2021
DOI: 10.1080/07908318.2021.1910703
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The integration of content and language in CLIL: a challenge for content-driven and language-driven teachers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Data of the study demonstrated the students' active interaction through different techniques as reflected in Koopman et al (2014), Oattes et al (2018), Van Kampen et al (2018, Tugun et al (2020), Villabona and Cenoz (2021) even in a remote learning setting. Results of studying pedagogical practices showing that students had enough opportunity to use English in CLIL classes contradict with those of other studies stating the challenges of using target language while studying content (Dalton-Puffer, 2007;Mahan et al, 2018;Villabona & Cenoz, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Data of the study demonstrated the students' active interaction through different techniques as reflected in Koopman et al (2014), Oattes et al (2018), Van Kampen et al (2018, Tugun et al (2020), Villabona and Cenoz (2021) even in a remote learning setting. Results of studying pedagogical practices showing that students had enough opportunity to use English in CLIL classes contradict with those of other studies stating the challenges of using target language while studying content (Dalton-Puffer, 2007;Mahan et al, 2018;Villabona & Cenoz, 2021).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…It should also be mentioned that different educational backgrounds may also influence CLIL competencies, as the study demonstrated in a much commonsensical way that the teachers having a languagebased educational background were more confident in teaching and using the TLs than those having a mixed or content-oriented educational background. Inevitably, many CLIL teachers are either language-driven or content-driven, and few of them may have received dual-focused teacher education specifically designed for CLIL (Lo, 2020), which justifies that they normally have divergent capabilities and perceptions of implementing CLIL (Villabona & Cenoz, 2021). This situation, along with the ones reflected by the findings of the languages and subjects being taught, sheds light on the need to unite language and subject educators of various fields to establish "not only a shared understanding of known practices but also a co-construction of new integrated pathways to guide meaning-making through connecting language domains" and content domains (Coyle & Meyer, 2021, p. 8).…”
Section: Summary Of Findings and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They should be monitored and responded to accordingly. The findings of researchers (Villabona & Cenoz, 2021) also argue that "the integration of language and content can be influenced by the specific content subjects, teachers' beliefs, practices and awareness, and also by the teachers' and students' level of English". Summarizing the results of the study, we note there is a moderate relationship between what discipline the educator teaches and whether he / she considers it appropriate to implement CLIL.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Researchers analyze only two teachers' beliefs. With such a small sample, their findings cannot be generalized (Villabona, & Cenoz, 2021). The study in Hong Kong (Lo, 2019) implemented a 6-month professional development programme for a group of content subject teachers in CLIL.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation