Search

This paper makes available to the broader educational community the instruments which have been originally designed and validated within the European project "CLIL for all: Attention to diversity in bilingual education" ("ADiBE") to determine how diversity is being catered to across a broad array of CLIL contexts in European Secondary Education (Austria, Finland, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom). They include three sets of questionnaires, interviews, and observation protocols and are qualitative and quantitative instruments whose design has been based on the latest research and which have undergone a carefully controlled double-fold pilot process for their validation (external ratings approach and pilot phase with a representative sample of 264 subjects). The questions included in the three sets of instruments are initially characterized, together with their format and main categories. The paper then details the steps undertaken for their research-based design and the double-fold pilot process followed for their validation. The questionnaires and interview and observation protocols are then presented in a format which is directly applicable in any CLIL classroom in order to determine the accessibility of bilingual programs for all types of achievers and to identify the chief difficulties and best practices in promoting inclusion in bilingual education.

This paper presents the experienced difficulties of students participating in the multidisciplinary, remote collaborating engineering design course challenge-based innovation at CERN. This is with the aim to identify learning barriers and improve future learning experiences. We statistically analyse the rated differences between distinct design activities, educational background and remote vs. co-located collaboration. The analysis is based on a quantitative and qualitative questionnaire (N = 37). Our analysis found significant ranking differences between remote and co-located activities. This questions whether the remote factor might be a barrier for the originally intended learning goals. Further a correlation between analytical and converging design phases was identified. Hence, future facilitators are suggested to help students in the transition from one design phase to the next rather than only teaching methods in the individual design phases. Finally, we discuss how educators address the identified learning barriers when designing future courses including multidisciplinary or remote collaboration.

In this paper an analysis is carried out whether objective tests and subjective self-assessments in international large-scale studies yield similar results when looking at cross-national differences in the effects of skills on earnings, and skills patterns across countries, fields of study and gender. The findings indicate that subjective skills measures do not correlate well with objective measures of similar constructs when looking at cross-national differences. Countrywise associations between subjective skills measures and earnings do not correlate well with those found using objective skills measures. Moreover, cross-national differences in the level of subjective skills measures do not correlate well with cross-national differences in skill levels based on objective tests. Nor do gender differences found using subjective skills measures correlate with those found using objective skills measures. This does not mean that self-assessments cannot be used, but they need to be restricted to analysing within-country differences. Within countries, self-assessments do a good job in predicting skills differences across fields of study and also in predicting the effect of skills on earnings. When comparing gender differences in skills levels within countries, however, one needs to be aware that females tend to overestimate their skills levels in typical "female" domains like literacy.