THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO CLIL Documents produced by TiFoLa teaching staff

REFLECTIONS ON CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL)

Doris Sygmund

1. Why CLIL?

1.1 The European perspective In the paper issued by the Commission of the European Communities in

July 2003 on “Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity” – An Action Plan 2004-2006 educators all over Europe are encouraged to dedicate time and effort to the cause of plurilingualism in Europe.

“Within a very short time, the European Union will undergo its most significant enlargement to date. The new Union will be home to 450 million Europeans from diverse ethnic, cultural and linguistic backgrounds. It will be more important than ever that citizens have the skills necessary to understand and communicate with their neighbours.” (p.3)

Among the possibilities of how to achieve the aim that every European citizen should speak his/her mother tongue plus two other languages CLIL is explicitly mentioned. “CLIL has a major contribution to make to the Union’s language learning goals. It can provide effective opportunities for pupils to use their new language skills now, rather than learn them now for use later. It opens doors on languages for a broader range of learners, nurturing self-confidence in young learners and those who have not responded well to formal language instruction in general education. It provides exposure to the language without requiring extra time in the curriculum, which can be of particular interest in vocational settings. The introduction of CLIL approaches in an institution can be facilitated by the presence of trained teachers who are native speakers of the vehicular language.”(p8)

General remarks Since the 1970s Communicative Language Teaching has been introduced

into most Countries. Their national curricula expect language learning to focus on communicative skills. Communicative competence is the goal of language teaching. As a reminder, let me mention a few characteristics:

• Whenever possible, use “authentic language” – language as it is used in a real context.

2

• Being able to figure out the speaker’s or writer’s intentions is part of being communicatively competent.

• The target language is a vehicle for classroom communication, not just the object of study.

• The emphasis is on the process of communication rather than just mastery of language forms.

• Students should be given opportunity to express their ideas and opinions.

• Games are important because they have certain features in common with real communicative events. The same goes for role plays and simulations.

• The teacher acts as a facilitator in setting up communicative activities and as an advisor during the activities. (Larsen-Freeman pp121-128)

All these characteristics are relevant to CLIL too, particularly when we talk about authenticity of materials used in the classroom and setting up a communicative environment. So why stay with artificial situations and not take examples from non-language subjects that are of interest to the students (e.g. globalisation)? CLIL offers the opportunity to use language “as a tool” for foreign language learning, rather than act as the actual target of the learning context. This is considered to be one of its most promising characteristics.

We must not forget that successful language acquisition also demands balanced affective factors. The target language learner should find the language learning context positive and should not carry undue negative stress about its environment. In a CLIL classroom students feel less inhibited to use the target language because making mistakes is not considered to be a very serious “crime”. Maybe we can turn less motivated language learners into successful students by giving them the opportunity to use the language in a meaningful context without insisting on absolute language correctness. The attention is not specifically paid to the language itself.

The question of how “input” and “output” relate, is also of importance. Effective language learning must be measured more by the output than the input. The quality of language learning will not be optimal if the student cannot actively use the language in a meaningful way during lessons – foreign langua-ge and non-language subjects alike. CLIL is generally considered to provide environments which allow both exposure to the target language, and opportunities for the learner to use this language in a meaningful way.

3

What is CLIL? Here is a definition of CLIL, though this is an umbrella term and can be

applied and used in a variety of contexts:

• CLIL is an educational methodology in which the learning of languages and other subjects has a joint curricular role.

• Students learn some non-language subjects or topics through a language, which is not his/her usual main language.

We speak of CLIL when at least 25% of the lessons are taught in the target language. In Europe and beyond (e.g. Canada) several initiatives and considerable research responding to different realities has been conducted. There is still no single model which can be considered suitable for the different learners. Some researchers describe up to 3000 inter-related varia-bles which could account for a bilingual educational environment (e.g. re-gional differences, language of one’s neighbours, children with different mother tongues in one classroom).

So we can see that within CLI the term “diversity” is a key foundation stone. It is possible to describe CLIL not so much as a single methodology, but rather a set of options which need to be considered and selected according to the type of plurilingual outcomes which are desired. This may sound vague to some of us; teachers tend to rely heavily on recipes and want to be given a methodology that they can follow without asking too many questions. But I see it more as a challenge for teachers and the possibility of breaking down the barriers between single subjects. Cooperation and teamwork are essential factors of successful CLIL lessons.

3. Who?

3.1. Students CLIL is a concept that should be part of mainstream education and not a

programme for gifted language learners. Finding reliable selection criteria is very problematic and should not be the main concern of educators. Selection for CLIL streams should not necessarily be based on first or target language competence, because of the significance of learner motivation in achieving successful outcomes.

Guidelines should be drawn up to facilitate the inclusion of a broad range of learners in the framework which encompasses various models of CLIL. This would help to unlock the potential of CLIL beyond specifically privileged

4

minority groups. Recommendations from the CEILINK Think Tank). A child’s resistance to learning a foreign language can be due to all sorts of reasons, e.g a rejection of poor or inappropriate language teaching methods.

Take, for instance, the issue of focussing on errors in the classroom. In discussion with pupils one often hears that the CLIL environment is positive and refreshing for these young people, precisely because they do not need to be on their guard as regards making errors, and that the currency of evaluation frequently reported as regards the foreign language classroom, namely grades, is not a key issue.

The question of assessment is one that must be decided by the educatio-nal authorities and the legal situation in very country. Students at secondary level have also been found to report very positive attitudes towards the target language, in addition to a clear understanding of the need to convert existing knowledge into skill. They might find a new interest in regular lan-guage classes and improve their performance there as well.

Many students see CLIL as an extra opportunity to practice the target language, a chance they would not want to miss. But sometimes students feel reluctant (mainly before the implementation of CLIL) to enrol in a CLIL programme, because they do not feel confident in the target language and do not want to have their challenging and interesting biology lessons “spoiled” by the introduction of CLIL. We must nor underestimate these fears, but when we do it the right way, we can easily win these children over and make them even competent language learners…

We need to consider the question of offering breadth of opportunity with regards to the language learning environment. Using language is about strategy, and in order to be strategic language users need to take risks. In taking risks, these language users (including teachers!) make mistakes, be they grammatical or pragmatic.

The idea of learning through a language rather than learning a foreign language is very positively seen by the students.

3.2 Teachers In many European countries we have a dual qualification system, which

means a foreign language and a non-language subject. These teachers are particularly well equipped to become successful CLIL teachers. But they are not the only ones. Of course, good linguistic knowledge and skills in the target language are commonly cited as pre-requisites for CLIL. There is

5

nothing to add to this. But many teachers of non-language subjects with workable foreign language skills feel intimidated by the “real” foreign language teachers. They feel inferior and refrain from implementing CLIL. Cooperation among members of staff is the key to success, sometimes a native speaker can help with the language in the classroom, co-teaching models must be developed (particularly when it comes to the pronunciation of specialised vocabulary).

Moreover, the role of the target language teacher is crucial. The ideal situation sees the target language teacher at the heart of the CLIL operation. Examples of such cooperation between subject and language teachers may be team teaching on certain courses, pre-teaching of language followed by content, or parallel handling of thematic modules. Recognition that language teaching needs to adapt to CLIL environments is also a characteristic of this role. Some teachers want to protect their professional territory against any intruders – this is a problem that needs to be discussed openly and without any restraints. Then steps can be taken and strategies developed to over-come any hard feelings and objections.

But “How good is good enough?” Language skills are important, but so is methodology. It is essential that

a teacher is able to adapt teaching methods, if the learners are to learn both content and language simultaneously. Some non-language teachers fear over-simplification of difficult concepts when they teach in the target language, but again once this problem has been spotted, solutions will be found. Looking for books/teaching material used in the target language countries can be very helpful, because children of the same age group have similar concepts of understanding and need clear language, whether it is in their mother tongue or in their target language.

Sometimes alliances between students and CLIL teachers develop; together they study the topics and do not hesitate to consult dictionaries or encyclopaedias to find their answers. Mutual support and interest are powerful incentives in any classroom. Other teachers fear that CLIL means excessive extra work, which is partly true if you are a loner. But once teachers start to co-operate the situation is less frightening.

First of all, CLIL teachers do not need to learn specialist subject know-ledge. They require three things only:

• a positive attitude to ESP (English for specific purposes);

6

• a knowledge of the fundamental principles of the subject area;

• an awareness of how much they probably already know.

This can be summed up as “the ability to ask intelligent questions”. In other words, the ESP teacher should not become a teacher of the subject matter, but rather an interested student of the subject matter. So here we see again that the role of the teacher is a different one, he is more of a learner together with his students → language and/or content wise → this is an interesting development and should be considered not as a drawback but as an asset in the learning process.

One more astonishing fact: In an extensive corpus of scientific and technical writing, technical vocabulary accounted for only 9% of the total range of lexis. Furthermore, this technical vocabulary was used far less frequently than the non-technical. These technical terms are also likely to pose the least problems for learners; they are often internationally used or can be worked out from a knowledge of the subject matter and common word roots.

And one remark to teacher education: There is a tradition in education of separating the Humanities and the Sciences. Languages have usually been allocated to the Humanities camp. The result has been that English teachers often receive little or no education in Sciences. They would prefer to be teaching Literature and Social English. (Hutchinson pp162-167).

So in-service teacher training courses will have to adapt their study plans in order to enable teachers to perform well in CLIL classrooms. We must equip future teachers with the necessary knowledge and skills to become successful and competent CLIL teachers.

4. What? The choice of subjects is also a very important issue under discussion. It

is clear that the qualifications of the teachers at a school are a decisive factor for the decision which subject will be taught in the target language. But there are also different ways of classifying subjects.

Some distinguish between practical and theoretical subjects: the former (e.g. home economics, PE) require less linguistic competence on behalf of the pupils than the latter (e.g. history). Others distinguish between verbal and non-verbal subjects. It is the extent to which subject matter can be taught through “learning by doing”. Environmental studies, mathematics, art, biology, history, chemistry, psychology and religious studies all appear frequently in terms of subject choice.

7

Again the decision lies with the local authorities and the teachers involved in CLIL. Apart from deciding for or against a specific subject we must not forget the two main components of CLIL: language and content.

Language learning is a long-term and complex process, which is not easy to measure. Is raising language awareness among pupils a positive criterion? Does it happen in a CLIL environment?

The achievement of a wider vocabulary range, and the development of listening and speaking skills are commonly cited as outcomes of CLIL.

Some teachers complain about the weaknesses of grammatical issues of their CLIL students. For me this does not come as a surprise. The message for me is that formal language teaching would have to readjust its learning and teaching aims and objectives. I do not speak out against teaching grammar, but we must look at this field of knowledge in a new perspective. In CLIL lessons grammar is necessary – (e.g. science subjects use many passive constructions, in history students must be competent in tenses).

A basic premise in many schools is that teaching in the target language should not be at the expense of development of the first language. This means that teachers pay attention to first language development throughout all CLIL teaching, adapting their methods and the use of both languages accordingly. If teachers are not constantly considering the needs of their learners as regards their first languages, then it is possible that problems could arise (e.g. change of schools).

A key question often surfaces as follows: ”Will the students manage to learn the content sufficiently well when taught through the target language?” This is a concern of learners, teachers, and parents, and the answer is not altogether straightforward. This is partly due to the sheer diversity of CLIL as it is implemented, but also because of lack of research.

Some teachers and students agree that content learning does not suffer, it rather becomes more versatile. So far no explicit deficit in content among students has been identified.

What we know is that CLIL teachers very often teach the core content highly effectively, and this results in good learning practice and outcomes. But, is there then a risk that not as much content is being taught in the CLIL classroom, or that less intellectual depth is being explored by learners? Again, these are issues which individual CLIL practitioners and researchers need to address.

8

Just a few more answers Student comments such as “CLIL makes boring things at least a little bit

more interesting” are frequently heard. On the other hand some students might be more interested in the language rather than the subject area and thus easily lose their motivation and interest.

One more example shows that CLIL also raises gender issues. One school reported that CLIL was drawing more female pupils into studying science than was previously the case. Other observations indicate a greater interest in languages than seen previously on the part of male pupils.

There are hosts of issues which need to be considered when examining assessment procedures which are context and particularly subject-specific. One critical issue relates to the notion of separating content and language mastery. Some teachers observe that “language mistakes do not affect the assessment of content”, others wholeheartedly disagree. In Austria we have similar problems when children answer questions or write tests in German. What shall teachers do with serious mistakes in language performance?

Surface grammatical mistakes are not, however, the only problems that using additional language may cause. Lack of precision in dealing with, for example, scientific issues, restrictions on formulating argumentation, and the inability to use the signalling systems for nuance nesessary in a range of subjects, can all have an impact on assessment.

What is clear is that the manner in which tests are constructed can have a strong influence on the resulting outcomes. So maybe, new types of testing must be developed. What if we assessed the achievements of our pupils rather than their deficiencies? The Common Reference Scales of the Council of Europe’s, Common European Framework of Reference for Language provide a good basis for schemes to describe individuals’ language skills in an objective, transparent, practical and portable manner.

5. How? The previous chapters have shown how versatile and diverse the CLIL

approach is. Therefore it does not come as a surprise that there is not one single standard methodology. I just want to list a number of principles, techniques and strategies that are definitely not completely new, but can be adopted and adapted in CLIL lessons.

9

• Create a learner friendly environment in which the needs for the students are at the centre of all teaching.

• CLIL is primarily student centred. Give room for individualisation and differentiation in your lessons.

• Visuality and illustrativeness increase clarity and understanding.

• The use of redundancy is often regarded as typical of good teaching practice, but it does also appear to be an essential characteristic of CLIL.

• Develop “unusual”, new tests for checking comprehension. Work on new assessment tools.

• Avoid oversimplification in your instruction.

• Focus on the essential content.

• Which of the four skills are most important? To my mind reading is most important and writing least. Listening and speaking are in between. Pay particular attention to effective reading strategies.

• Take into consideration the different learning styles of your students (VAK).

• Take into consideration the theory of multiple intelligences.

• Make use of the Communicative Language Teaching methodology (e.g. role play, drama…)

• Project work and interdisciplinary cooperation are promising features of CLIL.

• Encourage non-competitive sharing of materials.

• Go for authentic material (schoolbooks/readers used in the target language countries) despite cultural differences in the presentation of certain topics (e.g. history- The Battle of Waterloo).

• Use the Internet and CD-Roms.

10

CLIL AND THE EUROPEAN DIMENSION IN EDUCATION

Tomáš Janík

1. Introduction On May 1, 2004, the European Union underwent the greatest enlarge-

ment in its history. This fact brings consequences also in the area of education. The European Dimension is a key issue in European educational policy today. But what is meant by the European Dimensiom in Education?

According to the Green Paper on the European Dimension in Education (1993, p. 457ff) education in Europe should: 1.) grant equal chances for everyone, 2.) stress individual responsibility for the European society, 3.) develop individuals into self-sustaining, critical innovative European citizens, 4.) develop an attitude for life long learning and 5.) deliver qualifications to everyone in order to be an active menber in the society.

But how to make sure that these general objectives are filled with concrete contents?

2. European Dimension and foreign language learning

One of the ways to carry out the idea of the European Dimension is foreign language learning. The „Europe of languages“ is the slogan of these days. The need to learn foreign languages is stressed also in The National Programme of Development of Education in the Czech Republic, which was publisched under the title „The White Book“ (2001): „teaching of two foreign languages, one of which must be English, with the introduction in the 3rd and 6th form of the basic school and obligatory secondary leaving education controlled by the state ..“

Experts in the field of foreign language education and teachers in schools are looking for innovative approaches to foreign language learning. CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) is a newly introduced approach which brings together two significant domains of education: content and language.

11

3. CLIL as an integrative approach CLIL is an integrative approach or dual focus education. The aim of

CLIL is linking content of a non-linguistic subject through a foreign language. In CLIL for instance students with Czech as their mother tongue learn mathematics or physics and to do so they use English or German. CLIL programmes can be realised wholly in the foreign language (with both content and language goals) or partly where for instance only receptive skills are required in the foreign language – depending on the students´ age and their language competence.

CLIL suggests equilibrium between content and language learning – both are developed simultaneously and gradually (Novotná et al. 2003). But what is content? What is language? And what consequences does CLIL bring for teaching and learning? And what does it mean to be a CLIL-teacher?

4. Content as a key issue in CLIL What is content? Content of education is determined in teaching plans,

teaching standards, textbooks, etc. As J. Průcha states (1997, p. 244), „content of education includes not only the information that is intended to become pupil´s knowledge in school but also skills, values, postures and interests that the pupils are to develop“.

In a cognitive view content means not only static knowledge lik established facts (e. g. dates from history) but includes also dynamic knowledge like under-standing the meaning of concept (e.g. how blood circulation works). We consider content (knowledge) as a dynamic and complex structure of concepts.

Researches in children‘s preconcepts and naive theories show, what kinds of interpretation and misinterpretation of concepts children have. The importance of the role of language is undisputed. Language understanding is a precondition for learning with comprehension. Is it not a problematic point of CLIL? This question can be addressed as a challenge for educational research.

5. Language as a key issue in CLIL The content is communaicated in processes of teaching and learning. The

medium of communication is language (in CLIL a foreign language). Through language cognitive processes are stimulated and developed. The teacher uses language not only for knowledge transmission, but also for helping students

12

construct their knowledge. From this point of view language is very important for learning.

J. Novotná and M. Hofmannová (2001) point out a problem, we face in CLIL and interaction of three „languages“. When teaching for instance mathematics to Czech students in English (as a foreign language), there is interaction of: a) the mother tongue, b) foreign language, c) and the „language of mathematics“.

We must be aware of the differences between Czech and English. Further-more it is important to reflect the particularity of the „language“ of the non-linguistic subject. There is for instance a large difference between „the lan-guage of history“ (narration, description) and „the language of mathematics“ (symbols, definitions etc.).

6. Teachers and CLIL

Teachers are considered to be experts in teaching and learning. The question is what knowledge is necessary for a CLIL-Teacher? We refer to research on teacher‘s knowledge and to an analysis of teacher cognitive processes. L. S. Shulman (1986, 1987) discusses different types of teacher knowledge and he distinguishes between content knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge and others.

What is content knowledge? In Shulman´s point of view this term „refers to the amount and organization of knowledge per se in the mind of teacher (1986, p. 9). The teacher‘s content knowledge requires also understanding in the following way: “The teacher need not only understand that something is so; the teacher must further understand why it is so, on what grounds its warrant can be asserted…“ (1986, p. 9).

What is pedagogical content knowledge? L. S. Shulman considered pedagogical content knowledge as special amalgam of content knowledge and knowledge for teaching. Pedagogical content knowledge included „an unterstanding of how particular topics, problems, or issues are organized, presented, and adapted to the diverse interests and abilities of learners, and presented for instructions“ (Shulman, 1987, p.8).

We argue, these two types of knowledge are important also for CLIL-Teacher. A teacher needs them to help his students acquire content in a comprehensible way.

13

7. Concluding remarks We outlined the CLIL approach in the context of the European Dimension

in Education. We focused on the CLIL key concepts: content and language. We discussed the question what a teacher must know when implementing Content and Language Integrated Learning. All these questions are open. However CLIL offers many areas for educational research. The effectiveness of CLIL is one of them.

Answers to this set of following questions should be given: • Which factors influence the effectiveness of CLIL? • How effective is CLIL in cases where students have no sufficient

content (subject matter) knowledge? • How effective is CLIL in cases where students have no sufficient skills

in foreign language? • How effective is CLIL in cases where teachers are not experts in both

areas –Content education and foreign language education? • What teaching and learning styles or strategies are used in CLIL?

References Commission of the European Communities: Green Paper on the European Dimension of Education, European Commission, 1993.

Novotná, J., Moraová, H., Hofmannová, M. Using Original Textbooks when Teaching Mathematics in a Foreign Language. In: CERMER 3, edit.: Mariotti, Maria-Alessandra, ERME, 2003.

Novotná, J., Hofmannová, M. CLIL and mathematics education 2001.

http://math.unipa.ti/-grim/Jnovotna.PDF

Průcha, J. Moderní pedagogika. Praha: Portál, 1997.

Shulman, L. S. Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 1986, No.2, s. 4-14.

Shulman, L. S. Knowledge and Teaching. Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 1987, No. 1, p. 1-22.

The National Programme of Development of Education in the Czech Republik (The Czech White Book) Praha: Tauris, 2001.

http://www.msmt.cz/cp1250/web/12/WhiteBook.doc

14

INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION LEARNING Zdeněk Janík

„Understanding a people's culture exposes their normality without reducing their particularity...“

(Geertz 1973: 14)

Drawing on Clifford Geertz’ opening line, the article attempts to communi-cate some of the principal approaches to the conception of culture and their implications to nowadays teacher’s role as an actor competent in intercultural learning environment. In a brief overview of different meanings of culture we highlight the idea of culture closest to the purposes of intercultural learning. Intercultural awareness lies in the core of our learning. The question is whether we become aware of our own culture, and the culture of others, by means of ethnographic method of exploring culture (1), learning the strategies of intercultural communication (2), learning appropriate values and attitudes bearing on recognition and respect (3), or we raise our (inter-)cultural aware-ness by a combination of the three. The struggle over the best means of inter-cultural learning (and teaching) takes place on the more abstract field of knowledge, skills, and attitudes, where attitude is the most important element, albeit in a constant confrontation with experience. To put it more simply, to gain understanding of a culture we need knowledge of the culture (ad 1), we cannot do without the appropriate communicative skills of “what and how” strategies in intercultural communication (ad 2), and it is indispensable for us to acquire the attitudes without which understanding of a culture is impossible (ad 3). We may not, and indeed will not, achieve the state of perceiving others’ cultures’ “normality”1 as Geertz assumes, and we will definitely be struck with their particularities. But we will at least have a will to understand, recognize, and respect their particularities, despite, or because of, the contrary experiences we might gain when encountering the cultures of others. It is a teacher with intercultural competencies comprising the flexible combination of skills, know-ledge, and attitudes who can meet the demands of an intercultural environment.

We disregard the idea of dividing culture into so called “big C” and “little C” culture, where the former relates to history, institutions, cultural artifacts, and the like, and the latter to “behavior culture” (Tomalin, Stempleski 1993: 6).

1 The term „normality“ suggests obscurity. In my opinion, Geertz’s meaning of the term is

what people take for granted.

15

Although “behavior culture” is closer to our framework, we broaden the concept to include both types of cultures, assuming “big C” and “little C” cultures to be in interaction.

Culture is a way of life of people, their thinking, feeling, and believing. Culture is also a learned behavior and a set of techniques for adjusting to the external environment (Geertz 1973). Geertz stresses the semiotic concept of culture consisting of a web of symbols. Ethnographer then proceeds to interpret the web by isolating its elements, specifying their relationships, and characterizing the whole system. Culture as such implies a system of meaning. Be it system of meaning, or a system generally, the system per se is not “out there”. Culture is lived by people who produce meanings. Cul-ture is a result of people’s interaction: it both constitutes and is a constituent of people’s interaction. In construction and reconstruction of culture, people are constrained but also enabled by the cultural system.

Drawing partly on Geertz’s and other’s idea of culture, we come up with the following definition:

Culture is a pattern of learned perceptions – attitudes, belief and disbelief, worldviews, and behaviors that are acceptable and expectable by a cultural group (Byram, Fleming 1998, Geertz 1973, Gudykunst 2004, Jandt 2001).

Attitudes, belief and worldviews form the particularities that draw a thin or a thick line between what is acceptable and expectable for ‘us’ as opposed to ‘them’. Similarly, by accentuating differences between ‘me’ vis-à-vis ‘you’, we are inclined to see individuals as culturally unique beings. The underlying assumption here lies in the concept of identity. There is a lot we share in our identities and perhaps even more of what makes us different due to both our inherent characteristic features and the ways we are socialized.

If culture involves the learning of perceptions, the process of socialization must be stressed. Ideally, we view socialization as people’s interaction in acquiring and modifying meanings they assign to their world. We acquire our own culture and learn about cultures of others. Once we acquired our culture, we take it for granted. That is, we are not aware of our own culture and, in a parallel manner, we do not perceive in our culture what we were not taught to perceive. It is only when we encounter other cultures that we see our culture different from those of others. But seeing differences does not equal being aware of one’s own culture, let alone other cultures. This is because when we interact with other cultures, and thus actually involve in intercultural communi-cation – we unconsciously bring our own cultural frame of interpretation to the

16

intercultural situation. Shortly, ‘we’ perceive ‘them’ through the lenses of our own culture. That is not the way we achieve (inter-)cultural awareness.

But what are the means of a raising (inter-)cultural awareness? Let us take the first of the above-mentioned approaches based on the ethnographic method of exploring the cultures of others. We use as an example Gert Jan Hofstede, Paul B. Pedersen, and Geert Hofstede’s Exploring Culture (2002). The authors attempt a scientific classification of national cultures. The focus of their study lies in defining the following cultural dimensions: identity, hierarchy, gender, truth, and virtue. Each of the dimensions has its two opposites: for example, the dimension of identity on the one side expresses collectivism, its opposite conveys individualism, hierarchy signifies large power distance, its opposite is small power distance, and so on. The authors believe that almost each of the world´s national cultures inclines to one of the dimension opposites. To give a concrete example: Japanese culture tends to collectivism, which gives preferen-ce of a group over individual, and large power distance, which means acknow-ledging social status, hierarchical positions, and use of formal language. The culture of United States, on the other hand, moves towards the opposite extre-me of identity, encompassing individualism with its stress on a personal opinion and the privilege of the individual before the group. Likewise, the American small power distance regards privileges and status as unimportant and cherishes an informal talk of equal people (2002: 91-113).

The Hofstedes and Pedersen’s idea of learning other cultures can provide us with the knowledge of other cultures and perhaps of our own, too. We need to build the knowledge in order to avoid misunderstandings while in intercultural communication with a Japanese superior in office. The knowledge, however, will be of little help for us when we find ourselves immersed in a critical incident.2 What if the Japanese boss acts contrary to what we expect from collectivistic and large power distance cultures? Say, on the first acquaintance he/she acts rather informally and thus shatters our picture of Japanese collectivistic culture. The notion of expectation must be stressed here. It should go without saying that when encountering “the other” for the first time and without prior knowledge of their culture, we project our expectation to their behavior. That is we see the others through the lenses of our own culture. Yet, even when we acquire the knowledge, such as cultural features of nations, we then again project the expectations

2 We define critical incident as a situation of miscommunication due to a misunderstanding

occurring between two cultures (Gudykunst 2004, see also Tomalin, Stempleski 1993).

17

we learnt from the book into the intercultural communication. We thus use it as a tool for alleviating a cultural shock. Knowledge of cultures may indeed reduce the tension of cultural shock, but it does not lead to cultural awareness per se. If our experience of intercultural communication, by revealing before us something unlearnt and new, runs contrary to the knowledge we learnt from books, how then are we to adjust to various and unexpected circumstances? Intercultural skills are needed here.

We should give the authors of Exploring Culture credit for not neglecting the aspect of skills. In the book the authors introduce an eye-opening exercise that stimulates learners to read pictures based on the skill of separating observation from interpretation (2002: 5-27). We, never-theless, are more inspired by Gudykunst’s Bridging Differences. Gudykunst proposes certain abilities (2004: 253-273) we need in order to communicate effectively with strangers. The most fundamental are: ability to be mindful, ability to tolerate ambiguity, ability to manage anxiety, ability to adapt our communication, and ability to empathize.

To pinpoint some of the essential abilities, to be mindful means to be aware of the communication process per se, not to focus only on the outcome of communication that incites our excessive expectations of a talk. People who are mindful try to assess how their interpretations of messages differ from strangers’ interpretations of those messages. Being involved in this process of decoding messages, people negotiate meaning that is they seek “clarification of meanings during conversation…” (2004: 254). To be open to new information is part of the ability. The ability to empathize signifies taking the perspective of other person and striving to see the world from the other’s point of view. Both mindfulness and empathy require one underlying prerequisite: attitude. It is rather a difficult endeavor to empathize with others if we do not have the will to recognize and respect their culture.

It certainly becomes clear how we intend to interrelate knowledge, skills, and attitudes, and in doing so to form the amalgam we need to attain desirable intercultural competences. We consider attitudes the most important element of the three since it is inherently coupled with experience. To illustrate, we may build or change our attitudes towards the Roma minority by reading books about their culture and thus we might develop recognition and respect towards them. But it is our experience of meeting Roma people that will confirm or rectify the attitude we gained via knowledge.

Attitudes are the building stone of (inter-)cultural awareness. Hence also the role of teacher is clear: by helping children to reflect on their first-hand

18

experience and by discussing their distorted second-hand experience provided by the outside world and particularly by the mass media, teachers support children in building up suitable attitudes. This is, however, a requirement that should be met by all teachers, not only by teachers of intercultural communica-tion. The last part of the article gives a brief insight into the ways of familia-rizing future teachers with different methods of intercultural education with a particular stress on students’ development of expedient attitudes to raise cultu-ral and intercultural awareness not only with the students themselves, but also with their future pupils.

The following examples of activities come from our e-learning based course of Intercultural Communication. The course is designed for student teachers of first-level of primary schools. The course draws on the entry of cross-cutting topics in the Framework Educational Program for Primary Education, namely Multicultural Education and Education towards Thinking in European and Global Context.

The topics of the course are broadly divided into four stages aiming at gradual development of (inter-)cultural awareness: cognitive, (self-)reflectional, evaluative, and intercultural stage.

The cognitive stage focuses on cultural perceptions. How our perceptions differ from those of others could be seen in an activity “Interpretation and Observation” (Gert Jan Hofstede, Paul B. Pedersen, and Geert Hofstede 2002, Gudykunst 2004, Tomalin and Stempleski 1993). Students are presented with unfinished and unclear drawings of people involved in various activities (Hofstedes and Pedersen 2002: 8 – 11). By describing the pictures (first alone, then in pairs and groups) students see how their perceptions of the same picture differ from others. They learn to separate their observation from what may be their culturally-influenced interpretations.

Cognition is in mutual relation with (self-)reflection. In this stage learners see contrasts between the ways they view the world (i.e. they see differences that run along the border-line ‘you’ vis-à-vis ‘me’ and ‘us’ vis-à-vis ‘them’) and are able to reflect on them. Both reflection and self-reflection is actually synonymous, but not congruent with (inter-)cultural awareness. In the context of intercultural communication, (self-)reflection implies the ability to reflect on one’s own identity, attitudes, and values, likewise the ability to relate them to identities, attitudes, and values of others. There is an activity called Values continuum (adapted from Robert Kohl) based on contrary standing values (e.g. ‘competition’ vis-a-vis ‘cooperation’) where learners indicate on a scale which of two particular values they favour. They also think in terms of values what is

19

characteristic of their own culture. This activity reveals how learners assign diverse meanings to terms such as ‘equality’ and ‘freedom’. They corresponding-ly discuss culturally-shared meanings of the values for different cultural nations.

(Self-)reflection is closely linked with evaluation. We evaluate and assess our identity against the identity of others by asking questions such as Who Am I?, Who Am I in the eyes of others? The story of the Peacelike Mongoose (see app.) gives a deep insight into the sense of belonging and identity and sheds the light on cultural awareness. To evaluate is to judge and to judge is intrinsic to making stereotypes and being prejudiced. We will not discuss here the nature of stereotyping. The second story (see app.) relates to stereotypes at schools. The story is moving because it especially addresses young school learners. The underlying message of the stories is to be willing to “recognize and to be recognized” (Melucci, 1996).

The very brief introduction of activities took us to the last stage. The intercultural stage builds on an international project Argonauts of Europe (Comenius 2.2A; www.respect-network.org) that we coordinated at our faculty. The project was designed, apart from others, for training student teachers from different parts of Europe in intercultural communication. We adapted some of the project ideas for the course of Intercultural Communication. We drew on the assumption (that proves to be true) that students have low awareness of the necessity of intercultural understanding in our country. Yet newspaper articles (e.g.“Blanenské školy řeší, co s dětmi cizinců. Neumí česky.“ In MF Dnes Jihomoravský, 13. 9. 2004 p. 2), researches, and surveys show that the contrary is true and that there is a crucial need for educating teachers in intercultural competences.

Indeed nowadays, teachers encounter more frequently intercultural environ-ments in schools in forms of minority groups, both from our country and abroad. The presence of such groups in classrooms leads to cultural critical incidents (i.e. misunderstanding resulting from miscommunication due to cultural differences between teacher and their learner). The course of Intercultural Communication takes advantage of teaching practice being a part of student teachers curriculum and offers student teachers “fake” (that is made up, but definitely not far-fetched) case studies of critical incidents occurring in schools’ intercultural environments. Students read a particular case study, study a theory attached to the case, and discuss suggestions how to solve the incident (for examples see app.). The goal is not to come up with an ultimate solution, but to make students build on their (inter-)cultural awareness. Later, students bring in real case studies from their own experience.

20

The course of Intercultural communication is not yet well-developed. Even more, the course is time-constrained (one lesson a week per one term) and by its design gives only a training in, rather than deep understanding of, intercultural communication. Still, it builds on the fundamentals of reaching (inter-)cultural awareness through the steps of (inter-)cultural knowledge and skills. Underlying is the gradual shift towards positive attitudes accentuating a will to recognize and to respect.

Appendix of Example of Activities: 1. Make a circle. Inside the circle describe in words (adjectives) how you see your-self. Outside the circle describe in words how you think people around see you.

2. The peacelike mongoose

In cobra country a mongoose was born one day who didn't want to fight cobras or anything else. The word spread from mongoose to mongoose that there was a mongoose who didn't want to fight cobras. If he didn't want to fight anything else, it was his own business, but it was the duty of every mongoose to kill cobras or be killed by cobras "Why?" asked the peacelike mongoose, and the word went around that the strange new mongoose was not only pro-cobra and anti-mongoose but intellectually curious and against the ideals and traditions of mongoosism. "He is crazy:" cried the young mongoose's father. "He is sick," said his mother. "He is a coward" shouted his brothers. "He’s a mongoosexual," whispered his sisters. Strangers who had never laid eyes on the peacelike mongoose remembered that they had seen him crawling on his stomach, or trying on cobra hoods, or plotting the violent overthrow of Mongoosia. "I am trying to use reason and intelligence; said the strange new mongoose. "Reason is six-sevenths of treason," said one of his neighbors. "Intelligence is what the enemy uses," said another. Finally, the rumor spread that the mongoose had venom in his sting, like a cobra, and he was tried, convicted by a show of paws, and condemned to banishment. (Adapted from: James Thurber, Fables of our Time and Famous Poems Illustrated, New York: Harper Books: Harmondsworth 1965, p. 287.)

3. Who am I? For Asian-American students, the answer is a diligent, hardworking and intelligent young person. But living up to this reputation has secretly haunted me. The labeling starts in elementary school. It's not uncommon for a teacher to remark, "You're Asian, you're supposed to do well in math." The underlying message is, "You're Asian and you're supposed to be smarter." Not to say being labeled intelligent isn't flattering, because it is, or not to deny that basking in the limelight

21

of being top of my class isn't ego-boosting, because frankly it is. But at a certain point, the pressure became crushing. I felt as if doing poorly on my next spelling quiz would stain the exalted reputation of all Asian students forever. So I continued to be an academic overachiever, as were my friends. By junior high school I started to believe I was indeed smarter. I became condescending toward non-Asians. I was a bigot; all my friends were Asians. The thought of intermingling occurred rarely if ever. My elitist opinion of Asian students changed, however, in high school. As a student at what is considered one of the nation's most competitive science and math schools, I found that being on top is no longer an easy feat. I quickly learned that Asian students were not smarter. How could I ever have believed such a thing? All around me are intelligent, ambitious people who are not only Asian but white, black and Hispanic. Superiority complexes aside, the problem of social segregation still exists in the schools. With few exceptions, each race socializes only with its "own kind." Students see one another in the classroom, but outside the classroom there remains distinct segregation. Racist lingo abounds. An Asian student who socializes only with other Asians is believed to be an Asian Supremacist or, at the very least, arrogant and closed off. Yet an Asian student who socializes only with whites is called a "twinkie," one who is yellow on the outside but white on the inside. A white teenager who socializes only with whites is thought of as prejudiced, yet one who socializes with Asians is considered an "egg," white on the outside and yellow on the inside. These culinary classifications go on endlessly, needless to say, leaving many confused, and leaving many more fearful than ever of social experimentation. Because the stereotypes are accepted almost unani-mously, they are rarely challenged. Many develop harmful stereotypes of entire races. We label people before we even know them. Labels learned at a young age later metamorphose into more visible acts of racism. For example, my parents once accused and ultimately fired a Puerto Rican cashier, believing she had stolen $200 from the register at their grocery store. They later learned it was a mistake. An Asian shopkeeper nearby once beat a young Hispanic youth who worked there with a baseball bat because he believed the boy to be lazy and dishonest. We all hold misleading stereotypes of people that limit us as individuals in that we cheat ourselves out of the benefits different cultures can contribute. We can grow and learn from each culture whether it be Chinese, Korean or African-American. Just recently some Asian boys in my neighborhood were attacked by a group of young white boys who have christened themselves the Master Race. Rather than being angered by this act, I feel pity for this generation that lives in a state of bigotry. It may be too late for our parents' generation to accept that each person can only be judged for the characteristics that set him or her apart as an individual. We, however, can do better. (Adapted from Strom, M.S. Holocaust and Human Behavior. Massachusetts: Facing History and Ourselves Foundation, 1994, pp17-18.)

22

4. Examples of case studies: Case „Changing Education for Diversity“

Context: You are employed as a newly educated teacher in a school situated in an inner-city area where gangs of children from various backgrounds are common.

Critical incident: Their language is poor and they cause problems during the schoolday.

Instruction and questions:

• Please, read Corson's summary first.

• Try to answer the following question. (make use of Corson's theory)

• What do the teachers in the school need to do to facilitate for these students to be a part of the literate culture?

Case „Consequences of reprimand“

Context: Class sizes are increasing. Bob can barely cope with thirty-five students. He finds teaching hard work. There are no real discipline problems, but now and then he finds it very difficult to keep the various groups apart. Munir is one of his North African students. He and a few other North African students make up an important clan in the class. Bob has observed that they, in fact, rule the class, but he hasn’t been able to do much about it yet.

Critical incident: Not long ago, there was a serious quarrel and another student, Stephan, was openly threatened. Bob felt that the North African students had gone too far. He called Munir to the front of the class and told him off. Munir flew into a rage. Bob tried to calm him down, but without success. Munir left the classroom, making all kinds of threats. He refused to come back to class and didn’t want to talk about the problem.

Instruction and questions:

• Please, read the downloadable document entailing an abstract of Pinto’s book first.

• Assume you are the expert in intercultural communication. Try to answer the following questions (make use of Pinto’s theory):

• Can you explain what actually the problem is in this case?

• Can you give Bob a detailed piece of advice on how to handle this problem

23

Case „Bad manners?“

Context: The American student Andrew, who came to a Japanese secondary school on a student exchange, often asks questions in the history class. He also makes remarks the way he is used to do at his American school.

Critical incident: The Japanese teacher seems to be angry with his behaviour. Andrew does not understand the teacher's negative approach.

Instruction and questions:

• Please, download the summary of Jandt's book and try to answer the following questions (make use of Jandt's theory).

• Can you name some barriers of communication presented in this case?

• Who is behaving badly?

• Can you give Andrew and the Japanese teacher some advice based on Jandt's theory?

Bibliography Byram, M., Fleming, M. Language learning in intercultural perspective: approaches through drama and ethnography. Cambridge: CUP, 1998.

Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Culture.NY: Basic Books, 1973.

Gudykunst, William B. Bridging differences. effective intergroup communication. London: Sage publications, 2004

Hofstede, Gert J et al. Exploring culture:exercises, stories, and synthetic cultures. Maine: Intercultural Press, 2002.

Holocaust and Human Behavior. Massachusetts: Facing History and Ourselves Foundation, Inc., 1994.

Melucci, A. The playing self: person and meaning in the planetary society. Cambirdge: CUP, 1996.

Tomalin, B, Stempelski, B. Cultural awareness. Oxford: OUP, 1993.

Internet sources: http://moodlinka.ped.muni.cz

http://www.respect-network.org/argo

24

INTEGRATING CONTENT AND LANGUAGE IN MUSIC EDUCATION

Mary Stakelum

Introduction

In contrast to a view of language learning that is based on the acquisition of information about the language, whether vocabulary-based or grammar-based, the CLIL approach is based on direct experience of learning in the second language. A key feature of CLIL is the belief that knowledge can be accessed through the medium of a language which is not the learner’s first language. The intended outcome is the integration of content and language, so that the student’s understanding in both the subject knowledge and in the language is enhanced. The purpose of this essay is to outline ways in which this aspect of CLIL can be applied to music in general education. Using content knowledge as it is defined in the music education syllabus in contemporary policy documents in the Irish primary school context3, it points to ways in which music – as a non-discursive symbolic form – can be described, explored and evaluated using a discursive language. This notion of music education lends itself easily to the CLIL approach where content and language are integrated. The activities described in the essay are intended to be accessible to the generalist teacher and for classroom use with pupils in the 9-14 age range. Most notably there is a vital place for developing an understanding of ‘how music goes’, where the student and the teacher are involved together as ‘doers’. At the heart of this lies direct experience in composing (or making up music), performing (using voice and/or instruments) and listening purposefully to music (whether live or recorded).

Outlining the musical content

Content knowledge which is musical can be defined in terms which are universally applicable to all musics as follows:

CONTENT LANGUAGE Pulse the underlying beat of the music Pitch high and low Tempo fast and slow

3 NCCA (1999). Music. Arts Education Curriculum. Dublin: Stationery Office.

25

Dynamics loud and soft Duration long and short Structure same and different. Timbre the colour of the sound Texture the layering of the sound

Some of these terms need little explanation and the language used to explore

and describe them is literal. Others are less easily accessible and require a different understanding and form of linguistic expression. For example, in the case of dynamics, even very young children can discern the quality of ‘loud’ and ‘soft’. A teacher can play a short piece of music on a sound source – a drum, for example – and can stimulate discussion about how the music goes. Starting with broad questions such as ‘was it loud or soft? Was it all the same? Did it end softly or loudly?, the level of awareness of children can be refined as can their level of concentration, musical memory and powers of perception. Similarly with tempo, it is not too difficult for a teacher to draw children’s attention to the fact that a piece of music is fast or slow, or getting faster or slower4. Using the parameters of fast and slow, the same sound source – a drum - can also be used to evoke similar responses which are focused on describing the music. Did the music begin fast or slow? Was it the same throughout? and so forth. Thus children can begin to develop a means of communicating about music’s content in a language that is ‘musical’. This is a significant point. Although the language used is relatively simple, it is faithful to the music and focused on the pupil’s direct experience of the music.

On the other hand, consider the challenge to teacher and student to discuss the notion of ‘timbre’ in music. Just as in the case of ‘dynamics’ and ‘tempo’ above, in the case of ‘timbre’, what is required is that the students recognise and describe in words the particular property of the sound to which they are listening. While they might well discern differences between sounds made from a metallic source and those made from a wooden source, trying to find words to articulate these differences is difficult, even in one’s first language. Yet, given that decisions about timbre form an important part of a composer’s intention, and that much music is conceived for performance on a particular sound source for reasons of taste, developing an understanding of this aspect of music is an important facet of music education. Introducing students to the world of sound must include the provision to them of a vocabulary for describing differences. One such way of achieving this could involve the exploration of images and

4 Pugh, A. and Pugh, L. (1998). Music in the early years. London:Routledge.

26

metaphors. By drawing on the extra-musical, i.e. all the senses rather than exclusively the aural, there are ways in which the teacher can elicit rich responses. By providing objects that the students must describe, the teacher has an opportunity to enrich the word power of the students and to extend their means of describing their experiences of music. For example, having had direct experience of the feel of silk and gravel, and having expressed their responses to these in words, they might describe sounds as ‘rough as gravel’ or ‘smooth as silk’. Thus the student is learning to think in images and to apply image-based language taken from their full sensory experiences.

Practical examples

Integrating content and language in music education can occur in many ways in the classroom. Below is a summarised account of three ways in which the students are enabled to explore sonorities, to engage in ‘musical imagining’ and to work towards the creation of a sound story.

1. Exploring sonorities Build up a repertoire of words and phrases which can be used to describe the sounds that are available. A useful starting point is to present the class with a series of sound sources (metallic, wooden, tuned and untuned etc.) and describe the sounds. It becomes easier when the students can compare two sound sources. For example, it is easier to say that a maracas sounds rougher, darker, deeper than a sound made from a triangle than to dwell on words to describe one sound source.

2. Musical imagining Choose a stimulus of a picture. From this, the group has to work together to create a ‘sound picture’. As well as developing an understanding of ‘how music goes’, the students are involved in discussion and have an opportunity to put the ‘musical language’ into practice. The ‘sound picture’ can be performed for the whole class and discussion regarding choice of sound sources used. This, together with the use of ‘musical content’ can provide a framework within which appraisal of the work occurs.

3. Creating a sound story Choose a theme and work together to create a musical piece of about one minute’s duration. Examples which are ideal for this activity include experiences which are common to all the participants - such as a representation of the weather - or imaginings of adventures such as a journey to the jungle or to a treasure island.

27

This is a longer project and one which provides a means by which the class’s musical imagination can be put into use. To take the example of a storm, initial brainstorming by the group will involve deciding on a beginning, middle and end. Decisions about ‘how the music goes’ are taken by the group. The challenge might include moving from a point of quietness and calmness to the rumbling of thunder and the eye of the storm to the end when the storm has passed away and calmness returns. As a conclusion, the teacher could play a recorded piece of a storm. Thus, as a musical activity, the students are engaged as listener, composer and performer. Finally, the content and language are integrated to such an extent that both are based in and on the music. As a follow-up activity, the group could make a graphic score (using pictures or signs to depict the sequence of events). Similarly, on completion of the group activity, each group performs their piece for the whole class. Appraisal of composition can be framed using the ‘musical content’ outlined above.

Taken together, these three practical examples can provide opportunities in which student understanding in music can be enhanced. Learning outcomes can be assessed from both musical and language perspectives. From a musical perspective, the student’s understanding of the content can be assessed by attending to their ability to move from the intuitive to the analytical in music5. From a language perspective, the learning outcomes can be evaluated by the students’ ability to use language to reveal the process by which they came to that understanding.

Conclusion

In music education, the challenge is to provide learning opportunities for students which are based in the music as experienced by the students, and not reduced to descriptions about music in the abstract. The CLIL approach can provide such opportunities. Finding words to describe sounds is not easy in any language. Enriching a child’s means of expression can be made easier by giving them the means of describing in words this experience. A useful way of extending pupils’ understanding of music involves group composition. As can be seen in the examples above, language is used to describe, explore and interrogate the subject matter. The musical content of such activities centres on the controlling and shaping of the sounds within a structure, in order to create a piece of art which is meaningful and of value.

5 Swanwick, K. (1994). Musical knowledge. Intuition, analysis and music education.

London:Routledge.

28

An important pedagogical point is that, in group work, the stimulus is common to all the participants. For example, it is likely that most people have a notion of what a storm involves or can imagine it. Communicating this by means of language involves bringing this notion – real or imagined – to the fore. This communication can occur when students operate not just at a literal level, but when they begin to operate at a metaphorical level, both musically and linguistically.

RESEARCH ON CLIL UNDERWAY Peter Glatz and Doris Sygmund

So far very little research has been done concerning the effects of CLIL classes on the language level of pupils in lower secondary schools (10 – 15 year olds).

The authors followed the quantitative paradigm to measure the receptive language performance (reading and listening) in English. The subjects were lower secondary school students of 17 classes from 9 different schools in Lower Austria.

The collected data were processed by SPSS to carry out a factor analysis and to check the test items for their reliability.

The evaluation of the means showed that the test group 1 (min. 3 CLIL lessons a week) and test group 2 (1 – 2.5 CLIL lessons per week) had about the same results, whereas test group 3 (no CLIL lessons) was definitely better in their performance. The result is relativised by the fact that the subjects of the control group are all from three classes of one school. Thus no indication for the efficiency of the CLIL method could be found.

Possibly the extent of the additional language teaching is too low to be reflected in the result of the test. For the better documentation of the control group (N=52) a broader successive study could be helpful. The study is seen as an impulse to use quantitative methods in future studies.

29

INTERESTING INTERNET LINKS AND BOOKS

http://www.clilcompendium.com

http://www.euclic.net

http://www.euroclic.net/index.php?inhoud=inhoud/bulletins/bulletin7/9.html

http://www.fu-berlin.de/elc/

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JWCRAWFORD/biling.html

http://www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co-operation/education/Languages/Language_Policy/

http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/lang.issues.html

http://www.ecml.at/news/gazette.asp

http://www.ecml.at/help/detail.asp?i=122

http://www.fu-berlin.de/elc/docs/langpolENlong.pdf

http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/index_en.html

http://www.clilcompendium.com

http://www.euclic.net

Future Scenarios in Content and Language Integrated Learning Marsh, Marsland, Maljers (eds.) 16 visions of the potential development of CLIL across Europe. 1998, 128 pp. ISBN 951-39-0296-X.

CLIL Initiatives for the Millennium: report on the CEILINK Think-Thank

Marsh, Marsland (eds.) Speeches, recommendations and analyses from the expert CLIL Think-Tank. 1999, 135 pp. ISBN 951-39-0434-2.

A Resource Base for Bilingual Educators Kroschewski, Schuenemann, Wolff Multilingual bibliography of research and teaching materials for CLIL. 1998, 297 pp. ISBN 951-39-0282-X.

Learning with Languages (ed. by D. Marsh and B. Marhand) 1999 Spcrates-Lingua A DIESELL.

Marsh, D. Ennser Ch. Sygmund, D. Pursuing Plurilingualism, 1999.

30