Evaluating CLIL programmesinstrument design and validation

  1. Pérez Cañado, María Luisa
Revista:
Pulso: revista de educación

ISSN: 1577-0338,  2445-2866

Año de publicación: 2016

Número: 39

Páginas: 79-112

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Pulso: revista de educación

Resumen

This article presents the three sets of questionnaireswhich have been originally designed andvalidated within a broader governmentally-fundedresearch project to determine how CLIL schemesare playing out across a broad array of contexts(Primary and Secondary Education; urban andrural settings; public and private schools; with teachers,students, and parents). They are the firstqualitative instruments whose design has beenbased on recent research outcomes and whichhave undergone a carefully controlled double-foldpilot process for their validation (external ratingsapproach and pilot phase with a representativesample of nearly 300 subjects). After characterizingthe questions included in the surveys,along with their format and chief categories, thearticle goes on to describe the steps undertakenfor their research-based design and the doublefoldpilot process followed for their validation. Theactual questionnaires are then presented (forlanguage teachers, non-linguistic area teachers,teaching assistants, students, and parents) in aformat which can directly be applied in any CLILclassroom in order to gauge how bilingual programmesare playing out at present.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Alonso, E., Grisaleña, J., and Campo, A. (2008). Plurilingual education in secondary schools: Analysis of results. International CLIL Research Journal, 1/1, 36-49.
  • Blanca Pérez, A. (2009). La administración educativa en la organización de la enseñanza plurilingüe. In A. Bueno González, J. M. Nieto García, & D. Cobo López (Eds.), Atención a la diversidad en la enseñanza plurilingüe. I, II y III Jornadas Regionales de Formación del Profesorado (CD-ROM). Jaén: Delegación Provincial de Educación de Jaén y Universidad de Jaén.
  • Brown, J. D. (2001). Using surveys in language programs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • 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., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2013). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 2013, 1-21.
  • Coyle, D. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning. Motivating learners and teachers. . (December 3rd, 2015).
  • 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., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Czura, A., Papaja, K., & Urbaniak, M. (2009). Bilingual education and the emergence of CLIL in Poland. In D. Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. J. FrigolsMartín, S. Hughes, & G. Langé (Eds.), CLIL practice: Perspectives from the field (pp. 172-178). Finland: University of Jyväskylä,.
  • Denzin, N. K. (1994). The art and politics of interpretation. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 200-515). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Díaz Cobo, A. (2009). Assessment instruments for CLIL written production tasks. In Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. J. Frigols-Martín, S. Hughes & G. Langé (Eds.), CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field (pp. 139-148). Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
  • Dueñas, M. (2004). The whats, whys, hows and whos of content-based instruction in second/foreign language education. IJES, 4/1, 73-96.
  • Fernández Cézar, R., Aguirre Pérez, C., & Harris, C. (2009). Implementation of CLIL in Castilla-La Mancha (Spain) and teacher training. In D. Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. J. Frigols-Martín, S. Hughes & G. Langé (Eds.), CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field (pp. 21-27). Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
  • Fernández Fernández, R., Pena Díaz, C., García Gómez, A., & Halbach, A. (2005). La implantación de proyectos educativos bilingües en la Comunidad de Madrid: las expectativas del profesorado antes de iniciar el proyecto. Porta Linguarum, 3, 161-173.
  • Fernández, R. & Halbach, A. (2011). Analysing the situation of teachers in the Madrid bilingual project after four years of implementation. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, J. M. Sierra, & F. Gallardo del Puerto (Eds.), Content and Foreign Language Integrated Learning. Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp. 241-270). Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.
  • García López, M. & Bruton, A. (2013). Potential drawbacks and actual benefits of CLIL initiatives in public secondary 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. 256-272). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
  • García Mayo, M. P. (2009). El uso de tareas y la atención a la forma del lenguaje en el aula de AICLE. In V. Pavón Vázquez & J. Ávila López (Eds.), Aplicaciones didácticas para la enseñanza integrada de lengua y contenidos (pp. 55-74). Córdoba: Junta de Andalucía, Universidad de Córdoba, CETA.
  • Halbach, A. (2010). From the classroom to university and back: Teacher training for CLIL in Spain at the Universidad de Alcalá. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. 243-256). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • 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.
  • Infante, D., Benvenuto, G., & Lastrucci, E. (2009). The effects of CLIL from the perspective of experienced teachers. In D. Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. J. Frigols-Martín, S. Hughes, and G. Langé (Eds.), CLIL practice: Perspectives from the field (pp. 156-163). Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
  • Kelly, K. (2007). Content and Language Integrated Learning: The Basque Country. In Humanising Language Teaching, 9/3, . (December 3rd, 2015).
  • Lasagabaster, D. (2009). The implementation of CLIL and attitudes towards trilingualism. ITL, International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 159, 23-45.
  • Lasagabaster, D. & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2010). Ways forward in CLIL: Provision issues and future planning. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. 278-295). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • 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. (2010). CLIL in Andalusia. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. 2-11). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • 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.
  • Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Madrid Fernández, D. (2006). Bilingual and plurilingual education in the European and Andalusian context. International Journal of Learning, 12/4, 177-185.
  • Marsh, D. (2013). The CLIL trajectory: Educational Innovation for the 21st century iGeneration. Códoba: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Córdoba.
  • Marsh, D. (ed.). (2002). CLIL/EMILE. The European dimension. Actions, trends, and foresight potential. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
  • Marsh D. and Langé, G. (Eds.). (2000). Using languages to learn and learning to use languages. Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
  • Martín del Pozo, M. A. (2011). Teacher training for CLIL in Higher Education: A needs analysis from a language awareness perspective. Paper presented at the II Congreso Internacional de Enseñanza Bilingüe en Centros Educativos. Madrid: Universidad Rey Juan Carlos.
  • 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.
  • Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Pena Díaz, C. & Porto Requejo, M. D. (2008). Teacher beliefs in a CLIL education Project. Porta Linguarum, 10, 151-161.
  • Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2014). Teacher training needs for bilingual education: In-service teacher perceptions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, DOI: 10.1080/13670050.2014.980778.
  • Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2016). Are teachers ready for CLIL? Evidence from a European study. European Journal of Teacher Education. DOI: 10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104.
  • Roldán Tapia, A. (2007). Converting to CLIL. English Teaching professional, 52, 8-10.
  • Rubio Mostacero, M. D. (2009). Language teacher training for non-language teachers: Meeting the needs of Andalusian teachers for school plurilingualism projects. Design of a targeted training course. Jaén: Universidad de Jaén.
  • Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. & Lasagabaster, D. (2010). Introduction. The emergence of CLIL in Spain: An educational challenge. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. ix-xvii). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Ruiz Gómez, D. A. (2015). A Practical approach to CLIL in L2 content-based courses: Methodological guidelines for the Andalusian bilingual classroom. In D. Marsh, M. L. Pérez Cañado, & J. Ráez Padilla (Eds.), CLIL in action: Voices from the classroom (pp. 14-30). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Ruiz Gómez, D. A. & Nieto García, J. M. (2009). Las secciones bilingües en Secundaria y Bachillerato. Marco organizativo. Dificultades y propuestas. In A. Bueno González, J. M. Nieto García, & D. Cobo López (Eds.), Atención a la diversidad en la enseñanza plurilingüe. I, II y III Jornadas Regionales de Formación del Profesorado (CD-ROM). Jaén: Delegación Provincial de Educación de Jaén y Universidad de Jaén.
  • 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.
  • Tudor, I. (2013). From content to competency: Challenge facing higher education language teaching in Europe. In M.L. Pérez Cañado (Ed.), Competency-based Language Teaching in Higher Education (pp. 21-32). Amsterdam: Springer.
  • Vázquez, G. (2007). Models of CLIL: An evaluation of its status drawing on the German experience. A critical report on the limits of reality and perspectives. RESLA, Vol. Extra 1, 95-111.
  • Wolff, D. (2005). Approaching CLIL. In D. Marsh (Coord.), The CLIL quality matrix. Central workshop report, . (December 3rd, 2015).
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet