Zoekresultaten

Teaching History in Bilingual Secondary Education in the Netherlands

Content and Language Integrated Learning in Dutch bilingual education

This small-scale observational study explores how Dutch bilingual education history teachers (BHTs) focus on the L2 component in their CLIL-lessons. We observed and rated eight BHTs on five language teaching categories. Results show that Dutch BHTs focus more strongly on using the L2 to teach subject content and that they tend to be less engaged in teaching specific second language topics, such as focus on form or language learning strategies. Further results and suggestions for improving the BHTs’ L2 focus are discussed together with a plea for a CLIL definition that is more in line with the everyday reality of the CLIL classroom.

English teachers in bilingual streams: in search of identity and focus

In CLIL contexts in the Netherlands, learners use the target language meaningfully in subject lessons parallel to English classes and English teachers are expected to co-operate with subject teacher colleagues. What does this mean for content and language in English lessons and for English teachers’ pedagogical and collaborative practices? For example, it has been suggested that Teachers of English in Bilingual streams (TEBs) may need to use different language teaching methodologies to mainstream English teachers. Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010) suggest “the language needed in CLIL settings does not necessarily follow the same grammatical progression one would find in a language-learning setting.”(Coyle et al, 2010: 35) and that this has consequences for language teachers’ approaches to planning for CLIL learners; “It is not built on a grammatical model where progression focuses on a gradation of grammatical concepts, but incorporates grammatical progression from different perspectives.” (2010: 59)To explore the challenges facing TEBs, Dale, Oostdam and Verspoor (2017) reviewed the literature on language teachers in various forms of bilingual education. They found the literature referred to a wide variety and range of types and aspects of language, types of content, theories informing LTs’ pedagogical practices and issues for LTs’ collaborative practices. Even though there were no one-fits-all approaches to be found, a framework of possible choices to be made emerged. The framework presents a landscape for TEBs in four quadrants, based on the literature.This presentation will discuss this framework in the light of a subsequent qualitative study exploring idealisations of TEBs’ pedagogical and collaborative practices in the Netherlands. Focus group discussions were held with stakeholders in bilingual streams. These included members of quality assurance panels responsible for certification of bilingual schools, practising TEBs and subject teachers. On the basis of inductive and deductive analysis of the focus group transcripts, we will discuss the extent to which stakeholders’ ideals for TEBs reflect the literature. Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Dale,L. Oostdam, R., & Verspoor, L. (2017, submitted) Searching for Identity and Focus: Towards an analytical framework for language teachers in bilingual education Manuscript in preparation

The challenge of balancing content and language

The role of subject teachers in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) has received little attention, since most research focuses on language learning results of students. This exploratory study aims to gain insight into the perceptions of Dutch bilingual education history teachers by comparing teaching CLIL with regular history teaching. We used questionnaires and interviews to collect data. Results show that bilingual education history teachers perceived their dual task as language and subject teachers to be challenging. Teaching in English also enriched their teaching skills and eventually had a positive influence on their level of job satisfaction.

Current developments in bilingual primary education in the Netherlands

This contribution addresses two studies of the processes and outcomes of English as a foreign language (EFL) in Dutch primary education. Firstly, this article describes a preliminary study of the learning outcomes at the end of primary education, comparing pupils’ language proficiency after either two years or six to eight years of low-intensity EFL programs. Secondly, it describes the outcomes of a subsequent classroom observation study in a high-intensity bilingual primary education pilot in grade 1, focusing on teacher language use and teacher-pupil interaction. Results are related to learning outcome in terms of pupils’ receptive vocabulary knowledge. Conclusions focus on foreign language teaching in primary education in general, and bilingual primary education in particular.

A showdown between bilingual and mainstream education

Bilingual education has become popular in many countries in the last two decades. It is generally acknowledged that learning a second language (L2) through subject content has a positive impact on students’ L2 learning, but there is less agreement on whether this also applies to learning subject content knowledge in and through L2. This cross-sectional study compared Dutch pre-university mainstream and bilingual education students in grades 7 and 9 on a history knowledge test, taking into consideration the language of instruction and testing. Students were also tested on their motivation to learn and affinity with history, because of the alleged higher motivation bilingual education students bring to the classroom. Multilevel analyses showed that bilingual education students in grade 7 lagged behind in the English part of the test but performed at the same level in the Dutch part. 9th bilingual education graders on the other hand performed significantly better on the knowledge test than 9th mainstream graders in both L2 and L1, thus providing evidence for the non-detrimental effect of bilingual education on the acquisition of subject content knowledge.