Search

In content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms, it is assumed that non-language content subjects provide more authentic communicative contexts for students to learn a foreign/second/additional language (L2). However, learning abstract concepts and academic language in an L2 simultaneously is also challenging for CLIL students. It is thus important for CLIL teachers to unpack and repack both abstract concepts and academic discourse for the students. 'Semantic waves', which model classroom practices of both unpacking and repacking, is arguably a key to understanding cumulative knowledge-building. Applying the concepts of semantic profiles and semantic waves, this paper analyses the classroom discourse of two CLIL science lessons in Hong Kong. In one lesson, the semantic profile mainly consists of downward shifts. The teacher adopted various useful strategies to unpack science concepts, especially with multimodalities, everyday L2 and students' L1 resources. Yet, there was limited repacking. In contrast, some repacking was observed in another lesson, where the teacher provided explicit instruction on academic language and guided students through academic writing tasks. A semantic wave can thus be observed there. These findings on strategies for unpacking and repacking provide significant insights into knowledge building in CLIL contexts, and may hence illuminate CLIL pedagogical practices.

In Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) programmes, students learn content knowledge and a second/foreign language (L2) simultaneously. It follows that both content and language are assessed, although research on how to do so remains scarce. This study explores the interplay between cognitive and linguistic demands of CLIL assessments. Having analysed over 4900 questions in Science/Biology textbooks, workbooks and examination papers in Hong Kong, we observed that junior secondary assessments were dominated by low-level cognitive (i.e. recall of knowledge) and linguistic (i.e. no production or word-level production) demands, whereas senior secondary assessments required higher-order thinking skills (i.e. application and analysis of knowledge) expressed in sentences or even texts. Also, based on the analysis of 70 junior secondary students' performance in school examination papers, we noticed a potential hindrance of linguistic demands to students' performance in CLIL assessments. These findings together underscore the integral role of language in CLIL assessments and raise questions about the adequacy of existing pedagogical practices in preparing students to tackle both cognitive and linguistic demands in CLIL assessments, particularly when they proceed to higher grade levels where the demands in both dimensions leap. These have significant implications for CLIL assessment design, pedagogy and teacher education.

Content-based education programmes, in which a second/foreign language (L2) is used as the medium of instruction when teaching non-language content subjects, aim at both content and L2 learning. With such dual goal in mind, and with the rapid expansion of the programmes to contexts where students might have only basic L2 proficiency, there have been consistent calls for reconsidering the roles of first language (L1) in the teaching and learning process. The functions of L1 in content-based classrooms have been well documented, but it is necessary to have a more systematic approach to planning and using L1. This paper seeks to address this gap by applying the notions of 'curriculum genres' and 'task structure' when analysing patterns of teachers' use of L1 and L2 in a collection of content subject lessons observed in English-medium secondary schools in Hong Kong. With illustrative episodes presented in this paper, we would argue that 'curriculum genres' and 'task structure' can serve as useful tools for both researchers and teachers to analyse and critically reflect on patterns of pedagogic practices and language use in content-based classrooms. These will have significant implications for future research on using L1 and illuminate effective pedagogy in content-based education.

In Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) programmes, students are expected to master content knowledge and language simultaneously. The worldwide popularity of this kind of programme has called for professional development, particularly for content subject teachers who have to shoulder some responsibilities of language teaching in CLIL. There have been several frameworks or proposals for professional development of CLIL teachers. Yet, empirical studies investigating the effectiveness of CLIL professional development programmes remain scarce. This gap is particularly important, since the relationship between professional development and teacher change is complicated and there are various factors affecting whether and how teacher would change. This study implemented a 6-month professional development programme for a group of content subject teachers in CLIL in Hong Kong. With data gathered with questionnaires, interviews, lesson observations and post-lesson reflections, this paper reports the trajectory of three case teachers who seemed to experience different degrees of changes in beliefs and language awareness. These differences could be explained by the influence of such factors as school context, learning experience and subject discipline. This study yields important implications for teacher education in CLIL and teacher change.

There has been a rich literature on the role of language in learning and on its role in knowledge (co-)construction in the science classroom. This literature, rooted in social semiotics theories and sociocultural theories, discussed research conducted largely in contexts where students are learning content in their first language (L1). In this paper, we draw on concepts from this literature to analyse science lessons in an L2 (second/foreign language) context and discuss how these concepts can be further built on and extended to understand the role of "languaging" and "translanguaging" in knowledge (co-)construction and academic language learning in CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) classrooms, where students are learning content in their L2.

In content-based instruction (CBI) programmes, students learn content subjects through a second language (L2), so that they can incidentally learn the language. To further facilitate students' L2 development, the collaboration between L2 and content subject teachers has been strongly advocated. Previous research on such kind of collaboration mainly focused on how it may be realised, and on identifying potential obstacles, while its effectiveness remains under-explored. This paper reports the findings of a small-scale project conducted in a Hong Kong secondary school in which CBI is practised. Teachers of English, Integrated Humanities and Science collaborated in the design and teaching of several units for Grade 8 students. With data collected from teacher meetings, lesson observations, and students' performance on the pre- and post-tests, this study evaluated "whether" and "how" cross-curricular collaboration contributed to students' L2 learning. The findings show that students in classes where cross-curricular collaboration was practised demonstrated a better understanding of the targeted grammatical items. This could be attributed to enhanced teachers awareness of students' needs, a more suitable curriculum and changes in teachers' pedagogical foci in lessons. This study thus suggests the potentials of cross-curricular teacher collaboration and provides important implications for further enhancing the effectiveness of CBI.

In Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) classrooms where students' L2 proficiency has not reached the threshold level, teachers have been observed to use L1 to assist students in grasping specific technical terms and abstract concepts. It is argued to be a 'realistic' approach to the learning problems caused by students' limited L2 proficiency, particularly in English-as-a-foreign-language contexts. Nonetheless, researchers have also warranted "judicious" and "principled" use of L1 so that both content and language learning are facilitated. The question thus remains is whether teachers can use L1 appropriately to suit their students' needs. This study seeks to address this question. It includes data from 30 Grade 10 lessons in Hong Kong CLIL classrooms, where students' L2 proficiency varied considerably. Using both quantitative and qualitative analyses, this study shows that when teaching students with limited L2 proficiency, teachers used a significant proportion of L1 in lessons to explain the subject content, interact with students and develop students' L2 metalinguistic awareness. In contrast, with students highly proficient in L2, teachers used little L1, mainly to provide translation equivalents for L2 subject-specific vocabulary items. This study thus shows that teachers seemed to be sensitive when making use of students' existing linguistic repertoires.

Bilingual programmes in which an L2 is used as the medium of instruction are becoming popular in different parts of the world, and content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is one variant of such programmes. Recent research on CLIL has gradually shifted from product-oriented (i.e. evaluating the effectiveness of CLIL in terms of language and content learning outcomes) to more process-oriented by exploring classroom interaction in detail to gain insight into effective pedagogy and teacher education. This paper compares two different settings of CLIL classrooms in Hong Kong (where CLIL is referred to as "English Medium Instruction"). In one setting, the Grade 10 teachers and students (aged 15) had experienced CLIL for the first three years of secondary education; in the second one, the Grade 10 teachers and students had just started to experience the CLIL approach. In our comprehensive analysis of 15 observed lessons, we found that the teacher--student interaction where CLIL had just started was more monologic: the teacher dominated the lesson talk, students had difficulties expressing their meaning in L2, question-and-answer sequences were constrained--a finding which would cause concern if replicated more generally. Our interpretation is that it takes time for both teachers and students to get used to integrated content and language learning, teachers need to develop skills to engage students in extended verbal exchanges, and students need to reach operational levels of L2 proficiency. The findings of this study yield significant implications for the successful implementation of CLIL in other contexts.

As content-based instruction (CBI) programmes involve certain degrees of integration of second language (L2) and content learning, collaboration between L2 and content subject teachers has been strongly advocated. Whether this type of teacher collaboration can be successfully implemented will depend on many factors, one of which is teacher beliefs and attitudes. This study compares the beliefs and attitudes of L2 teachers with those of content subject teachers regarding their roles in CBI and cross-curricular collaboration. Data collected from the 261completed questionnaires, complemented with six semi-structured interviews, administered to teachers in Hong Kong secondary schools which practise CBI, show that the two groups of teachers have significantly different beliefs about their roles concerning language teaching in CBI. Even though they generally believe in the effectiveness of collaboration, they perceive some potential problems and are not fully committed to it. Such findings have important implications for the feasibility of cross-curricular collaboration, which is a practice often advocated to facilitate L2 learning in CBI. The findings can also shed light on teacher education in CBI.

To facilitate second language learning, it has become increasingly popular to use a second language as the medium of instruction for content subjects for majority language students. Although numerous research studies have shown the advantages of such kind of programs in North America and Europe, those investigating English as the Medium of Instruction (EMI) schools in Hong Kong yielded inconclusive results. This meta-analysis is the first attempt to synthesize the research evidence on EMI education in Hong Kong since 1970. Based on 24 studies, this meta-analysis shows that students in EMI secondary schools were more proficient in second language and performed better on measures of affective variables. Yet their learning in other content subjects suffered. The differences between the effectiveness of EMI education in Hong Kong and that of similar programs in other contexts will be discussed, thereby illuminating second language acquisition theories and bilingual education.

Content-based instruction (CBI) adopts a second language (L2) as the medium of instruction for some or all academic subjects to facilitate L2 learning. There seem however, no uniform policies concerning which academic subjects should be taught in L2, in case only some subjects are involved. Conventional wisdom tends to favour Humanities subjects since they are more verbal and hence more conducive to L2 learning. However, there has been no empirical evidence supporting such claim so far. This study attempts to address such a gap by comparing students' language learning opportunities in different academic subjects. Twenty-two lessons across grades and subjects were observed in two English-medium secondary schools in Hong Kong (where CBI was practised). By estimating the proportion of student talk, mean length of student turns, Initiation-Response-Feedback (I-R-F) sequences and form-focused exchanges, the language learning opportunities in Humanities and Science lessons were compared. It was found that in Humanities lessons, students talked significantly more and longer. There were also longer chains of I-R-F sequences where teachers elicited more student responses and provided feedback on students' L2 output. Such differences have significant implications for L2 learning and bilingual education programmes.

Teacher-student interaction in classrooms is perceived to be crucial for learning. Previous research has compared the interaction in classrooms where a second language is used as the medium of instruction (MoI) with those where the mother tongue is used. This has been done mainly via qualitative impressions. The current study adopted a mixed method design to examine objectively and comprehensively the classroom interaction in a sample of Hong Kong secondary schools that used Chinese as the MoI from Grade 7 to 9, but then switched to English from Grade 10 onwards (i.e. MoI-switching schools). By doing so, this study aimed to identify the possible effect of a change in the MoI on classroom interaction and its potential for learning. Sixty lessons were observed in Grade 9 and 10 in three MoI-switching schools and compared to two schools where English was used throughout all the grades. The results show that, when the MoI changed from students' first to second language, lessons tended to become more teacher-centred and there were fewer opportunities for negotiation of meaning and scaffolding. These findings have significant implications for the relationship between the MoI and classroom interaction and provide important insights into pedagogy and teacher development. (Contains 2 figures, 6 tables, and 5 notes.)

The aim of this study was to investigate vocabulary knowledge and growth across two different language-learning programmes in Hong Kong. The two programmes compared were English immersion programmes (IM) and regular English second-language programmes (RL2). While previous research has identified an overall advantage to IM with respect to language development, comparatively little research on vocabulary development in IM has examined the potential interaction between different types of words (in terms of frequency levels) and different types of vocabulary (passive versus active). Furthermore, very little work has compared these two specific educational contexts in Hong Kong with respect to vocabulary growth. Therefore, three different aspects of vocabulary were measured: passive, controlled active and free active word knowledge at different word-frequency levels in grade 7 and grade 9 students in both IM and RL2. The Vocabulary Levels Tests measured students' knowledge of passive and controlled active vocabulary, whereas students' writing was analysed with the Lexical Frequency Profiles to estimate their free active vocabulary knowledge. Overall, IM students outperform their counterparts in RL2 concerning their knowledge of different types of vocabulary at various frequency levels. IM students also experience a more rapid growth in their vocabulary knowledge, especially for the most frequent 2000 words and academic vocabulary. Such findings support the claim that IM can provide a more favourable context for L2 vocabulary learning than regular L2. The results of the present study are discussed in terms of wider implications for vocabulary learning and the effectiveness of the IM programmes implemented in Hong Kong. (Contains 14 tables and 6 notes.)