Becoming a Teacher of CLIL in Higher Education: A Pilot Study in Asia

學習成為高等教育體系中的CLIL教師：以亞洲教師為個案研究

李佳盈(Jia-Ying Lee)

content and language integrated learning (CLIL) ； English as an additional Language ； higher education ； teacher training ； 以英語為外語 ； 高等教育 ； 教師訓練 ； 學科內容與語言綜合學習

教育實踐與研究

34卷1期（2021 / 06 / 01）

91 - 119

英文

This study explores the developmental course of training to become a content and language integrated learning (CLIL) practitioner in higher education. Thirteen in-service teachers (five Japanese, four Taiwanese, two Chinese, one Filipino, and one Thai) wholly new to the CLIL approach received an intensive fortnight's training in CLIL. The training, following the CLIL model, started by introducing the theory, rationale and foundations of CLIL and concluded with a mini-CLIL teaching session from each teacher. Two quantitative surveys and a qualitative semi-structured survey yielded data on the trainees' experiences as course members. The results show that the teachers generally approved of CLIL, endorsing its effectiveness more than its efficiency. The teachers' self-confidence in English skills and their past teaching experiences seemingly affected their belief in CLIL's practices. Finally, the teachers revealed some challenges in implementing CLIL in general, in higher education, and in their specific culture-education contexts. The study made important contributions in the field, with its findings serving as valuable references for higher education, teacher-training programs, and interested teachers.

本研究旨在探討高等教育教師學習「學科內容與語言綜合學習法」（content and language integrated learning, CLIL）提升教學的效果。十三位大學在職教師（五位日籍、四位台灣籍、兩位中國籍、一位菲律賓、及一位泰國籍）參與為期兩週的CLIL密集師資訓練課程。課程從引領教師認識CLIL教學理論及原理開始，以實作及試教作為收尾。為評估教師參與學習CLIL教學的成效，研究採用兩份量化問卷及一份半結構質性問卷收集相關資料。研究結果顯示，參與教師普遍認同CLIL教學法，並認為其教學效果（effectiveness）優於教學效益（efficiency）。教師對CLIL教學實踐的信念，受到本身的英語程度及過往的教學經驗影響。參與教師對於CLIL於高等教育現場實踐，從所屬教育文化體系，提出存有的挑戰、困難，與困境。本研究為該領域帶來重要貢獻，其結果得提供高等教育發展CLIL教學之參照、師資培訓機構推動CLIL參考，及有志投入CLIL教學的教師了解CLIL教學法的本質等資訊。

1. Yang, W.(2017).From similarity to diversity: The changing use of language learning strategies in content and language integrated learning at the tertiary level in Taiwan.English Teaching & Learning,41(1),1-32.
   連結：
2. Aguilar, M.(2017).Engineering lecturers’ views on CLIL and EMI.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,20(6),722-735.
3. Aguilar, M.,Rodríguez, R.(2012).Lecturer and student perceptions on CLIL at a Spanish university.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,15(2),183-197.
4. Agustín-Llach, M. P.,Canga Alonso, A.(2016).Vocabulary growth in young CLIL and traditional EFL learners: Evidence from research and implications for education.International Journal of Applied Linguistics,26(2),211-227.
5. Arnó-Macià, E.,Mancho-Barés, G.(2015).The role of content and language in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at university: Challenges and implications for ESP.English for Specific Purposes,37,63-73.
6. Banegas, D. L.(2012).CLIL teacher development: Challenges and experiences.Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning,5(1),46-56.
7. Barnard, R.(Ed.),Jinrui, L.(Ed.)(2016).Language learner autonomy: Teachers’ beliefs and practices in Asian contexts.Phnom Penh, Cambodia:IDP Education.
8. Bentley, K.(2010).TKT course: CLIL module.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
9. Butler, Y. G.(2005).Content-based instruction in EFL contexts: Considerations for effective implementation.JALT Journal,27(2),227-245.
10. Catalán, R. M. J.,Llach, M. P. A.(2017).CLIL or time? Lexical profiles of CLIL and non-CLIL EFL learners.System,66,87-99.
11. Cenoz, J.(2015).Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: The same or different?.Language, Culture and Curriculum,28(1),8-24.
12. Chou, P. -I.,Su, M. -H.,Wang, Y. -T.(2018).Transforming teacher preparation for culturally responsive teaching in Taiwan.Teaching and Teacher Education,75,116-127.
13. Clements, P.(Ed.),Krause, A.(Ed.),Brown, H.(Ed.)(2016).Focus on the learner.Tokyo, Japan:JALT.
14. Coyle, D.(2007).Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies.The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,10,543-562.
15. Coyle, D.,Hood, P.,Marsh, D.(2010).CLIL – content and language integrated learning.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
16. Dale, L.,Van Der Es, W.,Tanner, R.(2011).CLIL skills.Leiden, Netherland:European platform.
17. Dalton-Puffer, C.(2011).Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles?.Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,31,182-204.
18. Dalton-Puffer, C.(2007).Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms.Amsterdam, Netherland:John Benjamins Publishing.
19. Dalton-Puffer, C.(Ed.),Nikula, T.(Ed.),Smit, U.(Ed.)(2010).Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms.Amsterdam, Netherlands:John Benjamins.
20. Dalton-Puffer, C.,Smit, U.(2013).Content and language integrated learning: A research agenda.Language Teaching,46(4),545-559.
21. Deller, S.,Price, C.(2007).Teaching other subjects through English.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
22. Dupuy, B. C.(2000).Content‐based instruction: Can it help ease the transition from beginning to advanced foreign language classes?.Foreign Language Annals,33(2),205-223.
23. Ellis, R.(2000).Task-based research and language pedagogy.Language Teaching Research,4(3),193-220.
24. Eurydice(2006).Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at school in Europe.Brussels, Kingdom of Belgium:The Eurydice European Unit.
25. Falout, J.,Elwood, J.,Hood, M.(2009).Demotivation: Affective states and learning outcomes.System,37(3),403-417.
26. Forey, G.,Cheung, L. M. E.(2019).The benefits of explicit teaching of language for curriculum learning in the physical education classroom.English for Specific Purposes,54,91-109.
27. García, O.,Wei, L.(2014).Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education.London, UK:Palgrave Macmillan.
28. Heras, A.,Lasagabaster, D.(2015).The impact of CLIL on affective factors and vocabulary learning.Language Teaching Research,19(1),70-88.
29. Hornberger, N. H.(Ed.)(2008).Encyclopedia of language and education.Boston, MA:Springer US.
30. Huang, K. -M.(2011).Motivating lessons: A classroom-oriented investigation of the effects of content-based instruction on EFL young learners’ motivated behaviours and classroom verbal interaction.System,39(2),186-201.
31. Hung, Y. -J.(2018).Group peer assessment of oral English performance in a Taiwanese elementary school.Studies in Educational Evaluation,59,19-28.
32. Kitamura, Y.(Ed.),Omomo, T.(Ed.),Katsuno, K.(Ed.)(2019).Education in Japan.Singapore, Singapore:Springer.
33. Kung, F. -W.(2018)."English-only or nothing": Practitioners’ perspective on the policy and implementation of CLIL in higher education.Education Journal,46(1),93-115.
34. Larsen-Freeman, D.,Anderson, M.(2013).Techniques and principles in language teaching.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
35. Lasagabaster, D.(2008).Foreign language competence in content and language integrated learning courses.The Open Applied Linguistic Journal,1,30-41.
36. Lasagabaster, D.,Sierra, J. M.(2009).Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities.ELT Journal,64(4),367-375.
37. Lin, M. -H.,Lee, J. -Y.(2015).Data-driven learning: Changing the teaching of grammar in EFL classes.ELT Journal,69(3),264-279.
38. Lo, Y. Y.,Jeong, H.(2018).Impact of genre-based pedagogy on students’ academic literacy development in content and language integrated learning (CLIL).Linguistics and Education,47,36-46.
39. Lopriore, L.(2020).Reframing teaching knowledge in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): A European perspective.Language Teaching Research,24(1),94-104.
40. Mayo, M. D. P. G.,Ibarrola, A. L.(2015).Do children negotiate for meaning in taskbased interaction? Evidence from CLIL and EFL settings.System,54,40-54.
41. Mearns, T.,de Graaff, R.,Coyle, D.(2020).Motivation for or from bilingual education? A comparative study of learner views in the Netherlands.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,23(6),724-737.
42. Mehisto, P.(2008).CLIL counterweights: Recognising and decreasing disjuncture in CLIL.International CLIL Research Journal,1(1),93-119.
43. Mehisto, P.,Marsh, D.,Frigols, M. J.(2008).Uncovering CLIL content and language integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education.Oxford, UK:Macmillan.
44. Moustakas, C.(1994).Phenomenological research methods.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
45. Pavón Vázquez, V.,Rubio, F.(2010).Teachers’ concerns and uncertainties about the introduction of CLIL programs.Porta Linguarum,14,45-58.
46. Pérez-Cañado, M. L.(2012).CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,15(3),315-341.
47. Pladevall-Ballester, E.(2015).Exploring primary school CLIL perceptions in Catalonia: Students’, teachers’ and parents’ opinions and expectations.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,18(1),45-59.
48. Pokrivčáková, S.(Ed.),Babocká, M.(Ed.),Bereczky, K.(Ed.),Bodorik, M.(Ed.),Bozdogan, D.(Ed.),Dombeva, L.(Ed.),Zavalari, L.(Ed.)(2015).CLIL in foreign language education: E-textbook for foreign language teachers.Nitra, Slovakia:Constantine the Philosopher University.
49. Ruiz de Zarobe, Y.,Zenotz, V.(2015).Reading strategies and CLIL: The effect of training in formal instruction.The Language Learning Journal,43(3),319-333.
50. Skehan, P.(1996).A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction.Applied Linguistics,17(1),38-62.
51. Smith, S.(2011).Learner construction of corpora for general English in Taiwan.Computer Assisted Language Learning,24(4),291-316.
52. Sugita McEown, M.,Sawaki, Y.,Harada, T.(2017).Foreign language learning motivation in the Japanese context: Social and political influences on self.The Modern Language Journal,101(3),533-547.
53. Ting, Y. -L. T.(2010).CLIL appeals to how the brain likes its information: Examples from CLIL-(neuro) science.International CLIL Research Journal,1(3),3-18.
54. Van Deusen-Scholl, N.(Ed.),Hornberger, N. H.(Ed.)(2008).Encyclopedia of language and education: Second and foreign language education.New York, NY:Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
55. Van Kampen, E.,Admiraal, W.,Berry, A.(2018).Content and language integrated learning in the Netherlands: Teachers’ self-reported pedagogical practices.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,21(2),222-236.
56. Wang, H. -Y.,Tsai, C. -C.(2012).An exploration of elementary school students’ conceptions of learning: A drawing analysis.The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher,21,610-617.
57. Willis, D.(Ed.),Willis, J.(Ed.)(2007).Doing task-based teaching.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
58. Willis, D.(Ed.),Willis, J.(Ed.)(1996).Challenge and change in language teaching.Oxford, UK:Macmillan.
59. Willis, D.,Willis, J.(2009).Task-based language teaching: Some questions and answers.The Language Teacher,33(3),3-8.
60. Yang, W.(2016).An investigation of learning efficacy, management difficulties and improvements in tertiary CLIL (content and language integrated learning) programmes in Taiwan: A survey of stakeholder perspectives.Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning,9(1),64-109.