CLIL module writer John Adamson Ed.D
John Adamson is a Professor at the University of Niigata Prefecture in Japan. As Chief Editor of Asian EFL Journal, he is active in editorial work. He received his Ed.D. from Leicester University in the U.K. focusing on a discourse analysis of interviews with Thai college students on their learning strategies. Currently he is interested in EAP/ESP provision at the university level, interdisciplinarity, and journal editing. He is a co-editor of Innovating EFL Teaching in Asia (2011) and Exploring EFL Fluency in Asia (2014) by Palgrave Macmillan.
|
Affiliation
The Asian EFL Journal
Site
Contents
1.0 Objectives
2.0 Recommended Reading
3.0 Introduction
4.0 Section One: Background to CLIL
4.1 Issues with the CLIL Approach
4.2 Benefits of the CLIL Approach
4.3 CLIL Evolution
4.4 CLIL in Japan
5.0 Further Reading
6.0 Section Two: Lesson ideas
6.1 Elementary Classes
6.2 University Classes
7.0 Considerations for Application
8.0 ALTs’ Working Together
9.0 Further Reading
2.0 Recommended Reading
3.0 Introduction
4.0 Section One: Background to CLIL
4.1 Issues with the CLIL Approach
4.2 Benefits of the CLIL Approach
4.3 CLIL Evolution
4.4 CLIL in Japan
5.0 Further Reading
6.0 Section Two: Lesson ideas
6.1 Elementary Classes
6.2 University Classes
7.0 Considerations for Application
8.0 ALTs’ Working Together
9.0 Further Reading
List of Figures
1: Content-Based Language Instruction. This figure illustrates a continuum of content and language integration
2: Flowchart representing cause and effect relationship of the subprime/Lehman crisis
2: Flowchart representing cause and effect relationship of the subprime/Lehman crisis
1.0 Objectives
- To introduce the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach to teaching.
- To detail ways to successfully integrate CLIL into your lesson planning and classroom practices.
2.0 Recommended Reading
You will be guided during the module when to read the text. Texts not included in the module are to be read after completing the module.
Brown, H. (2016). English-medium Instruction in Japan: Discussing implications for language teaching. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & H. Brown (Eds.), Focus on the learner. Tokyo: JALT. http://jalt-publications.org/node/4/articles/5418-english-medium-instruction-japan-discussing-implications-language-teaching
Galloway, N. (2009). A Critical Analysis of the Jet Programme. The Journal of Kanda of International Studies, 21. Retrieved from https://www.kandagaigo.ac.jp/kuis/about/bulletin/en/021/pdf/009.pdf
Hanesová, Dana. (2015). History of CLIL. CLIL in Foreign Language Education: e-textbook for foreign language teachers, Retrieved from http://www.klis.pf.ukf.sk/sk/na-stiahnutie/246-history-of-clil doi: 10.17846/CLIL.2015.7-16
Ikeda, M. (2013). Does CLIL Work for Japanese Secondary School Students? Potential for the ‘Weak’ Version of CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal, 2(1). retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/21/article3.html
Professor Makoto Ikeda, interviewed by Laura MacGregor, CLIL focus, The Language Teacher, 40 (1), January 2016. http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/4965-clil-focus-interview-professor-makoto-ikeda
MacGregor, L. (2016). CLIL in Japan: University teachers’ viewpoints. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & H. Brown (Eds.), Focus on the learner. Tokyo: JALT. Retrieved from http://jalt-publications.org/node/4/articles/5419-clil-japan-university-teachers%E2%80%99-viewpoints
Met, M. (2009). Content-Based Instruction: Defining Terms, Making Decisions. NFLC Reports. http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/principles/decisions.html
Sasajima, S. (2013). How CLIL Can Impact on EFL Teachers’ Mindsets about Teaching and Learning: An Exploratory Study on Teacher Cognition. International CLIL Research Journal, 2(1). retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/21/article3.html
Yamano, Y. (2013). CLIL in a Japanese Primary School: Exploring the Potential of CLIL in a Japanese EFL Context. International CLIL Research Journal, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/21/article2.html
Brown, H. (2016). English-medium Instruction in Japan: Discussing implications for language teaching. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & H. Brown (Eds.), Focus on the learner. Tokyo: JALT. http://jalt-publications.org/node/4/articles/5418-english-medium-instruction-japan-discussing-implications-language-teaching
Galloway, N. (2009). A Critical Analysis of the Jet Programme. The Journal of Kanda of International Studies, 21. Retrieved from https://www.kandagaigo.ac.jp/kuis/about/bulletin/en/021/pdf/009.pdf
Hanesová, Dana. (2015). History of CLIL. CLIL in Foreign Language Education: e-textbook for foreign language teachers, Retrieved from http://www.klis.pf.ukf.sk/sk/na-stiahnutie/246-history-of-clil doi: 10.17846/CLIL.2015.7-16
Ikeda, M. (2013). Does CLIL Work for Japanese Secondary School Students? Potential for the ‘Weak’ Version of CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal, 2(1). retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/21/article3.html
Professor Makoto Ikeda, interviewed by Laura MacGregor, CLIL focus, The Language Teacher, 40 (1), January 2016. http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/4965-clil-focus-interview-professor-makoto-ikeda
MacGregor, L. (2016). CLIL in Japan: University teachers’ viewpoints. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & H. Brown (Eds.), Focus on the learner. Tokyo: JALT. Retrieved from http://jalt-publications.org/node/4/articles/5419-clil-japan-university-teachers%E2%80%99-viewpoints
Met, M. (2009). Content-Based Instruction: Defining Terms, Making Decisions. NFLC Reports. http://www.carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/principles/decisions.html
Sasajima, S. (2013). How CLIL Can Impact on EFL Teachers’ Mindsets about Teaching and Learning: An Exploratory Study on Teacher Cognition. International CLIL Research Journal, 2(1). retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/21/article3.html
Yamano, Y. (2013). CLIL in a Japanese Primary School: Exploring the Potential of CLIL in a Japanese EFL Context. International CLIL Research Journal, 2(1). Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/21/article2.html
3.0 Introduction
CLIL may have its origins in non-Japanese contexts but is, nevertheless, being integrated into language classes even at elementary schools in Japan. It does not present itself as the perfect solution to all teaching/learning issues but I hope by reading through the background and lesson ideas and reflecting upon the tasks given to you in this module, you will at least become aware of this educational movement and consider incorporating elements of it into your classrooms. Let’s first turn to its background.
4.0 Section One: Background to CLIL
The term CLIL emerged in Europe in the early 1990s and is an umbrella term for various approaches to teaching, such as content-based learning and teaching, content-based instruction, EMI (English-Medium Instruction), ICLHE (Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education) and more. It basically is a term that describes a teaching context in which learners learn content (a subject or just a topic taken from content studies) through a foreign language, i.e. there is a dual focus on language and content. Normally, learners in secondary schools and universities study languages through one curriculum and content subjects through another. Typically, language lessons focus on grammar/ vocabulary or situations/functions in which learners can practise the language and so, for the teaching of English, well-known terms have emerged like EFL (English as a Foreign Language), ELT (English Language Teaching), TESOL (Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages) and TESL (Teaching English as a Second Language).
A former image of content instruction is that it is taught in the learners’ mother tongue (their first language/L1) in a separate curriculum to language studies. This way of thinking about learning started to change in the 1990s in Europe when educational conditions that encouraged multilingualism and global citizens were considered better. The CLIL movement was inspired, to some degree, by Canadian educational experiments in immersion teaching back in the 1960s. Basically, the idea was to nurture young Europeans to be able to cope with the realities of a borderless Europe (or world) in which the ability to communicate effectively in various social, business and political situations was regarded as a skill or competence. The movement of European citizens across borders for business and study (especially at the tertiary level with the Erasmus scheme) pushed the movement along and has led to fundamental educational changes at schools and universities. Schoolteachers started to look at the language and content curricula and see ways to connect them; for example, maths and science teachers delivered lessons in another language (English or other dominant European languages); language teachers introduced topics from content classes into class activities. CLIL was not just centred on teaching content through English – similar trials took place with German, French, Italian, Spanish and other European languages, so research into the effect of this instructional style came from various fields and languages, not just EFL. Naturally, some teachers embraced this movement and some objected, especially when such changes were imposed on them from above.
A former image of content instruction is that it is taught in the learners’ mother tongue (their first language/L1) in a separate curriculum to language studies. This way of thinking about learning started to change in the 1990s in Europe when educational conditions that encouraged multilingualism and global citizens were considered better. The CLIL movement was inspired, to some degree, by Canadian educational experiments in immersion teaching back in the 1960s. Basically, the idea was to nurture young Europeans to be able to cope with the realities of a borderless Europe (or world) in which the ability to communicate effectively in various social, business and political situations was regarded as a skill or competence. The movement of European citizens across borders for business and study (especially at the tertiary level with the Erasmus scheme) pushed the movement along and has led to fundamental educational changes at schools and universities. Schoolteachers started to look at the language and content curricula and see ways to connect them; for example, maths and science teachers delivered lessons in another language (English or other dominant European languages); language teachers introduced topics from content classes into class activities. CLIL was not just centred on teaching content through English – similar trials took place with German, French, Italian, Spanish and other European languages, so research into the effect of this instructional style came from various fields and languages, not just EFL. Naturally, some teachers embraced this movement and some objected, especially when such changes were imposed on them from above.
4.1 Issues With The CLIL Approach
To answer reflection question 4.0, the themes of ‘heritage language’ rights and ‘linguistic imperialism’ come to mind (in reference the ALTs’ see Galloway, 2009). Many language teachers argue that they are trained to teach language, not content, so bringing too much content into their classrooms places a burden on them to become knowledgeable about subjects like maths and science. Other language teachers note that ESP (English for Specific Purposes) and EAP (English for Academic Purposes) programs in universities already integrate the content field knowledge of learners into their syllabi, so there is no need for their classes to be relabelled. Content teachers argue that learners need to learn important content in their L1 first and that to teach it in a foreign language is confusing for them. Fundamentally, it denies the learners the right to study in their own mother tongue, their heritage language, which raises the issue of rights. Teachers also complain that they are not able to deliver the class in a foreign language such as English, as they were not trained to do so. In this sense, the spread of English is a type of ‘linguistic imperialism’ which needs to be resisted. Further issues surround the discussion of when learners should be exposed to CLIL instruction – should learners of very low language proficiency be taught in a CLIL style? Concerns exist that teaching content in a foreign language could be detrimental for both their content and language development so at what point – a ‘threshold’ – should learners start CLIL?
*Use this chart to compare TOEIC and TOEFL (Vancouver English Centre, 2015)
*Read this article on the validity of STEP (Karlsson, 2016) - (more supplementary for module 15)
*Read this article on the validity of STEP (Karlsson, 2016) - (more supplementary for module 15)
4.2 Benefits Of The CLIL Approach
In response to these criticisms and concerns, though, arguments about the promotion of bilingualism/multilingualism being cognitively beneficial for learners have been put forward, and an outcome is that learning content in a foreign language encourages learners to concentrate better on the lesson. For those learners who are not so proficient in the foreign language, but more skilled in the content, CLIL is empowering as they possess potentially more field knowledge than other learners. Some research suggests that such learners excel in a CLIL class as they are assessed not only on their language development, but also on their content knowledge. In this sense, CLIL is good for learners’ motivation as it links their content interests with language training. This arguably brings more authenticity and relevance to language classes which previously concentrated only on language skills. Furthermore, some researchers argue that CLIL promotes a kind of multilingualism in education, which is an everyday reality in social and working contexts, especially in European and Asian countries with increasing levels of migration across borders. However, more monolingual contexts such as Japan may not be able to see CLIL in that way (for an extended view on the Japanese context see modules 1 and 20 of this course).
4.3 CLIL Evolution
CLIL is starting to become increasingly popular in non-European contexts. In Asia, much research and experimentation is happening in China, Taiwan, Japan, Thailand and beyond.
Sophia University in Japan is one institution that researches CLIL in various contexts, from elementary to tertiary. What is emerging is a more nuanced picture of the types of CLIL. We could say that there are various models of CLIL:
Sophia University in Japan is one institution that researches CLIL in various contexts, from elementary to tertiary. What is emerging is a more nuanced picture of the types of CLIL. We could say that there are various models of CLIL:
- CLIL as co-current with content: in this model, language classes taught by a solo language teacher integrate content themes from content lessons that are currently (or have just been) taught to learners. For example, a CLIL class looks at some maths taught recently so it is fresh in learners’ minds.
- CLIL as a bridge: here CLIL integrates content themes that learners will study in the future. This is common in universities abroad, where learners need language training especially geared to their future content studies, such as undergraduate or postgraduate science studies in English. The language teacher typically teaches a class solo and may try to become familiar with the type of writing assignment and style of study the learners will have to take on in the future.
- CLIL as team-teaching: here a language teacher and a content teacher teach together in a class. In many European schools this is a typical scenario. A content teacher may bring a language specialist to the content lesson to support learners in understanding the language demands of teaching the content through a foreign language. Alternatively, the language teacher may bring the content teacher to the language lesson to present sections of the lesson about their content area.
- CLIL as purely content instruction in a foreign language: in this model, learners are taught content in a foreign language with no focus or support on language issues. The content teacher, if using English, delivers EMI (English-Medium Instruction) and does not cater to language problems (for EMI in Japan see Brown, 2016).
Hard CLIL |
<> |
<> |
<> |
<> |
Soft CLIL |
Content -driven |
Language -driven |
||||
EMI/Total Immersion |
Partial Immersion |
Sheltered |
Adjunct |
Theme -based |
Language classes using content language |
Figure 1: Content-Based Language Instruction. This figure illustrates a continuum of content and language integration (Met, M. 2009)
A further point to consider in understanding the background of CLIL is that it is a flexible concept with no single teaching methodology (see module 8 of this course for more on teaching methodologies). People often ask, ‘What is a CLIL teaching style?’ to which researchers cannot give one answer. I have engaged in various models of CLIL over the course of my career and, importantly, even within a lesson. This continuum above (Figure 1) is perhaps useful in trying to understand CLIL.
On the far left is ‘hard CLIL’ which is a typical EMI content class taught totally in a language that is not the mother tongue of the learners. The syllabus is content-driven, meaning the teacher does not account for language difficulties learners may have in following the lesson. On the right is ‘soft CLIL,’ where a language teacher uses a theme (a reading text perhaps) related to the learners’ content studies. Such lessons are still language-driven – that is, like a typical EFL class but with a touch of content. Partial immersion on the left is close to full immersion EMI, but where the teacher highlights some important language needed to understand the content – for foreign language learners this may be very useful. A Sheltered approach is typically a class on the language curriculum – taught by either a language or content teacher – in which the content is simplified to make it easier to understand for learners. Adjunct CLIL is a team-teaching situation on either the content or language curriculum as described before – a language and content teacher collaborate in some way to deliver the class. A Theme-based CLIL class is a language class in which the language teacher focuses heavily on the content that is related to the learners’ content studies. This requires some effort by the language teacher to research that theme thoroughly. Such lessons can refocus back to language issues quickly at any point when comprehension of the content becomes difficult.
As mentioned before, the approaches to implementing CLIL can vary along the continuum throughout the term or even in one lesson. For example, a teacher may start the lesson with practicing target grammar and then switch to a reading passage related to content studies. The language teacher might then either focus on vocabulary/grammar or deal with the reading like a content teacher would by typically focusing on the meaning or interpretation of the reading instead. The ‘switching’ of the teacher’s focus from language to content is one way in which the teacher moves up and down the CLIL continuum – this is something that we all have done at times and shows that we may have engaged in CLIL practice without using a ‘CLIL’ label.
On the far left is ‘hard CLIL’ which is a typical EMI content class taught totally in a language that is not the mother tongue of the learners. The syllabus is content-driven, meaning the teacher does not account for language difficulties learners may have in following the lesson. On the right is ‘soft CLIL,’ where a language teacher uses a theme (a reading text perhaps) related to the learners’ content studies. Such lessons are still language-driven – that is, like a typical EFL class but with a touch of content. Partial immersion on the left is close to full immersion EMI, but where the teacher highlights some important language needed to understand the content – for foreign language learners this may be very useful. A Sheltered approach is typically a class on the language curriculum – taught by either a language or content teacher – in which the content is simplified to make it easier to understand for learners. Adjunct CLIL is a team-teaching situation on either the content or language curriculum as described before – a language and content teacher collaborate in some way to deliver the class. A Theme-based CLIL class is a language class in which the language teacher focuses heavily on the content that is related to the learners’ content studies. This requires some effort by the language teacher to research that theme thoroughly. Such lessons can refocus back to language issues quickly at any point when comprehension of the content becomes difficult.
As mentioned before, the approaches to implementing CLIL can vary along the continuum throughout the term or even in one lesson. For example, a teacher may start the lesson with practicing target grammar and then switch to a reading passage related to content studies. The language teacher might then either focus on vocabulary/grammar or deal with the reading like a content teacher would by typically focusing on the meaning or interpretation of the reading instead. The ‘switching’ of the teacher’s focus from language to content is one way in which the teacher moves up and down the CLIL continuum – this is something that we all have done at times and shows that we may have engaged in CLIL practice without using a ‘CLIL’ label.
In brief, CLIL is an approach to teaching language and content that embraces many things we already do as EFL practitioners. It is often associated with active learning in that it engages learners with relevant language and content for their real-world needs. Some say it can overlap with elements of task-based learning as there is an authentic purpose to activities related to learners’ content studies. Others see it as making us think more carefully about the nature of communication, how we develop learners’ cognition, how we expose them to different national or disciplinary cultures, and also how we as teachers see the role of language in the curriculum – EFL as just a way to prepare learners for language tests, or as a means to make a connection to content studies. (See Mehisto, P., Marsh, D. & Frigols, M.J. (2008) Uncovering CLIL. Macmillan).
4.4 CLIL In Japan
Finally, let’s think about the Japanese context regarding CLIL. Recently, government initiatives show an increasing shift towards promoting EMI in the tertiary sector: the 2008 Global 30 project, the 2012 Global Human Resources, and most recently, the 2014 “Top Global University” project to encourage top universities to become more global or international in their curricula. This may be due to a variety of factors, for example: the low international ranking of Japanese universities, the high cost of long-term overseas study and a trend away from overseas study.
The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) reported that by 2011, 30% of 800 Japanese universities offered some form of EMI. Other universities wishing to be competitive in the market have also been offering more EMI courses and classes to increase enrolment from foreign and Japanese learners, especially due to a declining birth rate.
What is clear is that universities are struggling to survive and are offering more EMI courses. English departments at universities are, as a result, being transformed from providing purely general English language instruction to offering language instruction that prepares learners for EMI at the same institution or beyond. Becoming global citizens requires language proficiency which has a practical application – in other words, a focus on the content studies taught at university, college or vocational institutions. That’s where CLIL has its role. The result? Schoolteachers, who have previously focused on preparing learners for university entrance exams or standard language tests, may face a new pressure: to prepare learners not only to get into university but also to cope with the demands of EMI when studying there.
The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) reported that by 2011, 30% of 800 Japanese universities offered some form of EMI. Other universities wishing to be competitive in the market have also been offering more EMI courses and classes to increase enrolment from foreign and Japanese learners, especially due to a declining birth rate.
What is clear is that universities are struggling to survive and are offering more EMI courses. English departments at universities are, as a result, being transformed from providing purely general English language instruction to offering language instruction that prepares learners for EMI at the same institution or beyond. Becoming global citizens requires language proficiency which has a practical application – in other words, a focus on the content studies taught at university, college or vocational institutions. That’s where CLIL has its role. The result? Schoolteachers, who have previously focused on preparing learners for university entrance exams or standard language tests, may face a new pressure: to prepare learners not only to get into university but also to cope with the demands of EMI when studying there.
Now, read Brown, 2016.
5.0 Further Reading
Brown, H. (2016). English-medium Instruction in Japan: Discussing implications for language teaching. In P. Clements, A. Krause, & H. Brown (Eds.), Focus on the learner. (pp. 419-425), Tokyo: JALT. Retrieved from http://jalt-publications.org/node/4/articles/5418-english-medium-instruction-japan-discussing-implications-language-teaching
Chapple, J. (2014). Finally feasible or fresh façade? Analyzing the internationalization plans of Japanese universities. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 3(4), 1-14. doi:10.5861/ijrse.2014.794
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edsall, D., & Saito, Y. (2012). The motivational benefits of content. OnCUE Journal,6, 66–94. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/9036453/The_Motivational_Benefits_of_Content?auto=download
Ikeda, M. (2012). CLIL no genri to shidouhou [Principles and methodologies of CLIL]. In S. Izumi, M. Ikeda, & Y. Watanabe. (Eds.). (2012). CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) – New Challenges in Foreign Language Education at Sophia University – Volume 2: Practices and Applications. (pp. 1‒15). Tokyo: Sophia University Press.
Lasagabaster, D. (2011). English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5, 3-18.
Lucietto, S. (2008). A Model for Quality CLIL Provision. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 83-92. http://www.icrj.eu/11/article7.html
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols M.J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Oxford: Macmillan.
Met, M. (2009). Content-Based Instruction: Defining Terms, Making Decisions. NFLC Reports. Retrieved from http://carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/principles/decisions.html
Chapple, J. (2014). Finally feasible or fresh façade? Analyzing the internationalization plans of Japanese universities. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 3(4), 1-14. doi:10.5861/ijrse.2014.794
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Edsall, D., & Saito, Y. (2012). The motivational benefits of content. OnCUE Journal,6, 66–94. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/9036453/The_Motivational_Benefits_of_Content?auto=download
Ikeda, M. (2012). CLIL no genri to shidouhou [Principles and methodologies of CLIL]. In S. Izumi, M. Ikeda, & Y. Watanabe. (Eds.). (2012). CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) – New Challenges in Foreign Language Education at Sophia University – Volume 2: Practices and Applications. (pp. 1‒15). Tokyo: Sophia University Press.
Lasagabaster, D. (2011). English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5, 3-18.
Lucietto, S. (2008). A Model for Quality CLIL Provision. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 83-92. http://www.icrj.eu/11/article7.html
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols M.J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Oxford: Macmillan.
Met, M. (2009). Content-Based Instruction: Defining Terms, Making Decisions. NFLC Reports. Retrieved from http://carla.umn.edu/cobaltt/modules/principles/decisions.html
6.0 Section Two: Lesson Ideas
Let’s now turn to some possible applications at various levels of education (elementary to tertiary) and varying degrees of hard to soft CLIL (from Met’s continuum above – Figure 1). Even if you don’t work at the same level of education, it will be useful to understand what your learners may go on to experience when they move on. At the end of this module I will ask you to make your own CLIL-style lesson plan for your own current classes.
6.1 Elementary Classes
I got this idea originally from a Japanese teacher of English in Nagano. He adopted a CLIL approach to a group of fourth-year elementary school learners who had been recently taught a maths class on addition, subtraction, division and multiplication, so in this sense it represents a co-current CLIL model. He spoke to the maths teacher who briefed him on recent lessons and, as a consequence, made a few English lessons scaffolded with numbers and the mathematical skills they had just learned. He decided to firstly practise those same numbers from 0 to 10,000 using choral repetition and blackboard work. He followed up by placing the children into small groups and allocating each one a place on the blackboard to write answers. Groups competed with each other to write the teacher’s chosen number on the board in rotation. Children helped each other out, so a lot of chatting took place. That first practice step was, he admitted, fairly mechanistic but, interestingly, reasonably good fun for learners. Remembering the more advanced skills of addition, subtraction, division and multiplication, he replicated the first group competition step by making mathematical puzzles on the board, after which children again worked together to write the correct answers. Realising that the practice so far involved learners’ comprehension (listening), collaboration and writing without necessarily asking the children to produce oral responses or collaborate imaginatively with the mathematical tools they had mastered, he decided to set up a task with an aim. He told the class that they needed to decide what to buy for a party. After dividing them into larger groups of around 10 learners, he gave each group 10,000 yen in toy money. At this stage learners started to become excited and in their groups became enthusiastic about buying lots of their favourite drinks or ‘o-yatsu’ (candy or snacks). Strategically he allowed them this time of excitement because he realised it made them think of content words familiar to them in their real world.
Next, he asked them to stop and draw the food and drink they wanted to buy on large pieces of paper (four x A3-sized sheets pinned together). This led to less talk and more focus on thinking and drawing. As he monitored the groups, he identified common drinks and sweets/snacks which, when possible, he translated for them into English. The emphasis at this point was not on spelling but speaking the vocabulary items. Importantly, then he asked the children to count (in English) the top 10 most popular food items and top 10 drinks they had all drawn, then number the most popular items from 1-10. Each group was slightly different and after each group had created their two lists, he allowed them to wander around to see what other groups had decided upon. At around this point, it was time for that lesson to end, so, for homework, he told them to find out the prices of the items on their lists. With 10 members per group each member was asked to find the prices of two items.
In the next lesson when it came to this ‘party project’ time, he asked learners to write the prices next to each food and drink item. He then symbolically gave each group the toy money (fake 10,000 yen notes) and told them to decide how many items they could afford to buy with that amount of money. They were told that they could not overspend. This set the children a practical task in which they firstly needed to divide the money up between food and drink and allocate responsibilities for buying items: food or drinks. Usually, he noticed five members were allocated to food shopping and five to drinks shopping (but there was some group-to-group variation). He admitted that with one class there was some degree of chaos as children could not decide who was responsible for what (one group forgot to buy any drinks… oh well). With a little teacher intervention, though, division of money and job allocation were finally arranged. Giving each subgroup (a food group and a drink group) a separate piece of paper he asked them to calculate (in English) the amount of drinks needed, and the total money necessary to buy each item. For example:
For the drinks subgroup:
- 3 Colas x (multiplied by) 150 yen = (equals) 450 yen.
For the food subgroup:
- 2 Pocky x (multiplied by) 144 yen = (equals) 288 yen.
Once each subgroup had made their food or drinks list, they needed to make totals (requiring addition) and to make sure that they did not exceed their allocated budget. If they exceeded their budget, then subtraction was required. Finally, learners added the two food and drinks subtotals together. The permutations were numerous; some groups spent much less than 10,000 yen and some just less. The final stage was to ask each group to draw what they had decided to buy (e.g. three bottles of Cola, two packets of Pocky biscuits) on spreadsheets alongside the calculations for each item with subtotals and a final total at the bottom. He also suggested that he would ask learners to give group presentations of their spreadsheets to the class.
Various elements of CLIL were used in this lesson:
There is a high degree of authenticity and relevance to the task too as it involves using money responsibly and in an accountable manner to others. In that way, there is an added social skill involved (a child cannot simply buy all the food he or she likes but needs to concede to the wishes of peers).
Next, he asked them to stop and draw the food and drink they wanted to buy on large pieces of paper (four x A3-sized sheets pinned together). This led to less talk and more focus on thinking and drawing. As he monitored the groups, he identified common drinks and sweets/snacks which, when possible, he translated for them into English. The emphasis at this point was not on spelling but speaking the vocabulary items. Importantly, then he asked the children to count (in English) the top 10 most popular food items and top 10 drinks they had all drawn, then number the most popular items from 1-10. Each group was slightly different and after each group had created their two lists, he allowed them to wander around to see what other groups had decided upon. At around this point, it was time for that lesson to end, so, for homework, he told them to find out the prices of the items on their lists. With 10 members per group each member was asked to find the prices of two items.
In the next lesson when it came to this ‘party project’ time, he asked learners to write the prices next to each food and drink item. He then symbolically gave each group the toy money (fake 10,000 yen notes) and told them to decide how many items they could afford to buy with that amount of money. They were told that they could not overspend. This set the children a practical task in which they firstly needed to divide the money up between food and drink and allocate responsibilities for buying items: food or drinks. Usually, he noticed five members were allocated to food shopping and five to drinks shopping (but there was some group-to-group variation). He admitted that with one class there was some degree of chaos as children could not decide who was responsible for what (one group forgot to buy any drinks… oh well). With a little teacher intervention, though, division of money and job allocation were finally arranged. Giving each subgroup (a food group and a drink group) a separate piece of paper he asked them to calculate (in English) the amount of drinks needed, and the total money necessary to buy each item. For example:
For the drinks subgroup:
- 3 Colas x (multiplied by) 150 yen = (equals) 450 yen.
For the food subgroup:
- 2 Pocky x (multiplied by) 144 yen = (equals) 288 yen.
Once each subgroup had made their food or drinks list, they needed to make totals (requiring addition) and to make sure that they did not exceed their allocated budget. If they exceeded their budget, then subtraction was required. Finally, learners added the two food and drinks subtotals together. The permutations were numerous; some groups spent much less than 10,000 yen and some just less. The final stage was to ask each group to draw what they had decided to buy (e.g. three bottles of Cola, two packets of Pocky biscuits) on spreadsheets alongside the calculations for each item with subtotals and a final total at the bottom. He also suggested that he would ask learners to give group presentations of their spreadsheets to the class.
Various elements of CLIL were used in this lesson:
- Numbers and the language of calculation in maths already taught in their Japanese maths lessons. The English vocabulary may have been new, but the learners already knew how to calculate totals, so there was some scaffolding (of English (vocabulary) and Japanese (calculation)).
- Newly learned food and drink vocabulary.
- Collaboration, negotiation and decision-making.
- Pictorial representation (drawing) of food and drinks.
- Logical representation of mathematical calculation.
- Listening, speaking and writing numbers (not necessarily words).
There is a high degree of authenticity and relevance to the task too as it involves using money responsibly and in an accountable manner to others. In that way, there is an added social skill involved (a child cannot simply buy all the food he or she likes but needs to concede to the wishes of peers).
6.2 University Classes
Let me now turn to something that I do regularly in my university classes. I teach more than 100 learners in a course which focuses on primarily listening skills for lecture note-taking. It is multimodal in that it also requires learners to do pre- and post-lesson reading, and write an end-of-term report. Learners are first graders (18-19 years old) and have TOEIC scores ranging from very low up to 600. Their content studies focus on economics, politics, cross-cultural studies and environmental issues, so the topics I bring into the lecture classes are related accordingly. One lesson looks at banking problems around the world and highlights the Lehman Brothers crash and microcredit in Bangladesh. The language I felt most relevant for these themes was that of cause and effect as banking issues appear to be connected to people’s lives.
The class commenced by introducing the learners to the theme of banking and asking learners to help me brainstorm some common banking/money-related vocabulary items on the whiteboard (e.g. loan, lend, borrow, credit, owe, interest rate, go bankrupt). I then showed them the first picture below of the fall of Lehman Brothers in 2008 and asked learners to quickly discuss what they know about the event, what caused it and how it affected the U.S. economy thereafter.
Some groups were invited to write their elicited notes on the board. This revealed a variety of correct and incorrect vocabulary and understanding but praise was given for whatever was produced at this stage. I then asked learners to take notes on my mini-lecture on ‘subprime’ and Lehman Brothers, the text of which is here (teacher text 1).
Learners have already been taught to take notes of only key information rather than to treat the exercise as a dictation. After this, learners compare notes and make amendments to their understanding, spelling and key information. In the past, I have requested learners to orally summarise these notes in English but that tends to take up time and is quite a challenging exercise for some learners. Alternatively, I have allowed learners to summarise the notes in Japanese, which is, for some learners and teachers, potentially contentious because in some CLIL approaches the learners’ L1 is not allowed. Considering the dual focus of the course, I find that a CLIL approach (at any level of education) does not necessarily forbid learners’ L1 if it can be used to support content comprehension and/or encourage more participation in class. This English-Japanese switching is called ‘translanguaging’: a strategic mixing of languages to push comprehension of content and language foci forwards. For more on translanguaging in this context, see this.
The lesson moves on to the second section, which addresses microcredit as a financial support system for small businesses in Bangladesh, an idea developed by Professor Yunus and practised through the Grameen Bank. Again, a picture is used as a prompt for pre-listening discussion which manages to solicit one or two ideas.
The teacher input is here (Teacher text 2).
Again, group concept checking takes place in English or Japanese. After these two mini-lectures on Lehman and microcredit, attention then shifts to the language of cause and effect. Learners are asked to look back at their notes and a script (they are encouraged not to follow it when listening but only to refer to it later for concept checking and language analysis). Firstly, some key vocabulary items and expressions are highlighted on the board as follows:
Today I would like to talk about banking and its effect on society
….how this economic situation has caused many problems in …….
This was a result of the ‘subprime’ problem.
…this was brought about by banks…
As a result of problems……
Learners are then asked to analyse their own notes and the script in more detail to fill out the table below in which language is separated into active/passive voice and expressions (also known as ‘chunks’ of language).
The class commenced by introducing the learners to the theme of banking and asking learners to help me brainstorm some common banking/money-related vocabulary items on the whiteboard (e.g. loan, lend, borrow, credit, owe, interest rate, go bankrupt). I then showed them the first picture below of the fall of Lehman Brothers in 2008 and asked learners to quickly discuss what they know about the event, what caused it and how it affected the U.S. economy thereafter.
Some groups were invited to write their elicited notes on the board. This revealed a variety of correct and incorrect vocabulary and understanding but praise was given for whatever was produced at this stage. I then asked learners to take notes on my mini-lecture on ‘subprime’ and Lehman Brothers, the text of which is here (teacher text 1).
Learners have already been taught to take notes of only key information rather than to treat the exercise as a dictation. After this, learners compare notes and make amendments to their understanding, spelling and key information. In the past, I have requested learners to orally summarise these notes in English but that tends to take up time and is quite a challenging exercise for some learners. Alternatively, I have allowed learners to summarise the notes in Japanese, which is, for some learners and teachers, potentially contentious because in some CLIL approaches the learners’ L1 is not allowed. Considering the dual focus of the course, I find that a CLIL approach (at any level of education) does not necessarily forbid learners’ L1 if it can be used to support content comprehension and/or encourage more participation in class. This English-Japanese switching is called ‘translanguaging’: a strategic mixing of languages to push comprehension of content and language foci forwards. For more on translanguaging in this context, see this.
The lesson moves on to the second section, which addresses microcredit as a financial support system for small businesses in Bangladesh, an idea developed by Professor Yunus and practised through the Grameen Bank. Again, a picture is used as a prompt for pre-listening discussion which manages to solicit one or two ideas.
The teacher input is here (Teacher text 2).
Again, group concept checking takes place in English or Japanese. After these two mini-lectures on Lehman and microcredit, attention then shifts to the language of cause and effect. Learners are asked to look back at their notes and a script (they are encouraged not to follow it when listening but only to refer to it later for concept checking and language analysis). Firstly, some key vocabulary items and expressions are highlighted on the board as follows:
Today I would like to talk about banking and its effect on society
….how this economic situation has caused many problems in …….
This was a result of the ‘subprime’ problem.
…this was brought about by banks…
As a result of problems……
Learners are then asked to analyse their own notes and the script in more detail to fill out the table below in which language is separated into active/passive voice and expressions (also known as ‘chunks’ of language).
Active |
Passive |
Expressions |
has caused |
was brought about by |
its effect on |
- |
- |
This was a result of |
- |
- |
As a result of |
After the table is filled in, learners are invited to the board to write the vocabulary and expressions they have identified. The next stage moves to the use of flowcharts to represent cause-and-effect relations. The flowchart below, in the form of a vicious cycle, was given as a way to summarise the subprime/Lehman Brothers crisis. Learners were asked to firstly (orally) make sentences in groups using the cause-and-effect language from their tables and then write a short paragraph to summarise the first part of the lesson.
Homework is then assigned to draw a similar flowchart and write an accompanying paragraph to summarise the idea of microcredit as presented in the second part of the lesson. That, in essence, concludes the lesson and is a way to encourage learners to work with their own notes (with key words) to move from listening, note-taking and oral production in class to writing and visual representation of lesson content and language.
Thinking back at this stage to this lesson, I can say that the following CLIL elements were in operation:
Although you may think that, as ALTs, this type of lesson is potentially too demanding in terms of content familiarity and language difficulty for your teaching context, the purpose is to make you aware of what your present learners may go on to study after they graduate from high school. Some educators say that their responsibility is always to prepare their learners for the next stage in their lives, be it university or work in an increasingly multilingual work environment (see the Multiculturalism module on this course). As I explained in the background to CLIL section, CLIL/EMI is becoming increasingly popular in Japan for various reasons, so at least an awareness of what is happening in university-level English instruction is important.
Thinking back at this stage to this lesson, I can say that the following CLIL elements were in operation:
- Language scaffolding.
- Multi-modality.
- Collaboration and active learning.
- Some L1 (Japanese) use.
- The use of visuals, especially flowcharts as tools to summarise content.
Although you may think that, as ALTs, this type of lesson is potentially too demanding in terms of content familiarity and language difficulty for your teaching context, the purpose is to make you aware of what your present learners may go on to study after they graduate from high school. Some educators say that their responsibility is always to prepare their learners for the next stage in their lives, be it university or work in an increasingly multilingual work environment (see the Multiculturalism module on this course). As I explained in the background to CLIL section, CLIL/EMI is becoming increasingly popular in Japan for various reasons, so at least an awareness of what is happening in university-level English instruction is important.
7.0 Considerations For Application
As you work as an ALT in elementary, junior and/or senior high schools, I would like to ask you to make a lesson plan which embraces CLIL elements. If you are doing this for the first time, it may appear to be a difficult task to envisage something like this. However, I would like to give you some options and hints.
Firstly, remember that CLIL is a continuum (as explained using Met’s hard-to-soft continuum) so a lesson you teach can add just a small CLIL element. If you feel confident enough to move along that continuum to embrace a slightly ‘harder’ CLIL approach, then please do so. There is not really a ‘format’ for this lesson plan but, similar to the two plans I have given so far for elementary and university levels, I do try to summarise which CLIL elements are activated in the lesson plan. My advice/hints are as follows:
Firstly, remember that CLIL is a continuum (as explained using Met’s hard-to-soft continuum) so a lesson you teach can add just a small CLIL element. If you feel confident enough to move along that continuum to embrace a slightly ‘harder’ CLIL approach, then please do so. There is not really a ‘format’ for this lesson plan but, similar to the two plans I have given so far for elementary and university levels, I do try to summarise which CLIL elements are activated in the lesson plan. My advice/hints are as follows:
- What language focus do you have (vocabulary, functions, etc.) that could be enhanced by a reading text/visual or theme familiar to the learners’ content learning?
- In your class textbook, is there a theme (or even a picture) that you feel can be extended in content and language, especially one from a lesson which has worked well previously?
- Would it be possible for you to consult or observe a content class, or club, in your school to get content ideas? (ALTs can speak to teachers of other subjects about what learners have learnt, and incorporate these topics into their classes).
- In the textbook, is there a section/theme that you feel can replicate a university-level CLIL lesson as a ‘taster’ for future university study and to promote critical thinking?
- In your institution is there someone with whom you can collaborate on a CLIL lesson, or course of lessons? For example, could a content teacher deliver a short part of your lesson on their content area?
- For ensuing work which has been gathered from CLIL lessons – for example, a poster – is it possible to have it displayed in a part of your school (in the library, on your notice board, etc.)?
CLIL positively acts to make language authentic. Think back to your experiences of language learning in school, it may have felt (if no one spoke the language in your community) that the language was meaningless. But when you went to the country it is spoken in, it had meaning, and you being understood had a positive impact on you and, perhaps, your motivation. CLIL can create relevance, by you including information about: the school, the teachers at the school, news topics, TV shows etc. in your classroom. You may well have been using CLIL, but without attaching the label to it, and it is almost certain that JTEs at your schools do to – ask them.
If you wish to share your plan with me for discussion, please feel free to email me at [email protected]
One form of teacher training in Japan is for peers to watch your lessons and have a post lesson discussion. Teachers and Professors are frequently sent from universities to support teachers at the elementary, junior and high schools levels to support teachers; as their learners may well go on to university and this collaboration helps keep teachers on the same page. Sophia University in Tokyo sent Dr Shinichi Izumi to Niigata throughout 2017. Sophia University, as mentioned above, researches CLIL: their website and open days may give you further support in implementing CLIL. (The link to another researcher at Sophia University, Dr Ikeda, is below).
8.0 ALTs' Working Together
ALTs may submit their plans and research papers to [email protected] to find other ALTs to collaborate with. Doing this is a great way to ease yourself into using CLIL, and working with others/sharing ideas all around Japan. Once you have emailed your documents in (lesson plan, research paper or simply an idea) it will be put onto Google Docs and the link put on the Writing Circle page;
The Writing Circle is a well-established form of teacher development and is a well-practiced part of any teacher-training programme, especially for the obvious benefit of peer support. However, as CLIL is so broad, and maybe even a new concept, some ALTs may need additional guidance before attempting a whole lesson (hard) or even part of a lesson (soft). Use the social platforms of alttrainingonline.com website to connect with other ALTs and discuss: forum, teachers’ wall and Facebook.
You may choose to submit the finished piece to Englipedia for maximum use by ALTs.
Thank you for reading through this module on CLIL. I hope I have raised your awareness about its possibilities for you and have shown you an approach that your learners may be exposed to in their future language-learning experiences.
- ALTs can read the title and choose to collaborate by emailing their interest [email: ‘I’m interested in collaborating with CLIL’] – following this, access will be granted to other ALT(s) who submit their interest.
- Alternatively, ALTs may choose to have their Google doc open access (so anyone can view and add comments).
The Writing Circle is a well-established form of teacher development and is a well-practiced part of any teacher-training programme, especially for the obvious benefit of peer support. However, as CLIL is so broad, and maybe even a new concept, some ALTs may need additional guidance before attempting a whole lesson (hard) or even part of a lesson (soft). Use the social platforms of alttrainingonline.com website to connect with other ALTs and discuss: forum, teachers’ wall and Facebook.
You may choose to submit the finished piece to Englipedia for maximum use by ALTs.
Thank you for reading through this module on CLIL. I hope I have raised your awareness about its possibilities for you and have shown you an approach that your learners may be exposed to in their future language-learning experiences.
Dr. John L. Adamson (EdD)
Congratulations on completing module 18!
We really hope you enjoyed and gained from the content and reflection questions.
9.0 Further Reading
University of Cambridge, (n.d). Teaching Maths Through English – a CLIL approach. Retrieved from https://www.unifg.it/sites/default/files/allegatiparagrafo/21-01-2014/teaching_maths_through_clil.pdf
Karlsson, H. (2016, June 8). Is Eiken doing Japan’ English learners more harm than good?. The Japan Times. Retrieved from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2016/06/08/issues/eiken-japans-english-learners-harm-good/#.WVHpSpKGNGY
Vancouver English Centre. (2015). TOEFL Equivalency Table. Retrieved from http://www.englishcollege.pl/userfiles/file/TOEFL%20Equivalency%20Table%20-%20TOEIC,%20TOEFL,%20IELTS%20Score%20Comparison%20Chart.pdf
Karlsson, H. (2016, June 8). Is Eiken doing Japan’ English learners more harm than good?. The Japan Times. Retrieved from http://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2016/06/08/issues/eiken-japans-english-learners-harm-good/#.WVHpSpKGNGY
Vancouver English Centre. (2015). TOEFL Equivalency Table. Retrieved from http://www.englishcollege.pl/userfiles/file/TOEFL%20Equivalency%20Table%20-%20TOEIC,%20TOEFL,%20IELTS%20Score%20Comparison%20Chart.pdf
Professor Makoto Ikeda has kindly permitted ALTTO to share his site CLIL Japan. The site is in Japanese and English which makes communicating CLIL information, and lesson ideas, easy with the JTE you work with.
Content is available under Creative Commons:
Attribtion-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Attribtion-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Copyright © 2019 ALT Training Online