No abstract

The goal of this study is to critically discuss some of the most controversial issues affecting the characterization and implementation practices of CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) programmes from key stakeholders' perspective (teachers, learners and parents). The focus will be placed on examining their voices on what CLIL education actually means, its alleged potential benefits in terms of enhanced L2 competence and increased L2 exposure and use, whether content knowledge is improved by CLIL instruction, whether content is emphasised over language in CLIL assessment and, lastly, whether teachers and learners feel motivated and satisfied with the CLIL experience. With this in mind, and based on methodological triangulation, this paper follows a mixed-method research design for investigating the commonalities and differences of perspective. The stakeholders' voices we draw on in this paper largely coincide with most expectations and with what has been reported in the CLIL literature, though, surprisingly, not all view the need for L2 exposure and use in CLIL classes in the same way. On the whole, CLIL is positively evaluated by all stakeholders, provided these educational programmes are well articulated and effectively implemented in practice, although there is always room for further quality improvement and teacher training.

No abstract

This research investigated six established areas for quality (Ortega-Martín et al., 2018) in the implementation of CLIL programmes in a Spanish monolingual autonomous community from the perspective of its teachers, in particular focusing on possible differences of opinion between content and English language teachers, an understudied area. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 36 teachers at four secondary schools in urban Extremadura so as to assess the perceptions of the execution and the effectiveness of current CLIL education programmes, identifying specifically their potential challenges. Significant differences between content teachers and English teachers’ perceptions in six areas under study are examined, from programme management to academic results. Data results indicate that although programmes are viewed quite positively by both groups of teachers, some important areas of difference exist, including the amount of time the L2 is used in a content class and the language skills that are worked in a CLIL environment. To address this gap, suggestions are made to establish more widely accepted standards for CLIL programme objectives.

Although quantitative tools are often employed to examine students’ beliefs in language learning, qualitative interviews can offer further depth and insight on these beliefs, by shedding light on the detail of the experiences behind student perceptions. This is important to understanding student motivation in the language classroom, since beliefs form one of the important pillars behind motivation and language learning goals. The present study analyzed beliefs for 8 students in English for Hospitality vocational courses (2 male and 6 female from 25 to 43 years of age) in one-to-one, narrative interviews, looking both to the content of what students chose to share and the form in which they expressed themselves. This population is particularly interesting given that other studies in vocational studies indicate a lack of study persistence due to problems in motivation. Utilizing this qualitative, open-ended approach allowed the authors to more specifically examine how students conceive language learning when understood as a story of their experience with languages. The rich descriptions that emerge from this methodology have been imported for future curriculum planning, as they describe in more detail students’ tendencies to categorize language learning as something passive or active, as an object or as a process, which should be taken into account in course planning to optimize study persistence.