Keywords
Idioma Inglés
Aprendizaje
Lecciones Basadas en Contenido
CLIL University Students
English Language
Learning
Content-Based Lessons
CLIL
How to Cite
Abstract
Currently, the English language has both an important role in university studies and professional careers. With that in mind, the present study employed an exploratory research approach to determine university students’ perceptions with regard to learning course content on curriculum and education-related topics through the implementation of content-based lessons taught in the English language. A survey was administered to 171 students in different majors from one public university in Ecuador. The close-ended questions focused on learning about the respondents’ perceptions concerning varied statements, such as the importance and suitability of the use of English for the learning-teaching process of university subjects, the helpfulness and impact of learning content through the implementation of class sessions taught in English. Furthermore, an open-ended question was put forward to find out in what ways the learning of university subjects taught in English may help the study participants in the future. The findings showed that a large number of respondents had positive attitudes towards learning content-based lessons about the education-related subject matter in English, as they found this instructional process helpful in terms of class participation, motivation, critical thinking, and other aspects. It was concluded that students could better learn the English language in a more genuine manner by means of lessons directed by CLIL, as they complete essential undergraduate courses from their field of study at the university level.
References
Admiraal, W., Westhoff, G., & De Bot, K. (2006). Evaluation of bilingual secondary education in the Netherlands: Students' language proficiency in English. Educational research and Evaluation, 12(1), 75-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610500392160
Argudo, J., Abad, M., Fajardo-Dack, T. & Cabrera, P. (2018). Analyzing a pre-service EFL program through the lenses of the CLIL approach at the University of Cuenca-Ecuador. LACLIL, 11(1), 65-86. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2018.11.1.4
Cenoz, J. (2015). Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: the same or different? Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 8–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogy. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0
Coyle, D., Hood, P. & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.01.001
De Graaff, R., Jan Koopman, G., Anikina, Y., & Westhoff, G. (2007). An observation tool for effective L2 pedagogy in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 603-624. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb462.0
Georgiou, S. (2012). Reviewing the puzzle of CLIL [Special issue, October]. ELT Journal, 66(4), 495‒504. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs047
Guadamillas, M. (2017). Trainee primary-school teachers’ perceptions on CLIL instruction and assessment in universities: A case study. Acta Scientiarum. Education, 39 (1). 41-53. https://doi.org/10.4025/actascieduc.v39i1.32901
Kang, A. (2007). How to better serve EFL college learners in CBI courses. English Teaching-Anseonggun-, 62(3), 69. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.62.3.200709.69
Koopman, G. J., Skeet, J., & de Graaff, R. (2014). Exploring content teachers' knowledge of language pedagogy: A report on a small-scale research project in a Dutch CLIL context. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 123-136. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889974
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lou, Y. G., & Xu, P. (2016). Effects of Content-Based Instruction to Non-English-Major Undergraduates English Teaching with Internet-Based Language Laboratory Support. Creative Education, 7. 596-603. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2016.74062
Mart, C. (2019). A comparison of form-focused, content-based and mixed approaches to literature-based instruction to develop learners´ speaking skills. Cogent Education, 6. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2019.1660526
Martín de Lama, M. A. (2015). Making the match between content and foreign language: A case study on university students’ opinions towards CLIL. Higher Learning Research Communications, 5(1), 29-46. https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v5i1.232
McDougald, J.S. (2017). Language and content in higher education. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 10(1), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2017.10.1.1
Pérez-Cañado, M. (2012). CLIL Research in Europe: Past, Present, and Future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315‒341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.630064
Pladevall-Ballester, E. (2018). A longitudinal study of primary school EFL learning motivation in CLIL and non-CLIL settings. Language Teaching Research, 136216881876587. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818765877
Reiter, B. (2017). Teoría y metodología de la investigación exploratoria en ciencias sociales. Human Journals, 5 (4), 130-150.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.12691/jll-2-1-1
Sato, S., Hasegawa, A., Kumagai, Y., & Kamiyoshi, U. (2017). Content-based Instruction (CBI) for the Social Future: A Recommendation for Critical Content-Based Language Instruction (CCBI). L2 Journal, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.5070/l29334164
Stoller F.L. (2008). Content‐Based Instruction. In: Hornberger N.H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_89
Tsuchiya, K., & Pérez Murillo, M. D. (2015). Comparing the language policies and the students’ perceptions of CLIL in tertiary education in Spain and Japan, 8(1), 25-35. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2014.8.1.3
Vergara, L., López, J., Macea, J., & de la Rosa, A. (2016). Content-Based Instruction in Colombian Universities. Adelante Ahead Revista Institucional, (7), 55-63.
Verspoor, M., de Bot, K., & Xu, X. (2015). The effects of English bilingual education in the Netherlands. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 3(1), 4-27. https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.3.1.01ver
Waller, T. A. (2018). Content-Based Instruction. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0168
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. LACIJL, 9(1), 64-109. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2016.9.1.4
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2021 Diego Ortega-Auquilla, Paul Sigüenza-Garzón, Sara Cherres-Fajardo, Andrés Bonilla-Marchán