Critical Perspectives on Language Teaching Materials 2013
DOI: 10.1057/9781137384263_6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Critically Evaluating Materials for CLIL: Practitioners’ Practices and Perspectives

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
40
1
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
40
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, they selected sections that responded to the content topic and the language under focus. This seems to contradict the findings from Morton's (2013) survey. One plausible reason for such a difference may be due to the fact that CLIL was envisaged as language-driven, rather than content-driven, as in Morton's study.…”
Section: Teacher-developed Materials: Topics and Sourcescontrasting
confidence: 72%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, they selected sections that responded to the content topic and the language under focus. This seems to contradict the findings from Morton's (2013) survey. One plausible reason for such a difference may be due to the fact that CLIL was envisaged as language-driven, rather than content-driven, as in Morton's study.…”
Section: Teacher-developed Materials: Topics and Sourcescontrasting
confidence: 72%
“…According to Morton (2013), a key question is how to ensure that materials provide opportunities for both language learning and content learning. He proposes a set of can-do statements, emphasizing that CLIL materials:…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Creating CLIL materials is not easy, demanding considerable expertise from teachers (knowledge of content subject, foreign language and key notions of CLIL approach). Moreover, it is time-consuming (Laborda, 2011), especially when teachers have to make their courses from scratch (Morton, 2013) and constantly update them. In Morton's study, 90% of teachers reported that they had to designing all materials for their CLIL courses by themselves.…”
Section: Clil and Foreign Language Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some subject areas (e.g. history or arts) are culturally biased (Morton, 2013) and cannot be applied universally. In addition, the requirements for high-quality CLIL materials include a connection between students' lives, community, target learning, and different cultures, while avoiding stereotyping related to factors such as race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, and age-related stereotyping (Mehisto, 2012).…”
Section: Clil and Foreign Language Learningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Morton also states that CLIL impacts not only the field of language teaching, but also the curriculum, as non-language subjects are involved. [2] Coyle brings forward 4Cs framework which focus on the connections of four aspects: content (subject matter), communication (language), cognition (learning and thinking), culture (social awareness of self and "otherness"). All of these aspects are interwoven and must be conducted in a whole in practice.…”
Section: Theoretical Basismentioning
confidence: 99%