Activa JavaScript para disfrutar de los vídeos de la Mediateca.
Mesa de comunicación: Focusing on language in content teaching: the UAM-CLIL project
Ajuste de pantallaEl ajuste de pantalla se aprecia al ver el vídeo en pantalla completa. Elige la presentación que más te guste:
Mesa de comunicación "Focusing on language in content teaching: the UAM-CLIL project" por Dª.Ana Llinares y Dª.Rachel Whittaker, celebrado en el I Congreso Internacional sobre Bilingüismo en Centros Educativos el 14 de junio de 2010 dirigido a profesores de primaria, secundaria y universidades, a investigadores y responsables políticos interesados en la educación bilingüe y en metodología AICOLE (Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lengua)
We're going to present a summary of the results that we've had up to now.
00:00:00
The results come from a project that we've been involved in, Rachel and I, but other
00:00:25
people as well, in the Autonoma that we started four years ago, that wanted to look at the
00:00:30
language of certain subjects and we started with social sciences, geography and history
00:00:35
at the school.
00:00:40
So this is an overview of the presentation.
00:00:45
We're going to give you an overview of the project, the aims of the project as a whole,
00:00:48
the design, the way we collected the data and the analysis and then we're going to show
00:00:54
you a selection of results on the language of the students and the language of the teachers
00:01:00
and then some conclusions and possible applications, pedagogical applications for secondary school
00:01:04
CLIL contexts.
00:01:11
So what is the rationale, what was our motivation for this project when we got started?
00:01:17
I'm quoting Constant Leon here and the idea was to use the languages in teaching and learning
00:01:23
activities in CLIL contexts.
00:01:31
So we especially wanted to pay attention to the demands and possibilities for language
00:01:33
learning in the context of curriculum subject learning.
00:01:39
So that was the motivation.
00:01:43
Obviously there are different studies, different projects on CLIL, there are projects at a
00:01:47
more macro level, looking at big implementation of CLIL projects at schools or evaluation
00:01:51
of the development of CLIL projects.
00:02:03
We wanted to focus on the sort of more micro level.
00:02:05
We wanted to focus on the classroom and we wanted to look at both written and spoken
00:02:09
registers.
00:02:14
We were more involved in research on classroom discourse, spoken language and Rachel has
00:02:15
been involved in the analysis of second language written development.
00:02:22
We wanted to compare both registers and we had this idea of looking at both.
00:02:28
So we also obviously wanted to look at the way, I mean, language in CLIL as a process,
00:02:34
the way students use language in the classroom and in their compositions and also as a product,
00:02:44
what they actually learnt.
00:02:50
We wanted to look at both.
00:02:51
We're quoting here Dalton, Puffin and Schmidt because they have this very nice diagram with
00:02:53
research on CLIL based on either macro or micro projects and either focus on product
00:02:58
or focus on process.
00:03:06
So we thought it was nice to contextualise what we are doing.
00:03:08
In the end what we wanted is to try to identify linguistic needs of ESO learners and we needed
00:03:14
to focus on one specific subject to get started.
00:03:22
So we decided to focus on social sciences, geography and history simply because it was
00:03:24
the subject that was taught in all the schools in the Comunidad de Madrid that belong to
00:03:31
the British Council MEC project because obviously the Comunidad de Madrid project had not reached
00:03:37
the secondary level when we started.
00:03:42
So we wanted to make sure that we, I mean, just to get started that we wouldn't have
00:03:44
any problems with subjects not being taught in some of the schools.
00:03:49
And well, the final aim would be to provide support for secondary teachers, specialists
00:03:56
in disciplines or in English, setting up CLIL projects but in their own subjects, in their
00:04:02
own classrooms.
00:04:08
So these are the specific aims.
00:04:11
We wanted to look at the learner language, the learner's output.
00:04:14
Both spoken and written.
00:04:19
And we selected one topic per year from a social science syllabus in two state secondary
00:04:21
schools following the British Council MEC bilingual project.
00:04:27
So we collected this spoken and written data that I'll tell you about in a minute from
00:04:30
the same students.
00:04:37
So we wanted to follow the same students in order to be able to also do longitudinal analysis
00:04:38
and see how they developed both in the written and the spoken registers with the same students
00:04:45
in these two schools.
00:04:51
So there were two groups and we followed them.
00:04:52
And these are all the years where the data was collected.
00:04:55
So we've already finished the data collection and almost finished the transcription of the
00:04:58
last year.
00:05:03
I mean, we finished the first three years and almost the last year.
00:05:04
We also wanted to focus on the classroom input and we looked just very briefly, we just got
00:05:07
started with that, but we looked at the textbook.
00:05:14
But we also analysed quite deeply teacher talk in the classroom on the same topic, obviously,
00:05:16
because we were recording sessions on one specific topic per year.
00:05:22
And then we were also interested, obviously, in classroom interaction, teacher-students
00:05:28
interaction.
00:05:33
We also recorded students in group work, but we haven't looked at that yet.
00:05:34
And what we did also was we collected parallel data, actually, so the same type of data with
00:05:38
the same prompt from Spanish native groups on the same topics.
00:05:45
We were sent out into the Spanish history classrooms and we were able to record the
00:05:49
same prompt to record sessions on the same topic with students doing history and geography
00:05:57
in Spanish.
00:06:04
And then we were also lucky that we could ask them, the teachers, to ask the students
00:06:05
to write a composition as well on the same topic.
00:06:10
So exactly following the same prompt.
00:06:12
And we also have production of native speakers of English of the same age on similar topics
00:06:15
that we were also lucky to be able to obtain from schools such as the King's College, English
00:06:21
history schools, where children follow their, okay, no, but this is, no, and then from native,
00:06:29
from England, okay, yes, because these are not native, obviously, sorry.
00:06:36
Design of the tasks.
00:06:42
Obviously we needed to follow the syllabus requirements.
00:06:45
We couldn't ask students to perform a task that did not follow what they had obviously
00:06:48
been doing in class with their teachers.
00:06:54
So we looked at the syllabus, we looked at the integrated curriculum, and we talked to
00:06:56
the teachers about the topics that they would cover on that specific year in order to find
00:07:00
out which topics they thought were more attractive for the students because we wanted the students
00:07:07
to participate.
00:07:12
We wanted the students to participate.
00:07:13
So we didn't want to choose a topic that was not very interesting for them, okay.
00:07:14
And we needed input.
00:07:19
We needed a task for spoken and written production and we also needed production.
00:07:20
And we wanted extended output.
00:07:25
We wanted, we didn't want just the students to respond with short answers, okay, with
00:07:28
individual words.
00:07:32
We wanted the students to be allowed, to be encouraged to produce extended output both
00:07:33
in written and spoken registers, okay.
00:07:40
And we're quoting Swain because of the importance of encouraging students to produce longer
00:07:42
pieces of text, both written and spoken, in order for them to realize, to be aware of
00:07:48
their language problems, metalinguistic awareness, and then solve some of the problems themselves,
00:07:54
okay.
00:08:00
Right.
00:08:01
So these are the tasks.
00:08:02
For each year, we chose a topic together with a teacher, okay.
00:08:05
We negotiated a topic and the prompt, and the prompt was based on a number of points
00:08:11
and we wanted to make sure that these aspects that the prompt would be eliciting would cover
00:08:20
different genres that they had, of course, covered in the topic with their teacher in
00:08:28
class, okay.
00:08:34
So we wanted to make sure that the students were asked to refer to chronological events,
00:08:35
but that they were also asked to explain things that they had done in class because it was
00:08:43
there in the curriculum, it was there in the textbook, and that they were also, towards
00:08:47
the end of a prompt, we wanted them to have some kind of argumentation or some kind of
00:08:52
personal opinion, okay.
00:08:58
To the teachers about these, they obviously corrected some of the things on a prompt that
00:09:01
they believed the students could follow, okay.
00:09:07
And this was done at the end of a topic, and what we did is first, there was a group session
00:09:10
where the students worked on those questions or points in groups, and then there was a
00:09:17
whole class discussion where the teacher went through all these aspects of a topic, okay.
00:09:24
So that is the first task.
00:09:30
The second task, a couple of days later, or a week later, so not very far away from the
00:09:33
first task, the students were asked to write a composition on exactly the same points,
00:09:38
okay.
00:09:44
What you have there is an example of a prompt, and this is the format that the students got
00:09:45
for the composition.
00:09:50
Obviously, in the class, the format was kind of a point by point, okay, like questions
00:09:51
in a question format, but they were the same points, the same aspects that they would be
00:09:58
presented for the composition, okay.
00:10:02
And then, after they wrote the composition, a number of students, a limited number of
00:10:06
students, in fact, we began with six, but then, with six students from each school
00:10:11
in the first year of secondary education, and because we, and then we interviewed them
00:10:17
on the same, using the same prompt, because the idea was to see individual students' development
00:10:22
in writing, because we had the compositions from all the students, but also in speaking,
00:10:29
because obviously in the class, I mean, everybody would participate, or maybe not everybody,
00:10:34
always the same people would participate, but we wouldn't be able to make sure that
00:10:38
the same students' spoken language is looked at, so we interviewed six students from each
00:10:42
school from different levels, okay, we asked the teacher, we wanted students with a low
00:10:49
level of English, not of history, of English, sort of middle, sort of medium level of English
00:10:54
and a high level of English, okay, sorry, yes, oh, right.
00:11:02
So we, our theoretical framework for this study is genre and registering systemic functional
00:11:06
linguistics.
00:11:13
A systemic functional linguistics is a linguistic approach that, among other things, has been
00:11:14
used a lot in educational contexts in England and in Australia, and now it is very much
00:11:21
applied in, also in second language contexts in Australia, and it focuses on the importance
00:11:29
of identifying the characteristics of different genres, and then use that as a way of, and
00:11:35
use that for teaching students and also training teachers on the linguistic characteristics
00:11:43
of different genres and different sub-genres within subjects, okay, so what are the characteristics
00:11:49
of a language of history, of geography, language of biology, but then within biology, this
00:11:55
specific topic, what does it expect the students to do or to understand, okay, what genres,
00:12:00
and then the grammar and the lexis is like the, sort of, would be based on those specific
00:12:08
genres, so what type of lexis, what type of grammar is needed to be able to write a chronological
00:12:17
sequence of events, or to produce, to present, for example, a poster, or to carry out a debate,
00:12:23
okay, with different views, different ideas, and because we were looking at the language
00:12:30
of history, obviously we followed some work that has been done on the language of history.
00:12:34
Okay, then we also wanted to look at, so what type of language did we focus on, okay, we
00:12:39
looked at Halliday's idea that language is used to convey three main functions.
00:12:46
One is the use of language to represent reality, which is the ideational function, and there
00:12:53
are certain linguistic elements that are used to represent reality, for example, the types
00:12:59
of verbs, there are material verbs, relation, verbs of action, verbs of being, okay, mental
00:13:04
processes, so verbs of thinking, of feeling, etc.
00:13:12
Then another function is the interpersonal function, which is the use of language to
00:13:18
interact with the others, and one linguistic element to convey that function is modality,
00:13:22
the use of modal verbs, using must, or have to, or could, or should, depends on the, sort
00:13:29
of, also relationship that you have with your interlocutor, and textual function, which
00:13:36
is the information management that was very interesting for us, for the written text,
00:13:41
to see whether the students were able to relate to ideas that were presented before in a proper
00:13:45
way.
00:13:51
So well, this is just the method, the way we, well, we coded the corpus and we used
00:13:52
some retrieval programs in order to be able to classify, well, to analyse and quantify
00:13:57
the results.
00:14:06
Okay, and now Rachel is going to present some of the results.
00:14:07
Okay, so let's see, what we wanted to do, we decided we wouldn't give you some numbers
00:14:13
or some graphs, let's have examples.
00:14:18
So the first example is what Anna has just been explaining about, the expression of content,
00:14:20
so as Fred Genesee said yesterday, different disciplines need different types of meanings,
00:14:27
they express different types of meanings.
00:14:33
So we looked at the types of verbs, the semantic types, and how the clauses were extended with
00:14:35
different types of circumstances.
00:14:41
So through the analysis, we find this, so that in geography, in the first year, we took
00:14:43
a geography and then a history task for the other years, and we focused on history.
00:14:49
So in geography, what you find is that this type of verb turns up, lots of action verbs,
00:14:55
this is in the little debate in the first year.
00:15:00
Whereas in history, this history is typically represented, historical knowledge is in fact
00:15:04
not represented as actions through time at all, it's represented much more as states.
00:15:09
So we see these verbs of states, were, stood, and error, and another were.
00:15:15
So this was at the end of the first year, and this was a written text.
00:15:20
The students expanded the clauses a lot, most clauses had some sort of circumstance,
00:15:25
so they weren't just subject-verb-object clauses, this is interesting too.
00:15:30
And typically, of course, place and time for geography and history, but also we find manner,
00:15:34
which is a little bit more developed according to developmental studies.
00:15:40
So this was talking about how did we get the Black Death here, so brought it to Europe
00:15:45
in the middle of the 14th century from Genoa, so three expansions here by preposition phrases.
00:15:51
And talking about the past and now, what's the difference with our experience?
00:15:58
We can go from place to place faster with the car, another three.
00:16:03
So this is one of the results that if you analyse this type of text you find, and so
00:16:07
this is what the students need to be able to write or talk about these topics.
00:16:13
Then what Anna said too, that we need modality.
00:16:18
Academic language isn't just stating facts, it's not dogmatic.
00:16:23
It's talking about probabilities, possibilities, and also root modality, ability, and obligation
00:16:27
and permission.
00:16:33
What we found was that the students were very limited in their modals, tended to be multifunctional
00:16:34
can everywhere, or its past.
00:16:40
So talking about natural disasters, one of the students said, consequences can, being
00:16:42
probably, houses could float, people could die, and then ability, we can cut trees, it
00:16:48
went on here.
00:16:56
Well, what could you do about it, the students were asked.
00:16:57
I could think, maybe teach my sons, and maybe they can say something.
00:17:00
So we do have a little bit of variety here, but not very much in modality, and this is
00:17:04
key to academic language.
00:17:10
This we thought you might be interested in, this we're now in textual, managing information.
00:17:13
We were surprised not to find presentative there at all in the first year data, but second
00:17:18
year, yes.
00:17:25
So the students, but in the second year, something that they learned from the very beginning
00:17:26
of language, now they were using it for its function.
00:17:29
So bring in something new into the text.
00:17:33
So they were asked about feudal times, there were peasants or serfs, and there were free
00:17:36
peasants.
00:17:41
So the student knows this is new for the audience.
00:17:42
Another aspect of managing information, textual metafunction, some better, some worse.
00:17:46
So one student here, this is at the end of the first year, starts off the composition
00:17:54
assuming that the reader knows all these references.
00:17:59
So they, what's they, start in that places, where are those, because the population also
00:18:03
assumed growth.
00:18:07
Whereas this is now in the second year, we found much more developed knowledge of how
00:18:10
to produce cohesion.
00:18:16
So many people lived in rural places, these people worked, they lived, and then brought
00:18:18
in again the complete noun phrase, these people were called peasants.
00:18:24
So managing information we thought was interesting.
00:18:28
Something else, again, what Professor Genesee and other speakers have been saying, we need
00:18:33
to develop academic register in CLIL.
00:18:37
So we've got to go from the typical way of producing spoken clauses, lots of information
00:18:40
this student has produced in a written text, there are, I think, yes, here we got ten clauses
00:18:47
in one sentence written like this, and they're all, nearly all, coordinate clauses.
00:18:54
So because of the rats, because they go, and they infect, and so on and on, and because.
00:18:59
So typical of everyday spoken language, we want to move into academic language.
00:19:05
And we do find this is now end of the third year in this next example, so this student
00:19:11
has produced in fact one clause, and has put all that other information in this preposition
00:19:16
phrase.
00:19:22
So this is much more academic.
00:19:23
With the rise of taxes, we've got recursive prepositions, prices during inflation, after
00:19:25
mercantilism.
00:19:30
So moving into academic register, we're interested to see, you know, what was going on in the
00:19:32
L1 classes too as regards this, so here we are at the end of the second year, this is
00:19:38
in the L1 class, same, the question was why did the Black Death spread, and this student
00:19:45
speaking said, no, yes, yes, speaking says, por el latinamiento, so using an abstraction
00:19:51
very typical of this type of language, whereas the CLIL students partially, they're trying
00:19:59
to get there because the dirty of the people is a noun phrase, but then this student goes
00:20:05
back into everyday language, they don't wash, and this and that, and the rats, so goes back
00:20:10
into everyday language.
00:20:15
Whereas example three, this student is, has put all the real information in this clause
00:20:17
into the noun phrases, the filth of the cities, the expansion of it, so this one is moving
00:20:24
into academic register.
00:20:29
Evaluation, these students are learning to be historians, history is value laden, historians
00:20:31
are interpreters, and we thought this was interesting, look at this, this is the end
00:20:39
of the third year, this amazing fact was really relevant, so this student is evaluating
00:20:43
what's going on now, and this second one is also putting themselves into the point of
00:20:49
view of a historical actor, talking about Felipe Segundo, it was unfortunate for him,
00:20:55
so I think this is, they are now, they're not so egocentric for a start, as well as
00:21:01
becoming more academic, so, and this we thought you'd be interested a bit into what we've,
00:21:07
some things we've seen in the teacher language, so this was through the analysis again of
00:21:12
the processes, so seeing what sort of different meanings there are, and we found in the teacher
00:21:17
language a lot of mental and verbal processes, which the students didn't use, so we looked
00:21:22
at this, and it turns out that this is extremely interesting, the teachers, both types of teachers,
00:21:27
I think that Anna didn't explain to us, one teacher is an EFL teacher who did a degree
00:21:33
in history, and the other teacher is a historian with a very good level of English, they both
00:21:38
use this same technique, which is to construct the students as thinkers, so you are joining
00:21:44
this community of academics, so she said here, the importance of the river, this is in the
00:21:51
first year, they're talking about why the ancient civilizations grew where they did,
00:21:56
so importance of the river, why along the river, think about it, develop that idea,
00:22:03
you're capable of doing this, so the student goes on, and then here we have another example,
00:22:07
which was the role of language, there were a lot of verbal processes, so what's the language,
00:22:14
the language constructs knowledge, and both teachers did this quite a bit, say it, repeat
00:22:20
it, so focus on the language, the language is what we're doing, and also points to academic
00:22:27
functions, cause and consequence, I've nearly finished, so another thing, two more key ones,
00:22:34
teacher input we thought was interesting too for you, so message abundancy, Pauline Gibbons
00:22:41
talks about this, this idea too of scaffolding and helping, so teacher asks, what about the
00:22:46
obligations, nominalize, abstraction, and then repeats it, giving the student really
00:22:51
the language, because obviously this they understand, it's a cognate, but gives the
00:22:56
student the language by rephrasing into more everyday language, so they have to work the
00:23:00
lands, and then what about their rights, what were the rights of the peasants, so this referent has
00:23:05
some way back, so she gives the students the clue, this is what we're talking about, and again the
00:23:11
student takes up the Lexis in the answer, focus on form, we thought you'd be interested in this too,
00:23:17
in class interaction, this was interesting, and this was a difference, this is the teacher who
00:23:24
was EFL trained first, and she focused more on form taking, what the students are saying,
00:23:29
obviously, so the student says they have, but we're talking about history, so she rephrases,
00:23:36
had more power, student doesn't take any notice here, but later does, the king's conquest,
00:23:42
the teacher corrects, gives the verb, and the student does conquer it, and again here,
00:23:49
she constructs the student as capable of explaining a historical process, you've explained this,
00:23:55
so this is our summary, is that okay, can I get the summary, okay, so this is what we've seen,
00:24:01
and we've seen lots more things, we'd love to tell you about what we can't, so different disciplines
00:24:07
do require different linguistic features, but we can find them, it's easy to do these analysis,
00:24:12
so we can find them, we can be aware, and we can bring this knowledge into the class all the time
00:24:17
without being obtrusive, they need to control interpersonal language features like modality,
00:24:24
this we thought was, you know, this needs work, they need to control the systems that signal given
00:24:30
a new, so the discourse features, as well as grammar and vocabulary, and then CLIL teachers,
00:24:36
we've got to help, we've seen this all the time here in this conference yesterday too, message
00:24:44
abundancy and scaffolding, this also giving the students the ideas that they can do all these
00:24:49
things, they can produce in the discipline, we found development, we haven't showed you those
00:24:55
slides, there's fluency, there's much more writing in the later texts, and much longer turns in the
00:25:02
spoken texts, and we think that the written fluency was very much connected with the preparatory
00:25:09
activities, you need to write about something, you've got to know about something to have something
00:25:17
to say, so there's no point if we say just sit down and write, because nobody can do it, we can't,
00:25:22
we should test our tasks before we give them to anybody, so finally we think that this model,
00:25:27
but maybe there are others, this model has certainly been tried and tested, the books that
00:25:33
I edited which were mentioned, show examples of teachers and what they do with the students,
00:25:37
I think this is extremely interesting and we should try to do it too, so we think this model
00:25:44
is very useful because it allows us to integrate what the discipline needs, or what the task needs,
00:25:49
or what the genre needs, into the teaching of language, and it makes it, well it makes it
00:25:56
evident, it makes it explicit, teachers can explain in linguistic terms and students can
00:26:06
understand this because we've seen lots of work with quite young children, they can understand
00:26:11
what's going on if you explain it, but we've got to make it explicit, what's going on in the text,
00:26:15
what makes this text better than that one, so we can explain in linguistic terms what these
00:26:20
disciplines need, so sorry, thank you very much, sorry for the gallop.
00:26:25
you
00:26:41
- Valoración:
- Eres el primero. Inicia sesión para valorar el vídeo.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Idioma/s:
- Etiquetas:
- Miscelánea
- Autor/es:
- Dª.Ana Llinares y Dª.Rachel Whittaker
- Subido por:
- EducaMadrid
- Licencia:
- Reconocimiento - No comercial - Sin obra derivada
- Visualizaciones:
- 496
- Fecha:
- 14 de enero de 2011 - 10:10
- Visibilidad:
- Público
- Enlace Relacionado:
- Universidad Rey Juan Carlos de Madrid en colaboración con la Consejería de Educación de la Comunidad de Madrid
- Descripción ampliada:
La Universidad Rey Juan Carlos de Madrid en colaboración con la Consejería de Educación de la Comunidad de Madrid acogió el I Congreso Internacional sobre Bilingüismo en Centros Educativos que se celebró en Madrid en la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos los días 14, 15 y 16 de junio de 2010.
En los últimos años, se ha observado una implicación cada vez mayor en los países europeos respecto a la educación bilingüe con el fin de preparar a sus alumnos para sus futuros estudios, trabajo y vida en una Europa cada vez más multilingüe. Si el objetivo es conseguir una Europa multilingüe, el Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lengua (AICOLE) sería el instrumento necesario para conseguir esta meta. Como consecuencia, el AICOLE ha provocado un gran interés en los últimos años en Europa, y especialmente en España.
Por otro lado la Comunidad de Madrid se ha convertido en una región de referencia gracias a su decidida apuesta por el bilingüismo en los centros educativos. Un ambicioso proyecto iniciado en el año 2004 que cuenta en la actualidad con 242 colegios públicos en los que se desarrolla una enseñanza bilingüe de gran calidad. Este curso 20010-2011 el modelo alcanza a la enseñanza secundaria donde se extenderá con la puesta en marcha de 32 institutos bilingües. Estas políticas educativas están produciendo resultados muy apreciables y han generado un gran interés entre los profesores que se sienten cada vez más atraídos por este tipo de enseñanza.
Por estas razones, este I Congreso Internacional sobre Bilingüismo en Centros Educativos ha estado dirigido a profesores de primaria, secundaria y universidades, a investigadores y responsables políticos interesados en la educación bilingüe y en metodología AICOLE.- Duración:
- 26′ 42″
- Relación de aspecto:
- 1.31:1
- Resolución:
- 480x366 píxeles
- Tamaño:
- 169.12 MBytes
