From the CLIL craze to the CLIL conundrumaddressing the current CLIL controversy

Referencias bibliográficas

• Alonso, E., Grisaleña, J., & Campo, A. (2008). Plurilingual education in secondary schools: Analysis of results. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 36-49.
• Banegas, D. L. (2011). A review of CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Language and Education, 25, 182–185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2010.539045
• Bruton, A. (2011a). Are the differences between CLIL and non-CLIL groups in Andalusia due to CLIL? A reply to Lorenzo, Casal and Moore (2010). Applied Linguistics, 2011, 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr007
• Bruton, A. (2011b). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the Research. System, 39, 523-532. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.08.002
• Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why ... and why not. System, 41, 587-597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.001
• Bruton, A. (2015). CLIL: Detail matters in the whole picture. More than a reply to J. Hüttner and U. Smit (2014). System, 53, 119-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.07.005
• Cabezas Cabello, J. M. (2010). A SWOT analysis of the Andalusian Plurilingualism Promotion Plan (APPP). In M. L. Pérez Cañado (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd GRETA Convention (pp. 83-91). Jaén: Joxman.
• Cenoz, J. (2015). Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: the same or different? Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 8-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922
• Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2013). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 2013, 1-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011
• Cenoz, J. & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2015). Way forward in the twenty-first century in contentbased instruction: Moving towards integration. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 90-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000927
• Coonan, C. M. (2005). The natural learning of a foreign language. CLIL as a possible partial solution for the primary school. Scuola e Lingue Moderne, 4-5.
• Coyle, D. (2002). Relevance of CLIL to the European Commission’s language learning objectives. In D. Marsh (Ed.), CLIL/EMILE. The European dimension. Actions, trends, and foresight potential (pp. 27-28). Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
• Coyle, D. (2006). Content and language integrated learning. Motivating learners and teachers. <http://blocs.xtec.cat/clilpractiques1/files/2008/11/slrcoyle.pdf> (December 10th, 2015).
• Coyle, D. (2008). CLIL: A pedagogical approach from the European perspective. In N. Van Deusen-Scholl & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Second and foreign language education, Volume 4 (pp. 97-111). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
• Coyle, D. (2009a). Language pedagogies revisited: Alternative approaches for integrating language learning, language using and intercultural understanding. In J. Miller, A. Kostogriz, & M. Gearon (Eds.), Culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms: New dilemmas for teachers (pp. 172-195). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Coyle, D. (2009b). Promoting cultural diversity through intercultural understanding: A case study of CLIL teacher professional development at in-service and pre-service levels. In M. L. Carrió-Pastor (Ed.), Content and language integrated learning: Cultural diversity (pp. 105-124). Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.
• Coyle, D. (2010). Foreword. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: implementation, results and teacher training (pp. vii-viii). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Coyle, D. & Baetens Beardsmore, H. (2007). Research on content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 541-542. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13670050708668197
• Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., Lorenzo, F. & Nikula, T. (2014). You can stand under my umbrella. Immersion, CLIL and bilingual education. A response to Cenoz, Genesee & Gorter (2013). Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 213-218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu010
• Dickey, R. J. (2004). Content (adj) or content (n) with your English classes? Education International, 1(3), 10-15.
• Durán-Martínez, R. & Beltrán-Llavador, F. (2016). A regional assessment of bilingual programmes in primary and secondary schools: The teachers’ views. Porta Linguarum, 25, 79-92.
• European Commission. (1995). White Paper on education and training. Teaching and learning: Towards the learning society. <http://europa.eu/documents/comm/white_papers/pdf/com95_590_en.pdf>. (July 9th, 2010).
• Fortanet-Gómez, I. & Ruiz-Garrido, M. F. (2009). Sharing CLIL in Europe. In M. L. CarrióPastor (Ed.), Content and Language Integrated Learning: Cultural diversity (pp. 47- 75). Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.
• Genesee, F. (2004). What do we know about bilingual education for majority language students. In T. K. Bhatia & W. Ritchie (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism and multiculturalism (pp. 547–576). Oxford: Blackwell,
• Gimeno Sanz, A. M. (2009). How can CLIL benefit from the integration of information and communication technologies? In M. L. Carrió-Pastor (Ed.), Content and language integrated learning: Cultural diversity (pp. 77-102). Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.
• Hughes, S. (2010). The effectiveness of bilingual education: A case study. Paper presented at the 25th GRETA Convention: Celebrating 25 Years of Teacher Inspiration. Granada: University of Granada.
• Hüttner, J. & Smit, U. (2014). CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning): The bigger picture. A response to: A. Bruton. 2013. CLIL: Some of the reasons why … and why not. System 41 (2013): 587-597. System, 44, 160-167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.03.001
• Järvinen, H. M. (2005). Language learning in content-based instruction. In A. Housen & M. Pierrard (Eds.), Investigations in second language acquisition (pp. 433-456). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Kumaravadivelu, B. (2001). Towards a postmethod pedagogy. TESOL Quarterly, 35(4), 537- 560. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3588427
• Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in Content and Language Integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 31-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874913500801010030
• Lasagabaster, D. & Doiz, A. (2016). CLIL students' perceptions of their language learning process: Delving into self-perceived improvement and instructional preferences. Language Awareness, DOI: 10.1080/09658416.2015.1122019.
• Lasagabaster, D. & Sierra, J. M. (2009). Language attitudes in CLIL and traditional EFL classes. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(2), 4-17.
• Lorenzo, F. (2007). The sociolinguistics of CLIL: Language planning and language change in 21st century Europe. RESLA, Vol. Extra. 1, 27-38.
• Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., Moore, P., & Afonso, Y. M. (2009). Bilingüismo y educación. Situación de la red de centros bilingües en Andalucía. Sevilla: Fundación Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
• Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. (2011). On complexity in bilingual research: The causes, effects, and breadth of content and language integrated learning. A reply to Bruton (2011). Applied Linguistics, 32(4), 450-455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amr025
• Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Madrid, D. & García Sánchez. M. E. (2001). Content-based second language teaching. In M. E. García Sánchez (Ed.), Present and future trends in TEFL (pp. 101-129). Almería: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Almería.
• Marsh, D. (Ed.). (2002). CLIL/EMILE. The European dimension. Actions, trends, and foresight potential. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
• Marsh, D. (2006). English as Medium of instruction in the new global linguistic order: Global characteristics, local consequences. Finland: UNICOM, Continuing Education Centre, University of Jyväskylä,. <http://www.metsmac.org./2007/proceedings/2006/Marsh-DMETSMaC-2006.pdf>. (July 9th, 2015).
• Marsh, D. (2008). Language awareness and CLIL. In J. Cenoz & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education. Knowledge about language, Volume 6 (pp. 233-246). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.
• Marsh D. and Langé, G. (Eds.). (2000). Using languages to learn and learning to use languages. Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
• May, S. (2014). The multilingual turn. Implications for SLA, TESOL and bilingual education. New York: Routledge.
• Mehisto, P. (2007). What a school needs to consider before launching a CLIL program: the Estonian experience. In D. Marsh & D. Wolff (Eds.), Diverse contexts-converging goals: CLIL in Europe (pp. 61–77). Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.
• Merino, J. A. & Lasagabaster, D. (2015). CLIL as a way to multilingualism. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, DOI:10.1080/13670050.2015.1128386.
• Met, M. (1998). Curriculum decision-making in content-based language teaching. In J. Cenoz & F. Genesee (Eds.), Beyond bilingualism: Multilingualism and multilingual education (pp. 35-63). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Muñoz, C. (2007). CLIL: Some thoughts on its psycholinguistic principles. RESLA, Vol. Extra 1, 17-26.
• Navés, T. (2009). Effective content and language integrated (CLIL) programmes. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and Language Integrated Learning. Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 22-40). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Paran, A. (2013). Content and language integrated learning: Panacea or policy borrowing myth? Applied Linguistics Review, 4(2), 317-342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/applirev2013-0014
• Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2011). The effects of CLIL within the APPP: Lessons learned and ways forward. In R. Crespo & M. A. García de Sola (Eds.), Studies in honour of Ángeles Linde López (pp. 13-30). Granada: Universidad de Granada.
• Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315-341. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.630064
• Pérez Cañado, M. L. In press. Stopping the “pendulum effect” in CLIL research: Finding the balance between Pollyanna and Scrooge. Applied Linguistics Review.
• Pérez Cañado, M. L. & Ráez Padilla, J. (2015). Introduction and overview. In D. Marsh, M. L. Pérez Cañado, & J. Ráez Padilla (Eds.), CLIL in action: Voices from the classroom (pp. 1-12). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
• Pérez-Vidal, C. (2013). Perspectives and lessons from the challenge of CLIL experiences. In C. Abello-Contesse, P. M. Chandler, M. D. López-Jiménez, & R. Chacón-Beltrán (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education in the 21st century. Building on experience (pp. 59-82). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Piquer Vives, I. & Lorenzo Galés, N. (2015). Reflecting on CLIL innovation. An interview with Do Coyle and Elisabet Pladevall. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 8(1), 86-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.610
• Rimmer, W. (2009). A closer look at CLIL. English Teaching professional, 64, 4-6.
• Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2007). CLIL in a bilingual community: similarities and differences with learning English as a foreign language. View[z], 16(3), 47-52.
• Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2008). CLIL and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the Basque Country. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 60-73.
• Smit, U. (2007). Introduction. Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3), 3-5.
• Somers, T. & Surmont, J. (2011). CLIL and immersion: how clear-cut are they? ELT Journal, 66(1), 113-116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr079
• Swan, M. (1985). A critical look at the communicative approach (2). ELT Journal, 39(2), 76- 87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/39.2.76
• Tobin, N. A. & Abello-Contesse, C. (2013). The use of native assistants as language and cultural resources in Andalusia’s bilingual schools. In C. Abello-Contesse, P. M. Chandler, M. D. López-Jiménez, & R. Chacón-Beltrán (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education in the 21st century. Building on experience (pp. 231-255). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
• Vez, J. M. (2009). Multilingual education in Europe: Policy developments. Porta Linguarum, 12, 7-24.
• Wolff, D. (2003). Integrating language and content in the language classroom: Are transfer of knowledge and of language ensured? ASP: Pratiques et Recherches en Centres de Langues, 41-42, 35-46.
• Wolff, D. (2005). Approaching CLIL. In D. Marsh (Coord.), The CLIL quality matrix. Central workshop report, <http://www.ecml.at/mtp2/CLILmatrix/pdf/wsrepD3E2005_6.pdf>. (December 3rd, 2015).