Search

This paper focuses on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), an educational approach where a foreign language is used to teach non-language subjects. More specifically, this contribution presents new insights into an under-researched area, namely the potential of CLIL in fostering the learning and use of subject-specific target language vocabulary (SSV). This is investigated in a case study analysing spontaneous oral classroom productions of two groups of advanced, secondary-school students in an Austrian CLIL programme within the subject European economics and politics. Based on a holistic definition of SSV comprising both single and multi-word lexical units, complementary quantitative lexical and qualitative discourse-embedded research methods are employed to present a comprehensive picture of the engagement of learners with subject-specific vocabulary. Findings of the lexical analysis show a substantial and active use of SSV with some homogeneity but also considerable variation between students. Discursive investigations of the affordances for learning arising in interactions indicate that in constructing and negotiating SSV, the students make use of a range of learning and communication strategies, which indicates their heightened level of SSV learning awareness.

While research on CLIL suggests positive impacts on lexical proficiency and on spoken language, the crucial question of the effect of CLIL on advanced learners, both in terms of subject-specific language (SSL) proficiency and content knowledge, has received less attention. We argue that the ability to negotiate a factual position appropriately is a key element of SSL, relating to both content and to foreign language ability. As a theoretical framework for understanding these negotiations of generally opposing standpoints, we use argumentation theory. The study was conducted in upper-secondary CLIL classes on European economics and politics in Austria. From the data set of 16 hours of video-recording, comprising teacher-whole class interactions, group work, and role plays, episodes of argumentation were extracted and analysed. Two types of argumentation patterns emerge, with one focused on the joint construction and learning of new SSL and content knowledge, and the other on the enactment of such knowledge in interaction. Students' engagement in these argumentations gives clear evidence of their SSL proficiency in prepared and unprepared oral production. As the type of classroom event has an effect on the specific argumentation patterns, the need for exposing students to a diversity of educational practice is underlined.

While disagreements are often considered dispreferred choices and potentially face-threatening acts due to their oppositional nature, this perception does not adequately reflect the importance of disagreeing for many types of interaction, such as problem-solving and decision-making. Developing ability in performing this speech act therefore becomes relevant for learners of an L2 in order to show achievements in such general language learning targets as expressing and defending opinions and arguments, as well as negotiating consensual decisions. This paper presents a sequential analysis of disagreements in assessed interactions of advanced German-speaking learners of English, observed in three different exam formats, i.e. teacher-led interview, role play with teacher and paired student interaction. Overall, 33 disagreement episodes were identified in 18 oral exams. Findings show that the choice of examination format constrains range and type of disagreement trajectory enacted by the learners, highlighting the influence of minor contextual differences. Moreover, analyses of these exams suggest that linguistic alignment can and does co-exist with oppositional talk, supporting the notion that the purpose of achieving a successful joint performance of L2 interaction carries weight even when there is disagreement on a content level.