Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Vol. 11:1 (2023) ► pp.4–28

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Student-teacher interaction in CLIL and non-CLIL elementary education

A case study of verbal-pedagogical strategies and participation during read alouds in a Natural Science classroom

ORCiD logo with link | Universidad de Extremadura
 | Universidad de Extremadura
 | University of Michigan
 | Colegio Luis de Morales
Published online: 10 December 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.21005.ale
Abstract
This study analyzes interaction in a primary school science classroom. We compare the verbal scaffolding strategies used by a teacher during lessons from the same instructional unit taught in CLIL (English) and regular (Spanish) contexts. Results show that although there was no difference in the amount of information (‘content’) made available to students through the interactions, different verbal strategies were used (precision, justification and recall were more frequent in Spanish and exemplification in English) and that students were more active in engaging with science knowledge in the Spanish context. We discuss these findings in relation to the level of abstraction the teacher supported in interacting about science in the regular session, with implications for supporting children in learning both content and language in CLIL contexts.
Abstracta
Este estudio analiza la interacción en una clase de ciencias de Educación Primaria. Se comparan las estrategias de andamiaje verbal utilizadas por una profesora durante las clases de una misma unidad didáctica impartidas en contextos AICLE (inglés) y no-AICLE (español). Los resultados muestran que, aunque no se detectaron diferencias en la cantidad de información (“contenido”) disponible para el alumnado, se utilizaron diferentes estrategias verbales (la precisión, la justificación y el recuerdo más frecuentes en español y la ejemplificación en inglés) así como que los alumnos fueron más activos a la hora de abordar el conocimiento científico en el contexto español. Discutimos estos resultados en relación con el nivel de abstracción presente en la interacción en la sesión ordinaria, y reflexionamos sobre implicaciones para la ayuda que se presta en el aprendizaje tanto del contenido como del lenguaje en contextos AICLE.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.CLIL research and interactional scaffolding
  • 3.Research questions
  • 4.Method
    • 4.1Participants and research context
    • 4.2Codification and data analysis
      • 4.2.1Typical Classroom Activities, Episodes and Clauses
      • 3.2.2Categorization of the clauses
      • 4.2.3Verbal reworking and interactional strategies related to the information made public
      • 4.2.4Degree of student participation
      • 4.2.4Inter-rater reliability
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Amount of information made public
    • 5.2Types of verbal-pedagogic strategies used in the regular vs. CLIL class sessions
    • 5.3Degree of participation
    • 5.4Pedagogical-verbal strategies and level of participation
  • 6.Discussion
  • Note
  • References
References (49)
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bustos, A., Montenegro, C., Tapia, A., & Calfual, K. (2017). Leer para aprender: Cómo interactúan los profesores con sus alumnos en la Educación Primaria [Reading to learn: How teachers interact with their students in primary education]. Ocnos: Revista de Estudios Sobre Lectura, 16(1), 89–106. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A. (2001). Patterns of discourse in two kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly, 361, 378–411. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cummins, J. (1999). BICS and CALP: Clarifying the distinction (Report No. ED438551). ERIC Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 1–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Cognitive discourse functions: Specifying an integrative interdisciplinary construct. In T. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising Integration in CLIL and Multilingual Education (pp. 29–54). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Discourse analysis and CLIL. In A. Llinares & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp. 167–182). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Downing, A., & Locke, P. (2006). English grammar: A university course. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2007). Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellison, M. (2018). CLIL in the primary school context. In Garton, S., & Copland, F. (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Teaching English to Young Learners. (pp. 247–268). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 491–520. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gajo, L. (2007). Linguistic knowledge and subject knowledge: How does bilingualism contribute to subject development? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 563–581. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
García-Rodicio, H., Melero, M. A. & Izquierdo, M. B. (2018). A comparison of reading aloud, silent reading and follower reading. Which is best for comprehension? Una comparación de lectura en voz alta, lectura en silencio y lectura de seguimiento. ¿Cuál es mejor para la comprensión? Infancia y Aprendizaje, 41(1), 138–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbons, P. (2003). Mediating language learning: Teacher interactions with ESL students in a content-based classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 247–273. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Bridging discourses in the ESL classroom: Students, teachers, and researchers. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning (2nd ed.). Heinemann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kayi-Aydar, H. (2013). Scaffolding language learning in an academic ESL classroom. ELT Journal, 67(3), 324–335. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leisen, J. (2010). Handbuch sprachförderung im fach: Sprachsensibler sachunterricht in der praxis. [Handbook on language support in subjects: Language-sensitive teaching in practice]. Ernst Klett Sprachen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, A. M. (2016). Language across the curriculum & CLIL in English as an additional language (EAL) contexts: Theory and practice. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Llinares, A., & Morton, T. (Eds.). (2017). Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (Vol. 471). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Llinares, A., & Whittaker, R. (2010). Writing and speaking in the history class: Data from CLIL and first language contexts. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp.125–144). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorenzo, F. (2007) An Analytical Framework of Language Integration in L2 Content-based Courses: The European Dimension, Language and Education, 21:6, 502–514. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorenzo, F., S. Casal, and P. Moore. 2010. ‘The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: key findings from the Andalusian sections evaluation project,’ Applied Linguistics, 418–42. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McNeil, L. (2012). Using talk to scaffold referential questions for English language learners. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(3), 396–404. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning in bilingual and multilingual education. MacMillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Montali, J., & Lewandowski, L. (1996). Bimodal reading: Benefits of a talking computer for average and less skilled readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 291, 271–279. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikula, T. (2017). ‘What’s the moment thingy?’–On the emergence of subject-specific knowledge in CLIL classroom interaction. In Langman, J. & Hansen-Thomas, H. (eds.) Discourse analytic perspectives on STEM education (pp. 11–29). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Llinares, A. (2013). CLIL classroom discourse: Research from Europe. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 70–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., & Lorenzo, F. (2016). More than content and language: The complexity of integration in CLIL and bilingual education. In T. Nikula, C. Dalton-Puffer, A. Llinares, & F. Lorenzo (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 1–25). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Patterson, A., Roman, D., Friend, M., Osborne, J., & Donovan, B. (2018). Reading for meaning: The foundational knowledge every teacher of science should have. International Journal of Science Education, 40(3), 291–307. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prior, S. M., Fenwick, K. D., Saunders, K. S., Ouellette, R., O’Quinn, C., & Harvey, S. (2011). Comprehension after oral and silent reading: Does grade level matter? Literacy Research and Instruction, 501, 183–194. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rodríguez, D., Lucero, M. & Montanero, M. (2013). Análisis del discurso síncrono y asíncrono en entornos virtuales de aprendizaje universitario. Revista de Investigación en Educación, 243–256.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rojas Rojas, S. P., Meneses, A., & Sánchez Miguel, E. (2019). Teachers’ scaffolding science reading comprehension in low-income schools: how to improve achievement in science. International Journal of Science Education, 41(13), 1827–1847. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., Sierra, J. M. & Gallardo del Puerto, F. (2011). Content and foreign language integrated learning. Contributions to Multilingualism in European Contexts. Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
San Isidro, X., & Lasagabaster, D. (2019). Code-switching in a CLIL multilingual setting: a longitudinal qualitative study. International Journal of Multilingualism, 16(3), 336–356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sánchez, E., García, J. R., Rosales, J., De Sixte, R., & Castellano, N. (2008). Elementos para analizar la interacción entre estudiantes y profesores: ¿qué ocurre cuando se consideran diferentes dimensiones y diferentes unidades de análisis? [Analyzing teacher-student’s interactions: What happens when different units of analysis and different focuses are considered?]. Revista de Educación, 3461, 105–136.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2016). Content-based language teaching with functional grammar in the elementary school. Language Teaching, 49(1), 116–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. M., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tang, K-S. (2019). The role of language in scaffolding content and language integration in CLIL science classrooms. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 7(2), 315–318. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Kampen, E., Admiraal, W., & Berry, A. (2018). Content and language integrated learning in the Netherlands: teachers’ self-reported pedagogical practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(2), 222–236. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vázquez, V. P., & Ellison, M. (2018). Examining teacher roles and competences in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Linguarum Arena: Revista de Estudos em Didática de Línguas da Universidade do Porto, 41, 65–78.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wolf, M. K., Crosson, A. C., & Resnick, L. B. (2006). Accountable talk in Reading comprehension instruction. Technical Report. National Center for Research and Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. University of California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Castellano-Risco, Irene
2024. Academic Language in CLIL Settings. In Lexical Demands in CLIL Primary-School Textbooks, ► pp. 23 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue