Anthomy Schmidt

2016-12-12

Many ELT practitioners highlight the potential benefits for language learning that could be provided by CLIL (Content and language Integrated Learning, see Coyle et al 2010). Theoretical support is found in Constructivism, or in Krashen's influencial language acquisition hypotheses, for example. Empirical studies into the efficacy of CLIL approaches, often in comparison to more established language teaching practices, have tended to focus on specific language components, such as vocabulary, and look at limited time frames. This longitudinal study by Prieto-Arranz et al, considers comprehension skills more broadly, investigating whether CLIL and non-CLIL pupils progress in their reading and listening comprehension proficiency to the same degree. As an additional research question, the study looks at whether learners’ language profiles affect their acquisition of reading and listening skills in English.

Text: Prieto-Arranz , J.I., Lucrecia Rallo Fabra, Caterina Calafat-Ripoll, Magdalena Catrain-González. (2015). "Testing Progress on Receptive Skills in CLIL and Non-CLIL Contexts". Content-based Language Learning in Multilingual Educational Environments. Ed. Juan-Garau, M. & J. Salazar-Noguera. Springer, 2015. 123-137.  Print. Available here

Study:

  • Participants:
    • 87 Catalan–Spanish bilingual secondary-school pupils at 6 state schools. English = L3.
    • All aged 13 at start of study which lasted 3 years.
    • CLIL group (N = 50): learning science/social science through the medium of English in addition to English as a Foreign Language (EFL).
    • Non-CLIL group (N = 37): receiving formal instruction in EFL.
    • Based on self--reports, participants also categorised by language profile: Catalan-dominant bilinguals ( N = 33), Spanishdominant bilinguals ( N = 21), balanced Catalan-Spanish bilinguals ( N = 27) and multilingual subjects ( N = 6).
  • Tested on two listening comprehension (1 with written multiple-choice Qs, 1 with pictoral multiple-choice Qs) and two reading comprehension tests (1 general text, 1 social sciences text).
  • Tests repeated at four points over 3-year period. (Tests adapted from well-known intermediate level ELT materials).
  • Outliers eliminated from sample.

Results:

  • Reading comprehension: CLIL group significantly greater improvements over span of study in general. Most striking difference on specific reading test (social sciences text). Both groups similar levels of improvement on general reading test.
  • Listening comprehension: Both groups significantly improved over span of study in general. CLIL group improved significantly more on general listening comprehension test; no significant improvement in non-CLIL group on this test. Both groups similar levels of improvement on picture listening task.
  • Language profiles: Spanish-dominant pupils scored marginally higher than Catalan-dominant pupils on specific reading test. No significant differences on other tests.

Conclusions:

Overall, the CLIL approach had a beneficial effect on learners' reading comprehension skills. Looking at the highly significant difference in improvement regarding the specific reading test, it appears that CLIL provides learners' with a broader receptive vocabulary within the specific field of content. Looking in detail at the rates of improvement, the CLIL group seemed to take longer to reach the higher scores, perhaps because they are cognitively processing both language and content information simultaneously. Over the three-year study period, though, they made significantly larger gains in reading skills. With regard to listening comprehension, the analyses here do not seem to indicate a clear advantage of the CLIL approach over other more established ELT practices. The data here is not sufficient to draw conclusions on the possible benefits to foreign language learning derived from speaking a certain main language.

Applications:

If possible in the individual teaching context, it would seem advisable to train reading comprehension skills through a CLIL approach; the authors believe this exposes learners to a wider range of lexical items, which may not be covered in general EFL teaching. This is likely particularly applicable in EAP or ESP settings. Nonetheless, the approach should probably be applied consistently for a period of time, for significant learning gains to be established.

The authors also discuss possible effects of the test-type on learners' scores - noting that the pictoral multiple-choice questions maybe have made that listening comprehension test easier in general. Future research could imitate the design of the study and change the test types, to confirm the results found here.

References:

Coyle, D., P. Hood & D. Marsh. 2010. CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.