policy and research in languages education at school, including bilingual education and clil
DESCRIPTION
Policy and Research in Languages Education at school, including Bilingual Education and CLIL. Asian and European perspectives Richard Johnstone Asia TEFL: Hanoi, 2010. OVERVIEW. Personal background Factors affecting Languages Education at school Four models of Languages Education at School - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Policy and Research in Languages Education at school, including Bilingual Education and CLIL
Asian and European perspectives
Richard Johnstone
Asia TEFL: Hanoi, 2010
OVERVIEW
1. Personal background2. Factors affecting Languages Education at school3. Four models of Languages Education at School 4. Some evidence from research and development5. Some conditions for successful policy
implementation6. If there’s time:
Age differences in learning an additional language
2
A small amount of personal background
• Role as Director of the national centre in Scotland means that much of my research has been ‘big picture’ policy-related.
• Main languages interests have been French, German, other modern European languages, plus heritage and community languages.
• Main activity in recent years has been research, e.g. with the British Council and different national Ministries, and research review, e.g. Annual Review for Cambridge University Press.
• Main personal interests have been in early language learning, bilingual education and ‘languages for all’
3
Factors influencing the outcomes of Languages Education at school
4
Societalfactors
Provision factors
Processfactors
Individualfactors
Outcomes
FACTORS AFFECTING LANGUAGES EDUCATION AT SCHOOL
SOCIETAL FACTORS
Extent of TL exposure
Political will Geo-cultural
situation
Parental pressure Influence of media Public attitudes to
particular groups
PROVISION FACTORS
PROCESS FACTORS
INDIVIDUAL FACTORS
5
FACTORS AFFECTING LANGUAGES EDUCATION AT SCHOOL
SOCIETAL FACTORS Extent of TL exposure Political will Geo-cultural situation
Parental pressure Influence of media Public attitudes to particular groups
PROVISION FACTORS
National policy, support, evaluation
Teacher supply, training & development
Research Information International links
Place and role in the school curriculum
Time & Intensity Continuity primary to
secondary Networks Appropriate materials
PROCESS FACTORS
INDIVIDUAL FACTORS
6
FACTORS AFFECTING LANGUAGES EDUCATION AT SCHOOL
SOCIETAL FACTORS Extent of TL exposure Political will Geo-cultural situation
Parental pressure Influence of media Public attitudes to particular groups
PROVISION FACTORS National policy, support, evaluation Teacher supply, training & development Research Information International links
Place and role in the school curriculum Time & Intensity Continuity primary to secondary Networks Appropriate materials
PROCESS FACTORS
Understanding & expressing TL meanings (words/concepts …)
Internalising forms Explaining Interacting
Learning & Using Strategies
Diagnosing Managing Consulting Informing
INDIVIDUAL FACTORS
7
FACTORS AFFECTING LANGUAGES EDUCATION AT SCHOOL
SOCIETAL FACTORS Extent of TL exposure Political will Geo-cultural situation
Parental pressure Influence of media Public attitudes to particular groups
PROVISION FACTORS National policy, support, evaluation Teacher supply, training & development Research Information International links
Place and role in the school curriculum Time & Intensity Continuity primary to secondary Networks Appropriate materials
PROCESS FACTORS Understanding & expressing TL meanings (words/concepts …) Internalising forms Explaining Interacting
Learning & Using Strategies Diagnosing Managing Consulting Informing
INDIVIDUAL FACTORS
Age, Aptitudes & interests
Prior attainments & experience
Prior language(s) Socio-economic status
Geographical location Ethnicity Gender Attitudes & Motivation
8
FACTORS AFFECTING LANGUAGES EDUCATION AT SCHOOL
SOCIETAL FACTORS Extent of TL exposure Political will Geo-cultural situation
Parental pressure Influence of media Public attitudes to particular groups
PROVISION FACTORS National policy, support, evaluation Teacher supply, training &
development Research Information International links
Place and role in the school curriculum
Time & Intensity Continuity primary to secondary Networks Appropriate materials
PROCESS FACTORS Understanding & expressing TL meanings (words/concepts …)
Internalising forms Explaining Interacting
Learning & Using Strategies Diagnosing Managing Consulting Informing
INDIVIDUAL FACTORS Age, Aptitudes & interests Prior attainments & experience Prior language(s) Socio-economic status
Geographical location Ethnicity Gender Attitudes & Motivation
9
Four Models of Languages Education at school
10
1. TL as Subject
2.TL as Subject
Extended
3.CBLT/CLIL
4.Bilingual
Education / Immersion
Model 1: TL as SUBJECTe.g. MLPS/FLES• By far the main model in national policy development across
the world– Least ambitious of the possible models, but still presents a major
policy challenge
• Target Language (TL) is taught mainly as a subject– Usually for 40-80 minutes per week. Limited in ‘time’ and ‘intensity’– Variable starting ages
• Teachers often generalist and not specially trained for this– Big issues of teacher supply / training / continuing development
• EU outcomes, e.g. Blondin, 1999; Edelenbos et al, 2006– Positive attitudes were widespread– But modest proficiency (much pre-fabrication of utterances)
11
Model 2: ML as Subject (Enhanced)
CROATIA
• Pupils at primary school were fluent, confident, accurate & creative in their use of the Target Language– English / German / Italian /French
• Able to perform well in all four skills– L / S / R / W
• High motivation for learning and using their Target Language– Clear development in the nature of motivation from Year 1 to Year 3
• Teachers also highly motivated and gaining clear job-satisfaction
12
Model 2: Enhanced MLPS/FLES Croatia continued
• Official project. Well supported by research (Djigunovich and Vilke, 2000)
• Timeo 45 minutes per day
• Teacher educationo Teachers trained to teach at Primary School and also trained in the
Target Language (French or German or Italian or English)• Class-size
o 15-20 per class• Early Reading & Writing
o Introduced almost from the start in Year 1 (aged 6)• Conscious link made between first language and additional language
o Key grammatical concepts learned in L1 in year 1 and then systematically transferred to learning Target Language in Years 2&3
13
Model 3: CBLT / CLIL• Usually teaching 1 or 2 additional subjects in whole or in
part through the medium of the Target Language – Increased ‘time’ and ‘intensity’ compared with Model 1 MLPS/FLES
• Maybe up to 20/25% of total curriculum time in any week• Could begin at any age
– Tends to begin mid/late primary school or in secondary school, after learners have had some experience of MLPS/FLES
• Attracts in interest in many countries and across EU• Personally, I consider the term CLIL to be very vague
– Where possible I avoid it– But the Model itself is worthy of serious consideration
14
Model 3: CBLT/CLIL Finland
• Grades 1-3 at school in Finland• CLIL students (25% in EFL) compared with mainstream non-
CLIL students– CLIL students language development was quicker– It was also different: After 1-word phase in Grades 1&2, suddenly
full sentences in Grade 3– Mainstream pupils progressed through multi-word fragments but
failed to produce full sentences by end of Grade 5• Three years of CLIL needed (Grades 1-3) for completion of
implicit TL development, leading to fine-tuning activities from Grade 4 onwards. (Järvinen, H-J., 2008)
MODEL 3: CBLT/CLIL Finland continued
• CLIL & non-CLIL pupils compared in Grades 5&6• Mathematics and L1-Finnisho Development of mother tongue not negatively affeted by learning some
subject content through Englisho But learning in CLIL can be so challenging that the maximal outcome of
content learning is not always reached. • Pupils in CLIL had relatively low self concept in foreign languages o CLIL teachers should be aware of the possibility of a weak self-concept in
foreign languages among CLIL pupils o Need to pay attention to giving positive feedback about the pupils’ knowledge
of a foreign language (Seikkula-Leino , 2007)
MODEL 3: CBLT/CLIL Finland continued
• IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING:• The CLIL classroom environment CAN trigger natural L2
acquisition• CLIL teachers need high level of L2 proficiency• Importance of:
o Focusing on language as well as on contento Supporting accuracy as well as fluency, and of exploring deep
meaning (e.g. content-specific concepts; higher-order thinking skills).o Challenging pupils’ comprehensiono Creating opportunities for pupils to produce fairly elaborate
stretches of expression, not simply 1or2-word responses.
Model 4: Bilingual or Immersion Education• Variety of types
– Early/Delayed/Late Partial/Total One-way/Two-way• At least 40% of curriculum time devoted to learning
additional subjects through the medium of the TL• Covers a range of possible aims, e.g.
– Global citizenship– Economic competitiveness– National harmony– Minority first-language & culture maintenance & revitalisation
18
Model 4: Bilingual EducationProvision factors influencing success of national BEP (Spain)• An early start (from age 3 onwards)• Substantial time per week for learning through English as L2: 40%• Whole-school policy, avoiding emergence of monolingual sink-group• Agreement with secondary schools to continue the BEP up to age 16• Strong leadership from staff in both the Ministry and British Council• Development of a special BEP curriculum, conceived with collaboration
of participating teachers, and endorsed by national authority.• Supernumerary teachers, fluent in English, who work with mainstream
teachers• International examination (IGCSE) at which ultimately to aim• Independent external evaluation to identify problems as well as
successes.
19
Model 4: Bilingual EducationScience at Secondary 2: National BEP (Spain)T: ‘Can you describe the smell?’S: ‘It's repulsive and smells like rotten eggs!’T: ‘Can you tell me something about mercury?’S: ’It's toxic and therefore must stay sealed’ T: ‘What is the difference between a mixture and a compound?’S: ‘A mixture can be returned to its earlier state.’ T: ‘What is the process called when we turn a solid into a gas?’S: ‘Sublimation.’T: ‘Who could tell me something about, for example, polonium?’S: ‘Its symbol is Po, it is number 84 in the periodic table. Its mass is 209. It is highly radioactive…’T: ‘Who could tell me something about uranium?’S: ‘Uranium is very toxic (but) it is used in many production processes. Its symbol is U.’ All students showed interest and contributed something. They showed good understanding, spoke clearly with good
pronunciation and were willing to listen to each other. In the open-ended situation, the stronger students showed they could reel off statements, based on their studies, consisting of up to 10 well constructed sentences in English without notes or ‘parrot’ memorisation and with little hesitation.
20
Model 4: Bilingual EducationGood Practice: General Teaching StrategiesExamples from National BEP (Spain)• Keeps all pupils involved in the lesson• Is firm but pleasant• Uses visual aids • Gives clear explanations of what pupils are to do • Reviews pupil outputs with the whole class• Keeps pupils’ attention focused• Avoids spoon-feeding• Presents tasks in a clear and interesting way • Keeps a log of mistakes for subsequent comment• Encourages pupils to work out their own solutions
21
Model 4: Bilingual EducationGood Practice: Language Related StrategiesExamples from National BEP (Spain)• Helps pupils focus on linguistic form, function and discourse • Pays due attention to accuracy• Helps pupils focus on key words• Helps pupils develop clear definitions• Helps them describe the properties of things• Helps them make contrasts, e.g. …. whereas …..• Helps them develop robust classifications • Helps them develop use of the passive voice, essential for
science• Allows judicious use of L1-Spanish
22
Model 4: Bilingual EducationFurther examples• China (Knell et al,2007)
– Early partial immersion (English)– Impact on children’s Chinese character recognition
• USA (Thomas, Abbott & Collier,1994)
– Early partial immersion (French, Spanish, Japanese)– Impact on children’s attainments in maths and English
• Scotland (Johnstone et al,1999)
– Early total immersion in Scottish Gaelic– Impact on children’s attainments in science, maths,
English
Variable success of Bilingual Education across the world
• Many successes based on research evidence. But ……• In some parts of the world it has been abandoned, or
considerably reduced, or has been hotly contested, or radically revised, for many reasons, e.g.o Rushing ahead too quickly before adequately staffedo Inadequate support for teachers (e.g. in L2 and in L2 teaching
methodology)o Inadequate information for parentso Strong political or ideological or media oppositiono Misguided assumptions about teaching and learning .......... Others?
24
The nature of progression in language development• Mitchell (2003) claims that second language learning is
o not like climbing a ladder; but iso a complex and recursive process with multiple interconnections and
backslidings, and o complex trade-offs between advances in fluency, accuracy and
complexity. • Pelzer-Karpf & Zangl (1997) found that children’s utterances
seemed impressive in Years 1&2o but then in Year 3 went through a phase of ‘Systemturbulenz’ in which
their grammar control seemed to fall aparto when the cognitive demands of their tasks were raised to the point
that temporarily their grammar-systems could not fully copeo But by Year 4 it sorted itself out.
25
Learning Through English:Policies, Challenges and Prospects
Insights from East Asia
Nilawati HadisantosaTo Thi Thu HuongRichard Johnstone
Sonthida KeyuravongWonKey Lee
British Council East Asia Network
26
The four Country Studies• Not intended to provide a comprehensive or official
overview of each country in turn. • Each chapter written by a distinguished academic
professional from the particular country, in consultation with a small number of key stakeholders.
• They aim to offer insight into:– The social, cultural and socio-linguistic background to the particular
country– The emergence of English as major language– Past and present policies and practices for teaching English and for
teaching through English– Difficulties, challenges, solutions, successes and prospects
27
Concluding personal thoughts arising from the East Asia study• Several clear examples of good practice in policy planning
and development• Considerable variation across the four countries• Strong emphasis on instrumental aims, e.g. economic
competitiveness; career advantage• Maybe a need to state the cognitive and educational
benefits more clearly• Importance of attaining a good Threshhold if the cognitive
and educational benefits are to be realised
28
Concluding thoughts (continued)Issues on which policy makers might reflect• Modernisation without sacrificing cultural and linguistic
uniqueness• Equity and Inclusion• Long-term planning for sustainability• Teacher supply, training and professional development• Alignment of examinations with curriculum• Clarity about models of Languages Education in terms of their
provisions, processes and outcomes• Feasibility Studies preceding Piloting preceding wider expansion• Internationalisation• Research-Policy Partnership
29
The Effects of Age
• Is there a ‘critical period’ for the acquisition of an additional language?
• Distinction between ‘naturalistic’ informal contexts and more formal ‘instructed’ contexts.
• H. H. Stern (1974): Each age has its own advantages and disadvantages
• So, what advantages do younger learner have, and what advantages do older learners have?
The Effects of Age: Possible Advantages by Age
Younger Learners Older Learners•Intuitive acquisition capacity as for first language
•More developed conceptual map of the world
•More attuned to the sound system of the language
•More aware of patterns of discourse
•Less ‘language anxious’ •More able to draw on explicit strategies
•More time available overall•Educational experience
•May have a clearer sense of purpose and wider range of possible motivation
References
• Blondin, C., Candelier, M., Edelenbos, P., Johnstone, R., Kubanek-German, A. & Taeschner, T. (1998). Foreign languages in primary and pre-school education. A review of recent research within the European Union. London: CILT
• Carleton Board of Education. (1994). French immersion update. Carleton Occasional papers, Series ii, Number 2. Ottowa: Carleton Board of Education.• Edelenbos, P., Johnstone R. M. & Kubanek, A. (2006). The main pedagogical principles underlying the teaching of languages to very young learners.
Languages for the children of Europe: Published Research, Good Practice & Main Principles. Brussels, European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/lang/doc/young_en.pdf
• Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: studies of immersion and bilingual education. Cambridge MA: Newbury House. • Järvinen, H-J. (2008). Research in CLIL. European Commission. Euro-clic: Bulletin 8• Johnstone, R. M. , W. Harlen, M. MacNeil, R. Stradling & G. Thorpe (2000) The attainments of pupils receiving Gaelic-medium primary education in Scotland. Scottish
CILT for Scottish Executive Education Department.• Johnstone, R. M. (2001. Addressing 'the age factor': some implications for languages policy. Guide for the development of Language Education Policies
in Europe - From Linguistic Diversity to Plurilingual Education. Strasbourg, Council of Europe Reference Study http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/JohnstoneEN.pdf
• Johnstone, R. M. (2001). Immersion in a Second or Additional Language at School: evidence from international research. Report for the Scottish Executive Education Department. University of Stirling: Scottish CILT.
• Johnstone, R. M. & R. McKinstry (2008) Evaluation of Early partial Immersion in French at Walker Road Primary School, Aberdeen. University of Stirling: Scottish CILT.• Lyster, R. (2004a). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 399-432.• Knell, E., L. S.Siegel., Q. Haiyan., Z. Lun., P. Miao., Z. Wei & C. Yanping (2007). Early English literacy in Xi’an, China. The Modern Language Journal 91.iii, 395–417.• Mitchell, R. (2003). Rethinking the concept of progression in the national curriculum for modern foreign languages: a research perspective. Language Learning Journal,
Winter 2003.• Peltzer-Karpf, A. & R. Zangl (1997). Vier Jahre Vienna Bilingual Schooling: Eine Langzeitstudie. Vienna; Bundesministerium für Unterricht und kulturelle
Angelegenheiten., Abteilung 1/1.• Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). CLIL learning: Achievement levels and affective factors. Language & Education 21.4, 328–341. • Serra, C. (2007). Assessing CLIL at primary school: a longitudinal study. International Journal of Bilingual Education & Bilingualism 10.5, 582–602.• Thomas, W. P., V. Collier & M. Abbott (1993). Academic achievement through Japanese, Spanish or French. The first two years of partial immersion. The Modern
Language Journal, 77, 2, 170-79