Article published In: 10th Anniversary Celebration
Edited by Pádraig Ó Duibhir and Laurent Cammarata
[Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 10:2] 2022
► pp. 230–264
Thematic patterns, Cognitive Discourse Functions, and genres
Towards an Integrative Model for CLIL
Published online: 3 November 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.21024.wu
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.21024.wu
Abstract
As CLIL is developing into an established discipline, it is timely to deepen the theorizing of integration of content and language, particularly in CLIL assessment. To illustrate the challenges, a representative example of a high-stakes CLIL biology assessment task in Hong Kong will first be presented. An Integrative Model for CLIL will then be proposed and applied to illuminate the demands of the assessment task and diagnose a sample student performance. The Integrative Model is developed by integrating genre and register theory (Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox.), Cognitive Discourse Functions (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), 216–253. ), thematic patterns theory (Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing.), Concept-and-Language-Mapping (CLM) Approach (He, P., & Lin, A. M. Y. (2019). Co-developing science literacy and foreign language literacy through “Concept+ Language Mapping”. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 7(2), 261–288. ) and translanguaging/trans-semiotizing theories (García, O., & Li, W. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan. ; (2019). Theories of trans/languaging and trans-semiotizing: implications for content-based education classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(1), 5–16. ). To further illustrate the utility of the Model, a range of possible assessment-for-learning (Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for Learning: Putting it into practice. OUP.) CLIL task examples designed by the authors will be presented. The article will conclude with implications for CLIL pedagogy and assessment.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.An illustrative example of a high-stakes CLIL biology assessment task
- 3.Towards an Integrative Model for CLIL: Integrating existing theories
- 3.1Thematic patterns and “concept” learning
- 3.2Cognitive discourse functions (CDFs)
- 3.3Genres, registers and curriculum context
- 4.Application of the Integrative Model: Analysis of the demands of the CLIL biology assessment task and diagnosis of the sample student essay performance
- 4.1Understanding the overall requirements of the assessment task
- 4.2Applying the Integrative Model to analyze the demands of the assessment task
- 4.2.1Developing a thematic pattern map informed by content specialists’ perspectives and the Integrative Model
- 4.2.2The demands of the assessment task illuminated through the thematic pattern map
- 4.2.3A more well-formed essay delineating the thematic patterns, CDFs and genre features
- 4.3Diagnosing the performance of the sample student essay
- 4.3.1How the student essay performance fares from the perspective of the Integrative Model
- 4.3.2Putting content specialists’ comments in perspective through the lens of the Integrative Model: Two levels of challenges revealed
- 4.4The contribution of the Integrative Model for CLIL
- 5.Designing formative, assessment-for-learning tasks in CLIL
- 6.Coda
- Notes
References
References (24)
Airey, J. (2016). EAP, EMI or CLIL? In K. Hyland & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes (pp. 95–107). Routledge.
Ball, P. (2009). Does CLIL work? In D. Hill & P. Alan (Eds.), The Best of Both Worlds?: International Perspectives on CLIL (pp. 32–43). Norwich Institute for Language Education, Norwich.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for Learning: Putting it into practice. OUP.
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), 216–253.
(2018). Postscriptum: Research pathways in CLIL/Immersion instructional practices and teacher development. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 384–387.
García, O., & Li, W. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, Bilingualism and Education. Palgrave Macmillan.
He, P., & Lin, A. M. Y. (2019). Co-developing science literacy and foreign language literacy through “Concept+ Language Mapping”. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 7(2), 261–288.
Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority [HKEAA] (2014). Hong Kong Diploma of Secondary Education (DSE) Biology Examination Report. Hong Kong Government Printer.
Lin, A. M. Y. (2016). Language across the curriculum & CLIL in English as an additional language (EAL) contexts: Theory and practice. Springer.
(2019). Theories of trans/languaging and trans-semiotizing: implications for content-based education classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(1), 5–16.
Lin, A. M. Y., & Lo, Y. Y. (2017). Trans/Languaging and the Triadic Dialogue in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. Language and Education, 31(1), 26–45.
Lin, A. M., & Wu, Y. (2015). ‘May I speak Cantonese?’–Co-constructing a scientific proof in an EFL junior secondary science classroom. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(3), 289–305.
Lin, A. M. Y., & Wu, Y. (2021). Leveraging on L1 content knowledge in CLIL assessment: Thematic patterns, cognitive discourse functions & genres. Keynote paper presented in the CLIL and Multilingual Research Forum, 11 December 2021, Beijing Normal University, China.
Morton, T. (2020). Cognitive discourse functions: A bridge between content, literacy and language for teaching and assessment in CLIL. Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 3(1), 7–17.
Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., & Smit, U. (Eds.) (2016). Conceptualising Integration in CLIL and Multilingual Education. Multilingual Matters.
Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney School. Equinox.
Tang, K. S. (2020). Discourse strategies for science teaching and learning: Research and practice. Routledge.
Tang, K. S., Tan, S. C., & Yeo, J. (2011). Students’ multimodal construction of Work Energy Concept. International Journal of Science Education, 331, 1775–1804.
Wu, Y. (2021). Translanguaging/Trans-semiotizing in the flow of dialogic knowledge co-making in a CLIL biology class: A classroom discourse analytic study. Unpublished PhD dissertation, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
(2022). Towards an Integrative Model for CLIL: Implications of an analysis of a CLIL biology assessment task. Research notes presented at the Pokfulam Circle Study Group, University of Hong Kong, 9 April 2022.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Arias-Hermoso, Roberto, Amaia Lersundi, Eneritz Garro Larrañaga & Ainara Imaz
Liao, Junwei Sam, Fan Fang & Lawrence Jun Zhang
Liu, Chunhong, Megan K. Barker, Qinghua Chen, Maurice M.W. Cheng, Oloyede Solomon Oyelekan & Angel M.Y. Lin
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.
