Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is often introduced in school settings in an attempt to increase exposure to the foreign language (FL) and promote motivation and positive language attitudes. The present study examines how language learning motivation develops over the course of two academic years in two types of instruction setting (CLIL and non-CLIL) with equal but low exposure to the FL and in two types of CLIL subject (science and arts and crafts). Data were collected from four primary schools in fifth and sixth grades by means of a motivation questionnaire. Differences between groups are observable in relation to the second language (L2) learning experience dimension of motivation in favour of the CLIL learners, who increased their motivation over time. Type of CLIL subject was found to be relevant also only in relation to the L2 learning experience dimension of motivation. Even in low exposure contexts, FL motivation is promoted and maintained over time by adding CLIL to the language experience of young learners.
This study compares the development of English receptive skills of two groups of Spanish primary school children who were exposed to two different content and language integrated learning (CLIL) subjects, science and arts and crafts (A&C), during two academic years. Participants were also divided into level groups to explore if their level of English at the beginning of the study influenced language development. Science students generally obtained better results than A&C students but such differences became significant only in the case of listening skills after a certain amount of exposure had been accumulated, once the CLIL implementation process was over and all stakeholders had adapted to it. Low achievers improved more than stronger students and benefitted more from Science than from A&C CLIL, particularly in relation to their listening comprehension skills.Este estudio compara el desarrollo de las habilidades receptivas en inglés de dos grupos de estudiantes españoles de educación primaria que fueron expuestos a dos asignaturas AICLE, Ciencias y Plástica respectivamente, durante dos cursos académicos. Los participantes fueron divididos en grupos de nivel para analizar si su nivel de competencia lingüística al inicio del estudio tuvo algún efecto en el desarrollo de las destrezas lingüísticas analizadas durante el estudio. Los estudiantes expuestos a AICLE en Ciencias obtuvieron resultados significativamente mejores en la comprensión auditiva que los que fueron expuestos a AICLE en Plástica, después de haber acumulado exposición a la lengua y una vez que el proceso de implantación AICLE había finalizado y todos los participantes se habían adaptado al cambio de enfoque de instrucción. Los estudiantes cuya competencia lingüística era más baja al inicio del estudio progresaron más que los estudiantes con una competencia lingüística superior, en especial dentro del grupo AICLE de Ciencias y en relación a la comprensión auditiva.Palabras clave: AICLE, aprendices jóvenes, habilidades de comprensión auditiva y lectora, estudiantes con un nivel de competencia lingüística bajo/ alto
Previous research shows young learners are indeed able to interact in a foreign language (FL) and negotiate for meaning while also attending to form. One of the variables that has been least studied among young learners (YLs) in FL contexts is the kind of relationships established among the members of a dyad and how the nature of pair dynamics affects the learners’ ability to attend to language. The present study explores the pair dynamics and the frequency and types of language learning opportunities in the form of language-related episodes (LREs) that emerge during peer interaction in a spot-the-differences task completed by young learners in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context. We also examine the effects of age and pair dynamics on the production of these LREs. Results suggest that children interact mainly using collaborative patterns and can actually attend to language in episodes which are mainly meaning-focused and are resolved particularly in expert/novice dyads. Age has been found to significantly affect the production of LREs but pair dynamics seems to be less determinant. Findings corroborate the need for YLs to be given the chance to interact with their peers in class to foster learning opportunities.
Child peer interaction in English as a foreign language (EFL) settings has recently received increasing attention with respect to age, instruction type and first language (L1) use, but longitudinal studies remain scarce and the effects of proficiency pairing and language choice on meaning negotiation strategies are still rather unexplored. Within a primary school EFL context, this paper aims to explore the amount and types of meaning negotiation, and the effects of time, proficiency pairing and language choice in a spot-the-differences task. Forty Catalan/Spanish bilingual children were paired into mixed and matched proficiency dyads, and their oral production was analyzed twice over the course of two years (i.e., 9-10 and 11-12 years old). The analysis included conversational adjustments, self- and other-repetition and positive and negative feedback in the learners’ L1 and second language (L2). Our data show that the amount of meaning negotiation is low, although L2 meaning negotiation is higher than L1 meaning negotiation, and all the strategies are present in the data except for comprehension checks. Time effects are hardly observed. However, proficiency pairing and language effects are more generally found, whereby mixed proficiency dyads tend to negotiate for meaning more than matched dyads and meaning negotiation instances are more frequent in the L2 than in the L1.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.