The feel good factor: comparing immersion by design and immersion by default models

Gallagher, Fióna; Leahy, Angela

doi:10.1080/07908318.2013.877476

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Programmes to promote the use of the L1 when it is a minority language share some characteristics with CBI/CLIL programmes aimed at speakers of majority languages because of the challenges minority language speakers face due to the limited use of their language in some domains (see Gorter, Zenotz, & Cenoz, 2014). Gallagher and Leahy (2014) argue for another step and urge for transfer across models including 'immersion by default', that is, the case of migrant children who have the language(s) of the host country as the medium of instruction.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: the same or different?

Cenoz

2015

Language, Culture and Curriculum

199

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article looks at the characteristics of Content-Based Instruction (CBI) and Content land Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in order to examine their similarities and differences. The analysis shows that CBI/CLIL programmes share the same essential properties and are not pedagogically different from each other. In fact, the use of an L2 as the medium of instruction, the language, societal and educational aims and the typical type of child are the same in CBI and CLIL programmes. The use of both CBI and CLIL refers to programmes where academic content is taught through a second or additional language and the preference for one term over the other is associated with contextual and accidental characteristics. In this article, there are examples from Basque education where academic content is often taught through the medium of Basque and English to students with Spanish as a first language. The examples show that even if there are more subjects taught through the medium of Basque than through the medium of English, there are no essential differences between CBI (partial immersion in the Basque example) and CLIL (English-medium instruction in the Basque example). The need to share the research findings of CBI/ CLIL programmes is highlighted.Keywords: content-based instruction; CLIL; multilingual education; language teaching; Basque; English A school in the Basque Country We visit a class in a school located in the Basque Country where Basque is spoken by approximately 30% of the population. The use of Basque is not the same in different areas and our school is located in a Spanish-speaking area, Bilbo Handia-Gran Bilbao, in the Basque Autonomous Community (BAC) where only 23.1% of the population can speak Basque and Spanish is the majority language spoken by the whole population. There are 22 students in this class. The students are in the third year of secondary school (14-15 years old). All the students have Spanish as a first language except for two immigrant children who speak Romanian at home. These immigrant children also have Spanish as their dominant language because they have lived in the Basque Country for more than 10 years, and they speak Spanish to their classmates. They can understand Romanian very well but they often answer their parents in Spanish and they always speak Spanish with their © 2015 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.*Email: jasone.cenoz@ehu.es Language, Culture and Curriculum, 2015 Vol. 28, No. 1, 8-24, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014 friends. The class we visit is what is known in the Basque Country as the B model which has Basque and Spanish as the languages of instruction (see Cenoz, 2009). This ...

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: the same or different?

Cenoz

2015

Language, Culture and Curriculum

199

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given our increasingly multilingual classrooms, the link between various models of language immersion (Cenoz, Genesee and Gorter 2013;Gallagher and Leahy 2014;Hornberger and Skilton-Sylvester 2003) and other language learning contexts (Coyle, Hood and Marsh 2010;Dalton-Puffer 2011;García and Sylvan 2011) has been highlighted more and more frequently. Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010: 159) state: 'It is now becoming clear that there is commonality of teaching approaches, strategies and tasks which emphasise scaffolded learning and in particular language as a learning tool across first, second, new and other language contexts ' [italics in original].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

T(w)o and fro: using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom

Gallagher

Colohan

2014

The Language Learning Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes a small in-class study which sought to explore the effectiveness (or not) of using the emerging bilingual skills of the students as a teaching and learning tool in a Geography through English CLIL classroom in Northern Italy. In particular, the study sought to examine whether and to what extent the use of codeswitching / translanguaging between the native language and the language of instruction during content-related tasks might prove a useful technique for highlighting particular grammatical points in the CLIL vehicular language. Findings support the view that there is a place for the focused, planned and targeted use of the L1 during meaning-focused lessons in the language immersion classroom and that bilingual instructional techniques, such as the 'twisted dictation' used in the study, can be an effective means of both drawing students' attention to particular linguistic forms and of developing an enriched bilingual vocabulary. The authors suggest that the use of the L1 as a language teaching and learning tool is not limited to the CLIL or immersion classroom, but could be adapted for use in other language learning contexts.

show abstract

“…Therefore, based on a categorical analysis of literature on the factors that influence CBI/CLIL/immersion, according to researchers e.g. Cenoz & Zarobe (2014); Gallagher and Leahy (2014); March, Hau, & Kong (2000); Bulter, (2005); Morris & Tarone (2003), is a predetermining factors of integration and impact the language teaching. However, in accordance to the problem stated, the specific aim of the article are following: 1.…”

Section: Research Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting the Content-Based Instruction in Language Teaching in relation with CLIL: Implementation and Outcome

Karim

Rahman

2016

IJALEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present article has reviewed literature on Content-Based Instruction (CBI) along with the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in Language Teaching based on the recent development in the field. This includes the learning principle, factors responsible for the successful implementation of CBI/CLIL, their prospect and outcome. The paper is written based on secondary data from different articles providing exploratory account of contexts observed, paying attention to the views and practices of participants, and review papers on previous studies. The goal is to understand the aspects of CBI, its relation with CLIL, success and shortcoming resulted from the implementation in language teaching.

show abstract

The feel good factor: comparing immersion by design and immersion by default models

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: the same or different?

Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: the same or different?

T(w)o and fro: using the L1 as a language teaching tool in the CLIL classroom

Revisiting the Content-Based Instruction in Language Teaching in relation with CLIL: Implementation and Outcome

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About