SUBJECT PRACTICE ACTIVITIES

CONTENT & LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING

NAME AND SURNAME: GLORIA MARTINEZ ESCOBAR

GROUP

DATE: 26-05-2021
Table of contents

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................3
TASK 1..............................................................................................................................................3
TASK 2..............................................................................................................................................4
TASK 3..............................................................................................................................................5
TASK 4..............................................................................................................................................5
TASK 5..............................................................................................................................................6
CONCLUSIONS..............................................................................................................................6
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND WEB REFERENCES...............................................................................7
INTRODUCTION

The present study aims to show and describe assignments which contain a large variety of
themes embedded in content and language integrated learning methodology.

In addition, all the practice activities are taken from real life contexts where English is
spoken and lead learners to use the second language as mean of communication and be
aware of its cultural settings. Content language integrated learning (CLIL) is actually the
best way to develop language skills that can be used in every social situation where they
are engaged in.

Cultural awareness helps to encourage immediate usage of the language while putting
emphasis on fluency. Jindriska-2013

Moreover, the tasks aforementioned deal with grammar, suggestions, objectives, teaching
methodologies, comparisons, criteria of contents which are language components. We
have to analyze every task from the points of view of content and language integrated
learning and its methodological standards.

We recognize that CLIL is an excellent strategy to enhance language speaking skills with
intermediate learners. CLIL claims that L2 learners develop language skills more
effectively when they make real use of the second language in a natural way and through
stimulating environment that facilitates a low affective filter and encourages a progressive
development from Language comprehension to language production.

TASK 1

The two indexes have the same goal which is the development of all usage skills from a
grammar base by giving clear grammar information and employing a variety of practice
modes, from controlled response to open communicative interaction. Grammar tenses are
presented in a way that corresponds to the English level the students are in. Besides, it is
understood that a communicative approach is been used in order to enhance the speaking
and listening skills. We also notice that geography is taught in the first activity and math is
taught in the next one. So things the learning process is accomplished without focusing on
the development of knowledge in the second language. That is, a second language is not
fully concentrated through a CLIL approach since it is working out with several teaching
methodologies in order to teach the second language in a way where the learner feel at
ease learning grammar patterns and syntax as well. We are certain that it would facilitate
students to master their language abilities in a variety of social interactions (Marsh, 2002
p.17)

A great deal of current research shows that most of our students benefit greatly from a
grammar component blended with other communicative approaches in a well-balanced
program of second language instruction.

TASK 2

I recognize the main differences between the two tables of contents in the following
perspective:

The first table of contents is intended to follow and practice a communicative approach
which works with the four Language skills in a functional manner.

The table of content is a grammar-based lay out even though works on phonetics to
develop the learners speech.

We observe that the first table of contents maybe difficult when learners face troubles
pronouncing some words. The other table of contents also detailed the activities. In
general terms, the first examples is really focused on a CLIL methodology because treat
different methods as it deals with linguistic functions.

When the students use the language in terms of functions then they are not concentrated
in learning grammar items or patterns, but communication.

On the other hand, when the students develop classroom activities, the second language
must be used to understand the context in such a way, the L2 becomes the right learning
instrument to produce and develop language competences in the classroom (Dalton-
Puffer, 2007, p.60)
TASK 3

Study carefully the structure of the activity, it is easy to notice the influence of CLIL
methodological approach to language teaching; it contains practice activities to support
language production through comprehension of a variety of themes (Dain, 2006)

The activities look kind of confusing since it deals with the usage of “s” in different contexts
and CLIL settings. Sometimes that “s” is only a 3rd person singular in a verb form, some
other that “s” means possession or it is just the plural of a noun. In addition we observe a
particular usage of the subject and the language at the same time and the exercises
involved family members.

In reference to the unforgoing, CLIL approach involves learning to use language

appropriately while using language to learn content effectively (Thom, 2013)

Moreover, we could recognize that there is another teaching approach being used and that
is “scaffolding” as Coelho (2017) named, the instructor puts into practice different
strategies to make learners advance in terms of better understanding and independence
through the learning process led by the ESL/EFL teacher. As soon as the activities are
completed learners will be prepared to distinguish and classified words in the way
requested. Learners will be capable to respond all the questions with a better
understanding of every theme due to the learning achievement they all have reached.
What it is more relevant is the fact that learners apply a variety of learning strategies as
they develop their own communicative skills in L2.

TASK 4

We can hardly notice a relevant influence on CLIL methodological approach through all the
statements written because they are party of an average communicative program which
put emphasis on grammar patterns and new words. Such statements might be taken into
consideration for a lower level of goals as shown on Bloom’s taxonomy. The statements
are not subject specific through their contents; instead, they are more info language
teaching. They’d rather be conducted to a lower level of English in the classroom. The
maybe considered in the category of proceeding goals and achievements where there's an
abundant study materials for communicative purposes and a great deal of exchanging of
the content which are understandable for the learners.

TASK 5

It is intended for a communicative practice activity where learners may interact with others
while sharing insight information on countries and capitals cities, this kind of activity is
perfect for a thematic class involving geography. It also meets the CLIL setting where
learners can put into practice what they have learned about geography.

As it is mentioned in FUNIBER study materials (2019), in a CLIL approach, concentrate on

content and language are both accommodated while holding a duality where any of them
can be favored (p.17). I'm such a situation, both content and language maybe highlighted
based on the learner’s needs as well as the cultural setting of the class.

At this point, it is clear that CLIL approach is effective and appropriate for the students.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, CLIL is actually a bridge which connects language and contents at a major
scale, we are aware of all the issues about the implementation of CLIL at different levels of
education and the difficulty in the levels being taught, we still consider CLIL as a viable
solution to teaching a second language in a very effective way, we advise learners to work
and learn the L2 alongside their learning of L1.

In the long run, we will be rewarded with several benefits while using CLIL methodology.

CLIL is best used when schools make their own decisions based on which courses they
want taught in L1 or L2, because they know their learners need the best.

We also recognize that learners are able to learn a second language by studying a
particular subject.
The activities previously exposed show us similar structures with contextualized contents
enhancing the 4 language skills.

The exercises presented are designed for learners to make real uses of the L2 and so
improve their thinking abilities while developing their English proficiency.

I can also add that the experience of using the CLIL methodology in a bilingual school in
Colombia was very satisfactory (Gloria Martinez). The students acquired the English
language in a very natural way since they were kids in elementary school.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND WEB REFERENCES

 Ball, P. (2012) Content and Language Integrated Learning. FUNIBER study

materials. “The relevance and potential of CLIL for achieving MT L2 in Europe”
 Questions and answers regarding problems with CLIL FUNIBER.
www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/story/012674146438400.html
 Darn, S. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) A European
Overview
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234652746_content_and_Language_Inte
grated_Learning_CLIL_A_European_Overview
 Marsh, D. (2002) Content and Language Integrated Learning: The European
Dimension-Actions, Trends and Foresight potential. uniCOM, continuing Education
Centre: Finland
https://jyx.jyu.fi/bitstream/handle/123456789/47616/1/david_marsh-report.pdf
 Funiber (2019) “Content and Language Integrated Learning”. Funiber: Barcelona
 Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning
(CLIL) Classrooms, John Benjamins Publishing Co.
https://www.academia.edu/4692561/Discourse_in_Content_and_Language_Integr
ated_Learning_CLIL_Classrooms
 Coelho, M. (2017). Scaffolding Strategies in CLIL Classes – Supporting learners
towards autonomy. In M, Arau, A. Goncalves & M. Moreira (Eds.) Languages and
market. A recles pt selection of international perspectives and approaches (pp.106-
114). ReCless.pt
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318215436_Scaffolding_Strategies_in_C
LIL_Classes_-
_supporting_learners_towards_autonomy/link/595d1dba0f7e9b3aeladea1f/downlo
ad

 Jindriska S. (2013). The Content and Language Integrated Learning Approach in

Use. Acta Technologica Dubnicae, 3(2), 47-54
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277613774_The_Content_and_Language
_Integrated_Learning_Approach_in_Use/link/5ac8fbcf0f7e9bcd5197453c/downloa
d
 Thorne, R. (2013) Content and language integrated learning (clil) as a language
support strategy in a grade 8 natural sciences classroom (Degree of magister
thesis). Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, South Africa.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/145049443.pdf