Foreign LanguageMedium Studies in Tertiary Education Vaasa University

Foreign Language-Medium Studies in Tertiary Education Vaasa University of Applied Sciences 10 - 11 -Sep-2007 Content and Language Integrated Learning as a Tool towards Plurilingualism A. Papakyriakou, Asst. Professor papakyriakou. a@intercollege. ac. cy CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) FAUA (Fremdsprache als Unterrichts- und Arbeitssprache) Integrierter Unterricht von Sprache und Inhalt Integriertes Fremdsprachenlernen EMILE (Enseignement d’une Matière par l’Intégration d’une Langue Etrangère)

Objectives: • . . . “it seeks to develop proficiency in both the nonlanguage subject and the language in which this is taught, attaching the same importance to each. “ Eurydice Study „Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe (Brussels 2006)

Further objectives: linguistic objectives: • enabling pupils to develop language skills which emphasise effective communication, motivating pupils to learn languages by using them for real practical purposes educational objectives: • enabling pupils to develop subject-related knowledge and learning ability, stimulating the assimilation of subject matter by means of a different and innovative approach

dual-focused education • In class there are two main aims, one related to the subject and one linked to the language.

Meanwhile it is accepted that CLIL has positive impact on language teaching because: • Through CLIL the language is taught in a more natural context. • CLIL can increase the motivation for language learning CLIL can offer a natural situation for language development which brings language learning close to the language acquisition of the mother tongue (language learning vs. language acquisition/ conscious vs. unconscious). Learners use another language naturally, in such a way that they soon forget about the language and only focus on the learning topic.

CLIL a fast developing phenomenon in Europe that exists in three types of situations: • CLIL is part of mainstream school education • implementation of experimental projects • absence of any initiative in this area (Cyprus? )

Countries with no CLIL type provision: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Denmark Greece Cyprus Portugal Iceland Liechtenstein

• teaching time per week varies from 50 minutes to 50% • teacher qualifications differ • admission criteria for learners differ • levels of education concerned differ (mainly primary, lower secondary, • upper secondary, in some countries some activities from preprimary onwards: Finland? ) • little evaluation

Important difference: • to teach a subject in a language vs. • to teach a subject through a language

Subjects taught through CLIL The choice of subjects varies from one school or region to the next in the majority of countries. • Secondary education: mainly science subjects and social sciences • Primary education: creative, sports or environmental activities

Teaching models • What should we aim at in future? • Which are the consequences of every model (financial and other)? A) Just one teacher in charge? • In a CLIL class that is offered exclusively by the subject teacher who has fair/good knowledge of the foreign language it might happen in a system that there is just reflection on the subject. Language competence alone might not be an absolute promising factor. B) Co-teaching? (subject teacher and language teacher, experience from ARION visit “ 12, 11 – CLIL A New Way Towards the Integration of Foreign Language and Other School Subjects”/Salerno, Italy March 2007) • Teachers report that they also learn from each other. Efficient coordination between the two teachers is here of paramount importance for this model to be successful and for this teachers need time. • At a first glance, this model guarantees for the existence of both necessary components that should exist in a CLIL lesson: reflection on the subject and reflection on the language.

Consequences of CLIL for the curriculum as a whole • Does it mean that if a certain subject in taught in English (e. g. law in English) the time devoted to English language teaching will be reduced, in order to make space for another foreign language or in order to introduce the next foreign language at an earlier stage (possibly different perception of this in every country)?

Factors for successful CLIL application (1) support from the administrators/ decision-makers/ school directors (2) support from the parents and the society (3) qualified teachers (4) suitable material in the foreign language (5) provide time for the teachers to prepare the material and to prepare the class (6) continuous professional development of the teachers

Teachers’ qualification and recruitment criteria In CLIL type provision in most cases: • Specialists in one or more non-language subjects • Have two areas of specialisation, one in a language subject and the other in a non-language subject

Basic skills • Generally those possessed by teachers of non-language subjects • Empirical survey conducted in Norway: no teacher working in CLIL type provision who was only qualified to teach languages (double degrees or qualifications to teach a nonlanguage subject only)

Certified evidence of further particular skills in addition to their teaching qualification as a firm requirement • Only in a minority of countries • Focus of further certificates/diplomas: language skills

Just six countries require forms of certified evidence for teaching in CLIL provision (Source: Eurydice) Type of further qualification required Certificate/diploma testifying to knowledge of two languages of instruction Basic qualification obtained in the target language, and/or certificate of upper secondary education obtained in the target language Country SI Certificate of (advanced) knowledge of the target language Certificate testifying to the completion of 55 credits (80 marks) in the target language Regional language CAPES or a university qualification in the regional language BE fr, BE de, ES, HU, FI FI Qualification in two subjects incl. a language subject HU BE fr, BE de FR

Special initial training • Just in some countries (ca. 12 out of 30) teaching/methodological skills that are peculiar to CLIL, as opposed to language training • Features and duration vary widely: few lessons/ a course spread over one or two semesters/ postgraduate qualifications • Usually authorities don’t make such qualifications obligatory!

Current debate Concerns have been expressed from various sites. • Related to teaching/language: Could teaching of the national language suffer as the result of intensive teaching of another language? • Related to politics: Is it a threat if the position and influence of a language are the reflection of national culture and citizenship? • Related to the subject matter: Can learners develop knowledge of the subject in a CLIL model equally good as a student in a traditional model would do? (support from Finland)

Publications • Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe (2006), EURYDICE-Study, (http: //www. eurydice. org) • Marsh, D. (Ed) (2002) CLIL/EMILE- The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential Public Services Contract DG EAC: European Commission • Marsh David (2006) English as medium of instruction in the new global linguistic order: Global characteristics, local consequences, METSMa. C 2006 • Coyle D. (2006) Content and Language Integrated Learning – Motivating Learners and Teachers

Web sites • CLIL Compendium http: //www. clilcompendium. com/clilexpertise. htm • EUROCLIL – The European Network for Content and Language Integrated Classrooms http: //euroclil. net