Session Information
20 SES 06 A, Intercultural learning environments (part II)
Paper Session
Contribution
Research questions, objectives and theoretical framework
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is an educational innovation involving the learning of a subject through a foreign language, frequently English. Whilst CLIL belongs to EU Language Policy (e.g. European Commission, 2003), it is often implemented within the subject timetable. Defined as an innovative methodology (Marsh, 2002; Mehisto, et al. 2008) the extensive use of language teaching techniques in the subject classroom combined with the foreign language mediation of both teaching and learning (Coyle, 2006) has significant implications for the pedagogic and learning repertoires (Alexander, 2008) of this classroom. The increasingly mixed composition of classes in Finland further extends the challenge of teaching and learning a subject through a foreign or additional language. The 7th grade science class in which this research is based is a mixed ability class of international and domestic students, alongside immigrant learners. The pilot CLIL Chemistry course was timetabled for early autumn 2009 and the CLIL Physics course for early spring 2010.
Drawing on a sociocultural framework, emphasising dialogic approaches to learning, this research seeks to explore how talk-based science pedagogy (Mortimer & Scott, 2003) can benefit from and contribute to the concurrent learning of a foreign language and school science. To learn science is to learn the ways in which the science community perceives the world, along with the language in which this understanding is instantiated (Lemke, 1989). The appropriation of language to describe phenomena in appropriate scientific language, rather than in everyday language, can be highly demanding for learners (Leach & Scott, 2002). In a foreign or additional language mediated environment, learners may not even have the everyday language to interpret phenomena or to jointly construct their understanding. These are two ways in which learning repertoires are significantly reduced in a foreign language mediated setting. The implications for apprenticeship into the cultural ways of thinking and speaking in a subject community, and for participation in the talk-based educational culture of a classroom should not, therefore, be ignored.
The transition to a talk-based learning environment from a sociocultural perspective underscores the relevance of both teacher and learner talk in the classroom. The pilot course run in early autumn 2009, however, revealed how little learners are required to talk in a traditionally text-based, teacher-centred learning environment in Finland (Simola, 2005; Lavonen & Laaksonen, 2009). These findings, therefore, suggest that the question to address is how to establish a culture of talk in a multicultural, mainstream 7th grade science classroom following the Finnish national curriculum. To create a culture of talk requires reconsideration of the classroom environment and dynamics, the needs of the students, the requirements of science education in Finland and the resources available to the teacher.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Alexander, R. (2008). Culture, dialogue and learning: notes on an emerging pedagogy. In N. Mercer and S. Hodgkinson, Exploring talk in schools (pp. 91-114). London: SAGE. Coyle, D. (2006). Content and language integrated learning motivating learners and teachers. Scottish Languages Review. Retrieved from http://blocs.xtec.cat/clilpractiques1/files/2008/11/slrcoyle.pdf Edwards, A. (2000). Looking at action research through the lenses of sociocultural psychology and activity theory. Educational Action Research, 8(1), 195-204. Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550. European Commission (2003). Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity: Action plan 2004 – 2006. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities Keltchtermans, G. (1996). Teacher vulnerability: understanding its political and moral roots. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(3), 307-323. Huxham, C. (2003). Action research as a methodology for theory development. Policy and Politics, 31(2), 239–48. Lavonen, J. and Laaksonen, S. (2009). Context of teaching and learning school science in Finland: reflections on PISA 2006 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 922-944. Leach, J. and Scott, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: an approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38, 115-142. Lemke, J.L. (1989). Using language in the classroom. England: Oxford University Press Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE –the European dimension, action, trends and foresight potential, continuing education centre. Finland: University of Jyväskylä Mehisto, P., Frigols, M and Marsh, D. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Oxford: Macmillan Mortimer, E. and Scott, P. (2003). Making meaning in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead and Philadelphia: Open University Press Simola, H. (2005). The Finnish miracle of PISA: historical and sociological remarks on teaching and teacher education, Comparative Education, 41(4), 455-470.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.