Dontsov A.S.
S.
Theoretical
Foundations of Content and Language Integrated Learning
In recent years, Content and Language
Integrated Learning (CLIL) has been rapidly gaining popularity worldwide.
Originating in the 1990s in response to changes in the language policy of the
EU, CLIL quickly proved its effectiveness. Therefore, it is not surprising that
over time, the use of CLIL has become widespread not only in European
countries, but also far beyond this continent.
CLIL is an approach to bilingual
education in which the content of a subject discipline and a foreign/second
language (L2) are studied simultaneously. One of its important features is that
CLIL does not necessarily require a high level of L2 proficiency at the start
of learning. Therefore, CLIL is not an elitist approach; on the contrary, it is
available to a wide range of learners.
The multiple focus of CLIL can be best
described with the help of the so-called “
1. Content. The main goal is learning
the content, i.e. the acquisition of knowledge and development of skills
required by the program.
2. Communication. Learning occurs
through communication in a foreign language. Learners are actively involved in
speech perception and production activities (listening, reading, speaking and
writing) in L2.
3. Cognition. The materials, tasks
and activities are aimed at developing higher-order thinking skills.
4. Culture. Recognizing the
importance of the cultural diversity in modern world, a special emphasis is
placed in CLIL on the promotion of intercultural understanding.
An important feature of this approach
is its adaptability. CLIL is always implemented taking into account local
conditions, so there is no universal CLIL model that could be used equally successfully
everywhere. Such an orientation toward achieving practical results in a
specific context has led to the problem of the insufficiently developed
theoretical and methodological foundations of CLIL in general. Research in the
field of CLIL is mainly aimed at identifying and disseminating best practices
in the practical application of this approach, which further promotes its
popularization. Thus, the development of CLIL goes not from theory to practice,
but, on the contrary, from practice through the analysis of concrete experience
to theoretical generalizations. As a result, a number of researchers
acknowledge that the pace of practical implementation of CLIL is far ahead of
the pace of theoretical conceptualization of this approach.
This, however, does not mean complete
absence of any theoretical foundation. It is possible to single out six
pedagogical theories that form the basis of CLIL regardless of particular models
of its implementation.
1.
The Constructivist Learning Theory (Bruner, 1960)
Constructivism is a pedagogical
theory that has grown into an entire branch of the philosophy of education.
Constructivism recognizes the uniqueness of each person as the main value based
on the fact that throughout our lives, each of us constructs his or her own
unique understanding of the world. The key idea of constructivism
lies in the fact that knowledge can not be transferred to a learner in a “ready-made”
form. The true interiorization of knowledge is possible only when the learner
creates (constructs) this knowledge himself or herself. The role of the teacher
is to make certain changes in the learning environment, through which the
student would be able to build the desired cognitive structures. Consequently,
in constructivist understanding, cognition is an active process, not a passive
one.
Learners' active role is one of the
main characteristics of CLIL. This approach assumes the role of a teacher as an
experienced consultant and organizer of joint and individual activities. Owing
to the work with authentic sources and communication in L2, such activities
lead to not only to content learning but also to the development of language
skills in L2.
2.
The Sociocultural Theory (Vygotsky, 2005)
A significant contribution to the
development of constructivist ideas was made by the Soviet psychologist Lev
Vygotsky. Like Piaget, Vygotsky believed that the child discovers the world,
but stressed that most of such discoveries are due to the child's interaction
with other people. Piaget sees development as a process driven by internal
forces, whereas Vygotsky emphasizes the importance of external factors (culture
and social interaction). In many respects, it was thanks to his ideas that a
transition from individual to social constructivism took place.
Emphasizing the importance of culture
in the life of society, Vygotsky wrote that not only does man create culture,
but culture creates man as well. The enormous influence of culture on our
everyday lives is recognized in CLIL as one of the “4Cs”. One of the learning goals
in CLIL is developing better awareness of not only one's own culture, but other
cultures as well (including but not limited to those of the L2 countries),
promoting intercultural sensitivity, the ability to look at people, things and
phenomena through the prism of another culture, etc. All of the above is
necessary for effective intercultural communication.
Another important contribution to the
development of constructivism in general and CLIL in particular made by
Vygotsky was the introduction of the concept of “zone of proximal development”
as a potential level of intellectual development that can be achieved with the
help of a more experienced adult or peers. Later, on the basis of this idea,
the notion of “scaffolding” emerged. Scaffolding means various types of
learning support that help the learner to construct new knowledge based on
already existing knowledge and experience. Such support can be provided
verbally (instructions, tips, hints, etc.), visually (models, schemes, graphs,
etc.), in the form of a partial solution of the problem, etc. One of the main
characteristics of such support is its gradual reduction as the students'
abilities grow. The purpose of its use is to promote learner autonomy. This
ability to learn independently is extremely important for the realization of
the lifelong learning idea, which is relevant in the conditions
of constant acceleration of the rates of scientific and technological progress.
3.
The Taxonomy of Learning Domains (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)
Bloom and his followers (Anderson and
Krathwohl) presented a hierarchy of thinking activities in learning, singling
out the so-called “lower order thinking skills” and “higher order thinking
skills.” The first group includes remembering, understanding and applying,
while the second group consists of analyzing, evaluating and creating.
Another theory directly related to
the above-mentioned taxonomy is the Levels of Processing Theory by F. Craik and
R. Lockhart. According to it, the deeper information is processed, the longer
it will be stored in memory. That is why work with new material in CLIL should
be organized in a way that ensures its deep processing by using the
higher-order thinking skills.
Moreover, Bloom's taxonomy makes it
possible to link thinking and language. There is a number of publications on
how some common thinking and process skills can be linked with the typical
language required. This makes it possible for the teacher to make some
pre-prepared speech formulas / templates for each specific task and use them as
a scaffold enabling learners to develop language skills in L2 while
significantly reducing the use of L1.
4.
The Multiple Intelligences Theory (
According to
Despite the fact that this idea has
been repeatedly criticized in the scientific community, it is still widely used
in teaching practice. In particular, one of the mandatory requirements for a
CLIL lesson is a multimodal input. New information should be presented in
suitable way for learners with different learning styles (visual learners, auditory
learners, etc.).
5.
The Common Underlying Proficiency Theory (Cummins, 2000)
Cummins believed that as a result of
mastering L1, we acquire some skills and implicit metalinguistic knowledge
(Common Underlying Proficiency, CUP) that can be drawn upon when working with
L2. Any expansion of CUP that takes place in one language will have a
beneficial effect on the other language(s). This can explain the fact that for
people who speak several languages, each new language is much easier to learn
than the previous one. Thus, there is one thinking center, owing to which
skills and knowledge formed in one language, can be transferred to another.
This theory is important for CLIL. In
fact, it proves that the use of L1 does not impede the learning of L2. On the
contrary, it can serve as a support for learning. Concepts that have already
been formed in learners' L1 are much easier to transfer to L2. The same applies
to information processing skills and various learning skills.
6.
The Second Language Acquisition Theory (Krashen, 1981)
One of the goals of CLIL is teaching
L2. To achieve this goal, the teacher needs to know how the process of language
acquisition takes place. One of the most prominent theories in this field was proposed
by Stephen Krashen. It includes 5 hypotheses:
1. The Acquisition-Learning
Distinction hypothesis. Acquisition is a subconscious process that occurs as a
result of meaningful interaction in the target language. It is very similar to
the process children undergo when they acquire their L1. Learning is, on the
contrary, a conscious process carried out with the help of formal instruction
that results in certain knowledge “about” the language.
2. The Monitor hypothesis. This
hypothesis explains the interrelation between acquisition and learning.
Acquisition takes place naturally as a result of perceiving and producing
speech in the target language in certain situations. Our desire to interact
with people around us to achieve certain goals is the main driving force in
mastering the language. According to Krashen, the acquisition system is the
utterance initiator. Knowledge of language rules, which is achieved as a result
of formal instruction, allows the speaker to plan, edit and evaluate utterances
in terms of their compliance with language norms. So, the learning system
performs the role of the “monitor” or the “editor”.
Krashen emphasizes that the role of
the “monitor” is important, but still secondary to the role of the “initiator”.
The teacher should pay attention to learners' errors, but too frequent
corrections can lead to loss of self-confidence and unwillingness to experiment
with new material on the learners' part. The very goal of teaching L2 in CLIL
is to develop communicative competence in L2, i.e. readiness to use the
language for practical purposes to solve communicative tasks within the given
subject area. That's why in CLIL the main emphasis is always on meaning, not on
form.
3. The Natural Order hypothesis. The acquisition
of grammatical structures by a child occurs in a certain order. Transferring
this principle to CLIL can make acquisition easier for the learners.
4. The Input hypothesis. According to
Krashen, the learners improve and progress along the “natural order” when
receiving the L2 input that is one step beyond their current stage of
linguistic competence. For example, if the current level is “i”, then the
optimal input level will be “i +
5. The Affective Filter hypothesis.
According to this hypothesis, the emotions experienced in the learning process
can significantly hamper (or, conversely, contribute to) its effectiveness.
Krashen singled out anxiety, self-confidence and motivation as the main
variables that determine the “height” of the so-called “affective filter”.
Therefore, when working with CLIL, the teacher needs to create and maintain a
learning environment where the learners would feel safe, confident and
comfortable.
In conclusion, let us summarize all
the theories considered above. Table 1 shows some of the core principles of CLIL
and pedagogical theories that form their foundation.
Table 1. Main pedagogical theories that form the
foundation of CLIL.
|
CLIL Principles |
Pedagogical Theories |
|
Active learning: knowledge is not provided in a ready-made
form, it is constructed by learners |
The Constructivist Learning Theory (Bruner, 1960) |
|
Social interaction: knowledge is constructed by learners
as a result of teamwork and communication |
The
Sociocultural Theory (Vygotsky, 2005) |
|
Culture: one of the learning objectives in CLIL is
developing cultural awareness, constructing knowledge and skills required for
intercultural communication |
The
Sociocultural Theory (Vygotsky, 2005) |
|
Scaffolding: providing learners with temporary
support to help them build their own knowledge and develop autonomy |
Zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 2005) |
|
Development of higher-order thinking skills for
better learning |
The Taxonomy of Learning Domains (Bloom, Anderson
& Krathwohl, 2001) |
|
Multimodal input to suit different learning styles |
The Multiple Intelligences Theory ( |
|
Drawing upon metalinguistic knowledge and skills
already formed in L1 (Common Underlying Proficiency) |
The Common Underlying Proficiency Theory (Cummins,
2000) |
|
CLIL results in L2 levels improvement not so much
through the conscious memorization of new grammatical rules and lexical units
(“learning”) as owing to the use of new material in communication for solving
specific content-related problems (“acquisition”) |
The Second Language Acquisition Theory, the
Acquisition-Learning Distinction hypothesis (Krashen, 1981) |
|
The main focus is on meaning, not on form |
The Second Language Acquisition Theory, the Monitor
hypothesis (Krashen, 1981) |
|
Comprehensible input: L2 acquisition takes place
when the input level is one step beyond learners' current stage of linguistic
competence |
The Second Language Acquisition Theory, the Input
hypothesis (Krashen, 1981) |
|
Comfortable learning environment: attention to the
emotional state of learners |
The Second Language Acquisition Theory, the Affective
Filter hypothesis (Krashen, 1981) |
It should be noted here that only the
key theories were considered in this article. A more detailed study of the
theoretical and methodological foundations of CLIL certainly requires a more
detailed analysis.
References:
Bruner, J. (1960). The Process of Education.
Cummins, J. (2000) Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual
Children in the Crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second Language Acquisition and Second Language
Learning.
Vygotsky, L.S. (2005). Psikhologiya Razvitiya Cheloveka [Psychology
of Human Development] (in Russian).