Tento modul byl archivován. Vkládání a editace obsahu není možná.

CLIL - Content and Language Integrated Learning

Stránka naposledy upravena 12:33, 12 Črvn 2011 uživatelem Mgr.et Mgr. V?ra Gošová?
    Toto heslo bylo založeno Terezou šmídovou a Philem Ballem,
    Pomozte nám zvyšovat pedagogické znalosti o problematice, kterou se toto heslo zabývá. Zapojte se do diskuze a
    upravování  hesla.

     Překlad do českého jazyka

    Obsah stránky:

    Výklad hesla:

    1. Etymology of the term CLIL 

    The acronym is self-explanatory, is phonetically accessible to most world languages, and is easy to pronounce. Nevertheless, it has been translated into several European languages – AICLE in Spanish, TTO in Dutch and EMILE in French – but the dominance of English has overseen a predominance of the English version of the acronym.

    2. Emergence of Content and language integrated learning

    The acronym CLIL was originally defined in 1994, and launched in 1996 by UNICOM, University of Jyväskylä (in Finland) and the European Platform for Dutch Education. It was meant to describe educational methods where,
    '….subjects are taught through a foreign language with dual-focused aims, namely the learning of content, and the simultaneous learning of a foreign language'.
    This was later extended to include learning through any language that is not the first language of the learner. CLIL quickly became a generic 'umbrella' term to cover a range of different approaches in diverse educational contexts, although whether the educational orientation that CLIL covers is a methodology or an approach remains a matter of debate. 
    Names most associated with the genesis of the acronym are David Marsh and Do Coyle. Marsh still works at the University of Jyväskylä and Do Coyle at the University of Aberdeen. The term was created in response to dissatisfaction with the term ‘Content Based Teaching’, under whose auspices the movement began. Content-based approaches included acronyms such as CBT and CBI (Content Based Instruction), CLIL also has links to the task-based paradigm of language learning (TBLL), whose main figure was N Prabhu and the Bangalore Project of the 1980s. 

    3. Current situation

    CLIL seems to flourish within different context of education, monolingual, where students in home country learn a subject through CLIL and where students are mostly non-native speakers (Slovenia), bilingual, where students learn 50 % or more curricular subjects in a second or foreign language (the Netherlands), multilingual, where students learn curriculum subjects in three or more languages (Basque Country, Cataluňa) and plurilingual, where students learn several languages, one or more of which may be through CLIL (Australia).
    CLIL is currently spreading fast, although in two forms. One is the ‘strong’ form, where subject material from the curriculum is taught through another language other than the mother tongue of the students. This is often referred to as ‘concept-driven’. The ‘weak’ version is where language teachers attempt to incorporate more conceptual/topical content into their language lessons. This is referred to as ‘language-driven’. Both approaches attempt to combine a dual-focused emphasis, where subject teachers are encouraged to understand the importance of language to their subjects, and language teachers can expand their assessment procedures by incorporating conceptual measures into their objectives. 
    Future propagation of these approaches will depend on how easily the major publishers take to CLIL, and if they see it as commercially viable. At present (2010), it seems that they find the ‘weak’ version easier to market and potentially more profitable.

    4. Conclusion

    CLIL seems to represent a new approach or methodology which suits the more instrumentally-motivated students of today. Using language as a tool for learning other things, instead of as a language in itself, represents a new paradigm in education. English, as Graddol wrote (2006) is no longer a language as such but a ‘core skill’. If other languages can be considered in this light in the future then CLIL will develop into a major force.

    Použité zdroje a literatura:

    • MEHISTO, Peeter; FRIGOLS, Maria-Jesus; MARSH, David. Uncovering Clil : Content and Language Integrated Learning An. [s.l.] : Macmillan Elt, 2008. 240 s. ISBN 978-0230027190.
    • COYLE, Do; HOOD, Philip; MARSH, David. CLIL : Content and Language Integrated Learning. [s.l.] : Cambridge University Press, 2010. 184 s. ISBN 978-0521130219.
    • DELLER, Sheelagh; PRICE, Christine. Teaching Other Subjects Through English. [s.l.] : Oxford University Press, 2007. 151 s. ISBN 978-0194425780.
    • BENTLEY, Kay. The TKT Course CLIL Module. [s.l.] : Cambridge University Press, 2010. 128 s. ISBN 978-0521157339. - je to toto? University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations, TKT: CLIL Glossary,UCLES,  CUP 2009

    How to describe a CLIL activity in terms of its conceptual, procedural and linguistic content. The ‘trinity’ objective. (Ball, P. OneStopEnglish, Macmillan, 2009)

    Klíčová slova
    • Žádná klíčová slova

    Soubory 3

     clil - preklad.doc
    Žádný popis
    33.5 kB12:32, 12 Črvn 2011Mgr.et Mgr. V?ra Gošová?
    Žádný popis
    59.59 kB13:55, 6 Pro 2010David Pokorný
     Terms connected with CLIL.doc
    Žádný popis
    28 kB22:53, 30 Lis 2010Tereza Šmídová