Teachers develop CLIL materials in Argentina: A workshop experience

Abstract

Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is a Europe-born approach. Nevertheless, CLIL as a language learning approach has been implemented in Latin America in different ways and models: content-driven models and language-driven models. As regards the latter, new school curricula demand that CLIL be used in secondary education in Argentina and that teacher pedagogies and materials match the L1 curriculum and overall context. Therefore, teachers initially educated in other paradigms need professional development opportunities to understand CLIL as an innovative language teaching approach. The aim of this article is to reflect on CLIL materials produced by a group of Argentinian teachers as part of a professional development workshop. In this article, I shall first conceptualize CLIL and review the literature around CLIL materials. Then, I describe the workshop and offer content analysis of participants' lesson plans. I shall conclude with emergent working principles based on these participants' practices and suggestions for further research.

The effect of content and language integrated learning programmes' intensity on English proficiency: A longitudinal study

“…The term CLIL encompasses more than a dozen educational approaches of bilingual education and CLIL programmes vary as much as European sociolinguistic and socioeducational contexts do. Although CLIL refers to programmes in Europe, which is the context where and for which it was originally developed, sometimes it is used to allude to other contexts (Banegas, ; Wolff, ). That is why the term CLIL, instead of being a clearly defined educational model, usually encompasses a wide range of learning practices by means of an additional language (Nikula, ).…”

Content and language integrated learning in Latin America 2008-2018: Ten years of research and practice

“…Thus, CLIL, as implemented in Latin America, seems to be compatible with different approaches that highlight the need to provide learners at different levels with authentic, purposeful and engaging learning experiences which connect L2 learning with the curriculum and broader social imperatives such as global citizenship (see Section 5.4). In complying with such needs, there are publications which offer details around CLIL lesson planning (e.g., Banegas, 2016;Helver, 2015), materials development (e.g., Bettney, 2015;Zhyrun, 2016), and rubric-supported assessment (e.g., De la Barra et al, 2018;Leal, 2016) as an integral part of the learning process. These publications share the criteria that these aspects of CLIL need to be driven by (1) authenticity of tasks and multimedia input (e.g., Banegas, 2018, Porto, 2016 and (2) language scaffolding (e.g., Castillo, 2008;Keogh, 2017).…”

“…Concerning, practice-based contributions, Hillyard (2011) and Pistorio (2009) review teacher development models and necessary competences for teachers to successfully implement CLIL and call for the creation of stronger preand in-service teacher development opportunities in various parts of the world, including Latin America. Banegas (2016) presents one idea for teacher development through the designing of CLIL materials by teachers who may not have been originally prepared for teaching with CLIL. Based on this experience, the author suggests allowing teachers to participate in materials design as a way of decreasing top-down policy and allowing teachers to become "agents of change" by creating more context-responsive materials.…”

Content and Language Integrated Learning: In-Service Teachers’ Knowledge and Perceptions Before and After a Professional Development Program

“…Designing clil training programs is not an easy task, because clil and bilingual education are not interchangeable, even though they share similarities. According to Navés and Muñoz (1999), these shared characteristics include: respect and support for the learner's first language and culture; competent bilingual teachers; mainstream (not pull-out) optional courses; long-term, stable programs and teaching staff; parent support for the program; cooperation and leadership of educational authorities, administrators, and teachers; dually qualified teachers in content and language; availability of quality clil teaching materials (Banegas, 2016); and properly implemented clil methodology. Therefore, there is a need for traditional training courses, conferences, reading professional journals, etc., whose sufficiency has been debated recently (Birman, Desimone, Porter, Garet, & Yoon, 2000;Darling-Hammond, 1998), to promote an understanding of clil principles, so that teachers working with clil can be adequately supported in their effort to deliver effective, quality clil programs (Costa & D' Angelo, 2011).…”