What Students Tell Teachers about Practices that Integrate Subjects with English in a Lower Secondary School in Portugal

Open access


CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) is an approach thought to provide, mainly during Content (non-language, subject) classes, a meaningful environment at school for the use and learning of a foreign language (FL), and may also improve conditions and practices of the specific subject. Moreover, CLIL can represent a research context to gauge the importance of language-aware teaching as is the case with the Portuguese “English Plus” project (EP), in which History and Science are taught/ learnt with/in English at lower secondary school. Our doctoral research is designed as a descriptive-explanatory case study on the EP project and its participants (English and Science teachers, former and current students). More specifically, this work focuses on students and shows their relationship with the EP approach and (dis)advantages in learning a subject with a FL. Data were collected through a semi-structured questionnaire and interview, with subsequent content analysis. The importance of “integrated learning” and of diverse strategies used by the teacher to support/scaffold learning is present in students’ perspectives which may further influence teaching practices

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Barbero Teresina. “Insegnare in Lingua Straniera: Quali Sfide? Quali Difficoltà?” CLIL: Un Nuovo Ambiente Di Apprendimento. Sviluppi e Riflessioni Sull’uso Veicolare Di Una Lingua Seconda/ Straniera edited by Carmel Mary Coonan Libreria Editrice Cafoscarina 2006 pp. 105-17.

  • Beacco Jean-Claude et al. Guide for the Development and Implementation of Curricula for Plurilingual and Intercultural Education. Council of Europe 2010.

  • Blanchard Brigitte et al. “The PROFILES Project Promoting Science Teaching in a Foreign Language.” Science Education International vol. 25 no. 2 2014 pp. 78-96. www.icaseonline.net/sei/june2014/p4.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Bunch George C. et al. “Documenting the Language Demands of Mainstream Content-Area Assessment for English Learners: Participant Structures Communicative Modes and Genre in Science Performance Assessments.” Language and Education vol. 24 no. 3 2010 pp. 185-214 doi: 10.1080/09500780903518986

  • Canet Pladevall Roser and Natalia Evnitskaya. “Rethink Rewrite Remake or Learning to Teach Science Through English.” AICLE – CLIL – EMILE. Educació Plurilingüe: Experiencias Research & Polítiques edited by Cristina Escobar Urmeneta et al. Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 2011 pp. 167-77.

  • Clegg John. “Analysing the Language Demands of Lessons Taught in a Second Language.” Revista española de lingüística aplicada vol. 1 2007 pp. 113-28 dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/ articulo?codigo=2575499. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Council of Europe. Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning Teaching Assessment (CEFR). COE 2011 rm.coe.int/1680459f97. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Coyle Do. CLIL Planning Tools for Teachers. School of Education – University of Nottingham 2005 www.unifg.it/sites/default/files/allegatiparagrafo/20-01-2014/coyle_clil_planningtool_kit.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb 2018.

  • Coyle Do. “Listening to Learners: An Investigation into ‘Successful Learning’ across CLIL Contexts.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism vol. 16 no. 3 2013 pp. 244-66 doi:10.1080/13670050.2013.777384.

  • Coyle Do Philip Hood and David Marsh. CLIL Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge UP 2010.

  • Cummins Jim. “Bilingualism Language Proficiency and Metalinguistic Development.” Childhood Bilingualism: Aspects of Linguistic Cognitive and Social Development edited by Peter Homel et al. Erlbaum 1987 pp. 57-73.

  • Dalton-Puffer Christiane and Tarja Nikula. “Pragmatics of Content-Based Instruction: Teacher and Student Directives in Finnish and Austrian Classrooms.” Applied Linguistics vol. 27 no. 2 2006 pp. 241-67 doi:10.1093/applin/aml007.

  • Escobar Urmeneta Cristina and Natalia Evnitskaya. “Do You Know Actimel? The Adaptive Nature of Dialogic Teacher-Led Discussions in the CLIL Science Classroom: A Case Study.” The Language Learning Journal vol. 42 no. 2 2014 pp. 165-80 doi:10.1080/09571736.2014.889507.

  • European Commission. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Eurydice Reports 2006 publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/756ebdaa-f694-44e4-8409-21eef02c9b9b. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • European Commission. Civil Society Platform on Multilingualism. COM 2011 elen.ngo/wp-content/uploads/ 2016/05/report-civil-society_en.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • European Commission. Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe – 2017. Eurydice Reports 2017 doi:10.2797/12061.

  • Grandinetti Maria et al. “How CLIL Can Provide a Pragmatic Means to Renovate Science Education – Even in a Sub-Optimally Bilingual Context.” International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism vol. 16 no. 3 2013 pp. 354-74. doi:10.1080/13670050.2013.777390.

  • Lasagabaster David and Juan Manuel Sierra. “Immersion and CLIL in English: More Differences than Similarities.” ELT Journal vol. 64 no. 4 2010 pp. 367-75 doi:10.1093/elt/ccp082.

  • Lin Angel M. Y. Language Across the Curriculum & CLIL in English as an Additional Language (EAL) Contexts. Theory and Practice. Springer 2016.

  • Marsh David. CLIL/EMILE – The European Dimension. Actions Trends and Foresight Potential. Continuing Education Centre in Jyväskylä 2002.

  • Marsh David. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) A Development Trajectory. Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Córdoba 2012.

  • Marsh David and Gisella Langé editors. Using Languages to Learn and Learning to Use Languages. University of Jyväskylä 2000.

  • Marsh David et al. European Framework for CLIL Teacher Education. ECML 2011 www.ecml.at/Portals/1/documents/ECML-resources/CLIL-EN.pdf?ver=2018-03-21-153925-563. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Mehisto Peeter. “Criteria for Producing CLIL Learning Material.” Encuentro vol. 21 2012 pp. 15-33 files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539729.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Milton James and Paul Meara. “Are the British Really Bad at Learning Foreign Languages?” Language Learning Journal vol. 18 no. 1 1998 pp. 68-76 doi:10.1080/09571739885200291.

  • Nikula Tarja et al. “CLIL Classroom Discourse: Research from Europe.” Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language vol. 1 no. 1 2013 pp. 70-100 doi:10.1075/jicb.1.1.04nik.

  • Pavón Vázquez Víctor and Maria Ellison. “Examining Teacher Roles and Competences in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL).” Lingvarvm Arena vol. 4 2013 pp. 65-78 ler.letras.up.pt/uploads/ficheiros/12007.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Pérez Cañado María Luisa. “Are Teachers Ready for CLIL? Evidence from a European Study.” European Journal of Teacher Education vol. 39 no. 2 2016 pp. 202-21 doi:10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104.

  • Piacentini Valentina et al. “Abordagem Holística no Sistema Educativo Português para Desenvolver a(s) Literacia(s) das Ciências Integradas com o Inglês – Holistic Approach in the Portuguese Education System to Develop Literacies of Science Integrated with English.” Indagatio Didactica vol. 8 no. 1 2016 pp. 1975-992. revistas.ua.pt/ index.php/ID/article/view/3981/3663. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Piacentini Valentina et al. “The Language Focus of Science Education Integrated with English Learning.” Enseñanza de las Ciencias vol. Extra 2017 pp. 399-404 ddd.uab.cat/record/184622. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Roberts Douglas A. and Rodger W. Bybee. “Scientific Literacy Science Literacy and Science Education.” Handbook of Research on Science Education Volume II edited by Norman G. Lederman and Sandra K. Abell Routledge 2014 pp. 545-58.

  • Scott Philip H. et al. “The Tension between Authoritative and Dialogic Discourse: A Fundamental Characteristic of Meaning Making Interactions in High School Science Lessons.” Science Education vol. 90 no. 4 2006 pp. 605-31 doi:10.1002/sce.20131.

  • Simões Raquel A. et al. “The Project English Plus: A CLIL Approach in a Portuguese School.” Indagatio Didatica vol. 5 no. 4 2013 pp. 30-51 revistas.ua.pt/index.php/ID/ article/ viewFile/ 2565/2430. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Tedick Diane J. and Laurent Cammarata. “Content and Language Integration in K-12 Contexts: Student Outcomes Teacher Practices and Stakeholder Perspectives.” Foreign Language Annals vol. 45 no. 51 2012 pp. S28-S53 doi:10.111/j.1944-9720.2012.01178.x.

  • Ting Yen-Ling Teresa. “CLIL Appeals to How the Brain Likes its Information: Examples from CLIL-(Neuro)Science.” International CLIL Research Journal vol. 1 no. 3 2010 pp. 3-18 www.icrj.eu/13/article1.html. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

  • Vieira Rui M. et al. A Educação em Ciências com Orientação CTS. Atividades para o Ensino Básico. Areal Editores 2011.

  • Wellington Jerry and Jonathan Osborne. Language and Literacy in Science Education. Open UP 2001.

  • Wolff Dieter. “The European Framework for CLIL Teacher Education.” Synergies Italie vol. 8 2012 pp. 105-16 gerflint.fr/Base/Italie8/dieter_wolff.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb. 2018.

Journal information
Cited By
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 59 59 6
PDF Downloads 38 38 2