Disadvantages Of The Clil Methodology Education Essay

Content and Language Integrated Learning ( CLIL ) is â€Å" an advanced attack to acquisition, a dynamic and actuating force with holistic characteristics † ( Paresi et al. 2001: 77 ) . This method of larning the content of capable through a foreign linguistic communication has been acclaimed worldwide as a pedagogical tool of supplying scholars with a particular learn-promoting atmosphere. Although surveies conducted in CLIL schoolrooms have demonstrated legion positive effects on linguistic communication competencies and attitude, there are still certain accomplishments which can non be developed every bit successfully as in traditional schoolrooms. First of wholly, this concerns productive accomplishments which are fostered less efficaciously in CLIL categories. Therefore, extra schemes are much needed in order to hike both unwritten and written accomplishments. One of such suited techniques is concerted acquisition ( CL ) , which gives scholars an chance to work with their equals and, what is even more of import, motivates them. Integrating CL into CLIL may assist ease overall linguistic communication proficiency and make a high degree of larning motive. This paper will analyze how pupils may be motivated in CLIL categories by implementing CL. The intent of the survey is to demo how CLIL enriched by CL can make a motivation acquisition environment. The first subdivision of the paper is an debut, which is followed by an overview of the research conducted on CLIL in Europe. Section 3 trades with the drawbacks of the CLIL attack and Section 4 is devoted to CL, which is divided into three subdivisions. First subdivision gives an overview of CL research done in Europe. The following subdivision defines CL as a term and the undermentioned subdivision investigates the specialnesss of CL organisation of the acquisition. Section 5 discusses how a blend of CLIL and CL can lend to making actuating category atmosphere. The concluding subdivision will pull a decision approximately CL as one of the most utile techniques to increase pupils ‘ motive to larn linguistic communication.2. CLIL research in EuropeAs already stated in the debut, this subdivision deals with research surveies carried out in European states and points out chief treatments refering CLIL as a instruction method, viz. its influence on lingual and cognitive competenci es of scholars. Before lucubrating on CLIL research, it should be noted that there is â€Å" still a well-documented dearth of research in this country † ( Perez- Canado 2011: 315 ) . CLIL is a particular method of â€Å" instruction and larning through a foreign linguistic communication † ( March 2002: 54 ) , which has been widely acknowledged across Europe. This attack of incorporating content and linguistic communication in the schoolroom has gained an increasing popularity in European states in the 1990s when greater degrees of foreign linguistic communication proficiency and new signifiers of bilingual instruction were needed due to socio-economic integrating and globalisation. Being introduced and developed by Council of Europe in 1996, CLIL attack was later underpinned by a series of schoolroom based surveies which provided grounds for its advantages. Overall, research work carried out on CLIL affirms that â€Å" it is safe and promising manner of learning both for foreign ling uistic communication and a content topic † ( Gregorczyk 2012: 10 ) . Findingss have showed that CLIL has positive impact non merely on content acquisition ( californium. Serra 2007 ; Deller & A ; Price 2007 ; Seikkula-Leino 2007 ; Vollmer 2008 ; Jappinen 2006 ) , but besides on L1 and L2 competencies ( californium. Masih 1999 ; Lorenzo, Casal & A ; Moore 2009 ; Coyle, Hood & A ; March 2010 ) . Besides, there are some research workers who emphasize the ability of CLIL to better content and linguistic communication competencies and who strongly believe in the importance of the CLIL methodological analysis ( californium. Mehisto & A ; March 2008 ) .3. Disadvantages of the CLIL methodological analysisDespite the presented potency of CLIL undertaking, several disadvantages of the content-based linguistic communication instruction were observed and investigated by different bookmans and learning experts. These surveies have demonstrated that particularly productive accomplishments a re less boosted in CLIL schoolrooms and are achieved at well lower degrees of public presentation than receptive accomplishments. This means that both speech production and composing accomplishments are reported to be negatively affected in content-based contexts. Particularly unwritten production of scholars is likely to neglect to be successfully developed and improved in CLIL categories ( Perez- Canado 2011: 317 ) . Although some research workers argue that good synergistic accomplishments can be acquired in content-based schoolrooms ( Moore 2011: 533 ) , Casal ( 2006: 1 ) points out that scholars have few chances to pass on with each other which may hold a negative impact non merely on unwritten but besides on written production. Furthermore, it is indispensable to concentrate much more attending on composing in content-based categories in order to go more positive results ( Dulton-Puffer 2007: 36 ) . Apart from the inquiries of negatively affected lingual competencies raised by assorted research workers, other bookmans were concentrated on issues associated with linguistic communication development ( californium. Dalton-Puffer 2007 ; Merisuo-Storm 2007 ) . However, merely few surveies are concerned with scholars ‘ attitudes or perceptual experiences ( californium. Hunt 2011 ) . Since this paper is focused on CL as an effectual instruction tool for actuating scholars in CLIL categories, the research done on CL will be briefly discussed in the first subdivision of the following subdivision devoted to CL.4. Concerted acquisition.4.1. Overview of European surveies on CLThough the term concerted acquisition was coined in the USA in the 1940s, most research has been undertaken merely during the last 30 old ages and has done much to progress theoreticians and instructors ‘ cognition of cooperation instruction. By looking at CL research outside the USA, there are merely few E uropean states in which thorough and cardinal surveies on CL have been conducted, viz. in Italy by Lopriore ( 1999 ) and Spain by Lobato Fraile ( 1998 ) , Rodriguez Tunas and Morales Urgel ( 1998 ) , Casal ( 2005 ) , every bit good as in the Netherlands by Van Oudenhoven, Van Berkum and Swen-Koopmans ( 1987 ) . More research on CL is surely needed in Europe, which could put peculiar emphasis on the benefits of the incorporation of CL into CLIL categories, because this might heighten CLIL greatly.4.2. Definition of concerted acquisitionCL promotes better scholar ‘s accomplishment than traditional acquisition attacks ( Slavin 1984: 256 ) . CL is known for its utile and effectual instructional value in linguistic communication acquisition and in instruction in general. There exists a big assortment of definitions of CL which depend on the theoretical attack behind this term. For Olsen & A ; Kagan ( 1992: 8 ) CL is a group larning pattern with a particular construction, where larn ing depends on â€Å" the socially structured exchange of information † between pupils who are responsible non merely for their ain results and advancement but besides for those of their equals. Similar to Olsen & A ; Kagan ( 1992 ) Johnson & A ; Johnson ( 1981: 446 ) position CL as a method of set uping â€Å" little groups so that pupils work together to maximise their ain and each other ‘s acquisition † . However, there are several broader definitions of CL, for illustration, one that is given by Jacobs, Power & A ; Loh ( 2002: A 1 ) who define CL as â€Å" rules and techniques for assisting pupils work together more efficaciously † . Another generalisation of the term CL can be found in the surveies by Damon & A ; Phelps ( 1989: 136 ) where research workers postulate CL as an overarching impression consisting â€Å" a scope of team-based acquisition attacks † . Overall, the definition of CL varies harmonizing to the facet of larning which is of primary importance for a peculiar theoretician. In this paper CL is regarded as an effectual pedagogical tool for bettering productive accomplishments in CLIL categories and for actuating linguistic communication scholars, and therefore, peculiar attending is drawn to both academic accomplishment and societal relationships, which may be enhanced in a concerted environment. The accentuation of these benefits of CL can besides be explained by the fact that scholars in a concerted scene follow the purpose of the group and seek to assist each other in larning which serves as a motivation force for their preparedness to inform and help their equals ( Gillies & A ; Boyle 2010: 933 ) .4.3. Organization of larning in concerted schoolroomsThe predating treatment has demonstrated non merely the assortment of definitions of the term CL, but besides has highlighted the advantages of this effectual group larning technique. This subdivision will show the bing methods of forming of the acquisition procedure in concerted schoolrooms to demo the effectivity of CL for CLIL attack. There are several schemes of set uping larning in concerted schoolrooms, which is based on different attacks such as Leaning Together ( californium. Johnson & A ; Johnson 1981 ; Johnson, Johnson & A ; Holubec 1992 ) , Complex Instruction ( californium. Cohen 1994 ) , Group Investigation ( californium. Sharan 1994 ) , Student Team Learning ( californium. Slavin 1995 ) and Structural Approach to CL ( californium. Kagan 1994 ) . Obviously, certain similarities and differences can be found among them, nevertheless, and they are all underpinned by the basic rules of CL, viz. , positive mutuality and single answerability. At this point it should be stated that it is non merely the execution of CL attack into CLIL contexts which is important but besides the effectual and decently designed group methods with their built-in rules from which CLIL may profit well. Furthermore, a immense assortment of CL techniques will do content-based categories more exciting for each scholar. ( californium. J acobs, Power, & A ; Loh 2002 ; Sharan 2010 ) . Some of them are presented by Jacobs ( 2004: 4-5 ) , e.g. Circle of Speakers, Write-Pair-Switch, Question-and-Answer Pairs, etc. Importantly, the incorporation of such group activities into CLIL â€Å" provokes pupils to endeavor † ( Brecke & A ; Jensen 2007: 57 ) .5. Execution of CL in CLIL schoolroomsAs already discussed in the old subdivision, CL techniques may increase scholars ‘ motive. However, non merely group activities per Se motivate pupils, but it is a ‘social interaction ‘ that is so extremely of import for them, and by and large, for kids begin to larn at an early age ( Gillies & A ; Boyle 2011: 933 ) . Motivation together with exposure and usage are defined as important requirements for effectual linguistic communication acquisition ( Willis 1996: 11 ) . Therefore, supplying scholars with more societal contacts and peer interaction activities will actuate them to win and to larn. This does non inte nd that in content-based categories pupils can non interact and are non motivated. Pistorio ( 2010: 2 ) underscores that CLIL has a possible to bring forth a â€Å" socially constructed acquisition environment † . Furthermore, CLIL, being based on ‘intristic motive ‘ , gives a batch of chances to larn linguistic communication by the way ( Paresi et al. 2001: 79-80 ) . In add-on, some research worker ( e.g. Hunt ( 2011: 365 ) posit that CLIL programmes can work out the job of â€Å" alienation † in L2 across Europe ( Lorenzo, Casal & A ; Moore 2009: 12-13 ) . However, harmonizing to Seikkula-Leino ( 2007: 330 ) , linguistic communication and content incorporated into the learning environment can non be equated with success. Therefore, an luxuriant combination of indispensable characteristics of CLIL attack and CL techniques will give more positive consequences, and, at the same clip, will better scholars ‘ motive. â€Å" This integrating provides a mo tivational and cognitive footing for linguistic communication acquisition † ( Snow, Met & A ; Genesee 1989: 202 ) .6. DecisionIn decision, CLIL being applied in European schools has been developed to heighten bilingual instruction and has surely the potency for growing. In order to avoid some booby traps of the content-based acquisition, viz. negatively affected productive accomplishments, an extra instruction method – CL – has been suggested. In this paper, CL techniques with their important rules were demonstrated as successful pedagogical tools which may better academic accomplishment and societal interaction in a CLIL environment. Underliing the importance of societal interaction as one of the built-in conditions for successful linguistic communication acquisition, this survey has proved that CL may be efficaciously integrated into content-based schoolrooms in order to accomplish both a higher degree of motive and to hike lingual competency outcomes overall. Furthermore, since assorted CL activities force equal interaction, they can besides further talking accomplishments by actuating pupils to pass on with other. Further research in this country is needed to place other positive facets of CL, which are suited for CLIL and which may be applied efficaciously, particularly to better composing accomplishments. It will be besides indispensable to place other cooperation characteristics which may increase motive to larn linguistic communication in content-based categories. Of class, CLIL needs to continue with development and research non merely to foreground its advantages, but besides to concentrate on extra instruction techniques in order to vouch that pupils can successfully develop both their receptive and productive accomplishments in a content-based environment. The consequences of this paper show that CLIL ‘s benefits will far outweigh the disadvantages when implementing CL into CLIL.