and pupils in other countries in Europe, a suitable environment where language comes alive, pupils become more confident and autonomous, and they acquire new ICT skills and learn about other cultures.

7.

Bibliography

Central Support for eTwinning and European Schoolnet, Brussels, 2010. A journey through eTwinning: 'A journey of a thousand miles begins with one small step' (Etwinning Publications) Central Support for eTwinning and European Schoolnet, Brussels, 2011. eTwinning Cookbook: 50 recipes for school collaboration and professional development in Europe. (Etwinning Publications) Central Support for eTwinning and European Schoolnet, Brussels, 2012. Voices of eTwinning: Teachers talk. (Etwinning Publications) European Commission and Directorate-General for Education and Culture, 2013. Study of the impact of eTwinning on participating pupils, teachers and schools.

10

Motivating Language Learners through Innovative Teaching and Learning Practices from http://www.molan-network.eu/docs/1_0.pdf Brian Holmes: eTwinning in the Lifelong Programme from http://www.slideshare.net/ajoyce/brian-holmes-etwinning Tiina Sarisalmi, Miriam Schembri, Adam Stepinski, Irina Vasilescu: eTwinning Ambassadors Conference, 17-19 October 2013 eTwinning Learning Events – Pedagogical Objectives from http://etwinning.indire.it/ambasciatori/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/WORLE-pedagogical-objectives-Catania-2013.pdf

11

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. An experience on Content and Language Integrated Learning in University lessons of Operating Systems in the Computer Science Area. Antonio J. Tallón-Ballesteros University of Seville (Spain) Abstract: This paper reports an experience carried out in the University of Seville on the context of Content and Language Integrated Learning via English in the Computer Science Area in the lessons of Operating Systems. The arrival of the Higher Education European Space (HEES) brought some changes in the teaching way. From the starting date, in 2010/2011 academic year, of the undergraduate degrees adapted to the HEES, the University of Seville launched an English teaching initiative at Higher Technical School of Computer Science Engineering, providing a wide offer in subjects that are taught in English. A full group limited to 24 students has been created for those interested in study almost all the undergraduate degree in English language. The related experience is about a second year mandatory subject entitled Operating Systems in the undergraduate degree of Computer Science from their beginning academic year, 2011/12, to the current one. An analysis on the profile of the students is detailed along with the results of the continuous assessment, the official evaluation and the optional works. The global performance is very high compared with the standard groups using the Spanish language in the sense that the number of non-passed pupils is very small.

1.

Introduction

Foreign languages play a crucial role in the current society. According to Grenoble (2012: 1), ‘there are estimated to be between 6000 and 7000 languages spoken in the world today’. The five most spoken world languages are Chinese, Spanish, English, Hindi and Arabic that totalize two thousand four hundred and twenty-one millions of speakers (Wiley, Garcia, Danzig and Stigler, 2014: xii), that is approximately a third of the world population in 2014. The provided analysis by Wiley et al. (2014: x, xii):

highlights two additional findings with regard to English. Some may find it surprising that English is the third most spoken language in the world behind both Chinese and Spanish. But its global impact is evident given that it is spoken in more countries than any other language.

Moreover, English may be considered the language of the science. Likely, it has been caused by the presence in international rankings on distinguish positions of research institutes and Universities from English-spoken countries.

The term CLIL (Content-Language Integrated Learning) was coined in 1994 in Europe by David Marsh (2002: 48): ‘CLIL refers to situations where subjects, or parts of subjects, are taught through a foreign language with dual-focused aims, namely the learning of content and the simultaneous learning of a foreign language’.

In Spanish Universities, approximately ten years ago started the boost to teach classes in a foreign language, specially in English. The arrival of the Higher Education European Space (HEES) brought some changes in the teaching way. Generally speaking, one of the most important levers in HEES is the mobility of students and staff between European Universities. Typically, the link between the source and destination cities/Universities is matched by means of a common vehicular language. Since then, it has been broadened the number of courses in the undergraduate degrees that are taught completely in English. It is a new interesting way for Erasmus pupils and for those whose mother tongue is not Spanish, like people coming from close countries to Spain that are studying the full degree in the University of Seville. For instance, a typical situation for Erasmus students is to be enrolled in courses from different faculties in order to complete their required academic load during their stay (one or two semesters) together with their complementary experience of taking some outer-University classes in order to acquire the basic concepts of Spanish.

2.

English and Computer Science in the University of Seville

The knowledge of a second language, that is, an additional language apart from the mother tongue, and in the particular context of Computer Science studies, allows to the

students to acquire more job training and provides a higher level of competitiveness. Since we are fully immersed in the HEES, the mastery of the English language is essential as a basic means of intercommunication. The study and development of the English language in the first three levels of the degree will provide to our students access to study in foreign Universities that could benefit from scholarships and double degrees for two Universities included in bilateral agreements.

Moreover, under the current regulations, all students of the University of Seville (Spain) must prove before finishing their undergraduate studies, a level of knowledge and skill in English equivalent at least to B1 level of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching and Assessment (CEFR), which corresponds to an independent user level in a foreign language.

The Higher Technical School of Computer Science Engineering (HTSCSE) gives to the students the opportunity to foster the gain of this requirement bringing them to the knowledge and use of English as a foreign language throughout several courses of the undergraduate degrees in Computer Science that are taught completely in this language. These subjects are also offered in Spanish; however the student can be enrolled for each of them exclusively in a single language. It goals the opportunity to develop knowledge of the English language transversely along with the various courses promoting the development of curricular pathways with some or most of them taught in English.

From the 2010/2011 academic year the HTSCSE offers three undergraduate degrees: a) Computer Science - Software Engineering (CS-SE), b) Computer Science - Computer Engineering (CS-CE) and c) Computer Science - Information Technology (CS-IT). More recently, a new undergraduate degree on Health Engineering was launched in 2011/2012. Hereinafter, we will refer to the three degrees on Computer Science. The undergraduate

degrees have a teaching load of 240 ECTS (European Credit Transfer Systems) credits that are shared out over four academic years.

HTSCSE provides from the beginning of the current degree programmes an additional group whose classes are taught in English and include all the common subjects of the first three academic years from all degrees. For the pupils the advantages of being enrolled in English group are twofold: a) an increase in the use and practice of the foreign language and b) if the subject is passed, there is an automatic recognition of the same for any of the three grades. The maximum availability for this group is 24 seats in total for the theory group, which is to have a much smaller group than the usual one that can lead to improved personal monitoring of students. The division in practical and laboratory subgroups will be similar to that of the other groups in Spanish, depending on the teaching model of each subject.

3.

The subject and the syllabus

Operating Systems is the name of the goal subject of this paper. It is a compulsory course taught in the first semester of the second level of the three undergraduate degrees on Computer Science. Thus, the class group comprises or may comprise students from all of the degrees. On one hand, according to the statistics, the subject is particularly difficult for students due to a number of circumstances, the intrinsic difficulty of the huge amount of new concepts, taxonomies, tools to be learned, rational thought and their own negative personal predisposition to this extensive course. Moreover, it is based on Fundamentals of Programming of the previous level that may result another difficult subject, at least at the beginning, for people with no previous knowledge about Programming acquired in primary and secondary educational stages. On the other hand, the reduced size of the class group can have some counterparts; the students have a more participatory role, which is very important to develop the competence of working in group and learn to express ideas in an

ordered and accurate fashion. All the activities, with no exception, have been carried out using the English language, which has caused students to progress in their level of mastery of the language, and develop other skills (such as oral presentation abilities in public, group work, look for information on Internet or other kind of resources in English, vocabulary, ...). This approach to the subject, whose contents have been considered historically difficult for previous students, has motivated the body student who has become the focus of the class. Furthermore, the fact that the group is smaller than usual has allowed for a more personalized monitoring of the student learning, finally obtaining good results both in terms of qualifications and a good experience in the use of the foreign language. The syllabus is composed of seventeen units that are divided in four sections of related contents.

4.

The enrolled students

Table 1 shows on the top information about pupils. More exactly, the concrete number of students enrolled in every academic year of this study along with the averages, maximum values for any subject and their rankings. The first academic year depicted is the start year of this subject, thus their number of pupils depends on the result of the students in the previous level so it may be influenced by the earlier year. The number of enrolled students ranges from seven to fifteen and takes the value of 11.67 in average with a standard deviation (SD) of 4.16. In relation to the preference or ranking according to the number of applications to the course, the average is round to the third position. The profile of the students is very different covering from persons whose mother tongue is Spanish to some belonging to Erasmus program or simply foreign people that are based on Spain.

5.

Scheduling of classes

The kind of classes of this course is theoretical-practical and are spread over 57 hours of lectures divided in sessions of two hours, and weekly four hours, plus 3 hours at the four exams regards to alternative or continuous assessment, which sums the 60 hours of classroom student work. Moreover, 90 hours of not face-to-face work should be added by the student to complete the 150 hours of work in a course of 6 ECTS credits.

Issue

Academic year

Averages

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 Mean SD

Pupils

Enrolled pupils

15

7

13

11.67 4.16

19

20

13

17.33 3.79

5

4

1

3.33

Maximum of enrolled pupils in any course of the same level

Ranking

according

enrolled (lower Max=11

Marks

pupil’s is

better).

to

number Min=1; 2.08

Pupils

that

followed

alternative evaluation (more than the half of exams)

Number

13

5

6

8

4.36

20.4

Pupils

that

passed

Percentage 86.67

71.43

46.15

68.08 6

Number

4

4

5

in

alternative evaluation (over enrolled ones)

7

1.73

13.2

Pupils

that

passed

Percentage 46.67

57.14

30.77

44.86 8

Number

4

4

5

in

alternative evaluation (over those that followed AE)

7

1.73

13.0 Percentage 53.85

80.00

66.67

66.84 8

Number

4

4

7.33

Total of pupils that passed in official evaluation (over enrolled ones)

14

5.77

31.4 Percentage 93.33

57.14

30.77

60.42 1

Total of pupils that passed in official evaluation (over those that followed AE)

Number

14

4

4

7.33

5.77

20.9 Percentage 107.69 80

66.67

84.79 3

Number

3

2.33

Optional Works

4

0

2.08

11.5 Percentage 26.67

0

23.08

16.58 4

Table 1.- Summary of results on Operating Systems throughout three academic years (2011-2014).

In relation to the class period, the teacher introduces the lessons by means of slides with animations displayed on a screen with a projector. The lessons contain interleaved exercises that can be solved verbally or in the blackboard by the teacher and/or the body student with the participation of a good number of them. During the explanation or the solving of the exercises any question may be formulated by any people (any student, the teacher) and should be answered by other student and/or the teacher. Depending on the session class often or in every one all or most the students have at least one slot to participate in the class for answering any question formulated by the teacher or other

classmate. Usually, at the beginning of the lessons a feedback between the teacher and the pupils is done in order to have an initial idea of the background or concepts that have heard any time the pupils. In case that the output would not be the expected, sometimes it is possible to devote some few minutes to look for information (text and/or images) on Internet in order to motivate and to empathize with the pupils.

6.

Evaluation

There are two ways to pass the subject: a) by alternative or continuous evaluation or b) by official evaluation.

6.1

Alternative evaluation

Although it may result a not very common or sound practice, under the exam regulations developed ten years ago by the University of Seville it should be offered for any subject in some schools or faculties. In this modality there are four short written exams encompassing about four units of the syllabus. The duration is about forty or forty-five minutes. Each exam includes different kind of evaluation items: short questions, problems and medium-size questions; the distribution of the marks of each kind of question is approximately 35%, 35-50% and 15-30%, respectively. It is not mandatory to pass or attend to all exams. The single requirement is that the average of the four ones would be greater or equal than five. It is extremely recommended to pass the subject by this variation since the contents for each exam are more or less seven classes.

6.2

Official evaluation

This is the traditional evaluation way of the University for a long time ago. In each exam session call (for this course, belonging to first semester there are three calls to be held in February, September and December) there is an exam comprising all the syllabus of the

subject. The format of the exam is exactly the same explained in the previous subsection with the exception that there is only one exam and covers the entire syllabus. Any student can take part in the official evaluation and moreover those who failed the alternative evaluation.

6.3

Optional works

Complementary to any kind of evaluation is it possible to improve the final marks from 0 to 2 points once the subject is passed via an optional work. The topic is agreed by the teacher and the student during the class period. It must be delivered by the date of the first exam session call.

7.

Results and conclusions

The reported results encompass three academic years including only the first exam session call. The middle of Table 1 depicts the values expressed in percentage or in numbers regarding the student body that passed this subject. We include values in relation to two criteria: a) the number of enrolled pupils and b) the number of students that followed alternative evaluation (AE). We have considered that a pupil followed EA if did more than the half of the exams. The bottom of Table 1 shows the percentage of pupils that have delivered an optional work. It is very reduced, with an average value of 16.58%.

In order to clarify the results we show two plots. On one hand, Figure 1 gives a good idea that from all the enrolled pupils no more than the half of them passed the course by alternative evaluation. On the other hand, Figure 2 represents the total of pupils that passed in official evaluation from two groups: a) all the enrolled pupils and b) those that followed AE. In relation to the first group round to 60% passed in official evaluation (first exam session call) and regarding the second group about an 80%.

It is relevant to take into account that from the students that followed the alternative evaluation only a 66.84% in average passed the subject by this method. However, if we consider the same group of persons, in official evaluation we will climb to 84.79%. This let us to conclude that alternative evaluation is a guarantee of success. The main reason is that the syllabus is studied step by step and the pupil is evaluated after six/seven classes. Really, this method enforces the students to follow the subject. Another conclusion is that actually the interest for improving their mark is not very high, according to the number or percentage of pupils that completed the optional work.

Finally, the analysis of the results have shown that the most appropriate way for students to pass the subject is studying very often and as close as possible to the explanation of the lesson. In addition, the concepts are learnt as pieces in order to complete the puzzle.

90 80

Percentage

70 60

Pupils that passed in alternative evaluation (over enrolled ones)

50

Pupils that passed in alternative evaluation (over those that followed AE)

40 30 20 10 0 2011/12

2012/13

2013/14

Average

Academic year

Figure 1.- Plot of the student body percentage that passed in Alternative Evaluation (period 2011-2014).

120

Percentage

100 80

Total of pupils that passed in official evaluation (over enrolled ones)

60

Total of pupils that passed in official evaluation (over those that followed AE)

40 20 0 2011/12

2012/13

2013/14

Average

Academic year

Figure 2.- Plot of the student body percentage that passed in Official Evaluation (period 2011-2014).

8.

References

Grenoble, L. A., 2012. ‘Linguistic Diversity.’ The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Ed. C. A. Chapelle. New York: Wiley Blackwell. Marsh, D., 2002. CLIL/EMILE - The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential. Brussels: European Commission. Wiley, T. G., Garcia, D. R., Danzig, A. B., and Stigler, M. L., 2014. ‘Language Policy, Politics, and Diversity in Education’. Review of Research in Education, 38:1, vii-xxiii.

Language Learning

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning) English as a medium of instruction in teaching other languages: attitudes and practices Vilma Bijeikiene Vytautas Magnus University Daiva Pundziuviene Vytautas Magnus University Internationalisation of HE and emergence of English as a global academic lingua franca used by people who share neither a common native tongue nor cultural and educational background have not only offered more opportunities but also raised challenges. According to recent European surveys, the percentage of pupils attaining the level of independent user in English varies from 14% to 82%, which evidences the potential and the complexity for English as a medium of instruction at tertiary level. This study aims to present the model of foreign language instruction at Vytautas Magnus University where one third of 30 languages are taught through English. It investigates the attitudes and practices of teachers in delivering their English-medium language courses by discussing the questions whether teaching other languages through English is psychologically, culturally and educationally preferable for teachers and students, whether it can limit the content taught and require a special methodology, how the teaching process changes with multiple languages used in the classroom and what level of English is necessary for teachers and students to ensure high quality of English-medium language teaching. The study is based on qualitative methodology with 12 language teachers participating as respondents. The results reveal areas in need of improvement.

1.

Introduction

The increasing complexity and magnitude of issues in multilingualism, multiculturalism and language learning are demonstrated by the up-front presence of these issues in European policy debates, public forums, educational discourse and other solemn arenas. The questions placed on the table are broad and reaching far into a variety of areas relevant to societal cohesion and welfare. Moreover, they are inextricably bound together and interdependent so that a superficial and overgeneralising approach will not suffice. For instance, an increasing multicultural and multi-ethnic compositions of European countries has encouraged the reconsideration of a rather simplified primary 1+>2 formula of a European citizen’s preferable linguistic competence shifting to a more localised focus on

minority, cross-border, significant regional and other types of languages. This shift in its own turn requires relevant changes in language teaching policies.

In view of the ‘unity in diversity’ principle, Vytautas Magnus University (VMU) places a special emphasis on the development of students’ plurilingual competence and their broad multicultural awareness. With the offer of over 30 languages to the university students of all study fields and the general public, VMU not only implements its artes liberales ideology, but undoubtedly provides its graduates with enhanced career opportunities. Around one third of the languages offered at VMU are taught through the medium of English, which has been determined by a number of factors. Firstly, VMU Institute of Foreign Languages, which provides most of foreign language instruction, is highly multicultural with 16 nationalities represented by its academic staff. Most of them teach their first language and thus need English as an additional language, an academic Lingua Franca, for instruction. Secondly, the advancement of internationalisation at VMU has resulted in growing numbers of international students and the need of English-medium language courses as well. Finally, the increasing internationalisation has determined the need in English-medium study programmes which also include language learning as part of the curriculum. For instance, depending on their interests and specialisation into particular regions, students in the English-medium study programme of International Politics and Development Studies are required to choose between Russian and Arabic; similarly, students of another internationally-oriented programme, namely the programme of European Economic Studies, have to gain communicative competence in Spanish, German or French.

The circumstances outlined above undoubtedly underscore the expanding and multifaceted role of English which is nowadays referred to as the ‘core skill’ in CLIL discourse (Ball, 2014). Ironic as it might sound, in the context of highly internationalised

contemporary tertiary education, English has become not only the core skill indispensable in developing one’s professional and academic, i.e. content related, competences, but also the key instrument in acquiring one’s plurilingual proficiency. In view of this complexity, the current study has undertaken the following research aims: to analyse the attitudes and practices of teachers as participants in EMI (English-medium) language learning and teaching process, to investigate their evaluation of the benefits and challenges of this process and to examine their insights in its methodological aspects. Finally, the overall aim of the study is to outline recommendations for the quality improvement of EMI language learning and teaching.

2.

Theoretical considerations of English-medium language learning

Since its introduction into language teaching discourse in the early 1990s, the term CLIL has not only acquired the place of an umbrella term in the hierarchy of content-oriented and pragmatics-driven approaches towards language teaching and learning, but also gained the brand label feature including such as “innovative, modern, effective, efficient and forward-looking” and most probably many more (Dalton-Puffer, Nikula, Smit 2010:3; cf. Coyle, Hood, Marsh 2010). It must be the capacity to connote these features that maintains the attractiveness of CLIL as brand label and continuously expands its inclusiveness.

Given that the present study aims at the analysis of teaching languages through the medium of English to speakers whose native or first language is not English, a question arises as to how much this teaching process could be related to CLIL -- no matter how inclusive this umbrella term is. Technically speaking, it is the process of teaching one’s third or subsequent language L3, L4, etc. through the medium of one’s second L2 (cf. Hufeisen, Neuner 2004; Ringbom 2007). On the one hand, this teaching process remains within a linguistic domain, i.e. no non-linguistic subject as for instance mathematics,

economics, etc. is involved. Therefore, in this process one of the most important features of CLIL as a fusion of language teaching and subject (non-linguistic subject) teaching is cancelled out. On the other hand, another equally significant characteristic of CLIL, namely the use of an additional language, or vehicular language, is a very much highlighted aspect of the teaching process focused on in the present study. Moreover, along with this similarity comes the need of new didactic decisions and adaptation of methodology, which is the need emphasised in CLIL as well as in teaching L3 through the medium of L2.

3.

Methodology

To reach the aims set in the introduction, the study applies qualitative methodology using a questionnaire designed with closed and open questions. Moreover, teachers’ round-table discussions that regularly take place at the Institute of Foreign Languages have also contributed to elicit the intended data. The questionnaire clusters into four parts, firstly, focusing on the respondents’ experience in EMI language teaching, secondly, concentrating on various benefits the respondents see in EMI language teaching, then aiming to disclose the challenges such teaching may pose to the participants of this process and finally initiating an open question discussion as to what methodological changes are necessary for such language teaching to be effective. The answers have been obtained from 12 language teachers who agreed to participate in the study as respondents.

4.

Results and discussion

As indicated in the introductory part, VMU Institute of Foreign Languages supplies learners with the offer of 30 languages, with the possibility of 1/3 of the offer to be learned through the medium of English. Thus the considerably high proportion of EMI in language teaching

determines a correspondingly broad variety in the respondents’ experience in EMI as well as in the circumstances under which such teaching is implemented (Table 1).

Table 1. Experience in EMI language teaching.

Target language

TL vs L1

Experience

in

Special

training

Is special training in

EMI

in EMI

EMI necessary?

Arabic

-//-

3,5 years

No

Yes

Chinese

-//-

2 years

No

Maybe

Chinese

-//-

1 year

No

Yes

Chinese

-//-

1 year

No

Yes

French

-//-

2 years

No

of course

German

Lithuanian

2 years

unfortunately no

highly necessary

Lithuanian

-//-

10 years

No

yes, for non-linguists

Norwegian

-//-

0,5 year

no

--

Russian

-//-

2 years

unfortunately no

highly necessary

Russian

Kirghiz

1 year

No

--

Spanish/Catalan

-//-

10 years

a course

yes,

for

inexperienced

Spanish

-//-

10 years

a course

would be helpful

In their teaching practice, the respondents of the current study cover a wide spectrum of languages (9 in total) representing a rich linguistic and sociocultural variation. Most of the respondents, except for two, teach their first languages, however, their experience in EMI language teaching considerably differs ranging from one semester to 10 years. Most of the teachers, except for two who indicated a short course, undertook EMI language teaching without any special EMI didactics training. Moreover, the necessity of such training is presupposed in two answers which have a modifier unfortunately added the negation no and further revealed in the direct question about such need (see the last column in Table 1). A tendency can be observed that most acute necessity of all EMI training is felt by the teachers who have had 2 years of experience which could be seen as sufficient time to discover the specificity and complexity of such teaching, but insufficient time gain enough competence to cope with the challenges without additional linguistic and didactic support.

The answers to the question as to what exactly the training in EMI language teaching could include split into two categories. First of all, the respondents highlight the importance to develop their communicative competence of English starting with a diagnostic test and advancing further within their relevant level. In regard to the specific aspects of English competence development, the respondents accentuated general listening and speaking

skills, the language of classroom management, as for instance, giving feedback or giving instructions, specific vocabulary, grammar terminology and academic English. They also emphasised the need in developing the skills of recognising and exploiting the crosslinguistic similarities in case of English as an additional language. The other category in the respondents’ argumentation for EMI training relates to cooperation, teamwork and sharing of good practice. For example, the respondents would see it as an important advantage if their classes could be observed by more experienced colleagues in order to obtain the latters’ feedback. They also believe that examples of international experience would be highly beneficial and would enable inexperienced teachers to add creativity and versatility to their EMI language teaching.

Figure 1. Benefits of EMI language teaching.

Round table discussions with EMI language teachers allowed us to formulate a set of possible EMI benefits (Figure 1) and challenges (Figure 2) for the respondents to consider and evaluate. The answers to the proposed benefits reveal the respondents’ quite positive attitudes as the agreeing and partially agreeing answers tend to dominate. Most

agreement or partial agreement has been generated in multilingualism-related categories. In other words, the respondents believe that EMI empowers them to have more students interested in enrolling in their groups, which closely relates to the new teaching environment of the increasing multiculturalism of higher education. They also regard the multilingual and multicultural audiences to be an advantage for language teaching. As indicated by one of the respondents: “It is hard to say why, but mixed groups (Lithuanians and a few foreign students) are usually very nice”. Less support is granted to the statements related to methodological issues. The teachers are in doubt about the exploitation of cross-linguistic similarity, the possibility of additionally improving students’ competence

of

English,

developing

cross-cultural

skills

and

applying

a

more

communicative approach. When delivering their comments on the benefits of EMI in language teaching, the respondents also mentioned the possibility that they have as teachers to also improve their competence of English by delivering EMI classes.

The respondents’ attitudes toward the challenges of EMI in language teaching (Figure 2) present a more controversial picture than in the case of benefits which is shown by the fact that all three types of answers alternate in different proportions. Multilingualism of the class appears to be seen by the respondents as the least challenging issue, which supports the tendency observed in the analysis of the benefits. In contrast to the case of benefits, however, the consideration of challenges resulted in many more comments delivered by the respondents in that way revealing their feeling of doubts and concerns. The comments could be seen as clustering into three categories: linguistic, procedural and cultural challenges.

Figure 2. Challenges of EMI language teaching.

The linguistic challenges primarily relate to the respondents’ belief about students’ inadequacy with regard to English, namely their failure to understand the teacher’s explanations, their different levels of English and different experience in EMI learning. This is reported to be evidenced by students’ reluctance to ask questions and their ensuing poorer participation in class which can finally result in their lower marks. Comments about procedural challenges demonstrate teachers’ lack of experience in handling multilingual audiences in EMI language teaching as could be derived from their comments like “What language should I use to give an answer to a question placed in Lithuanian in a multilingual class?”. The cultural challenges of EMI language teaching relate to students’ cultural and educational backgrounds which may differ significantly and in that way hinder the

teaching process.

One of

the

respondents has

shared

a culture-related

misunderstanding in his multilingual and multicultural class: when explaining the Spanish word ‘rosa’, he makes reference to a well-known cartoon “Pink Panther”, which works well

with the students from European cultures, but is not recognised by students from China and Korea.

The respondents’ answers about methodological changes that they had to make when transferring to EMI language teaching permeate their either positive or negative attitudes that have been observed in their evaluation of benefits and challenges. The negatively permeated, or rather pessimistic, attitudes are evidences by the following methodological decisions: reduced methodological versatility, fewer creative tasks due to the lack of time and increased procedural strictness as, for instance, supplying students with word lists to make sure that all students understand. Other decisions include keeping English to a minimum and resorting more to ICT usage as well as trying to exploit the multilingual composition of the audience for revealing cross-linguistic similarities and ‘false-friends’. Some respondents report about their practice of bringing in examples of cross-linguistic comparison not only from the target and the vehicular languages (i.e. English), but also showing examples of learners’ first languages, for instance, Lithuanian.

5.

Conclusions

The divergence in teachers’ answers demonstrates that EMI in language teaching shapes out in multifaceted and largely unfamiliar situations and needs to be studied in detail in order to enhance the quality of language teaching at tertiary level. On the one hand, this unpredictability sometimes coupled with teachers’ linguistic insecurity and lack of methodological bases poses obstacles to EMI language teaching that need to be considered and attempted to be removed by higher education institutions to promote the internationalisation of their study programmes. On the other hand, the appreciation of EMI for language teaching as the way of attracting multilingual and multicultural audiences gives hope that the challenges can be turned to opportunities based on such values as a

friendly atmosphere, increased cultural awareness as well as maintaining and sharing of tolerance.

6.

References

Ball, Phil, 2014. Plenary speech ‘CLIL and Competences: Assessment’. In CLIL Policy and Practice: Competence-based Education for employability, mobility and growth. 10-12 March 2014. Como. Coyle, Do; Hood, Philip; Marsh, David, 2010. CLIL Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dalton-Puffer, Christiane; Nikula, Tarja, and Smit, Ute, 2010. „Charting policies, premises and research on content and language integrated learining“, in Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1-19. Hufeisen, Britta, and Neuner, Gerhard, 2004. The Plurilingualism Project: Tertiary Language Learning – German after English. Council of Europe Publishing Ringbom, Hakan, 2007. Cross-linguistic Similarity in Foreign Language Learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Language Learning in Task Management and Task Accomplishment Heidi Jauni & Nina Niemelä Tampere University of Technology, Finland

Abstract: In this paper we study student interaction in English and Swedish courses at a Finnish university. We focus on language choices made in task-related activities in small group interaction. Our research interests arose from the change in the teaching curriculum, in which content and language courses were integrated at Tampere University of Technology in 2013. Using conversation analysis, we analysed groups of 4-5 students who worked collaboratively on a task via a video conference programme. The results show how language alternation has different functions in 1) situations where students orient to managing the task, e.g., in transitions into task, or where they orient to technical problems, and 2) situations where students accomplish the task. With the results, we aim to show how language alternation can provide interactional opportunities for language learning. The findings will be useful in designing tasks in the future.

1.

Introduction

Working life has become increasingly global and intercultural. Consequently, the ability to communicate in professional situations in intercultural contexts is a skill that is highly valued in working life. To ensure that graduates have adequate communication skills, higher education has to respond to the needs of the labour market. One such response is the integration of content and language studies, which is beneficial for the graduates when they enter the global working life and need to communicate in intercultural professional contexts.

Previous studies on multilingual education have focused on English as the additional language used alongside the first language(s). The focus on English is prompted by the fact that most universities in Europe, including Finland, have chosen English as their additional working language (see, e.g., Ammon & McConnell, 2002; Wächter & Maiworm, 2008).

Other languages besides English are used in higher education as additional

languages mainly in countries where they have an official status. Finland is officially a bilingual country, and therefore Swedish language studies are obligatory for Finnish university students.

Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) in higher education has been studied previously by, e.g., Dafouz Milne & Núñez Perucha, 2010; Smit, 2010a, 2010b; Smit & Dafouz, 2012.

In Finland, both empirical CLIL research and surveys on the

implementation of CLIL have been carried out mainly in primary and secondary education (e.g., Nikula & Marsh, 1996, 1997; Nikula & Järvinen, 2013). Thus, there is clearly a need to study the use of CLIL in higher education. In this paper, we address this need with a micro level study on the practices university students use in a CLIL setting.

2.

Aims

The aim of this paper is to analyze from a microanalytic interactional perspective how university students in English and Swedish courses use language alternation as a resource in learning content specific ways of using language. On a general level, the results of the analysis will contribute towards a better understanding of how students interact with each other, and how they achieve intersubjective understanding of the actionat-hand (see, e.g., Sacks, 1992; ten Have, 2007; Sidnell, 2010). A more specific focus of analysis lies in the use of two or more languages as a resource in task-related activities.

Questions we are interested in answering are: Can we learn more about the learning process and language learning needs in situations where two or more languages are used alongside each other? Can the results help teachers design better tasks or instructions for the tasks?

3.

Data and Method 3.1

Data

Our data was collected from English and Swedish courses that are part of the Bachelor degree requirement. The English course is designed for students at CEFR levels B2-C1, and the Swedish course is designed for students at CEFR levels B1-B2. The data used in this paper consist of video recordings and transcripts of small groups of 3-5 students, who were working on a task that was accomplished using a video conference programme.

The task that the students were given was divided into four stages. The first stage consisted of reading an article related to the students’ field as a homework assignment. Secondly, the students were instructed to find information on the topic discussed in the article. Each small group was instructed to focus on a different aspect of the topic. In the third stage of the task the students discussed their findings in a videoconference. This third stage is where our data is recorded from. The fourth stage of the task included sharing the outcome of the group discussion with the rest of the class in Moodle. The videoconferences lasted from 30 minutes up to one hour, and they were transcribed using a transcription system based on the system originally developed by Gail Jefferson (see Appendix 1).

3.2

Method

Adopting a conversation analytic approach, we analysed the video recordings together with the transcripts to uncover how the students construct social actions. This inductive method places emphasis on practices the participants themselves observably treat as relevant at any given moment. Thus, the perspective we take on the organization of actionin-interaction is inherently emic, and no pre-defined categories are used.

We also draw on other approaches that share an understanding of learning as something that takes place in interaction and in co-operation with other people (see Lave and Wenger, 1991). The theory of situated learning developed by Lave and Wenger (1991) emphasizes the co-construction of knowledge, and the situatedness of learning in a specific social and physical context. The theory has been used among conversation analysts who have an interest in language learning (see, e.g., Brouwer and Wagner, 2004; Firth, 2009; Sahlström, 2009). According to the theory of situated learning, learning can be defined as changes in the way people participate in their communities of practice. This is relevant when studying how people become competent members of the community – in this case students becoming experts in their own field.

As any other action, language learning, or “doing” language learning is one form of social action. In other words, learning and use are inseparable from each other (Hall, 2004; Firth and Wagner, 2007; Hall et al., 2011; Pallotti and Wagner, 2011).The sociocultural paradigm of learning has been used by conversation analysts (see, e.g., Wong, 2000a, 2000b; Mondada and Pekarek-Doehler, 2004), and in recent years conversation analysis (hereafter CA) has been increasingly used in SLA research. Pallotti & Wagner (2011), in their book on second language learning as social practice, state that conversation analysts interested in language learning can describe how the participants do learning, in other words analysts will “look at the practices in which participants show an orientation towards gaining control of linguistic resources in interaction.” (Pallotti & Wagner, 2011:4).

4.

Analysis

The following examples present sequences that include language alternation. The analysis shows how students use different languages as interactional resources in task management and task accomplishment. Before the students can accomplish the task they need to come to a mutual understanding of what the task entails, and how they can

accomplish the task (Hellermann and Pekarek Doehler, 2010). Our task management data extracts come from sequences of negotiation of what the task entails; transitions into task, and sequences where students orient to technical problems. Data extracts from task accomplishment come from sequences where students orient to accomplishing the task.

In example (1), we will show what kind of functions language alternation has in transitions into task. According to Hellermann and Pekarek Doehler (2010:43) transitions into task are situations where the participants can explicitly display and negotiate their understanding of the task. In the example below the participants are starting their group work. Before this sequence the students have spent a significant amount of time (close to 20 minutes) dealing with technical problems, using Finnish only.

Example 1. ACP Group 3 SWE. 21:15 Ska vi börja

1

Teuvo FI Joo alotettaisko [ (.)

SWE ska vi börja

yeah should we start

2

Jouni

should we start

FI [Jaa nii mi mitä täs

oh yeah what

3

FI kuuluu tehä muute

are we supposed to do anyway here

4

Niilo

SWE Va ska vi göra

what should we do

5

Kari

SWE Vi ska diskutera om [våra frågor om företagets

We are going to discuss our questions about the company’s

6

Teuvo

SWE [vi ska öö prata vi ska göra

we are going to uh talk we are going to do

7

SWE [våra grupparbete

our group work

8

Jouni

SWE [och vad ska vi diskutera

and what are we going to discuss

In line 1, Teuvo initiates the start of group work in Finnish, and repeats this initiative in Swedish. Jouni displays a problem of understanding the task at hand (oh yeah what are we supposed to do anyway here, lines 2-3). Niilo also displays uncertainty, but does this in Swedish (what should we do, line 4). After this, the other participants select Swedish in their responses. By using the target language, the participants orient to task accomplishment, and they display an understanding of using the target language as an essential part of accomplishing the task. This type of language alternation in our Swedish data is one of the quite rare instances where Swedish is used in task management. These types of actions provide opportunities for authentic interaction and for language learning.

Language alternation occurs often in our data in situations where the participants orient to technical problems. The following data extract illustrates orientation to technical problems.

Example 2. ACP group 3 SWE. 21:30 ei kuulu kunnolla ollenkaan

1

Kari

FI Nonii (1,5) SWE så-

alright, so

((Kari straightens his back, leans slightly forward))

2

Teuvo

FI (x) ei kuulu kunnolla ollenkaan

I can’t hear properly at all

3

4

(0,5)

Niilo

FI Kuuluu kuuluu

I can hear I can hear

((3 minutes omitted from transcript))

5

Kari

FI Entäs ny↑

How about now

6

Niilo

SWE De e bra:

It is good

7

Kari

SWE Samma här

same here

Kari uses Swedish to mark transition into task (alright, so, line 1). During his utterance he shifts his posture so that it is more upright, and he leans slightly forward. These nonverbal cues, which are visible to the other group members, display orientation to the task at hand. At this point Teuvo switches back to Finnish in orienting to technical problems (l can’t hear properly at all, line 2). This utterance is followed by a long exchange of turns on adjusting the volume (not included in the transcript). The sequence is closed by a question-answer pair where the question is produced by Kari in Finnish (how about now, line 5). Niilo answers the question using Swedish (it is good, line 6). This example illustrates that participants can alternate between languages within adjacency pairs. Here the first pair part on line is produced in Finnish, and the second pair part is produced in Swedish. In this manner the participants can align with each other on the action level, yet simultaneously project a move forwards, to an action in which it is relevant to use the target language.

Using the next-turn proof procedure, we can say that selecting Swedish is a relevant action for the other participants; for in the turn that follows, Kari also switches to Swedish and agrees with Niilo (Samma här, line 7).

In comparison, students in the English groups use English predominantly throughout task accomplishment, but also to a large extent in task management. This is the case also when they orient to transitions into task accomplishment and when they deal with technical problems. The following example illustrates language use both a transition into task (lines 1-5) and orienting to technical problems (lines 10-13).

Example 3. ACP group 4 ENG. 13:02 shall we begin

1

Leo

2

3

Shall we be↑g***i***n:

(1)

Eero

4

(xx)-let’s begin:

(1)

5

?

yeah.

6

Leo

so everyone has (.) read the text, I guess

7

8

9

(.)

Leo

(or no.)

(1)

10

Eero

(uh) could you (.) lower your (.) volume a bit.

11

it’s uh- quite (.) loud

12

(.)

13

Leo

ok:a:↑y

When the students have established the video and audio connection, they move into the task using English (line 1). In contrast with the examples from our Swedish data, this example shows how the students have the linguistic, interactional and pragmatic competence to use the target language also when orienting to technical problems (line 10).

We will now move on to describing a common practice of language alternation, found in our Swedish data. We call this practice translation technique. It occurs in sequences where students share information they have gathered before the videoconference. Briefly described, it consists of students first sharing information in the target language (Swedish), and repeating it immediately in their first language. When the students do this, they often frame the translation with the Finnish word eli (so). Data extract (4) comes from a sequence where each student shares a piece of information that they have searched at home with the others. This extract is taken from the middle of the sequence.

Example 4. ACP group 3 29:00 eli on ympäristöjohtamista

1

Kari

SWE Också varje företagen har egen miljö (.) lagerskap-

also every company has their own environment leadership

2

Kari

SWE

that is responsible for environmental problems

3

Kari

FI Eli on ympäristöjohtamista joka yrityksessä

so there is environment management

4

Jouni

FI Joo-o

Yeah

5

Niilo

SWE =Och tidigare smu:tsiga vatten från fabriken

and earlier dirty water from the factory

6

SWE går på flo:der ((echo: floder))

goes to rivers

7

8

(5,0)

Niilo

FI Eli aikaisemmi [ laskettiin jätevedet (.) jokiin ((echo: jokiin))

so earlier dirty waters were led to rivers

10

?

FI[öö, ja:

uh and

11

Teuvo

SWE Men ida: [gör också några (.)

but now companies make

företag det

The translation technique is used repeatedly by the participants. What is interesting is that understanding is ensured by the current speaker in this manner when participants present information, even though the other participants do not display problems in understanding. This technique is employed in our Swedish data, and it does not occur in English data.

The following data extract shows how a problem of understanding of lexical items is displayed in the information sharing sequences in our Swedish data. Usually these otherinitiated repair sequences are produced in Finnish. However, there are some instances where participants other-initiate repair in Swedish, as in this case with vad. Although low in number, it is evident that the students are able to accomplish these actions also in Swedish.

Example 5. ACP group 3 9:20 vad

1

Niilo

SWE O i nittonhundratalet (.) notera man effekten av före-o-rening

And in the 20th century the effects of pollution was noticed

2

Teuvo

SWE Vad↑

What

3

Kari

FI Mikä se viimene SWE fö:reorening

What was the last pollution

4

Jouni

FI Se on saastutta[.minen

It is polluting

5

Niilo

FI [eli (1,0) joo↑ eli tuhatyhdeksänsataaluvulla

so

6

Niilo

yeah so in the 20th century

FI ru- ruvettiin huomaamaan ¤vasta¤ se että se rupeaa

people started to notice only that it starts

7

Niilo

FI saastuttamaan

to pollute

The side sequence in which Kari displays problems with understanding is done in Finnish (line 3). After solving the problem in understanding, the participants reconstruct the content by using the translation technique, again initiated with eli (so). It is interesting to note that even in an instance where a participant explicitly identifies the problem source to be a lexical item, the speaker still reconstructs the entire content of the utterance by using the translation technique.

Data extract (6) shows how problems in retrieving lexical items are dealt with in our English data.

Example 6 ACP group 5 7:18 what’s sorvaus

1

Niilo T

second thing:, was that u:h (.) some (.) shapes (.)

2

are (.) hard and expensive or even impossible

3

to manufacture with u:h (x)

4

today’s technology:, like

5

what’s FI sorvaus in English

6

and- or (.) FI .

7

(1)

8

9

Niilo T

they are just (.)

h***a***rd to m***a***ke, and-

10

if you- ()

11

3 d (.) print them

12

it’s- it- it’s might b

13

it might be cheaper and (.)

14

even make some things pos- possible

15

like hollow things it’s (.)

16

you can’t really-

17

manufacture them (.) easily,

18

(1)

19

Mikko

that’s true

In this example the current speaker does not remember the words for “sorvaus” (lathing) or “koneistus” (machining) in English (lines 5 and 6). When we compare this example to example (5), we can see that the students orient to language alternation in word search situations differently. While in the Swedish data the participants interrupted information sharing to solve language problems, both the speaker and the recipients in our English data let the problem pass, and continue talking about the content. This type of language alternation shows how Finnish and English are resources that are shared by the

participants. Inserting a Finnish word in the middle of otherwise English discussion does not interrupt the ongoing action.

5.

Conclusion

CA as a form of microanalysis enables us to identify actions that students construct in their group work at different CEFR levels. Students in our Swedish group use language alternation mainly in task accomplishment. For the most part, they select Finnish as the language to use in actions related to task management. However, as our analysis shows, while it is quite rare, they can also alternate between languages in task management, e.g., in transitions into task. We argue that these instances provide rich opportunities for language learning. Consequently, the educators should attempt to take this into consideration when designing tasks.

Students of English have a high enough competence to orient to the content. Language for them is mainly a vehicle with which content is negotiated. For example, one word code switching into Finnish is typically ignored by other participants. Thus, a code switch that could be seen as a language learning opportunity is rather one resource among others to accomplish the task at hand. This situation would naturally be different if the participants came from different linguistic backgrounds and did not have shared resources.

While students in the Swedish group can accomplish the same task, they display orientations to doing a school task where language is the target of learning. One dominant practice that is revealed in our Swedish data is reading aloud written text. The sentence structure of read-aloud text poses difficulties for the recipients to process the language. The translation technique seems to be essential for the students to achieve intersubjective understanding. However, to be able to develop the students’ skills, there is a need to design tasks that force the students away from text when they interact with each other.

Our suggestion for lower levels is to design tasks that force the students away from the text, for example by allowing the students to use a mind map only. This would mean that the students would need to rephrase the information using their own words. In this way the learners not only achieve a deeper understanding of the subject, but also make it easier for their recipients to follow their spoken utterances.

The findings show that similar tasks can be used in studying languages at different CEFR levels. However, the practices that the participants use need to be taken into account when planning tasks for learners. With groups at lower levels, the teacher must ensure that the instructions provide the necessary support to guide the action that will support language use at the current level and give opportunities for learning.

6.

References

Ammon, U., and G. McConnell, 2002. English as an academic language in Europe: A survey of its use in teaching (Duisburger Arbeiten zur Sprach- und Kulturwissenschaft 48). Bern: Peter Lang. Brouwer, C.E., and J. Wagner, 2004. Developmental issues in second language conversation. Journal of Applied Linguistics 1, 1: 29-47. Dafouz Milne, E., and B. Núñez Perucha, 2010. Metadiscursive devices in university lectures. A contrastive analysis of L1 and L2 teacher performance, In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 213–231). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. Firth, A., 2009. Doing not being a foreign language learner: English as a lingua franca in the workplace and (some) implications for SLA. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 47, 1: 127-156.

Firth A., and J. Wagner, 2007. Second/foreign language learning as a social accomplishment: Elaborations on a reconceptualized SLA. Modern Language Journal 91, 1: 800-819. Hall, J.K., 2004. Language learning as an interactional achievement. Modern Language Journal 88: 606-612. Hellermann, J., and S. Pekarek Doehler, 2010. On the contingent nature of languagelearning tasks. Classroom Discourse 1, 1: 25–45. Lave, J., & E. Wenger, 1991. Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mondada, L., and S. Pekarek-Doehler, 2004. Second language acquisition as situated practice: Task accomplishment in the French second language classroom. Modern Language Journal 88, 4: 501–518. Nikula, T., and H-M. Järvinen, 2012. Vieraskielinen opetus Suomessa (’CLIL in Finland’). In L. Tainio & H. Harju-Luukkanen (eds.) Kaksikielinen koulu- tulevaisuuden monikielinen Suomi (’Bilingual school – the multilingual Finland of the future’). Helsinki: Suomen Kasvatustieteellinen Seura, 143-167. Nikula, T., and Marsh, D. 1997. Vieraskielisen opetuksen tavoitteet ja toteuttaminen (‘Content and language integrated teaching: From aims to implementation’). Helsinki: National Board of Education. Nikula, T., and Marsh, D. 1997. Vieraskielisen Opetuksen Tavoitteet ja Toteuttaminen. (’Content and Language Integrated Learning in the Primary and Secondary Sector’), Helsinki: National Board of Education, Finland. Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer C., and A. Llinares, 2013. CLIL classroom discourse. Research from Europe. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 1, 1: 70–100. Pallotti, G., and J. Wagner, (Eds.). (2011). L2 learning as social practice: Conversationanalytic perspectives. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.

Sacks, H., 1992. Lectures on conversation. 2 vols. Edited by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Sahlström, F., 2009. Conversation analysis as a way of studying learning. An introduction to a special issue of SJER. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 53, 2: 103–111. Sidnell, J., 2010. Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. London: Wiley-Blackwell. Smit, U. 2010(a). English as a lingua franca in higher education. A longitudinal study of classroom discourse. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter. Smit, U. 2010(b). CLIL in an English as a lingua franca (ELF) classroom: On explaining terms and expressions interactively. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smith (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 259–277). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. Smit, U., and Dafouz, E. (Eds.) 2012. Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education. Gaining insights into English-Medium Instruction at European Universities. AILA Review, 25. ten Have, P. 2007. Doing conversation analysis: a practical guide. Second Edition. London: Sage. Wächter, B., and F. Maiworm, 2008. English-taught programmes in European higher education. The picture in 2007. Bonn: Lemmens (ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education). Wong, J. 2000(a). Delayed next turn repair initiation in native-non-native speaker English conversation. Applied Linguistics 21, 2: 244-267. Wong, J. 2000(b). The token ‘yeah’ in non-native speaker English conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 33, 1: 39-67.

Appendix 1 Transcription conventions ***talk***

emphasis

CAPITALS

increased volume

ºhigh circlesº

decreased volume

ta:::lk

prolongation of the preceding sound

tal-

cut-off word

.hhh

inbreath

hh

outbreath

(.)

a micropause of less than 0.4 seconds

pause, timed in tenths of a second ta[lk] [tal]king

overlapping utterances

talk= =talk

latching utterances

(talk)

uncertain transcrption

(x)

unintelligible item, probably one word only

(xx)

unintelligible items, approximately of phrase length

(xxx)

unintelligible items, beyond phrase length

,

continuing intonation

.

falling intonation

?

rising intonation

↑

high pitch

>fast<

fast speech



slow speech

₤

altered tone of voice, e.g. when quoting somebody

ta(h)lk

breathiness, e.g. in laughter

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Investigación en docencia por contenidos (español como segunda lengua) en el proceso de internacionalización de la Universidad de Alicante Susana Pastor Cesteros Ana María Gil del Moral Universidad de Alicante (UA) Grupo de investigación ACQUA (http://dfelg.ua.es/acqua/) Esta comunicación se enmarca en la reflexión sobre el aprendizaje de una segunda lengua por contenidos en el ámbito universitario, pero, a diferencia de lo que suele ser habitual, no se basa en la lengua inglesa, sino en la española, en la medida en que trabajamos con estudiantes de movilidad internacional que cursan sus asignaturas en una lengua adicional, el español. Presentamos, en un primer apartado, una introducción a los estudios de AICLE en español y a la investigación en Español Académico. Y mostramos, en el segundo, la labor de una Red de Investigación en Docencia Universitaria del Programa Redes del Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación de la Universidad de Alicante, cuyo objetivo es doble: recabar datos sobre la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de contenido y de lengua en tal contexto, tanto por parte del alumnado como del profesorado implicado; y crear una guía para el alumnado extranjero con información estrictamente académica que contribuya a un mejor aprovechamiento de la estancia a nivel lingüístico y curricular. Las conclusiones muestran la oportunidad de realizar Cursos de Español Académico también con tal fin. PALABRAS CLAVE: Español académico (EA), Español para Fines Específicos (EFE), Lenguas de especialidad, Aprendizaje integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extranjeras (AICLE), Movilidad estudiantil, Internacionalización universitaria.

1.

Introducción

Cuando nos referimos al aprendizaje integrado de contenidos y lenguas extranjeras (AICLE en adelante, en las siglas acuñadas por la profesora Carmen Muñoz), a menudo pensamos directamente en la enseñanza del inglés. Sin embargo, intentaremos a través de este trabajo ver la situación desde la perspectiva de la lengua española, centrada además en el ámbito universitario. Esta propuesta se enmarca en el trabajo del Grupo de investigación ACQUA (http://dfelg.ua.es/acqua/), en sus líneas dedicadas a AICLE, a la Enseñanza de la Lengua para Fines Específicos (EFE) y al Español Académico (EA), sobre el que también se está finalizando una investigación doctoral. La experiencia acumulada desde la coordinación de programas internacionales y la docencia a alumnado

universitario no nativo, en cursos de lengua general, en licenciaturas, grados y posgrados, así como en las cinco ediciones del Curso de español académico para alumnos extranjeros de la UA (desde 2010-11), nos ha permitido constatar las necesidades por parte de los estudiantes de cara a una adquisición tanto de la lengua como de las asignaturas cursadas. Por un lado, se requiere recibir formación en esta modalidad académica de la lengua y, por otro, conviene disponer de un material de ayuda en forma de guía que mejore el rendimiento académico de su estancia.

El marco teórico en el que nos movemos no es otro que el de los estudios sobre aprendizaje por contenidos (Coyle et al., 2010; Escobar et al., 2011; Ruiz de Zarobe et al., 2011; Fortanet, 2013; Ruiz de Zarobe, 2013), si bien la pregunta que nos planteamos es si podemos hablar de AICLE en contexto universitario tratándose de español como SL, en cuyo caso, ¿qué rasgos tiene? ¿cabe extrapolar las conclusiones de los trabajos citados para aplicar AICLE en nuestro contexto? Intentamos responder brevemente a continuación. En primer lugar, la situación de AICLE respecto del español puede analizarse desde tres dimensiones: la que tiene que ver con los ya clásicos programas de inmersión en Estados Unidos; la que aborda la enseñanza en primaria y secundaria para alumnado extranjero en nuestros centros (con formación, nivel de lengua y culturas muy diversos); y la que afronta el modo en que los estudiantes de programas de movilidad cursan parte de sus carreras en nuestras universidades en español. Obviamente, nos centraremos solo en esta última, precisando un aspecto que resulta trascendente: si por un lado hay muchos estudiantes internacionales que solicitan asignaturas en inglés, también son numerosos los que acceden a ellas en español, en grupos donde el porcentaje entre alumnado nativo y no nativo es muy variable y en los que, en ocasiones, es mayoritario el segundo, con las implicaciones que ello comporta. Por ejemplo, el conocimiento de la lengua vehicular por su parte ha de tener unos mínimos, si bien no siempre se cumple este requisito lingüístico; en nuestra Facultad, la recientemente

aprobada normativa de Movilidad exige supuestamente un B1 al alumnado extranjero (lo cual ya de por sí no es mucho, dada la complejidad de muchas materias), pero lo cierto es que es un requisito solo sobre el papel, pues acceden a las aulas también con niveles inferiores. El profesorado lo es de su especialidad, no suele ser consciente de que se convierte al tiempo, indirectamente, en profesor de lengua y de que puede o debe utilizar herramientas alternativas para facilitar el acceso a los contenidos (en forma de un discurso de aula adaptado, de materiales auxiliares, etc.). Por su parte, el alumnado asiste a clases, pero no siempre conoce el alcance del Español Académico, en su doble vertiente: la cultural, de tradición educativa, por un lado, y en la más puramente textual, con tipologías y expresiones específicas, por otro.

Nos movemos, por tanto, en un ámbito en el que confluyen los estudios de Español para Fines Específicos (EFE), pues estamos hablando de carreras universitarias y de lenguas de especialidad (Alcaraz et al., 2007; Gómez de Enterría, 2009; Aguirre, 2012; Robles y Sánchez, 2012) y los de Español Académico (EA). En el ámbito hispánico, la investigación acerca del aprendizaje del EA ha partido en sus inicios en gran medida de esta preocupación por ofrecer a los estudiantes extranjeros de intercambio universitario un modelo de discurso tanto desde una perspectiva lingüística (oral y escrita) como pragmática y sociocultural (Pastor, 2006; 2010). Sin duda, la autora pionera en esta área ha sido la profesora de la Universidad de Berlín Graciela Vázquez (2005), quien desarrolló el primer proyecto europeo sobre el discurso académico en español, ADIEU. Paralelamente, ha habido otras aportaciones al estudio del español académico, más bien de forma combinada con los discursos profesionales y de especialidad (Sanz Ávala, 2007; Cassany, 2009). Y ya desde el punto de vista de los géneros universitarios, se observa un creciente interés a través de recientes publicaciones (Perea, 2013; Regueiro y Sáez, 2013). Con este marco de referencia se han llevado a cabo en nuestra universidad cinco ediciones del Curso de español académico para alumnos extranjeros de la UA (Gil, en

prensa), que constituyen un excelente banco de pruebas de la utilidad que un recurso de estas características puede tener como preparación al acceso universitario o en paralelo al desarrollo de las clases. Este es, pues, el espacio que nos ha llevado a desarrollar la investigación que describimos a continuación.

2.

Investigación en docencia por contenidos en ELE

La red Investigación en docencia por contenidos (español como segunda lengua) en el proceso de internacionalización de la Universidad de Alicante se incluye dentro del Programa Redes de Investigación en Docencia Universitaria (http://web.ua.es/ice/redes), que el Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación de la Universidad de Alicante convocó en su XII edición para el curso académico 2013-2014. Está coordinada por Susana Pastor e integrada por otras siete profesoras con experiencia en docencia con no nativos, tanto en cursos universitarios de ELE como en planes oficiales de estudios (Mª Mar Galindo, Larissa Timofeeva, Elisa Barrajón, Mª Isabel Pérez, Natalia Contreras, Claudia Comes Peña, Ana Mª Gil), una alumna del Grado de Español: Lengua y Literaturas (Sandra Cabanes) y una gestora de Movilidad de la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras (Patricia Botella). Los objetivos que pretendemos alcanzar con esta red son los siguientes:

Diagnosticar dificultades tanto del alumnado internacional matriculado en asignaturas de lengua y literatura españolas de diferentes Grados de la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, como del profesorado que imparte las asignaturas que siguen.

Diseñar una Guía académica para el alumnado extranjero, con:

a) Información académica general.

b) Información específica de las asignaturas recomendadas:

• Grado de dificultad.

• Requisitos lingüísticos.

• Conocimientos previos de la materia.

• Conocimiento recomendado de la lengua de especialidad y su terminología.

• Lecturas adaptadas o divulgativas.

• Glosario de la materia.

• Recursos recomendados.

Asimismo, las preguntas de investigación a las que intentamos dar respuesta son cuatro:

¿Cuántos alumnos de movilidad acogidos tiene la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras y cuáles son su perfil y necesidades?

¿Cuáles son las asignaturas más demandadas? ¿Coinciden con las más recomendadas por parte de los coordinadores?

¿Qué relación tiene el profesorado de tales materias con el alumnado internacional (atención específica, materiales especiales, grado de exigencia, problemas de evaluación…)?

¿Puede contribuir la Guía académica, diseñada y creada especialmente para este alumnado, a un mayor rendimiento de su estancia?

La metodología empleada en esta investigación para la recogida de datos se ha secuenciado en cuatro pasos:

1. Selección de las asignaturas más demandadas, a través de información administrativa.

2. Entrevistas al alumnado.

3. Entrevistas al profesorado.

4. Diseño de la Guía académica para el estudiante extranjero y posterior cumplimentación para cada asignatura.

Analizamos brevemente a continuación los datos disponibles hasta el momento (pues se trata de una investigación aún en proceso):

1. El análisis de la media de las matrículas realizadas por el alumnado de movilidad internacional en la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras en los últimos tres años, nos ha permitido conocer las quince asignaturas más demandadas, que, por orden de mayor a menor número de alumnado extranjero, son las siguientes:

31553-Español Coloquial

31554-El Español de América

31510-Clases de palabras en Español

31533-Español como Lengua Extranjera/Segunda Lengua

32514-Lengua Española para la Traducción I

32520-Lengua Española para la Traducción II

31620-Introducción a la Literatura Hispanoamericana

32515-Introducción a la Lengua Española para la Traducción

31523-Literatura Hispanoamericana Contemporánea

31611-Español: norma y uso I

31513-Literatura Española de la Ilustración y del Romanticismo

31532-Sociolingüística y Dialectología Españolas

31511-Fonética y Fonología Españolas

31538-Teatro Español del Siglo de Oro

31539-Literatura Española del Siglo XVI

2. En el presente curso académico 2013-14, se han matriculado en la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Universidad de Alicante un total de 448 alumnos de movilidad internacional entre los dos cuatrimestres. El cuestionario que se les ha enviado para obtener información se ha diseñado en una plataforma en línea para facilitar el acceso y la comodidad de los estudiantes para completarlo, y está disponible en español y en inglés (véase anexo 1). Consta de doce preguntas acerca del programa internacional al que pertenecen, las asignaturas que cursan en la UA, los estudios en su universidad de origen, su nivel de español según el Marco Común Europeo de Referencia (MCER), el

nivel de lengua que se les ha exigido para estudiar en la UA, sus conocimientos previos sobre las materias matriculadas y por qué las han elegido, si estas cumplen sus expectativas, qué dificultades les plantean, si disponen de los programas, si tienen claros los criterios de evaluación y qué información les hubiese sido de ayuda antes de matricularse (asignaturas recomendadas para extranjeros, impartidas en otra lengua, niveles de dificultad lingüística o de contenido, criterios de evaluación, etc.).

3. El cuestionario para el profesorado del Dpto. de Filología Española, Lingüística General y Teoría de la Literatura de la UA con docencia en asignaturas que cursan los estudiantes de movilidad internacional (alrededor de 30 sobre un total de 60 docentes), se ha elaborado igualmente en línea y está formado por quince preguntas (véase anexo 2). Se interroga acerca de su experiencia en este tipo de docencia, la procedencia de su alumnado extranjero, la opinión sobre su presencia, el grado de asistencia, integración y participación en las clases, cómo solucionan sus dudas, qué nivel mínimo de español deberían poseer para seguir el contenido de su asignatura y en caso de no poseerlo, cómo plantean estos sus dudas. A continuación, se les pregunta si han tenido algún tipo de dificultad con este alumnado y a qué creen que se ha debido. Las últimas cuestiones se centran en aquello que a nuestro juicio más preocupa a los estudiantes: el acceso al contenido, la entrega de prácticas según las normas, los posibles malentendidos culturales o el grado real de exigencia en la evaluación, independientemente de los criterios establecidos.

4. La Guía académica, finalmente, constará de dos apartados principales: Información estrictamente académica de carácter general, en primer término, y específica de las quince asignaturas seleccionadas, a continuación. A pesar de que la Universidad de Alicante, como el resto de instituciones, elabora anualmente una Guía del estudiante disponible en inglés, catalán y español, (http://web.ua.es/es/oia/publicaciones/guia-

alumnado/guia-castellano13-14.pdf) su análisis demuestra que resultan complicadas y poco operativas para el alumnado de movilidad internacional debido a la enorme cantidad de información y el nivel de los textos. Por tanto, en la guía resultado de este proyecto, los textos son mucho más sencillos, dado que el nivel de lengua está pensado para un B1-B2 y la información, no siempre accesible en otras fuentes, se sintetiza al máximo. En la primera parte se presenta nuestro sistema universitario ante los ojos de un extranjero: el modo de calificar, el funcionamiento del campus virtual o la cultura académica (asistencia a clases, frecuencia de tutorías presenciales y virtuales, relación con el profesorado, sentido de los horarios lectivos…), en definitiva, reglas no siempre escritas de la dinámica universitaria, pensadas según sus necesidades y nivel. En la segunda parte, el alumno dispondrá de información específica sobre las quince asignaturas más demandadas, con indicación de su dificultad y nivel de español requerido, grado de exigencia en el español oral y escrito de cara a la evaluación, bibliografía recomendada adaptada a su nivel, glosarios disponibles y materiales que pueden facilitarle la comprensión del contenido y la adquisición de la lengua, para ayudarle a lograr el éxito en la evaluación final.

3.

Conclusiones

A pesar de que se trata de una investigación en curso, cuyos resultados se expondrán en el marco de las Jornadas de Redes de Docencia Universitaria de la UA, podemos avanzar las siguientes conclusiones:

Una enseñanza universitaria de español por contenidos programada y consciente por parte del profesorado puede mejorar el aprendizaje de la materia y de la lengua vehicular del alumnado extranjero.

Hay que considerar la triple dimensión del español como: Segunda Lengua (en contexto de inmersión), Lengua académica (de uso en un entorno universitario) y Lengua de especialidad (como reflejo de un área de conocimiento o profesión específicos).

Concebimos esta Guía académica para el alumnado extranjero como ayuda al aprovechamiento real de la estancia universitaria, desde la perspectiva de un mayor rendimiento académico en las tasas de éxito, un aspecto sobre el que no existen datos a nivel institucional.

Probablemente un proyecto de estas características requiera revisión, una vez finalizado el diseño de la Guía académica e implantado su uso. Esta sería una de las posibles futuras líneas de trabajo, la comprobación de su utilidad real, además de la identificación de los géneros académicos que presenten mayor dificultad con el objetivo de crear materiales específicos. En definitiva, se requiere aún mayor investigación empírica acerca de AICLE y español como segunda lengua en el ámbito universitario, si bien confiamos en haber sentado las bases para el acercamiento a un tema que, por su proyección futura, está destinado a ser vital en el proceso de internacionalización de la universidad española.

4.

Bibliografía

Aguirre Beltrán, Blanca, 2012. Aprendizaje y enseñanza de español con fines específicos. Madrid: SGEL. Alcaraz Varó, Enrique, J. Mateo Martínez y F. Yus eds. 2007. Las lenguas profesionales y académicas. Barcelona: Ariel/IULMA. Breeze, Ruth, 2012. Rethinking academic writing pedagogy for the European university. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Cassany, Daniel y Óscar Morales, 2009. “Leer y escribir en la universidad: los géneros científicos”, en Cassany, Daniel. (comp.), Para ser letrados. Voces y miradas sobre la lectura. Barcelona: Paidós, 109-128. Coyle, D., Hood, P. and D. Marsh, 2010. CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dalton-Puffer, Christian y Ute Smit, eds. 2007. Empirical Perspectives on CLIL Classroom Discourse. Viena: Peter Lang. Escobar, C.; Evnitskaya, N.; Moore, E.; A. Patiño, eds. 2011. AICLE-CLIL-EMELIE educació plurilingüe: experiencias, researchs & politiques. Barcelona, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Fortanet, I. 2013. CLIL in Higher Education. Towards a multilingual language policy. London: Multilingual Matters. Gil del Moral, Ana María (en prensa), “Español Académico para el Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extrajeras (AICLE): Experiencia de una investigación en curso con alumnado internacional en la Universidad de Alicante”, en Actas del XXIV Congreso Internacional de la Asociación para la Enseñanza de Español como Lengua Extranjera (ASELE). Jaén: Universidad de Jaén. Gómez de Enterría, Josefa, 2009. El español lengua de especialidad: enseñanza y aprendizaje. Madrid: Arco. Lasagabaster, D. y Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, eds. 2010. CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Pastor Cesteros, Susana, 2006. “La enseñanza del español como lengua vehicular en contextos académicos”, Marcoele, nº 2, junio 2006. Pastor Cesteros, Susana, 2010. “Enseñanza de español con fines profesionales y académicos y aprendizaje por contenidos en contexto universitario”, Testi e linguaggi, nº 4. Salerno: Università degli Studi di Salerno, 71-88.

Perea Siller, Francisco Javier (coord.) 2013. Comunicar en la Universidad. Descripción y metodología de los géneros académicos. Córdoba: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Córdoba. Regueiro Rodríguez, Mª Luisa; Daniel Sáez Rivera, 2013. El español académico. Guía práctica para la elaboración de textos académicos. Madrid: Arco. Robles Ávila, Sara y Sánchez Lobato, Jesús eds. 2012. Teoría y práctica de la enseñanza-aprendizaje del español para fines específicos. Málaga: Analecta Malacitana. Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. 2013. “CLIL implementation: from policy-makers to individual initiatives”, International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, vol. 16. Issue 3, 231-243. Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., Sierra, J.M. y Gallardo, F. eds. 2011. Content and Foreign Language Integrated Learning. Contributions to Multilingualism in European Contexts. Bern: Peter Lang. Sanz Álava, I. 2007. El Español Profesional y Académico en el aula universitaria: El discurso oral y escrito. Valencia: Tirant Lo Blanch. Vázquez, G. (coord.) 2005. Español con fines académicos. Madrid: Edinumen.

Anexo 1

CUESTIONARIO PARA ALUMNADO INTERNACIONAL DE LA UA NACIONALIDAD: EDAD: SEXO: LENGUA MATERNA: UNIVERSIDAD DE ORIGEN: 1)

¿A través de qué programa estás estudiando como alumno internacional de la Universidad de Alicante? □ Soy estudiante del Programa Erasmus-Sócrates □ Soy estudiante procedente de una Universidad de Estados Unidos con un programa de estudios internacionales en Alicante (si se marca la opción anterior, intentar que aparezca un desplegable para que especifiquen el programa o marquen una de estas opciones: Spanish Studies Abroad, USAC, CIEE, CEA, ALI) □ Soy estudiante de la Oficina de Relaciones con Asia Pacífico □ Estudio de manera independiente en la UA □ Otros. Especificar: ___________________________________________________________

2)

¿Qué asignatura(s) estás cursando en la Universidad de Alicante? Especifica el nombre de las asignaturas y, si lo sabes, el código de las mismas (por ejemplo: Introducción a la Literatura Española – 31610) _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________

3)

¿Cuáles son tus estudios en tu universidad de origen? (Por ejemplo: Lenguas, Económicas, Historia, etc.) ____________________________________________________________________________

4)

¿Cuál es tu nivel de español según el Marco Común Europeo de Referencia para las Lenguas? □ A1 (Beginner) □ A2 (Pre-intermediate) □ B1 (Intermediate) □ B2 (Upper-intermediate) □ C1 (Advanced) □ C2 (Proficiency) □ El español es mi lengua materna □ No sé cuál es mi nivel

5)

¿Qué nivel de lengua te han exigido antes de venir a la Universidad de Alicante? □ A1 (Beginner) □ A2 (Pre-intermediate) □ B1 (Intermediate) □ B2 (Upper-intermediate) □ C1 (Advanced) □ C2 (Proficiency) □ Ninguno

6)

¿Tenías conocimientos previos de la(s) asignatura(s) que estás cursando en la UA? □ Sí, he estudiado asignaturas con contenidos similares en mi universidad de origen □ Sí, he estudiado de manera independiente temas relacionados con la asignatura (cursos de formación, lecturas, etc.) □ No, mis estudios no están relacionados con la materia que estudio en la UA □ Comentarios adicionales: _________________________________________

7)

¿Por qué has elegido cursar esta(s) asignatura(s)? Puedes elegir una o más respuestas de las siguientes opciones: □ Es un requisito de mi universidad de origen □ Es posible convalidarla por otra asignatura/curso en mi universidad de origen □ Me interesan los contenidos de la asignatura □ Por recomendación de mi coordinador/consejero académico en mi universidad de origen □ Por recomendación de mi coordinador/director/consejero académico en la Universidad de Alicante □ Por recomendación de otros alumnos que han cursado la(s) asignatura(s) □ Porque tengo buenas referencias del profesor/profesora que imparte la asignatura □ He elegido las que creía más fáciles □ Por el horario

8)

¿La(s) asignatura(s) está(n) cumpliendo las expectativas que tenías antes de cursarla(s)? Valora tu nivel de satisfacción del 1 al 5, siendo el 1 el mínimo y 5 el máximo. □1 □2 □3 □4 □5

9)

¿Qué dificultades estás encontrando en la(s) asignatura(s) que estás cursando en la UA? □ No entiendo bien al profesor □ No entiendo bien los materiales

□ No tengo conocimientos previos sobre la materia □ Los criterios de evaluación son diferentes a los de mi universidad de origen □ Me piden lo mismo que a los estudiantes españoles □ Otros. Especificar: ___________________________________________________________ 10) ¿Tienes el programa (sílabo-guía docente) de la asignatura? □ Sí, lo encontré en la web de la UA □ Sí, me lo dio el/la profesor/a □ No, todavía no lo tengo □ Otros. Especificar: ___________________________________________________________ 11) ¿Tienes claros los criterios de evaluación de la asignatura? □ Sí □ No □ Comentarios adicionales: _____________________________________________________ 12) ¿Qué información te hubiera gustado tener antes de elegir tu(s) asignatura(s)? □ Listado de asignaturas recomendadas para alumnos extranjeros □ Listado de asignaturas impartidas en otras lenguas distintas del español □ Clasificación de asignaturas por niveles de dificultad lingüística □ Clasificación de asignaturas por niveles de dificultad de contenidos □ Más información sobre los criterios de evaluación de las asignaturas □ Instrucciones sobre cómo redactar trabajos académicos □ Otros. Especificar: ___________________________________________________________

Anexo 2

CUESTIONARIO PARA EL PROFESORADO CON DOCENCIA EN ASIGNATURAS QUE ACOGEN ESTUDIANTES DE MOVILIDAD (en caso de impartir varias asignaturas, elija aquella en la que haya mayor número de estudiantes extranjeros) Nombre y apellidos: Asignatura (Título y código): Grado en el que se imparte: Nº de alumnos total: Nº de alumnos de movilidad internacional: 1.

Es mi primer curso académico con alumnos de movilidad: a. Sí b. No, es mi segundo curso c. No, tengo bastante experiencia 2. Sus alumnos de movilidad mayoritariamente son de procedencia: a. Europea (lengua materna NO románica) b. Europea (lengua materna románica) c. Norteamericana (lengua materna inglesa) d. Norteamericana de origen hispano e. Asiática f. Otros 3. Los alumnos de movilidad asisten a clase con regularidad: a. Sí b. No c. No lo sé, no controlo la asistencia 4. En general, la presencia de estudiantes de movilidad en clase es, desde mi punto de vista: a. Positiva b. Negativa c. Indiferente d. Otros comentarios 5. Estos alumnos se integran con normalidad en la dinámica de la clase: a. Sí b. No c. Otros 6. Participan activamente en el aula: a. No suelen participar b. Sí, participan igual que los españoles c. Sí, participan más que los españoles 7. El alumnado de movilidad intenta solucionar sus dudas: a. Preguntando en clase b. Preguntando en las tutorías virtuales o presenciales c. No suele preguntar nada d. Pidiendo bibliografía complementaria/adaptada a sus necesidades 8. Para cursar esta asignatura en particular creo que los alumnos de movilidad deberían tener como mínimo un nivel: a. A2 (pre-intermedio) b. B1 (intermedio) c. B2 (intermedio alto) d. C1 (avanzado) e. C2 (superior) 9. He tenido dificultades con el alumnado de movilidad en mi asignatura: a. Por un dominio deficiente de la lengua b. Por no tener los conocimientos previos necesarios de la materia c. Por la propia dificultad de la materia d. En la evaluación e. Por las diferencias culturales y de tradición académica f. No he tenido dificultades g. Otros 10. Cuando se plantea una consulta derivada de un insuficiente dominio lingüístico por parte del alumnado de movilidad (en clase o en tutoría), lo resuelvo: a. Repitiendo la explicación más lentamente b. Simplificando la explicación c. Recurriendo al inglés d. Pidiéndole que venga a una tutoría e. Aconsejando la realización de un curso de lengua española f. Otros 11. En cuanto a los contenidos de la asignatura y la bibliografía recomendada en el curso: a. Mis estudiantes de movilidad siguen el ritmo de clase con normalidad b. Mis estudiantes de movilidad tienen dificultades para seguir los contenidos y la bibliografía: i. Me piden bibliografía complementaria más sencilla (divulgativa) ii. Ofrezco recursos específicos para los estudiantes de movilidad

iii. No ofrezco recursos específicos, pero creo que sería interesante hacerlo 12. A la hora de evaluar, ¿el grado de exigencia es el mismo que para el resto de estudiantes?: a. Sí, exactamente igual b. Sí, pero ello ha generado quejas o reclamaciones por parte de los alumnos c. Sí en cuanto al contenido, pero soy más permisivo/a en cuanto a la expresión d. No evalúo igual, pero creo que deberíamos tener criterios claros para hacerlo 13. Respecto a las actividades prácticas de la asignatura, ¿el alumnado internacional cumple correctamente los plazos?: a. Sí, y también los requisitos formales de entrega b. Sí, pero tienen problemas con los requisitos formales de entrega c. No cumplen con los plazos 14. Existen tablas de equivalencias entre los diversos sistemas de calificación de los distintos países europeos; sin embargo, la cultura académica de cada país es distinta y también las valoraciones de las calificaciones y la frecuencia con que se dan. En ese sentido, ¿ha tenido reclamaciones o quejas respecto a la nota recibida? a. Sí b. No c. Comentarios 15. Comentarios o sugerencias que puedan ayudar a una mejor integración del alumnado extranjero y a un mayor rendimiento académico de su estancia. ¡Muchas gracias por su colaboración!

Assessment

Primer Congreso Internacional HEPCLIL (Perspectivas de Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extranjeras en la Enseñanza Superior) Evaluación simultánea de las actividades de laboratorio de Biología Celular y de expresión escrita en Inglés I de alumnos de Biotecnología Rosa Maria Belda, Fernando Fornes, Consuelo Monerri, Sergio Nebauer, Milagros del Saz, Penny MacDonald, Debra Westall Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica y del Medio Natural Universitat Politècnica de València

Resumen: Siete profesores de los departamentos de Lingüística Aplicada y de Producción Vegetal de la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica de del Medio Natural de la Universitat Politècnica de València nos unimos en un proyecto de innovación educativa financiado por la universidad para alumnos de primer curso de Biotecnología. El objetivo era el diseño de la evaluación de las actividades prácticas del laboratorio de Biología Celular utilizando como lengua vehicular el inglés, de manera que por la misma actividad los alumnos fueran evaluados de expresión escrita en la asignatura de Inglés I. Se analizaron dos tipos de evaluación que utilizaban el inglés como lengua vehicular: 1) cuestionarios de prácticas y 2) redacción de un artículo científico basado en una de las prácticas. Ambos tipos de actividad se realizaron en grupos de cinco alumnos. El procedimiento consistió en 1) elaborar el cuestionario de prácticas y el material de apoyo necesario para la realización del artículo científico; 2) diseñar los criterios de evaluación para Biología Celular y para Inglés I; 3) analizar la valoración de alumnos y profesores de las actividades propuestas y 4) analizar el rendimiento de los alumnos en cada tipo de evaluación. En general, se observa que los alumnos mejoran en atención y seguimiento de las prácticas cuando se trata de la evaluación por cuestionario mientras que la evaluación por artículo científico supone que desarrollen algunas destrezas de tipo transversal como el uso y referencia correcta de las fuentes bibliográficas y la síntesis y focalización de objetivos. Abstract: Seven lecturers of the Lingüística Aplicada and Producción Vegetal departments of the Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica y del Medio Natural of the Universitat Politècnica de València joined together in an innovative education project funded by the university for first year students of Biotechnology. The aim was to design the evaluation of lab practicals of Biología Celular using English as vehicular language in such a way that the students were evaluated for their writing abilities in Inglés I as well. Two evaluation systems were analyzed which had English as vehicular language: 1) questionnaire on each lab practical and 2) writing a scientific paper on one of the practicals. Both activities were carried out in teams of five. The procedure consisted of 1) making a questionnaire of the practicals and the support material needed for writing the scientific paper; 2) establishing the evaluation criteria for Bilogía Celular and Inglés I; 3) analyzing student and lecturer appraisal of both activities and 4) analyzing student performance in each evaluation system. Results showed that students pay more attention and follow the practicals best with the questionnaire system, whilst evaluating them with the scientific article improves transversal competences such

as the correct use and reference of the literature and the synthesis and focalization of objectives.

1.

Antecedentes

La Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV) asignó grupos de Alto Rendimiento Académico (ARA) a aquellas titulaciones de grado a las que los alumnos accedían con notas de PAU superiores a 11 sobre 14. Es el caso del grado de Biotecnología que se imparte en la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Agronómica y del Medio Natural. Entre los requisitos de los grupos ARA está el de que el 50% de la docencia se imparte en inglés.

El cambio de paradigma educativo que supone la formación por competencias ,cf. Fernández, 2010: 11) llevó a los profesores de Biología Celular e Inglés I de la titulación de Biotecnología a colaborar en la realización de actividades académicas conjuntas. Las actividades que se describen en este trabajo formaron parte de un Proyecto de Innovación y Mejora Educativa PIME 2013 financiado por la Universitat Politècnica de València.

Dentro del marco de las Dimensiones Competenciales UPV que se publicaron en 2013 diseñamos dos actividades relacionadas con las prácticas de laboratorio de Biología Celular: 1) cuestionario sobre cada práctica y 2) artículo científico sobre una práctica. Pretendíamos desarrollar y evaluar las competencias de “Trabajo en equipo y liderazgo” definida como “Trabajar y liderar equipos de forma efectiva para la consecución de objetivos comunes, contribuyendo al desarrollo personal y profesional de los mismos”, “Comunicación efectiva” definida como “Comunicarse de manera efectiva, tanto de forma oral como escrita, utilizando adecuadamente los recursos necesarios y adaptándose a las características de la situación y la audiencia” y “Instrumental específica” definida como la “Capacidad para utilizar las técnicas, las habilidades y las herramientas actualizadas necesarias

para

la

práctica

de

la

profesión”

http://www.upv.es/contenidos/ICEP/info/DimensionesCompetenciales.pdf).

(cf.

Hipótesis de trabajo

Se partió de las siguientes hipótesis de trabajo:

1. La evaluación por cuestionarios después de cada práctica supondría que los alumnos trabajarían con interés la práctica. Para evitar que se limitaran a copiar explicaciones del profesor las preguntas del cuestionario habrían de suponer un cierto trabajo de búsqueda en la bibliografía y de reflexión del alumno.

2. La evaluación por artículo científico permitiría desarrollar competencias profesionales a nivel básico. Debería hacerse emulando a un grupo de científicos profesionales que presentan un artículo de una de sus investigaciones a una revista de impacto del ámbito de la biotecnología. Al tratarse de alumnos de primer curso la exigencia se centraría en la comprensión de la actividad realizada en el laboratorio y en la presentación formal del artículo.

2.

Objetivo

Valoración de los dos sistemas de evaluación de prácticas de laboratorio de Biología Celular: a) cuestionarios de prácticas y b) artículo científico

1. Estudio cualitativo de la percepción de alumnos y profesores de ambos sistemas de evaluación.

2. Estudio cuantitativo del rendimiento de los alumnos.

3. Comparación de ambos.

3.

Procedimiento

Las actividades realizadas en el presente estudio se secuenciaron del siguiente modo:

- Preparación del material de apoyo para la realización del artículo científico por los profesores de inglés y de biología y preparación de los cuestionarios de prácticas por los profesores de biología.

- Publicación de ambos tipos de materiales en la plataforma de la asignatura.

- Presentación de las actividades a los alumnos el primer día de clase por el profesor responsable de la asignatura. Se les indica que deberán hacer equipos de 5 personas y que el equipo será el mismo para los dos tipos de actividades. Todos los grupos realizarán los dos tipos de actividades. La calificación será la mejor de las obtenidas por los dos métodos de evaluación.

- Presentación del material de apoyo para la realización del artículo científico y explicación de cómo adecuarlo formalmente en inglés por los profesores de inglés y de biología.

- El cuestionario de cada práctica constaba de 3-4 preguntas que estaban disponibles al finalizar la práctica y que debían entregarse a la semana siguiente

- Para el artículo científico contaban con seis semanas desde la realización de la práctica hasta la fecha de entrega.

- El último día de clase de prácticas, antes de saber su calificación en las mismas, los alumnos respondieron a la pregunta “Give your opinion on the two evaluation systems”. Eran conocedores de la pregunta con una semana de antelación y se les dieron 15 minutos para responder. Respondieron 108 alumnos y se procesaron todas las respuestas.

- Tanto el cuestionario de cada práctica como el artículo científico fueron corregidos por profesores de Biología Celular y por profesores de Inglés I.

- Tras la calificación todos los profesores respondieron a la pregunta “Give your opinion on the two evaluation systems”.

4.

Metodología de análisis

Para el estudio de los resultados se utilizaron dos métodos de análisis: el análisis cualitativo para interpretar la percepción de alumnos y profesores en las respuestas a la pregunta abierta y el análisis cuantitativo para estudiar el rendimiento de los alumnos.

4.1

Análisis de la valoración de alumnos y profesores de las actividades de evaluación

El análisis de la valoración de las actividades de evaluación ha sido un análisis cualitativo basado en la Teoría Fundamentada (Scott and Howell, 2008). Se escogió este tipo de análisis de la valoración de alumnos y profesores porque permitía la interpretación de los discursos y de las estructuras latentes que podría ayudar a mejorar las actividades en cursos siguientes. Se consideraron dos tipos: “alumno” y “profesor” porque consideramos que representaban variables discursivas diferentes. Sin embargo, en algunos aspectos concretos se vio el interés de desdoblar “profesor” en “profesor de biología” y “profesor de inglés”.

En primer lugar se utilizó la estrategia de codificación abierta para identificar los temas y categorías emergentes. Respecto a la organización de los temas se diferenciaron en aspectos centrales, aspectos secundarios y aspectos recurrentes. Se codificaron los relatos en base a dos conceptos nucleares y 10 categorías para alumnos y 7 para profesores. Se diseñó una matriz conceptual del relato que permitía una visión

globalizadora y que se utilizó como modelo interpretativo. Finalmente se elaboró el informe como descripción narrativa.

Los dos conceptos nucleares fueron: percepción de la evaluación por cuestionario de cada práctica y percepción de la evaluación por artículo científico de una práctica, tanto para el tipo “alumno” como para el tipo “profesor”. Hubo categorías coincidentes para los dos tipos: preferencia, implicación en las actividades, proyección de la actividad, percepción sobre calificaciones, recursos y opinión sobre el trabajo en grupo. En el tipo “alumno” además emergieron las siguientes: dedicación, coherencia con las actividades de laboratorio, falta de experiencia y percepción general y en el tipo “profesor” sugerencias.

Desde la perspectiva del “alumno” la proyección de la actividad emergió como categoría aglutinante de aspectos centrales del discurso. La realización del artículo científico les parecía útil, que enseñaba a redactar informes científicos, a citar adecuadamente y a hacer gráficas. Perciben que “prepara para el futuro” y les “hace sentirse parte del mundo científico”. En relación con ello hablaban de falta de experiencia: es la primera vez que se enfrentan a este tipo de trabajos, no se sienten preparados y les parece “difícil porque no tenemos experiencia”. Paralelamente consideran que “cuesta elaborarlo”, que “es largo”, “requiere más tiempo” y “requiere mucha dedicación”. No obstante, al comparar la dedicación con el sistema cuestionario consideraban que el artículo científico “permitía más flexibilidad temporal al tener más tiempo” y “no quitaba tanto tiempo” mientras que el cuestionario “requería reunirse (el equipo) cada semana” y “era difícil la puesta en común” al tener que buscar tiempo. Respecto al cuestionario de cada práctica emergió una categoría imprevista: la coherencia con las actividades del laboratorio. Los alumnos “no encuentran relación directa con las prácticas”. Este aspecto resultó recurrente apareciendo en el 40% de las respuestas. Para ellos, que hubiera que buscar información

bibliográfica para resolver las cuestiones las hacía “difíciles” y consideraban que “no se correspondían con su nivel” por lo que a sus ojos la actividad no servía para evaluar las prácticas de laboratorio. Su percepción sobre el sistema cuestionario no era, sin embargo, negativa porque consideraban que las preguntas eran “interesantes”, “entretenidas” y “variadas” y lo hubieran visto “bien si hubieran estado más relacionadas con las prácticas”. Además observaban que les implicaba en las prácticas porque “obligan a estar atento durante las sesiones” y “permiten afianzar conocimientos y profundizar” y pedían que “se clarificara la bibliografía”. Por otro lado la realización del artículo científico permitía que “se profundizara”, “se entendiera mejor la práctica”, “se recopilara mucha información interesante” y que “todos los esfuerzos confluyeran en un trabajo a fondo”. Valoraron positivamente el material de apoyo del que disponían en la plataforma y las explicaciones para la realización del artículo, indicando que “(los profesores) se esmeran en concretar todos los aspectos del artículo” y “encontramos útil el material (en la plataforma)”. Con todo, solicitaban que se “explicara mejor como enfocar y presentar la ‘Introducción’”, que era el apartado donde se sentían más inseguros ya que tenía más libertad de contenidos. Otro aspecto recurrente a resaltar fue la percepción sobre las calificaciones (no habían recibido ninguna nota cuando contestaron a la pregunta de opinión). Consideran que con el cuestionario “se incluyen todas las prácticas en la evaluación” y “no te juegas la nota a una práctica” mientras que con el artículo “te juegas la nota en un solo trabajo” y hay “menos oportunidades de sacar buena nota”. Además solicitaban que las cuestiones “se corrigieran al día para poder mejorarlas”. Un aspecto secundario pero que se manifestó en el 33% de los casos fue la valoración del trabajo en grupo. Consideraron que ambas actividades “acostumbran a trabajar en equipo”, que el trabajar “en equipo da seguridad”, que “permite resolver problemas” y que “permite repartir el trabajo”. No obstante, afirmaban que eran “demasiados en el grupo”, que “había mucha diversidad de opiniones” y que “no quedan todos satisfechos”. Aunque la preferencia por uno de los dos sistemas

no figuraba en la pregunta, el 61% se manifestó al respecto: el 21% prefirieron el cuestionario y el 40% el artículo científico.

Desde la perspectiva del “profesor” hay que tener presente que expresaron su opinión después de calificar. Respecto a la implicación de los alumnos en las actividades señalan que las cuestiones permiten el “análisis y maduración de contenidos” y que si sólo se realizara el artículo científico “concentrarían sus esfuerzos sólo en esa práctica”. Por otro lado, consideran que “no suelen entender bien la estructura/filosofía del artículo” aunque sí que “trabajan bien los resultados y la interpretación”. Valoran que desarrollan “competencias y habilidades que no vienen dadas directamente por realizar las prácticas” y que es “recomendable como primera aproximación al tratamiento de datos”. Los “profesores de inglés” señalaron que el artículo era “linguistically and cognitively the more interesting option” y que permitía que “they become familiarized with the structure of scientific/academic articles which is obviously beneficial to them, not only for their university work (projects, TFG, etc.), but thereafter”, que además proporcionaba “more freedom to choose what aspects to write about” y que suponía “more research into other aspects of the task proposed” y que, en general, era “most challenging for the students”. Respecto al cuestionario subrayaron que exigía de los estudiantes “more specific information and a ‘finer’ analysis of the task at hand”. Con relación a los recursos “los profesores de biología” señalaron que los alumnos acudían con demasiada exclusividad a internet para responder al cuestionario y que “se debería ajustar la complejidad de las cuestiones” y “proponer cuestiones que requieran directamente libros recomendados”. Los profesores también opinaron sobre el trabajo en equipos resaltando que estos no deberían ser de más de tres estudiantes además de reconocer que “el trabajo en grupo les obliga a negociar respuestas, la forma de presentación…”. Como aspectos secundarios surgió la dedicación del profesor en tareas de evaluación que se consideraba

superior en el sistema de preguntas y la pertinencia de ambos sistemas, que de seguir manteniéndose implicaría la reducción del cuestionario.

4.2

Análisis del rendimiento de los alumnos

El análisis del rendimiento de los alumnos ha sido cuantitativo y se ha utilizado estadística descriptiva (medias, desviaciones estándar) y análisis de frecuencias.

La media de las notas obtenidas mediante artículo científico fue de 7,02 con una desviación de 1,52 y la de notas obtenidas en cuestionario fue de 7,06 con una desviación de 1,28, lo que indicaría que apenas hay sesgo por un sistema u otro, especialmente por parte del profesor que corrige. Se calculó la diferencia entre los dos sistemas por equipos y se promedió obteniéndose el valor de 1,05, es decir podía obtenerse de media 1,05 puntos más dependiendo del sistema de evaluación. El histograma de frecuencias (figura 1) muestra que la mayoría de alumnos obtuvo mejor nota por el artículo científico que por el cuestionario y que aquellos alumnos que habían obtenido más nota por el artículo científico habían presentado menor diferencia entre sistemas de evaluación.

5.

Conclusiones

El estudio comparativo de dos actividades evaluables referidas a las prácticas de laboratorio ha permitido resaltar sus fuerzas y debilidades, no sólo desde la perspectiva del profesor sino también del alumno, pudiendo valorar aspectos que no se perciben teniendo en cuenta exclusivamente las calificaciones.

Histograma

6

frecuencia

5 4 3 2 1 0 -5

-3 -1 1 diferencia entre sistemas

3

Figura 1. Histograma de frecuencias de los valores de la diferencia en nota de los dos sistemas de evaluación. El valor positivo para los que obtuvieron mayor nota en el artículo y el negativo para los que la obtuvieron en el cuestionario.

6.

Agradecimientos

Este proyecto ha sido financiado por la Universitat Politècnica de València. Los autores desean agradecer la inestimable colaboración de los alumnos de Biología Celular del curso 2013-2014.

7.

Bibliografía

Fernández March, Amparo, 2010. “La evaluación orientada al aprendizaje en un modelo de formación por competencias en la educación universitaria.” Revista de Docencia Universitaria. 8, 1: 11-34. Scott, Karen and Howell, Dana, 2008. “Clarifying Analysis and Interpretation in Grounded Theory: Using a Conditional Relationship Guide and Reflective Coding Matrix”. International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 7, 2: 1-15.

Vicerrectorado de Estudios, Calidad y Acreditación de la Universitat Politècnica de València. Área de Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación ICE-Profesorado [Consulta: 27 feb. 2014]

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Assessment in CLIL Nalan Kenny Abstract: The aim of this talk is to explore assessment in higher education and support for learners during their academic education. It investigates the assessment methods that provide success for universities and learners. Universities which implement CLIL should assess learners who would like to attend a programme in English without taking account of their English language qualifications. This assessment should be done in writing, listening and comprehension, speaking and reading and comprehension. In the literature, formative and summative assessments are considered. Formative assessment is ongoing, 'more complex as its intention is to be directly diagnostics with a view to immediately impacting on learner's next steps' (Coyle et al, 2010). Summative assessment occurs at the end of the term or course. McKay, 2006 divides assessment into three phases: design, operationalization and administration phase. If these three phases can't be embedded in the classroom as they are, they can be introduced as a set of questions; why?, how? and what?

1.

Introduction

CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) has been defined as 'an umbrella' (Mehisto et al, 2008), of 'dual focus' (Kiely, 2009; Coyle et al, 2010), and as a bilingual process in the literature. It is a new way to develop learners competence and attitudes in learning a language. CLIL has spread and started being used in many schools in Europe. Although it is newly-named approach, it has a long history (Mehisto et al, 2008).

This has become a very popular approach to learning language and content and has been implemented in primary and secondary schools and universities. As it is still fairly a new approach, some universities have implemented CLIL partially and some by full immersion. There have been some issues implementing CLIL in primary and secondary school because of a lack of teacher's level of target language or excessive work but there are also some successful cases too. Kiely, 2009 states 'assessment in CLIL is a complex area for a number of reasons' with one of the reason being that CLIL has a dual focus approach.

Assessment is an-ongoing process done by teachers, official education authorities or learners themselves. Assessment can be a guide and done in many ways. In CLIL classroom assessment, the content and language teacher should be integrated. Content should be assessed by the content teacher who would have the depth of knowledge. 'Teacher must distinguish between the language and content knowledge of the students and decide if one is interfering with the demonstration of the others' (Short, 1993). In the literature there are two essential assessment: formative and summative. Formative assessment is an ongoing assessment, 'more complex as its intention is to be directly diagnostics with a view to immediately impacting on learner's next steps' (Coyle et al, 2010). Summative assessment is done at the end of term or course. If these three phases can't be embedded in the classroom as they are they can be introduced as a set of questions; why?, how?, and what? It is important to know:

Why will I assess?

What am I going to do with the information?

How should I assess the learning acquisition?

Universities which implement CLIL should assess learners who would like to attend a programme in English without taking account of their current English language qualifications. This assessment should be done in writing, listening and comprehension, speaking and reading and comprehension.

2.

Big question in CLIL

Assessment is a major process to measure what learners understand, what they know and how the programme/lesson plan works. However; in literature the biggest discussion is

how the teacher can make sure whether the learner has a comprehension problem because of lack of language. Questions need to be answered as follows:

Why do we assess?

Who should assess?

What do we assess?

How do we assess?

2.1

Why do we assess?

We assess learners to make sure what is meant to be taught has been captured and what the learner is expected to do to complete the task. According to the results in assessment, we are be able to give feedback and set real learning outcomes. Not only would we give feedback to learners but assessment also helps us make decisions about our effectiveness as teachers. Assessment allows the teacher to identify any gaps in the learner's language and content acquisition and support him/her to achieve his/her goals.

2.2

Who should be involved in assessment?

Teachers, university, sponsor bodies but also the learners themselves. Peer assessment also gives learners a lot of information how they are progressing and change their attitude toward learning. The teacher is the assessor of all because he/she best knows the learner's abilities from training/course. The content teacher should work in cooperation with the language teacher. Harris and McCann (1994:4) states: 'A co-operative approach saves both time and work, pools vital knowledge and resources'.

2.3

What do we assess?

This is the major issue in CLIL and has been discussed in literature. Especially in higher education it is very important as the university provides programmes in the target language, here English. Learners are expected to learn both content and language at a certain level. It is vital for the learner's future career to be able to find a better job, or be able to work abroad using depth of knowledge and language together. Learners should be aware of this expectation and assessment criteria should be set up accordingly. It leads us to 'content should be the priority over language accuracy' (Hofmannova et al., 2008) to assess learner's progress. For example; if the learner answers all questions correctly but has poor English, then content answers should be taken an account and he shouldn't fail. This poor English will affect teaching as well to avoid that and also protect the university's reputation; besides learners progress in English the learner should get language support according to his/her level of English. At this stage language support and language input the learner gets is important.

2.4

How do we assess?

Harris and McCann (1994) states that assessment should be done constructively focusing on achievement not failure. Finding out what learners can do is important. Assessment should have reliability for learners to demonstrate what they have learnt or know and also for the teacher to have success in teaching.

Assessment depends on expectations, target, achievement level and learning abilities. Pre assessment can be done to have an idea about the learners' level of English so it will enable the teacher to make a better lesson plan and set realistic targets for learners. We should focus on what we are assessing not anything else. For example: if we assess whether or not they have understood the subject content in Mathematics we should consider the answers, not spelling mistakes in language.

3.

Assessment methods

There are many assessment methods, including observation, tasked based activities, oral, written, listening, debate, ask and answer, classroom diary, display, presentation, portfolio, summary, research projects, journals, quizzes.

Some of these methods are done daily or regularly during learning and teaching. However, at higher education, we can choose presentation and quizzes in both content and language assessment besides university's official testing system.

3.1

Presentations

Setting up the right criteria is important for the learner's progress. Every learner should be able to present his/her ideas in an effective way. When we assess presentations we should look for whether they are:

clear simple and understandable

able to express what the learner tries to say

open to any questions

able to integrate with language and content

engaging with the concept

fluent and accurate in language

depth of knowledge

Presentations improve the learner's communication skills, ability to speak independently, confidence, expressing ideas and assessing themselves. Fortanet-Gómez (2013) points out the five aspects in the language dimension:

improve overall target language competence.

develop oral communication skills

deepen awareness of both mother tongue and target language

develop plurilingual interests and attitudes

introduce a target language

Fortanet-Gómez; 2013 states that it is too general to implement the five aspects above as objectives in higher education as learners are required to write complex academic assignments and reports amongst other things. I agree with that. However; it is not impossible when you set up the language programme according to departments or fields such as engineering, science or social science. This ability can be given to learners as a support language when they are studying the content. In a full immersion CLIL implementation, learners will be aware of the university's language policy and expectations. Under these terms, learners will get support from the teacher, language department, and university. Full immersion is important to attract foreign students, to have a good quality education and to raise the university's profile among the other universities nationally and internationally.

The teacher should ask and focus on 'what I am assessing'. It is important for the learner and teacher to focus on key points of assessment criteria. In presentations, not only is the learner able to use the variety structure of language but also the depth of knowledge and

being in control of the topic. Presentations give the learner confidence in the field and use of language. The learner improve their thinking skills and creativity in presentations. When the learner involves and engages to an active learning cognition takes place faster. Therefore, presentations will give the learner chance to show his/her understanding and competence in language

3.2

Quizzes

These are small tests and can be given at the end of each unit or at the end of lesson. Learners usually don't like quizzes. However, they provide the teacher a great information in a short time and help the teacher to keep track learner's progress. Asking key points in learning will provide the teacher information how the learners captured key points and how they demonstrate that.

Not only do they give the ability in improving learners writing skills but also improves thinking skills to be able to give the correct answer in short time. Quizzes can be a great tool and create competition in class to demonstrate what the learner already knows and close the gaps in misconceptions. The teacher might let learners do peer assessment when the teacher go through the answers in the class. Key points of quizzes:

interpretation of ask and answer method

doesn't take much time

evidence for learning

gives feedback to learner and teacher in short time

4.

Assessment Stages

To apply this in CLIL, all learners should have had pre assessment before they start their academic training. Pre assessment involves language proficiency and is essential to have some idea about learner's social and general background, and language training during their education so far. This assessment gives the teacher what expectations would be in language and set the lesson plan according to level of proficiency in language. Llinares et al (2012) point out "it may not be appropriate to use language testing materials not based on the actual curriculum content studied." In that matter, pre assessment will demonstrate that learners should get language support once or twice a week in academic writing such as reports, essays and graphs to improve their writing skills. Teacher should encourage learners to involve in tasks or lessons by group or pair work. In that way, learners will improve their communication skills. Massler 2012 states how important language input is to reach the target. The volume of language input is essential to be successful in CLIL.

Diagnostic assessment identifies the issues and provides explicit feedback. It's an ongoing process as a part of learning and teaching. It helps teacher to find alternative teaching sources according to the results.

The ultimate assessment is decision making. It's the last assessment the learner have. They can be done at the end of each term and also includes projects and assignments.

5.

Conclusion

I have discussed assessment in CLIL from a higher education perspective and tried to outline the methods and stages of the assessment. What kind of assessment the teacher use is depends on the university, education authority but overall we should assess content as content teacher and language as language teacher. If the language is barrier in learning the content there should be 'language support unit' for the learner. Content and language should think separately in assessment.

In higher education, I believe that assessment can be done effectively through presentations, and quizzes at the end of each unit. Overall it gives the teacher an idea of learner's progress, issues, if there is any, and feedback. Keeping track of learner is important to be able to give him/her feedback about his/her progress at earlier stage and set the right assessment criteria to success. Assessment is not an easy job but it is the last stage of learning and how learner's progress is also affects his future career.

To be able to assess learner's progress, first, there should be the right assessment criteria, learners should know what they are assessed for, and flexible time especially in CLIL. For future studies, it would be a good idea to look into the factors affecting assessment.

6.

References

Coyle, Do, Hood, Philip. & Marsh, David, 2010. CLIL:Content and Language Integrated Learning, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Harris, Michael & McCann, Paul, 1994. Assessment . Oxford, Macmillan.

Hofmannová, Marie, Novotná, Jarmila, & Pípalová, Renata, 2008. 'Assessment Approaches to Teaching Mathematics in English as a Foreign Language'. International CLIL Research Journal 1, 1: 20-35. University of Jyväskylä. Fortanet-Gómez, Immaculada, 2013. CLIL in Higher Education. Towards a Multilingual Language Policy. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Kiely, Richard, 2009. The question of assessment. in www.developingteachers.com. Llinares, Ana, Morton, Tom & Whittaker, Rachel, 2012. The Roles of Language in CLIL. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. McKay, Penny, 2006. Assessing Young Language Learners, Cambridge, Cambridge Univeristy Press. Massler, Ute, 2012. Primary CLIL and Its Stakeholders: What Children, Parents and Teachers Think of the potential Merits and Pitfalls of CLIL Modules in Primary Teaching. International CLIL Research Journal.' 1, 4: 36-46. University of Jyväskylä. Mehisto, Peeter, Marsh, David. & Frigols, Maria Jesus, 2008. Uncovering CLIL Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Educaton, Oxford, Macmillan Education. Short, Deborah, 1993. 'Assessing Language and Integrated Instruction'. TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Winter, 1993), pp. 627-656.

Theoretical Framework

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. Com explicar un sistema CLIL: un model dinàmic newtonià Montserrat Alsina Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya BarcelonaTech Spain

Abstract: In the CLIL implementation in higher education, beside studies on the level of the students and the willingness of teachers, and the elaboration of interdisciplinary educational material, the current challenge is to get content teachers, of a wide range of disciplines, more involved in CLIL. In this communication the bases of a model for a CLIL system is presented, using the Newtonian dynamics. It could be an interesting and plausible model to be used in a scientific and technological university environment, where so far CLIL has been implemented only slightly. Resum: En la implementació del CLIL a l’educació superior, apart d’estudis sobre el nivell de l’estudiantat i la disponibilitat del professorat, i de l’elaboració de material educatiu interdisciplinari, el repte actual és aconseguir que s’involucrin activament en CLIL els professors de contingut d’un ventall ampli de disciplines. En aquesta comunicació es presenten les bases d’un model per un sistema CLIL, utilitzant la dinàmica newtoniana. Pot ser un model interessant i plausible en un context universitari científic i tecnològic, on fins ara el CLIL s’ha implementat només lleugerament.

1.

Introducció: el repte

Actualment, la major part de les institucions europees d'educació superior estan convençudes de la importància i els avantatges d’impartir continguts en una llengua estrangera, a través de diferents estratègies com per exemple CLIL o EMI. És clar que la competència multilingüe està ben valorada i recomanada des de les institucions de la Unió Europea (European Council, 1995; 2002), però és bo remarcar que el coneixement de llenguatges també ha estat reconegut des d’Amèrica (Modern Language Association of America, 2007), reclamant també implicació en l’educació superior:

“ the need to understand other cultures and languages is one of the five imperative needs to which higher education must respond in the next ten years”.

El professorat de llengua estrangera involucrat està desenvolupant mètodes, tècniques i teories interessants sobre aquestes estratègies per millorar el coneixement de llengües, i cada vegada més institucions estan adaptant les seves línies d’actuació en aquesta direcció i ofereixen cursos de formació als professors interessats. En aquest mateix volum se’n poden trobar exemples.

A l’Escola Politècnica Superior d’Enginyeria de Manresa de la Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (EPSEM, UPC) també s’ha treballat per tal d’implementar el CLIL en el context científic i tecnològic que correspon als diversos graus d’enginyeria que s’imparteixen al centre. En el procés s’ha analitzat el punt de partida d’estudiantat i professorat i les dificultats inherents (cf. Alsina, Fortuny-Santos i Giralt, 2012; Heras, Lao, Gamisans, Alsina, 2012). Les dificultats que anaven sorgint amb l’ús de l’anglès a l’aula universitària anaren motivant el desenvolupament de recursos per reduir-les (cf. Alsina, Fortuny, 2012; Bonet-Dalmau, Alsina, 2012). En particular, destaca l’elaboració de la fraseologia de la docència universitària CLASS-TALK, recurs disponible a (http://www.upc.edu/slt/classtalk). La motivació per l’anàlisi de les dificultats i l’elaboració de material de suport va ser justament l’origen de u-Linguatech el grup de recerca en Comunicació Científica i Tecnològica Multilingüe (https://www.upc.edu/rima/grups/linguatech),.

Ara bé, en aquest article ens referim a dificultats d’un tipus ben diferent, que també cal superar. La major part de les experiències de CLIL publicades i estudiades vénen de l'educació primària i secundària, on les condicions són diferents: es requereix molt menys nivell d'expertesa, i la col·laboració entre el professorat de llengua i el de contingut és més factible. En canvi, a l'educació superior l'especialització és important, i el contingut és impartit per professorat especialitzat. A més, els departaments estan organitzats per àrees temàtiques, alguns d'ells ben lluny de les àrees relacionades amb les llengües. Així, a les universitats, el fet d’impartir una assignatura en llengua estrangera depèn bàsicament del

professorat expert en aquella assignatura. Per tant, creiem que un dels reptes actual consisteix a animar el professorat de contingut, en especial de l’àmbit científic i tecnològic a implicar-se en CLIL.

Seria bo fer un estudi profund i complet de l’estat actual de la qüestió a les universitats catalanes, amb l'anglès com a llengua estrangera. Una ullada a la literatura i els congressos recents, prenent com a punt de partida (Navès-Victori, 2009), ja indica que s’han publicat algunes experiències de CLIL a les universitats de Catalunya, però només algunes d’elles estan relacionades amb graus científics i tecnològics. Les raons poden ser ben diverses, però una d’elles seria el distanciament habitual entre les llengües i les ciències.

En aquest sentit, en aquest article proposem un model per explicar i treballar la metodologia CLIL, i més en general l’aprenentatge, basat en un patró científic ben conegut. Creiem que aquest model pot ser molt útil per explicar millor al professorat científic i tecnològic com podria funcionar la metodologia CLIL en el seu context, la qual cosa hauria de contribuir a encoratjar-los a posar-lo en pràctica. A la vegada, amb la utilització del llenguatge visual, facilita la seva interpretació amb referències a la vida quotidiana i fa de pont entre el llenguatge simbòlic i el verbal, reduint distàncies.

2.

Un model dinàmic newtonià

El nou model per explicar el funcionament d’un sistema CLIL està inspirat en la mecànica clàssica, un dels temes més significatius de la ciència, l'enginyeria i la tecnologia. Remarquem que l’adjectiu dinàmic d’aquest model és ben adient, ja que actua amb una doble connotació. D'una banda es refereix a la dinàmica, la part de la mecànica clàssica que descriu el moviment dels cossos sota l'acció d'un sistema de forces, basada en les lleis de Newton, la qual cosa també justifica l'ús de l’adjectiu newtonià. D'altra banda,

també es refereix al significat habitual de la paraula, procedent del grec dynamikos (poderós), i sinònim d’enèrgic, potent, vigorós, en contraposició, per exemple, d’inactiu.

En primer lloc, es descriu la idea bàsica. Després s’enuncien les tres lleis de Newton, amb una interpretació breu del seu significat en aquest context. Una presentació més detallada del model apareixerà en un proper article.

2.1

Base del model

La idea bàsica d’aquest model és identificar l’aprenentatge com un procés que porta l’estudiantat a caminar endavant, en una direcció adequada.

Utilitzant aquest punt de vista, l’estudiant és el principal protagonista del seu aprenentatge, en el qual hi juga un paper fonamental. Així, l’hem de visualitzar caminant com es mostra a la primera imatge de la Fig.1, de manera que dinàmic és realment un adjectiu molt adequat.

El professorat el visualitzarem com a forces que actuen en l’estudiantat, empenyent amb intensitats diferents en direccions diferents, com es mostra a la segona vinyeta de la Fig.1. Per descomptat, els professors no són els únics personatges que interactuen amb els estudiants; seria massa simple i pretensiós. Si volem tenir un model més complet, cal tenir en compte més agents. Per exemple, la motivació es pot veure com a força en la mateixa direcció, mentre altres elements representen forces en direcció contrària. Com veurem a la descripció del model seguint les lleis de la dinàmica, les lleis de Newton, hi ha diferents elements que modelen aspectes interessants del procés d’aprenentatge.

Per descomptat, podem fer una interpretació directa del sentit i la direcció de les forces. Diferents assignatures i metodologies incideixen en l’aprenentatge de l’estudiant i l’enriqueixen. Ara bé, forces en direccions diferents no optimitzen el moviment, poden

dificultar-lo, i fins i tot aturar-lo. L’efecte de les forces serà òptim si actuen en paral·lel, com es mostra a la tercera vinyeta de la Fig.1. En particular a nivell de CLIL, a cada assignatura, posar en paral·lel l’aprenentatge del contingut específic de les matèries amb la pràctica de la llengua facilita que l’aprenentatge continuï endavant.

.

Figura 1. Interpretació bàsica del model dinàmic newtonià

2.2

Primera llei: la inèrcia dels estudiants

El primer aspecte de l’aprenentatge, interpretat com a moviment, el modelem amb la primera llei de Newton, coneguda també amb el nom de Principi d’inèrcia: “Un objecte continua fent el que està fent si no s'exerceix una força sobre ell ". És a dir, un objecte que està en repòs romandrà en repòs llevat que una força externa actuï sobre ell; un objecte que està en moviment no canviarà la seva velocitat a menys que una força externa actuï sobre ell (Fig.2). Des d'aquest punt de vista, el professorat ha d'actuar tenint en compte la inèrcia dels estudiants perquè es moguin i avancin, és a dir aprenguin, en una direcció adequada. En particular, el professorat ha de vigilar de no aturar l'aprenentatge dels estudiants i han de ser conscients que no es pot interpretar qualsevol moviment com a aprenentatge. Ser un bon professor mai ha estat trivial.

Figura 2. II·lustració de la primera llei de Newton.

En el nostre context, això significa que el professorat han de tenir en compte el que està fent l’estudiantat, sobretot en referència a la llengua. Així, si un estudiant no té l'hàbit d'usar l’anglès, no es pot pretendre que comenci a utilitzar-lo per ell mateix, llevat que alguna cosa externa actuï. Notem que la inèrcia de l'estudiant existeix encara que l'estudiant ja estigui en moviment, tirant endavant. Així, també significa que si un estudiant està habituat a fer quelcom, però de manera no prou correcta, cal alguna acció per canviar-ho, encara que només sigui la direcció del seu moviment el que necessita ser canviat. Per exemple, no es pot esperar que els errors es corregeixin sols; fer-los notar, per agafar-ne consciència, pot significar un canvi de direcció. De fet, fins i tot de cara a l’aprenentatge de contingut, l'ús de l’anglès com a mitjà d'instrucció podria ser una força externa al contingut que desencadena un moviment o canvia l'actual.

2.3

Segona llei: relació de causa i efecte

La segona llei de Newton és ben coneguda: “l’acceleració d’un sistema és directament proporcional a, i en la mateixa direcció que, la força externa total que actua sobre el sistema, i inversament proporcional a la seva massa”.

A continuació, afegim alguns comentaris per tal del millorar la seva aplicació en el nostre context. La consideració inicial és sobre la proporcionalitat, concepte ben assumit en general. És clar que més força indueix més acceleració. Per tant cal fer més esforç si es vol aconseguir més acceleració. No es pot pretendre aconseguir més bons resultats si es deixa tot igual, sense canviar cap pauta d’actuació. Però obtenim una millor interpretació, si ens fixem amb atenció en la fórmula de la llei, indicada a la Fig.3. El cub representa un estudiant, i la seva massa M les seves característiques personals, és a dir, la seva resistència o oposició al moviment. En aquest cas la persona representada és qui realitza l’acció, el professorat.

Figura 3. Fórmula de la segona llei de Newton.

D'acord amb aquesta interpretació, és fàcil tenir present que la mateixa força per part del professor pot induir diferents acceleracions en diferents estudiants tot i que estan en el mateix grup. Un millor coneixement de les característiques personals del grup, basat en qüestionaris o altres eines, conduiran a un millor ensenyament i aprenentatge. Més precisament, una bona planificació consistiria en: la quantificació de l’acceleració que es vol aconseguir com a objectius i el càlcul d'una mena de mitjana de la massa per al grup d'estudiants, referida a certes característiques. Llavors es podria predir la força necessària, en termes d'activitats i recursos, o qualsevol altra eina pedagògica. Si bé això sigui difícil de dur a terme en general, ja que implica triar un sistema general de

referència, és una estratègia que pot ser adequada per establir comparacions en un mateix grup, aplicat a moments diferents.

També és important observar que la llei s’aplica a cada instant de temps de manera independent. Així, les accions i intervencions poden ser progressives, per anar ajustant el moviment

Un estudi més profund de la segona llei de Newton ens aporta altres consideracions, que il·lustrem a la Fig. 4.

En primer lloc, no només cal tenir en compte la massa de la caixa, sinó també la superfície on està, com mostra el dibuix de l’esquerra. Per moure la caixa, cal empènyer amb més força de la que es necessària si tenim en compte només la massa i l’acceleració del moviment que volem. Cal vèncer el fregament abans d’aconseguir moviment. Ser conscients de la força de fregament ens recorda que hi ha dificultats i esculls addicionals, exteriors a l’estudiant, que cal tenir en compte, com podrien ser certes mancances degudes al seu procés anterior.

Figura 4. Més detalls de la segona llei de Newton.

En el context del CLIL una bona interpretació seria veure les dificultats en la comprensió i l’expressió oral o la manca de vocabulari, com irregularitats en la superfície, de manera que dificulten el moviment entès ara com a aprenentatge de contingut. En aquest sentit, per als professorat de contingut, l’elaboració de recursos de suport és clau per tal de

reduir les dificultats addicionals, (eliminant esculls i allisant la superfície), i assegurar que l’alumnat segueixi el seu procés d’aprenentatge. Aquesta interpretació es mostra a la Fig. 5, amb vinyetes que formen part del vídeo que explica els objectius i activitats del grup de recerca u-Linguatech.

Figura 5. Interpretació de com els recursos ajuden a eliminar les dificultats.

En segon lloc, fins i tot només tenint en compte una assignatura cal tenir en compte la direcció de la força que s’aplica per tal de fer-ho de manera òptima. La força que va en una direcció en que el moviment no és possible no és útil. Així, tornant a la Fig.4, el segon dibuix planteja com de la força aplicada en diagonal, només s’aprofita la component horitzontal per al moviment horitzontal. En el context del CLIL, és una manera d’interpretar que és important fer una reflexió prèvia de quina és la direcció en que es volen resultats per plantejar accions en les direccions corresponents.

2.4

Tercera llei: principi d’acció-reacció

La tercera llei de Newton ens diu: “Sempre que un cos exerceix una força sobre un altre, aquest segon cos exerceix sobre el primer una força d’igual magnitud i direcció però de sentit contrari.”

Aquestes forces s’anomenen acció i reacció, però són intercanviables entre elles. Així, podem pensar en l’acció que fa el professorat i la reacció de l’estudiantat. Però també podem estudiar les accions de l’estudiantat i les reaccions del professorat, depenent de

l’acció concreta, i de l’èmfasi i el punt de vista que vulguem adoptar. En el mon quotidià s’aplica aquest principi en contextos ben diversos. La Fig.6 en mostra un exemple gràfic.

Figura 6. Il·lustració de la tercera llei de Newton.

Cal remarcar que aquestes dues forces, tot i que tenen la mateixa mida i direcció, i el sentit oposat, no es contraresten, ja que estan aplicades sobre cossos diferents.

També és important veure que els efectes poden ser positius en un i altre objecte. A la Fig.7 mostrem un exemple entenedor de com els dos cossos es beneficien d’aquestes forces contraposades, que pot inspirar accions i reaccions semblants en un context CLIL.

Figura 7. Exemple de la tercera llei de Newton.

Un dels aspectes on aquesta reacció és més evident és en l’actitud dels estudiants. És ben conegut que: l’actitud de l’estudiant és més positiva si detecta un entorn més favorable, i que una actitud positiva afavoreix l’aprenentatge. Des del grup de recerca uLinguatech, s’ha estudiat la reacció de l’estudiantat a través d’enquestes en que se li demanava valorar la motivació i l’acció del professorat que impartia. Les respostes

obtingudes en una mostra de 60 estudiants de diferents cursos dels graus d’enginyeria impartits a l’EPSEM, vegeu Fig.8, posen de manifest que l’estudiantat valora l’esforç del professorat que imparteix CLIL, de manera que promou una actitud més positiva.

Figura 8. Diagrames de les respostes de l’estudiantat.

Finalment, cal remarcar que un sistema CLIL no fa referència només a dues persones (membres del professorat i l’estudiantat, respectivament), ja que les classes s’imparteixen a un grup d’estudiants. Cal tenir en compte que la dinàmica de forces explica també com les accions provoquen reaccions que afecten també als elements de l’entorn. L’exemple de la Fig. 9 n’ofereix una bona interpretació: l’acció de la bola vermella en la bola de la dreta provoca de fet moviment en totes les boles, encara que no hi actua directament.

Figura 9. Interrelació entre diferents elements.

3.

Conclusions

Identificant l’aprenentatge amb moviment (amb paràmetres adequats) i les accions amb forces, hem utilitzat les lleis de Newton per resumir el funcionament del que pot ser un sistema CLIL. La interpretació de les lleis de la dinàmica en aquest context pot ajudar a comprendre millor l’efecte de diferents accions del professorat i les reaccions de l’estudiantat, a la vegada que ens ajuda a tenir present el paper d’altres elements, com els recursos de suport per exemple. Es tractaran més detalls en un proper article.

Aquesta formulació del funcionament del CLIL com a model inspirat en la dinàmica newtoniana el pot fer més proper a l’entorn científic i tecnològic universitari; podria involucrar a més persones especialistes en contingut no lingüístic en la impartició de contingut universitari en llengua estrangera. En particular, fent referència de nou a la figura anterior, és important disposar de boles vermelles que puguin iniciar accions, encara que siguin puntuals, que poden acabar incidint en altres elements indirectament.

4.

Referències

Alsina, M., Fortuny-Santos, J., i Giralt, R., 2012. "Elaboració de recursos multimèdia per a l'ensenyament/aprenentatge en anglès en graus tecnològics" a Congrés Internacional de Docència Universitària i Innovació (CIDUI). Alsina, M., Fortuny, J. 2012. "Class-Talk: Recurs en línia per a l’ ensenyament d’assignatures en anglès" a Proceedings of II International Round Table on CLIL Programmes, VI Colloquium on Clil in Catalonia, TRICLIL-2012, N. Evnitskaya et al (eds), Publicacions de la UAB, 2012, 201-205. Bonet-Dalmau, J., Alsina, M., 2012. “Teaching Symbolic Language to non-native Speakers” a Proceedings of SEFI 40th annual conference Engineering Education 2020:meet the future,.166-167.

European Council, 1995. “Teaching and Learning, towards the learning Society”, White Paper on Education and Training, COM(95) 590, November (1995). Disponible online a http://europa.eu/documents/comm/white_papers/pdf/com95_590_en.pdf Heras, F.X.C., Lao, C., Gamisans, X. i Alsina, M. 2012, "The challenge of plurilingual competence: Analaysis and teaching tools from the chemical engineering". a Innovation and Quality in Engineering Education. Universidad de Valladolid, DL-VA-398-2012. Imamura, J. The Electronic Universe, an educational outreach server, Physics department, University of oregon, http://zebu.uoregon.edu/ Modern Language Association of America Committee on Foreign Languages, Foreign Languages and Higher Educations: New Structures for a Changed World, 2007 Navés, T. & Victori, M. 2009. “CLIL in Catalonia: an overview of research” a CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training (Eds. Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & D. Lasagabaster), Cambridge.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. A framework for the analysis of CLIL lecturers’ discourse from a genre perspective Mª Ángeles Martín del Pozo Universidad de Valladolid Abstract: Internationalization strategies and the European Space of Higher Education are causing a growing interest in English medium instruction (EMI). University linguistic and internationalization policies are attempting to provide lectures with the required training and education. Linguists can supply not only the knowledge of the language but the knowledge about language which may enable lecturers to increase their academic language competence autonomously. This paper presents a framework for the analysis of lecturers’ discourse to trigger reflection about the linguistic needs in CLIL/EMI contexts.

The proposed framework is based on the lecture, the main academic oral genre and still the most widely used teaching option. The framework departs from the model of lecture phases (Young, 1994) and centres in the metadiscoursal phases following Dafouz and Nuñezs (2010) modifications regarding the interaction phase. Regarding the content phase, taxonomies of three academic functions (definition, explanation and hypothesis expression) are provided.

The categories of these items may serve as a checklist at the reach of any non language expert for either self analysis or peer observation in EMI lectures. Therefore, the framework could be considered a tool for reflection on the role of language in EMI and for training EMI lecturers.

1.

CLIL in Higher Education

Internationalization of universities and the European Space of Higher Education (ESHE) have accelerated the growth of English medium instruction (EMI). This practice has turned

from an added value to a must for third level institutions. However ‘foreign language learning in itself is NOT the reason why institutions adopt English medium teaching’ (Coleman, 2006: 4). This emphasis has important implications. The main one is that language objectives are not explicit neither at corporate level nor at individual level. The divergence regarding language focus is thus summarized:

There is an area where CLIL and EMI diverge from each other; this is the attention that each of them pays to language learning. While CLIL is a dual focused process, aiming to overtly develop both language and content knowledge, EMI focuses mainly on subject learning and exploits the language of instruction as a mere neutral tool to perform that goal. (Francomacaro, 2011: 34)

However, far too little attention has been paid to what variables can contribute to compensate for the lack of explicit language learning objectives and counteract the drawbacks of naturalistic learning conditions. This paper indicates how the language spoken at the CLIL/EMI classroom may be enhanced.

1.1

Training lectures for CLIL

In the middle of these new bilingual scenarios, one main issue concerning both CLIL theorists and practitioners remains unsolved: CLIL teacher training. Abundant evidence of this need can be found in literature (Dafouz, 2008; Lasagabaster & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010; Doiz, Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2012; Ball, & Lindsay, 2012; Aguilar Pérez & Rodriguez 2012; Martín del Pozo, 2013, et al.). Additionally official documentation points at this need as well as other less official sources (web sites, expert Forums, Special Interest Research Groups). This issue is also considered a key factor for CLIL implementation and success. As Coyle, Hood and Marsh state “the key to future capacity building and sustainability is teacher education” (2010: 161). Debate continues about the required competences for

these teachers. There is agreement in two main dimensions of education needed to teach in and through a second language: linguistic education and methodological education (see references previously given). As regards the first dimension, one of the most significant current discussions is language competence level for CLIL/EMI practitioners.

The linguistic competence of EMI lecturers has been described in terms of the Common European Framework for Reference (CEFR). For example, Lasagabaster and Ruiz de Zarobe (2010: 288) establish C1 as the minimum for both secondary and tertiary levels. This paper supports the stance that the discussion would be more productive if attention focused on the type of language required for successful EMI rather than concentrating on language qualifications. This position of the debate provides models of language use in CLIL/EMI (Coyle et al. 2010; Llinares, Morton & Whittaker, 2011; Gierlinger, 2013) which could function as tools for needs analysis and language education. As Dalton Puffer (2007) defended after her groundbreaking study of CLIL classrooms discourse, practitioners necessitate academic language skills for knowledge acquisition and transmission. The proposed framework aims to respond to this request to identify academic language skills.

2.

Theoretical and pedagogical foundations of the framework

The theoretical foundation of the proposed framework is genre analysis. This section refers to how this approach is used for classroom and academic discourse analysis and for integration of content and language in CLIL.

2.1

Genre analysis and classroom discourse

Classroom discourse and academic discourse could be approached from different perspectives. All methods are useful and, if combined, an integral description of EMI

classroom discourse can be assured (cf. Dalton Puffer 2007: 44). However, genre analysis is perhaps the model which shows a more considerable potential for this task. This option derives from Bhatia’s definition of genre analysis: “to study situated linguistic behavior in institutionalized academic or professional settings” (1993: 181). Swales seminal work Genre analysis: English in Academic and research settings (1990) had transferred the concept of genre from Literature to the academic world. In Swales work and in Bhatia’s pioneer and pragmatic work Analyzing genre: Language uses in professional settings (1993), only written genres were studied. Genres are understood as staged events (Bhatia, 1993; Swales, 1990), which can be achieved by a sequence of moves and steps which is known as schematic structure. The main motivation behind these studies was the production of teaching materials for non native speakers of English. Practice and research have proven the potential of genre analysis in the teaching of English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and English for Academic Purposes (EAP). Also for pedagogical needs, the attention is now focusing in oral academic genres. The lecture is perhaps the most widely studied among them. A systematic proposal to the structural patterns of the lecture from a genre analysis perspective is the phase model (Young, 1994). Young defines phases as ‘Strands of discourse that recur discontinuously throughout a particular language event, and, taken together, structure the event. These strands recur and are interspersed with others resulting in an interweaving of threads as the discourse progresses’ (1994: 165). The definition and the model are the result of analyzing 72 lectures from different disciplines in order to delineate a common macroestructure and the most relevant features of each one of the parts. Phases can be grouped in two categories: 1) metadiscursive, which refer to discourse: Discourse structuring, Conclusion Evaluation; 2) non-metadiscursive, related to content: Interaction Content Exemplification.

This classification on the one hand establishes a main distinction between moves in the lecture referring to discourse and moves not referring to it. On the other, it shows a

macrostructure and some significant features which could be exploited in order to teach this genre.

2.2

Genre analysis and CLIL

In CLIL genre analysis is also valued as the “much soughtafter analytical tool that captures content-and-language integration” (Dalton Puffer 2011: 193). This claim is experience and research based because

Application to genre analysis to teaching in content classes in different parts of the world have shown its effective use, since understanding the function of a text and of the stages it is made up allows teachers and students to connect subject knowledge and the use of language. The cognitive functions intrinsic to a subject become visible through a focus on genres and their stages. (Llinares & Whittaker, 2011: 146)

In Spain several groups of studies are focusing the CLIL lesson/lecture from a genre perspective. At secondary level, the genre is seen as a tool to join content and language in the disciplines. The main research at this level is carried out by Universidad Autónoma CLIL group (Llinares & Whittaker, 2011, Llinares et al. 2011). At tertiary level, the most important results come from the Universidad Complutense project Content Learning in University Education (CLUE). The framework presented here departs from findings of this research group and was used in a doctoral thesis to be defended by the author of the paper in middle 2014.

3.

The framework for discourse analysis

The framework is built on Dafouz and Nuñez’s (2010) proposal, which is itself based on Young’s model described in section 2.1. Items added by the author to Dafouz and Nuñez’s

(2010) classification are highlighted in table 1. The examples are taken from data used for the doctoral thesis already mentioned. Reasons for new categories are:

The categories verbal topicalizers, non verbal topicalizers and topicalizers referring to visuals emerged from observations of lecturers. This division was necessary because lecturers introduce new topics in different ways. However, not all of them are equally efficient. For example, too many non verbal topicalizers may hindrance comprehension.

The different categories of questions are taken from Morell (2004). This distinction aims to activate reflection about how questions can contribute to learning and to interaction.

Table 1. Framework for metadiscourse elementes in the lecture phases

These categories refer to metadiscourse, that is discourse to talk about discourse and which has been proven to facilitate comprehension and recall of lectures. Regarding the

content phase, table 2 presents several categories of three academic language functions following different authors. These classifications could raise awareness about how lecturers perform the functions.

Table 2. Framework for the content phase (academic fuctions)

It is our suggestion that these two tables could be used by non linguists for peer or self observation of their discourses when lecturing in English. Considering these items is likely to enhance their language awareness of academic register.

4.

Conclusions

The research to date has tended to focus on the product on CLIL/EMI instruction (language learning gains) rather than in the process of teaching and learning. Considering the elements in this process could provide valuable insights of linguistic and didactic variables which could be targeted by teacher trainers. The proposed framework for the analysis of lecturer’s discourse may contribute to a systematic observation of this process.

We suggest that the obtained results recall one of the main advantages of corpus based research: ‘We can claim with some confidence that showing what does not occur, negative evidence if you wish, is one of the great benefits of a corpora approach, especially when we consider the pedagogical implications of these dispreferences’ (Swales & Malczewski, 2001: 161). Pointing at ‘what does not occur’ will provide dimensions of EMI lecturers’ language competence which require reinforcement.

5.

References

Aguilar Pérez, Marta. & Rodriguez, Rosa. 2012. ‘Lecturer and student perceptions on CLIL at a Spanish university’. International Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism, 15 (2), 183-197. Ball, Phill. & Lindsay, Diane, 2012. ‘Language demands and support for English Medium Instruction in tertiary education’. English-Medium Instruction at Universities: Global Challenges. Eds. Doiz, Aiztane, Lasagabaster, David & Sierra, J. Manuel. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 44-64. Bhatia, Vijai, 1993. Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings (1st ed.). London: Longman. Brown, George, 2006. ‘Explaining’. The Handbook of Communication Skills. Ed. Owen Hargie. London: Routledge.1 ed 1986. 204- 224. Coleman, Jim, 2006. ‘English-Medium Teaching in European Higher Education’. Language Teaching, 39, 1- 14. Coyle, Do, Hood, Peter, & Marsh, David, 2010. Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dafouz, Emma, 2008. ‘La Universidad y el reto bilingüe. ¿Está preparada la educación superior para el aprendizaje en una lengua extranjera?’ AULA de Innovación Educativa, 168, 45-49.

Dafouz, Emma. & Núñez Begoña, 2010. ‘Metadiscursive devices in university lectures: A constrastive analysis of L1 and L2 performance’. Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms. Eds. Christiane Dalton-Puffer, Tarja Nikula, & Ute Smit. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 213-231. Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, 2007. Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, 2011. ‘Content and language integrated learning: from practice to principles’. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 31, 182-204. Doiz, Aiztane, Lasagabaster, David & Sierra, J. Manuel. Eds., 2012. English-Medium Instruction at Universities: Global Challenges. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Flowerdew, John, 1992. ‘Definitions in science lectures’. Applied Linguistics, 13, 202-219. Francomacaro, M. Rosario, 2011. English as a Medium of Instruction at an Italian Engineering Faculty: an Investigation of Structural Features and Pragmatic Functions. (Doctoral Thesis) University of Naples, Italy. Gierlinger, Erdwin, 2013. The languages for CLIL Model, Retrieved February 11, 2014 from http://clilingmesoftly.wordpress.com/clil-teachers-tl-competence/ Lasagabaster, David. & Ruiz de Zarobe, Yolanda Eds., 2010. CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training, Cambridge Scholars Library: Newcastle. Llinares, Ana, Morton, Tom & Whittaker, Rachel. 2011. The Role of Language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Llinares Ana, & Whittaker, Rachel, 2011. ‘Functions of language in CLIL secondary classes: a systemic functional approach’. Aprendre en una altra llengua/Learning through another Language. Cristina Escobar, & Luci Nussbaum. Eds. Barcelona: UAB. 141-161. Marsh, David. & Laitinen, Jim, 2005. Medium of instruction in European higher education: Summary of research outcomes of European Network for Language Learning Amongst Undergraduates (ENLU) Task Group 4. Jyväskylä: UniCOM, University of Jyväskylä.

Martín del Pozo, M. Angeles, 2013. ‘Formación lingüística del profesorado universitario para la docencia en inglés’. Revista de Docencia Universitaria. REDU, 11 (3). 197-218. Morell, Teresa, 2004. ‘Interactive lecture discourse for university EFL students’. English for Specific Purposes, 23, 325-338. Swales, John, 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Swales, John, & Malcewski, Bonnie, 2001. ‘Discourse management and new episode flags in MICASE’. Corpus Linguistics in North America: Selections from the 1999 symposium. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 145-164. Young, Lynne, 1994. ‘University lectures macro-structures and micro-features´. Academic listening: research perspectives, Ed. John Flowerdew, Cambridge: CUP. 159-179.

HEPCLIL (Higher Education Perspectives on Content and Language Integrated Learning). Vic, 2014. A review of second language acquisition research in CLIL contexts in European higher education Àngels Pinyana Facultat d’Empresa i Comunicació Universitat de Vic – Universitat Central de Catalunya Spain Sarah Khan Escola Politècnica Superior Universitat de Vic – Universitat Central de Catalunya Spain Abstract: There has been a steep rise in the number of courses offered in an additional language in higher education institutions (Costa & Coleman, 2010; Lasagabaster & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010; Fortanet-Gómez, 2013) in Europe, a trend which is believed will continue, as it is being driven by globalisation and related social and economic factors. Despite its growing implementation, empirical research on CLIL is still in its infancy with few studies investigating its effect on second language acquisition (Ruiz de Zarobe & Jiménez Catalán, 2009), and fewer still in the higher education context (Dafouz, 2007; Airey, 2011, among others). The aim of this study is to review CLIL research in European higher education. To conduct the review our literature search was limited to English-medium journals over the last ten years (2004-2013). A review of methodologies, findings and their value for CLIL in higher education in Spain are discussed. We hope that this paper can help to map out CLIL research in European higher education up to this moment, pointing to the gaps in empirical research and the key areas which need attention for CLIL to become a consolidated approach for second language acquisition.

1.

Introduction

European CLIL is commonly claimed as stemming from North American CBI (Contentbased instruction) and French immersion programmes in Canada as well as European bilingual and international schools, where research in these contexts has found positive benefits of bilingual education far outweighing the drawbacks. In fact, the majority of this empirical research has been carried out at primary and secondary level (García Mayo & García Lecumberri, 2003; Dalton-Puffer, 2007; Coonan, 2008; Lorenzo et al., 2009; Navés, 2009; Vallbona, 2009; Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2010; Navés & Victori, 2010;

Breidbach, & Viebrock, 2012; Cammarata & Tedick, 2012; Llinares, Morton & Whittaker, 2012).

In higher education plurilingual and multilingual policies at European, national and institutional levels are leading to the rapid spread of content and language integrated learning (CLIL), as documented by researchers working in different European countries (Wilkinson, 2004; Coleman, 2006; Marsh, 2006; Guilherme, 2007; Tudor, 2007; Phillipson, 2008; Räisänen & Fortanet-Gómez, 2008; Wächter & Maiworm, 2008; Cañado, 2010; Costa & Coleman, 2010; Lasagabaster & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010; De Zarobe, Sierra, & Puerto, 2011; Dalton-Puffer, 2011; Hauge & Therese, 2011; Bolton & Kuttiva, 2012; PérezCañado, 2012; Saarinen, 2012; Fortanet-Gómez, 2013; Saarinen & Nikula, 2013; Williams, Strubell, & Williams, 2013).

A few reviews of CLIL research have already been published (Dalton-Puffer, 2008; Navés & Victori, 2010; Pérez-Cañado, 2012). Dalton-Puffer’s (2008) review of CLIL research in primary and secondary settings in Europe provides an excellent basis for predicting the kind of results that could be found in tertiary settings, such as the language competences favoured by CLIL (receptive skills, vocabulary, risk-taking, fluency, affective factors) and those unaffected (writing, syntax, non-technical language, pronunciation and pragmatics). However, tertiary research is not addressed. Another extensive review by Pérez-Cañado (2012) provides a geographical review of CLIL in Europe, pointing out the major researchers and summarising research from primary, secondary and tertiary settings. Nevertheless, very few studies are cited in the tertiary context. Pérez-Cañado points out that no studies quantify the influence of CLIL approaches in European universities. Cenoz, Genesee, & Gorter (2013) provide a recent critical examination of the concept of CLIL and call for “CLIL scholars to move from celebration to a critical empirical examination of CLIL in its diverse forms to better identify its strengths and weaknesses in different learning

contexts” Cenoz, Genesee, & Gorter (2013: 16). To our knowledge, therefore, there has so far been no other review on CLIL in higher education. With this gap in the literature in mind the present study aims to answer the following questions:

What are the areas of CLIL research in higher education in Europe?

What are the main findings of this research?

How can these findings inform future research in this area?

The term CLIL emerged in Europe in the 1990s and has been defined as “an educational approach in which diverse methodologies are used which lead to dual-focussed education where attention is given to both topic and language of instruction” (Marsh 2008: 233). Although the articles reviewed in this paper are often not clear about how “attention to both topic and language” is implemented to achieve the “dual-focussed” content and language learning aims, and over 99% of articles reviewed refer to contexts where English is the language of instruction, we choose to use the term CLIL in this paper, in a broad sense, to cover the diverse contexts in which content is taught through an additional language.

2.

Method

The methodological approach adopted was that of a narrative review (Mayer, 2009), where a selection of papers was made and a qualitative analysis was conducted which entailed classifying, summarising, analysing, comparing and evaluating studies. The initial selection of papers was undertaken using CLIL, then higher education as keywords, and limiting the search to studies carried out in European contexts and published in applied linguistics journals between 2004 and 2013. Table 1 lists the search engines used, the keywords and the number of publications found in February 2014.

Table 1 Number of keyword hits according to search engine

Keywords

Search engine

CLIL

CLIL; Higher Education

Google Scholars

10,100

3,180

Dialnet plus

133

10

Eric

67

6

Citeulike

14

0

Full papers or their references were stored in the Mendeley reference manager. As references were built up, a list of 40 scientific journals publishing CLIL in higher education articles was compiled. The journal web pages were then used to search for further references. Furthermore, while reading the publications any related references or those pertinent to our search criteria were followed up, thus expanding the database. A list of over 200 references including books, reviews and both empirical and non-empirical research papers was finally obtained.

Both researchers scanned the whole database and gave each paper one or two labels according to their understanding of the research topic from the titles and abstracts, such as “scaffolding” or “discourse analysis”. The researchers then repeated the whole process again together, comparing over 40 different labels, relabelling and regrouping them.

The publications were then read and summarized, and in some cases, put into a different category more suited to the topic or eliminated from the database. The criteria for eliminating papers were 1) if the context was not aimed at higher education 2) if the research was conducted outside Europe or 3) if the context was EFL rather than EMI or CLIL. In fact, refining the database was one of the most time-consuming aspects of our study.

3.

Empirical research on CLIL in European Higher Education

Articles were initially categorised as empirical (48%) and non-empirical research (52%) and also according to nine categories as shown in Figure 1, which answers our first question, “What are the areas of CLIL research in higher education in Europe?”. A third of the articles were published during the first five years reviewed (2004 to 2008) compared to two-thirds during the second five years (2009-2013), showing that there has been a trend towards more research in this area.

Figure 1 Research areas on CLIL in European higher education

The largest category was CLIL implementation (23%), followed by teachers and students perceptions of CLIL (18%), CLIL policy (18%), oral competence (14%), CLIL overview articles (11%), other competences (8%), theory (6%), assessment (3%) and review (2%). For the purpose of this paper only the empirical research is reviewed, about half (48%) of our database, which included papers in the categories implementation, perceptions, oral competence, other competences and assessment. To answer our second question “What are the main findings of this research?”, for each of these categories the main methods and findings are described.

3.1

Implementation

The majority of empirical research in higher education is related to implementation (23%) where articles have been found between 2009 and 2013, and 2013 being the year with the most articles published in this area. The articles describe recommendations for good practice through the views of teachers and students (Bartik, Maerten, Tudor, & Valcke, 2010); descriptions of courses, focusing on the course structure, materials and assessments (Dalton-Puffer, Huettner, Schindelegger, & Smit, 2009; Knapp, 2011; Frydrychova Klimova, 2013; Hughes, 2013); teaching organisation, such as team teaching practices (Cianflone & Coppolino, 2011) or use of drama (Carrasco & Dinapoli, 2012); methods used to help teachers programme their courses, such as the Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix (Airey, 2011) or the Schema Theory (Sobhy, Berzosa, & Crean, 2013); and finally some of the articles report the experience of comparing CLIL groups with nonCLIL groups, such as immersion groups (Fernández-Santiago, 2011) or mainstream groups (Woźniak, 2013).

The type of research is qualitative with a range of between 15 to 30 subjects. The subject disciplines are Physiology, Pharmacy, Political Economy, Culture and Literature, Gastronomy and Engineering. The instruments used range from group discussions,

interviews, questionnaires, some of them with rating scales, and class observation. Data analysis is mainly qualitative and some studies report descriptive quantitative statistics.

In the articles reviewed, findings related to CLIL implementation converge in the fact that linguistic difficulties pose a challenge to their implementation both from the point of view of the teachers, when they are non-native speakers, as well as from the students’ perspective. Content teachers, in particular, are concerned about their ability to express nuances of meaning and speak spontaneously. Furthermore, findings reveal that implementing CLIL courses develops not only ICT and communicative competences but also interpersonal and intercultural ones (Álvarez, 2013) because students are required to engage in more negotiating in communication activities than when the instruction is in their own language, which, in turn, fosters learner autonomy as students are involved in the decision-making process, making them responsible for their own decisions and learning (Frydrychova Klimova, 2013).

According to the articles, team teaching practices would require a closer collaboration between language and content teachers (Cianflone & Coppolino, 2011; Woźniak, 2013) and also the need for more support in managing the educational and organizational aspects of such courses (Knapp, 2011). Finally, a number of CLIL implementation articles point out the challenge that assessment represents and call for more research and guidelines in this area of CLIL implementation (Bartik et al., 2010; Woźniak, 2013).

3.2

Perceptions

Much of empirical research (18%) is also based on perceptions, with articles found between 2004 and 2013. The areas covered describe both students’ and teachers’ perceptions of CLIL. The type of research is qualitative with a range of between 3 and 35 subjects. The subject disciplines are mainly Business or Engineering, although a number

of articles, do not mention the subject discipline but the objective of the study, such as the students or teachers’ perceptions of a CLIL programme (Tatzl, 2011), their perception of the impact of instructional methods of teaching through English (Wilkinson, 2005) or their perceptions related to scientific literacy (Airey, 2009).

Instruments used to elicit perceptions range from structured or semi-structured interviews, to questionnaires with open or closed questions. Data is basically described qualitatively and in relation to the context where it is collected. A common practice in studies on perceptions is to identify several recurrent topics in the data and discuss the results in relation to these topics.

Perception studies on CLIL have shown that students perceive the experience as positive not only because they perceive an improvement in their overall language skills, especially in their acquisition of vocabulary (Pinyana & Khan, 2007; Aguilar & Rodrıguez, 2012), but also because they consider these programmes as preparation for their future professional career (Tatzl, 2011). Nevertheless, the CLIL experience is not devoid of challenges. For example, Airey (2009) reports that students perceived the need to invest more time in CLIL courses, or Aguilar & Rodriguez (2012) observed that students sometimes perceived a low level of linguistic ability in their teachers, and that the students, also, had problems when interacting in class or when expressing themselves in writing, especially in exams.

As far as teachers’ perceptions are concerned they report being motivated to teach in a language other than their own because it helps improve their own linguistic ability (Aguilar & Rodrıguez, 2012) and makes the programmes more attractive for an international audience as they prepare students for the global workplace (Tatzl, 2011). However, they perceive that they lack linguistic ability to make their lectures attractive to students and that

they may have to reduce the amount of content taught when compared to their lectures in their own language (Wilkinson, 2005).

3.3

Oral competence

Another popular focus of research is oral competence (14%), with articles found each year between 2004 and 2013 describing mainly L2 lecturer discourse (Dafouz, 2006; Dafouz, 2007; Dafouz, Nunez, & Sancho, 2007a; Crawford Camiciottoli, 2010; Domínguez Romero & Maíz Arévalo, 2010; Hincks, 2010; Sánchez García, 2010; Thøgersen & Airey, 2011; Braga Riera & Maíz Arévalo, 2013; Dafouz-Milne & Sánchez García, 2013;), to a lesser extent pragmatic strategies (Björkman, 2008, 2011; Smit, 2010) in English as a lingua franca settings and codeswitching (Airey & Linder, 2008; Airey, 2009; Ljosland, 2011).

The type of research is qualitative with a range of between 1 and 12 subjects. The language proficiency of these subjects is either not given or self reported and the discipline areas are mainly Business, Physics or Engineering. Data analysis involves transcription and coding of lecture corpuses with relatively few studies using data triangulation with questionnaires or interviews. Transcriptions are then analysed for fluency (speech rate), types of questions (confirmation, display, repetition, rhetorical etc.), stance (reducing interpersonal distance between speaker and listener), strategies (commenting on concepts, task, discourse structure, signalling, self repair, translation etc.).

Findings have shown that for L2 lecturers 1) speech rate is slower in English than L1 but not necessarily due to a lack of fluency, as strategies are used to provide more comprehensible input (repetition, synonyms, defining), 2) lecturing in English is more formal, 3) fewer pragmatic strategies are used by lecturers compared to students working in groups, who employ a wider range of functions, 4) translation strategies employed during lecture preparation, structuring the lecture, transmitting theory and exemplification

during the lecture improve comprehension rather than cause interference, 5) the use of certain pronouns and modals reduce interpersonal distance between expert and learner, 6) the most common question types are comprehension checks, self-answered questions and display questions, similar to L1 and across disciplines, suggesting the lecture genre predominates. In Smit’s (2010) longitudinal study questions move from display to referential and students questions from short to longer responses over time) and 7) lecturers use a narrower lexical range compared to L1.

As for students, in group work they communicate using frequent errors in morphosyntax but this did not disturb communicative effectiveness. Factors which are detrimental to communication are when local students slip into L1 (more in group work than during lectures and presentations) and, therefore, international students become excluded from conversation or when involuntary codeswitching is used to describe scientific concepts, indicating that the more codeswitching the lower the student’s scientific literacy.

3.4

Other competences

Although some research exists on oral competence, comparatively very little was found on all the other language competences (reading, writing and listening) put together, 8% of our database, and even less on disciplinary competences such as numeracy or scientific literacy (Airey & Linder, 2008).

Once again the type of research on other competences has been predominantly qualitative, and mainly on writing, involving analysis of corpuses of complete written essays (Codó et al., 2007; Feixas et al, 2009) or short extracts (Mungra, 2010), using language and content indicators to code the data. Data has been collected after the implementation of specific strategies or scaffolding during a course. It is worth highlighting the work of Hughes (2013) as the only study in which Spanish and not English was the

additional language in the CLIL context. Hellekjaer (2009) is also an exception, as one of the few studies carrying out quantitative research with questionnaires to assess reading comprehension.

Findings in reading comprehension research in Nordic countries suggest that many students do not have the necessary academic reading skills, with unfamiliar vocabulary, slow reading and poor language skills being a problem (Shaw & McMillion, 2008; Hellekjaer, 2009) or reading in English resulting in a more superficial understanding of text.

Research on listening (Hellekjær, 2010) has found problems of comprehension: understanding the meaning of particular terms and difficulties in taking notes. Student comprehension has been related to the number of questions asked by the lecturer (Suviniitty, 2010) and while students report that they learn equally well in L1 and L2, the same students point to learning difficulties when shown videos of the lectures they attended (Airey, 2009).

Airey & Linder’s (2008) analysis of university physics syllabuses show that a high level of attainment is expected in non-linguistic areas (maths, graphs, diagrams, tables, tools, activities) but in linguistic areas little spoken competence is expected (even in courses provided in L1), high levels of reading are expected in CLIL groups and high levels of listening in L1. In other words production skills take a back seat in science courses, CLIL or non-CLIL.

3.5

Assessment

Very little exists on assessment of CLIL in higher education. Among the articles on perceptions (Section 3.2), some authors include students and teachers’ self-assessment of CLIL programmes (Foran & Sancho, 2009; Bartik et al., 2010; Valcke, Bartik, & Tudor,

2011; Wilkinson, 2011) all of which were positive. According to Bartik, CLIL instruction seems to affect skills in different ways:

It is clear that under CLIL conditions, certain aspects of language competence develop further than others. After assessing students’ linguistic abilities either at the end of 1 or 2 years of CLIL, it was noted that the areas where clear gains are observable are receptive skills, vocabulary, domain-specific terminology, and fluency; while the areas where gains could not be assessed or were more difficult to assess are syntax, writing, informal and non-technical language and pronunciation. (Bartik et al., 2010: 8)

In Dafouz, Camacho & Urquia’s (2013) quantitative study of a Business Administration degree taught in parallel in English and Spanish in Spain, the same assessment was given for both CLIL and non-CLIL groups, who did exactly the same course, and grades were analysed statistically for History, Accounting and Finance. No difference was found between the two groups, suggesting that learning in English does not impede learning academic content.

4.

Conclusion

This overview brings to light several features of the research conducted on CLIL so far in higher education. In terms of methodology it shows that qualitative research methods predominate, mainly in Engineering, Science (Physics) and Business, and that even many quantitative studies include fewer than 30 subjects and do not include statistical analyses, making it impossible to generalise findings within a discipline, or across them. Many questionnaire studies exist but using different questionnaires, making the comparison of results across these studies complicated.

As for the results, the majority of research is aimed at implementation and perceptions, which has shown that despite concerns, particularly for their own language competence, both students and teachers perceive CLIL as beneficial, especially for vocabulary acquisition and communicative competence. Nevertheless, the lack of studies directly measuring specific gains in language competence means that these benefits still remain to be proven.

Contradictions have also emerged in terms of perceptions and practice: students do not perceive learning problems but they are detected in research on particular competences, and teachers, when not specifically trained for CLIL, do not perceive the need to be methodologically trained, nonetheless, once training is administered, they realise that some adaptations are needed (Johnson, 2012; Vallbona & Khan, 2012).

Furthermore, where no particular CLIL approach has been implemented but simply the language of instruction changed, it has been shown that students have difficulty with certain aspects of receptive skills (listening and reading) and areas of academic literacy, and little is asked of them in terms of production skills (speaking and writing) in science, which suggests that communicative competence will, in fact, not be fostered.

These findings highlight the need for further research in several areas, which brings us to the answer of our third question, “ How can these findings inform future research in this area?”. Although lecture discourse has been the most commonly studied aspect, it still represents a very small corpus of academic lectures by non-native speakers, and building up such a European corpus could lead us to a better understanding of the lecture genre. Curiously, no studies were found on classroom discourse, which is often the focus in primary and secondary school research (Dalton-Puffer, 2005, 2007, among others). Case studies on codeswitching in Asian higher education (Barnard & McLellan, 2013) point to its

positive role in the classroom, but little is still known of its role in the European context. Therefore further research on spoken classroom discourse may paint a more accurate picture of the dual/multiple linguistic environment that is characteristic of tertiary CLIL courses. Other essential areas of future research are discipline related competences, thinking skills and assessment, where very little research was found. No articles so far address the nature of assessment or language or content acquisition.

More longitudinal studies are also required to see how language competences develop over a university course. To gain an even bigger picture, a cross-sectional study going from pre-school through to primary and secondary to higher education would describe language learning development over the course of a child’s education and allow us to diagnose the health of language learning, and see if language becomes richer and tasks more cognitively demanding or whether, in fact, the classroom limits exposure to language to a narrow range of functions and lexis.

As previously mentioned this review was limited to applied linguistics journals and the European context. Evidently, extending the search to journals from different discipline areas would give a less linguistically skewed picture of this area and by encompassing authors worldwide, a great deal more important work could be considered from e.g. South Africa (Jacobs, 2007; Madiba, 2010), Asia (Barnard & McLellan, 2013; Yang & Gosling, 2013) and South America (Corrales & Maloof, 2009).

Research so far suggests that CLIL and its different forms of implementation seem to be well-perceived by teachers and students of higher education. Now, as the number of CLIL courses soar across European higher education, seems to be the time to produce large scale studies which are comparable across contexts and examine how these perceptions

translate into the real linguistic gains, which will define CLIL as an approach to second language acquisition.

5.

References

Aguilar, M., & Rodrıguez, R. 2012. Lecturer and student perceptions on CLIL at a Spanish university. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15,2: 183-197. Airey, J. 2009. Estimating undergraduate bilingual scientific literacy in Sweden. International CLIL Research Journal, 1,2: 26–35. Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/12-742 Airey, J. 2011. The disciplinary literacy discussion matrix: A heuristic tool for initiating collaboration in higher education. Across the Disciplines. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/ATD/clil/airey.cfm Airey, J., & Linder, C. 2008. Bilingual scientific literacy? The use of English in Swedish university science courses. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7,3: 145-161. Álvarez, I. A. 2013. A holistic experience in the integrated learning of specialized English and content in engineering degrees. Language Value, 5,1: 48–75. Roger Barnard, & James McLellan (Eds.). 2013. Codeswitching in University Englishmedium Classes: Asian Perspectives (Vol. 36). Multilingual Matters. Bartik, K., Maerten, C., Tudor, I., & Valcke, J. 2010. A discussion brief of content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at the Faculty of Applied Sciences. Bruxelles: Université Libre de …, (Clil), 1–21. Retrieved from http://www.uco.es/poling/multilingualism_plan/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/CLILDescription-Brief1.pdf Björkman, B. 2008. English as the lingua franca of engineering: The morphosyntax of academic speech events. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7, 3: 103-122.

Björkman, B. 2011. Pragmatic strategies in English as an academic lingua franca: Ways of achieving communicative effectiveness? Journal of Pragmatics, 43,4: 950–964. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.033 Bolton, K., & Kuttiva, M. 2012. English as an academic language at a Swedish university: parallel language use and the “ threat ” of English. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33,5: 429–447. Braga Riera, J., & Maíz Arévalo, C. 2013. CLIL and translation in tertiary education. Revista de Lenguas Para Fines Específicos, 19: 29–59. Breidbach, S., & Viebrock, B. 2012. CLIL in Germany: Results from recent research in a contested field of education. International CLIL Research Journal,1,4: 5-16. Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J. 2012. Balancing content and language in instruction: The experience of immersion teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 96,2: 251-269. Cañado, M. L. P. 2010. Globalisation in foreign language teaching: Establishing transatlantic links in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 64: 392–412. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2273.2010.00451.x Carrasco, V. A., & Dinapoli, R. 2012. Engaging in dramatic activites in English as a foreign language classes at the university level. Encuentro, 21: 94–103. Retrieved from http://dspace.uah.es/dspace/handle/10017/14701 Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. 2013. Critical Analysis of CLIL: taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 1–21. Retrieved from http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.1093/applin/amt011 Cianflone, E., & Coppolino, R. 2011. An interdisciplinary module to teach English and Business Organization in a university-level vocational course. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4,1: 40–48. doi:10.5294/laclil.2011.4.1.4 Codó, E., Masats, D., Feixas, M., Espinet, M., & Couso, D. 2007. Analysing the Level of Complexity of University Students’ Written Responses: A Comparison between First and

Foreign Language Productions. Rust, C.(2007 (Ed.): Improving Student Learning Through Teaching. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University, 158-170. Coleman, J. A. 2006. English-medium teaching in European higher education. Language Teaching, 39,1:1-14. doi:10.1017/S026144480600320X Coonan, C. 2009. The foreign language in the CLIL lesson: problems and implications. Studi di glottodidattica, 2,4: 22-52. Corrales, K., & Maloof, C. 2009. Evaluating the effects of CBI on an English for medical students program. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 2,1. Costa, F., & Coleman, J. 2010. Integrating content and language in higher education in Italy. Ongoing Research. International CLIL Research Journal, 1,3:19–29. Crawford Camiciottoli, B. 2010. Meeting the challenges of European student mobility: Preparing Italian Erasmus students for business lectures in English. English for Specific Purposes, 29,4: 268–280. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2010.01.001 Dafouz, E., Camacho, M., & Urquia, E. 2013. ‘Surely they can't do as well’: a comparison of business students’ academic performance in English-medium and Spanish-as-firstlanguage-medium programmes. Language and Education, 1-14. Dafouz-milne, E. 2006. Solidarity strategies in CLIL university lectures: teacher’s use of pronouns and modal verbs. Vienna English Working Papers, 15,S3: 9–14. Retrieved from https://anglistik.univie.ac.at/fileadmin/user_upload/dep_anglist/weitere_Uploads/Views/vie ws15_3_clil_special.pdf#page=9 Dafouz, E. 2007. On content and language integrated learning in higher education: The case of university lectures. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 67–82. Retrieved from http://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/2575496.pdf Dafouz, E., Nunez, B., & Sancho, C. 2007a. Analysing stance in a CLIL university context: Non-native speaker use of personal pronouns and modal verbs. International Journal of

Bilingual …, 10,5: 647–662. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2167/beb464.0 Dafouz, E., Núñez, B., & Sancho D., C. & F. 2007b. Integrating CLIL at the tertiary level: teachers’ and students' reactions. In D. & M. Wolff D. (Ed.), Diverse contexts converging goals. Content and language integrated learning in Europe. Volume 4: 91–102. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Dafouz-milne, E., & Sánchez García, D. 2013. “ Does everybody understand?” Teacher questions across disciplines in English-mediated university lectures: An exploratory study. Language Value, 5,1: 129–151. Dalton-Puffer, C. 2005. Negotiating interpersonal meanings in naturalistic classroom discourse: directives in content-and-language-integrated classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics, 37,8: 1275-1293. Dalton-Puffer, C. 2007. Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms (Vol. 20). John Benjamins Publishing. Dalton-Puffer, C. 2008. Outcomes and processes in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): current research from Europe. In Delanoy, W. & L. Volkmann (Eds.) Future Perspectives for English Language Teaching. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Dalton-Puffer, C. 2011. A Postscript on Institutional Motivations, Research Concerns and Professional Implications. AILA Review, 25: 101–103. Dalton-Puffer, C., Huettner, J., Schindelegger, V., & Smit, U. 2009. Technology-geeks speak out: what students think about vocational CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal. Domínguez Romero, E., & Maíz Arévalo, C. 2010. Multimodality and listening comprehension: testing and implementing classroom material. Language Value, 2,1: 100– 139. Feixas, M., Codó, E., Couso, D., Espinet, M., & Masats, D. 2009. Enseñar en inglés en la universidad: Reflexiones del alumnado y el profesorado en torno a dos experiencias

AICLE [Teaching English at the university: Student and teacher reflections on two CLIL experiences]. Investigar desde un contexto educativo innovador [Investigating from an innovative instruction context], ed. R. Roig, J. Blasco, MA Cano, R. Gilar, A. Lledó, and C. Manas, 137Á53. Alicante: Editorial Marfil. Fernández-Santiago, M. 2011. Integration or mmersion? A comparative study at the tertiary level. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4,1: 49–64. doi:10.5294/laclil.2011.4.1.5 Foran, D., & Sancho, C. 2009. CLIL approaches in university Applied Science environments. In Dafouz E. & M. Guerrini (2009) CLIL across Educational Levels: Experiences from Primary, Secondary and Tertiary Context. Fortanet-Gómez, I. 2013. CLIL in Higher Education: Towards a Multilingual Language Policy. Bristol: Multilingual Matters | Channel View Publications. Frydrychova Klimova, B. 2013. CLIL at the Faculty of Informatics and Management. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83: 196–199. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.038 García Mayo, M. P., & García Lecumberri, M. L. . (Eds.). 2003. Age and the Acquisition of English as a Foreign Language (Vol. 4). Clevendon: Multilingual Matters. Guilherme, M. 2007. English as a Global Language and Education for Cosmopolitan Citizenship. Language and Intercultural Communication, 7,1: 72–90. doi:10.2167/laic184.0 Hauge, & Therese. 2011. Language excellence - a necessary skill? - Research - Roskilde University. In R. Cancino, L. Dam, & K. Jæger (Eds.), Policies, Principles, Practices: New directions in foreign language education in the era of educational globalization (p. 10). Cambridge Scholars Publishers. Retrieved from http://rucforsk.ruc.dk/site/en/publications/language-excellence--a-necessaryskill(7bdc77a1-e677-4c67-beaf-49acc5830e1f).html Hellekjaer, G. O. 2010. Lecture comprehension in English-medium higher education. Hermes–Journal of Language and Communication Studies, 45:11-34.

Hellekjaer, G. O. 2009. Academic English reading proficiency at the university level: A Norwegian case study. Reading in a foreign language, 21, 2. Hincks, R. 2010. Speaking rate and information content in English lingua franca oral presentations. English for specific purposes, 29:1, 4-18. Hughes, N. 2013. Developing academic register in CLIL: UK-based Spanish L2 students’ Latin America Political Economy writing in the UK. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 6,2: 42–71. doi:10.5294/3149 Jacobs, C. 2007. Mainstreaming academic literacy teaching: Implications for how academic development understands its work in higher education. South African Journal of Higher Education, 21, 7: 870-881. Johnson, M. 2012. Bilingual degree teachers’ beliefs: a case study in a tertiary setting. Pulso: Revista de Educación, 49–74. Retrieved from http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=4118685 Knapp, A. 2011. Using English as a lingua franca for (mis-) managing conflict in an international university context: An example from a course in engineering. Journal of Pragmatics, 43,4: 978–990. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2010.08.008 Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. 2010. Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64, 4: 367-375. Lasagabaster, D., & de Zarobe, Y. R. (Eds.). 2010. CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. 278-295). Newcastle upon Tyne,, UK: Cambridge Scholars. Ljosland, R. 2011. English as an Academic Lingua Franca: Language policies and multilingual practices in a Norwegian university. Journal of Pragmatics, 43,4: 991–1004. Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. 2012. The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.

Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. 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. Madiba, M. 2010. Towards multilingual higher education in South Africa: the University of Cape Town's experience. Language Learning Journal, 38, 3: 327-346. Marsh, D. 2006. English as a medium of instruction in the new global linguistic order: Global characteristics, Local Consequences. Second Annual Conference for Middle East Teachers. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.125.2388&rep=rep1&type=pdf Mayer, P. 2009. Guidelines for writing a Review Article A ) Good to know about review articles, 1–10. Mungra, P. 2010. Teaching writing of scientific abstracts in English: CLIL methodology in an integrated English and Medicine course. Ibérica, (20). Navés, T. 2009. Effective content and language integrated learning (CLIL) programmes. Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe, 22-40. Naves, T., & Victori, M. 2010. CLIL in Catalonia: An overview of research studies. D. Lasagabaster and Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (eds), 30-54. Pérez-Cañado, M. 2012. CLIL research in Europe: past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education, (February 2013), 37–41. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13670050.2011.630064 Phillipson, R. 2008. Language policy and education in the European Union. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_19.pdf Pinyana, À. & S. Khan, 2007. Integrating content and language: The students' perspective. In Wilkinson, R. & Zegers, V. (Ed.), Researching content and language integration in higher education (pp. 179-189). Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht University Language Centre

Räisänen, C., & Fortanet-Gómez, I. 2008. The state of ESP teaching and learning in Western European higher education after Bologna. In Fortanet-Gómez, I. & C. Räisänen (Eds) ESP in higher education. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. R., & Jiménez Catalan, R. M. (Eds.). 2009. Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (Vol. 41). Multilingual Matters. Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., Sierra, J. M., & Puerto, F. G. del. 2011. Content and foreign language integrated learning: contributions to multilingualism in European contexts. Linguistic insights: studies in language and communication (Vol. 108, p. 343). Bern; New York: Peter Lang. Saarinen, T. 2012. Internationalization of Finnish higher education—is language an issue? International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2012,216: 157–173. Retrieved from http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/ijsl.2012.2012.issue-216/ijsl-2012-0044/ijsl-2012-0044.xml Sánchez García, D. 2010. Classroom interaction in University Settings: The case of questions in three disciplines. Retrieved from http://eprints.ucm.es/12793/ Shaw, P., & McMillion, A. 2008. Proficiency effects and compensation in advanced second-language reading. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 7, 3: 123-143. Smit, U. 2010. English as a lingua franca in higher education: A longitudinal study of classroom discourse (Vol. 2). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Sobhy, N. N., Berzosa, C., & Crean, F. M. 2013. From ESP to CLIL using the Schema Theory. Revista de Lenguas Para Fines Especiíficos, 8561,19: 251–267. Suviniitty, J. 2010. Lecturers’ questions and student perception of lecture comprehension. Helsinki English Studies, 6: 44-57. Tatzl, D. 2011. English-medium masters’ programmes at an Austrian university of applied sciences: Attitudes, experiences and challenges. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10,4. 252–270. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2011.08.003

Thøgersen, J., & Airey, J. 2011. Lecturing undergraduate science in Danish and in English: A comparison of speaking rate and rhetorical style. English for Specific Purposes, 30,3: 209–221. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2011.01.002 Tudor, I. 2007. The language challenge for higher education institutions in Europe, and the specific case of CLIL. El Multilingüisme de Las Universitats En l’Espai Europeu d'Educació Superior. (Actes del seminari del CUIMPB-CEL 2007) Barcelona: Institut d'Estudis Catalans, 2008, p.41-64 Valcke, J., Bartik, K., & Tudor, I. 2011. Practising CLIL in Higher Education: Challenges and Perspectives. In Quality interfaces Examining evidence and exploring solutions in CLIL (pp. 141–155). Vallbona, A., 2009 Implementing CLIL in primary Education. A case study. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona. Vallbona, A. & S. Khan. 2012. First steps towards CLIL: Perceptions and training at a Catalan university.In TRICLIL 2012 Proceedings: Better CLIL: More Opportunities in Primary, Secondary and Higher Education. Barcelona: UAB, 132-137. Wächter, B., & Maiworm, F. 2008. English-taught programmes in European higher education. ACA Papers on International Cooperation in Education. Bonn: Lemmens. Wilkinson, R. 2004. Integrating content and language:meeting the challenge of a multilingual higher education: In Proceedings of the ICL Conference, October 23-25 2003 (p. 589). Maastricht: Universitaire Pers Maastricht. Wilkinson, R. 2005. The impact of language on teaching content: Views from the content teacher. In Conference at Helsinki (Vol. 1). Retrieved from http://www.palmenia.helsinki.fi/congress/bilingual2005/presentations/wilkinson.pdf Wilkinson, R. 2011. If all business education were in English, would it matter? ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 161:111–123.

Williams, G., Strubell, M., & Williams, G. O. 2013. Trends in European language education. The Language Learning Journal, 41,1:5–36. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2011.567355 Woźniak, M. (2013). CLIL in Pharmacy: A case of collaboration between content and language lecturers. Language Value, 5,1: 107–128. Yang, W., & M. Gosling,.2013. What makes a Taiwan CLIL programme highly recommended or not recommended?. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (ahead-of-print), 1-16.

ISBN: 978-84-941644-9-1