CLIL in Sweden – why does it not work? A metaperspective on CLIL across contexts in Europe

Abstract Many studies show positive correlations between content and language integrated learning (CLIL) and the learning of English as a foreign language. However, findings from CLIL research in Sweden do not match those obtained elsewhere. The aim of this article is to show that some explanations for discrepancies in results obtained across CLIL contexts in Europe may be found in nation-specific contextual factors. Four such factors are focused on: policy framework, teacher education, age of implementation, and extramural exposure to English. The article gives an overview of these factors in four European countries: Finland, Germany, Spain, and Sweden. A coordinate system is created using four quadrants: the policy framework factor is paired with amount of research; the age factor is combined with amount of CLIL; the teacher education factor includes pre-service and in-service programs; and extramural English is considered in amount and range. From this coordinate system, nation-specific CLIL profiles emerge. It is argued that such national profiles will serve as an essential theoretical point of departure for comparisons of research results across nations. Furthermore, the profiles will facilitate policy-level discussions on CLIL implementation in individual countries.

[1]  John Masih,et al.  Learning Through a Foreign Language: Models, Methods and Outcomes , 1999 .

[2]  J. Alderson.  The politics of language education : individuals and institutions , 2009 .

[3]  Thomas R. Guskey,et al.  Professional Development in Education: New Paradigms and Practices. , 1995 .

[4]  Marlise Horst,et al.  Does Word Coach Coach Words , 2011 .

[5]  Eva Olsson,et al.  "Everything I read on the Internet is in English". On the impact of extramural English on Swedish 16-year-old pupils’ writing proficiency. , 2012 .

[6]  Michael Fullan,et al.  The school as a learning organization: Distant dreams , 1995 .

[7]  Merrill Swain,et al.  Bilingual Education in Ontario: A Decade of Research. , 1981 .

[8]  T. Seidel,et al.  How Pre-Service Teachers Observe Teaching on Video: Effects of Viewers' Teaching Subjects and the Subject of the Video , 2011 .

[9]  Håkan Ringbom.  Review of recent applied linguistics research in Finland and Sweden, with specific reference to foreign language learning and teaching , 2012, Language Teaching.

[10]  Karmen Terlevic Johansson.  Erfolgreiches Deutschlernen durch CLIL? Zu Lexikon und Kommunikationsstrategien in mündlicher L3 schwedischer Schüler mit bilingualem Profil , 2011 .

[11]  Nathalie Baïdak,et al.  Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe. 2012 Edition. , 2012 .

[12]  J. Cummins.  Cognitive/Academic Language Proficiency, Linguistic Interdependence, the Optimum Age Question and Some Other Matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, No. 19. , 1979 .

[13]  Michael H. Long.  INPUT, INTERACTION, AND SECOND‐LANGUAGE ACQUISITION , 1981 .

[14]  Tarja Nikula.  Speaking English in Finnish Content-Based Classrooms. , 2007 .

[15]  Mikaela Björklund.  Conditions for EFL learning and professional development : Finland-Swedish learner and teacher perspectives , 2008 .

[16]  Francisco Gallardo del Puerto,et al.  Content and Foreign Language Integrated Learning , 2011 .

[17]  Carmen Muñoz,et al.  Chapter 1 .The Effects of Age on Foreign Language Learning: The BAF Project , 2006 .

[18]  David Birdsong,et al.  Age and Second Language Acquisition and Processing: A Selective Overview , 2006 .

[19]  Teresa Navés,et al.  CLIL in Catalonia: An Overview of Research Studies , 2010 .

[20]  Pia Sundqvist,et al.  Gaming as extramural English L2 learning and L2 proficiency among young learners* , 2012, ReCALL.

[21]  Friederike Klippel.  New prospects or imminent danger? - The impact of English medium instruction on education in Germany , 2003 .

[22]  Pia Sundqvist,et al.  Extramural English Matters : Out-of-School English and Its Impact on Swedish Ninth Graders' Oral Proficiency and Vocabulary , 2009 .

[23]  John Airey,et al.  Science, Language, and Literacy : Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics , 2009 .

[24]  Maria Lim Falk,et al.  Svenska i engelskspråkig skolmiljö : Ämnesrelaterat språkbruk i två gymnasieklasser , 2008 .

[25]  Kenneth Hyltenstam,et al.  Age of Onset and Nativelikeness in a Second Language: Listener Perception Versus Linguistic Scrutiny , 2009 .

[26]  Taina Saarinen,et al.  Selvitys kotimaisten kielten kielikylpyopetuksen ja vieraskielisen opetuksen tilanteesta Suomessa : kuntatason tarkastelu , 2012 .

[27]  Heini-Marja Järvinen.  Language as a meaning making resource in learning and teaching content: Analysing historical writing in content and language integrated learning , 2010 .

[28]  Carmen Muñoz,et al.  Input and long-term effects of starting age in foreign language learning , 2011 .

[29]  Pia Sundqvist,et al.  Similarities between Playing World of Warcraft and CLIL , 2012 .

[30]  Pia Sundqvist,et al.  World of VocCraft: Computer Games and Swedish Learners’ L2 English Vocabulary , 2012 .

[31]  K. de Bot,et al.  In the presence of English : Media and European youth , 2007 .

[32]  Cristina Escobar Urmeneta.  Pre-service CLIL Teacher-education in Catalonia. Expert and Novice Practitioners Teaching and Thinking Together , 2010 .

[33]  R. Phillipson.  On English in Europe , 1996, English Today.

[34]  Christiane Dalton.  Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms , 2007 .

[35]  Carmen Muñoz,et al.  Age-related differences in foreign language learning. Revisiting the empirical evidence , 2008 .

[36]  P. Lightbown,et al.  Intensive ESL Programmes in Quebec Primary Schools , 1989 .

[37]  D. Coyle.  CLIL - a pedagogical approach from the European perspective , 2010 .

[38]  吉島 茂,et al.  文化と言語の多様性の中のCommon European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR)--それは基準か? (第10回明海大学大学院応用言語学研究科セミナー 講演) , 2008 .

[39]  Tarja Nikula.  English as an object and tool of study in classrooms: Interactional effects and pragmatic implications , 2005 .

[40]  David Lasagabaster,et al.  Foreign Language Competence in Content and Language Integrated Courses , 2008 .

[41]  Yolanda Ruiz de Zarobe,et al.  CLIL in a Bilingual Community: The Basque Autonomous Community , 2010 .

[42]  Jenifer Larson-Hall,et al.  What does the Critical Period really mean , 2005 .

[43]  R. Dekeyser.  THE ROBUSTNESS OF CRITICAL PERIOD EFFECTS IN SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION , 2000, Studies in Second Language Acquisition.

[44]  Ditza Maskit.  Teachers’ attitudes toward pedagogical changes during various stages of professional development , 2011 .

[45]  Liss Kerstin Sylvén.  Teaching in English or English Teaching? On the effects of content and language integrated learning on Swedish learners´ incidental vocabulary acquisition , 2004 .

[46]  An H. Kuppens,et al.  Incidental foreign language acquisition from media exposure , 2010 .

[47]  Yu A Anikina,et al.  An Observation Tool for Effective L2 Pedagogy in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) , 2007 .

[48]  David Lasagabaster,et al.  Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities , 2010 .

[49]  Nando Mäsch.  The German Model of Bilingual Education. , 1993 .

[50]  K. Mård-Miettinen,et al.  Chapter 2. Integrating Multiple Languages in Immersion: Swedish Immersion in Finland , 2011 .

[51]  Suzanne K. Hilgendorf,et al.  English in Germany: contact, spread and attitudes , 2007 .

[52]  Yen-Ling Teresa Ting,et al.  CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training , 2011 .

[53]  Christiane Dalton-Puffer,et al.  Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms , 2010 .