The use of the L1 in CLIL classes: The teachers’ perspective
Keywords:cambio de código, translanguaging, AICLE, instrucción en inglés, uso de la L1.
There are currently different perspectives about the role to be played by the L1 in CLIL (Context and Language Integrated Learning) contexts, although its use seems to be common practice. Some voices consider that the L1 only has a support function for explanation and its use should be minimized, whereas other voices state that the L1 has a learning function, as it can help to build up students’ lexicon and to foster their metalinguistic awareness. In this paper 35 in-service CLIL teachers were asked about their beliefs regarding the use of the L1 in their classes in Colombia. The results indicated that the participants were positive about L1 use, as they believed it can serve to scaffold language and content learning, although the amount of first language use varied greatly from teacher to teacher. The paper ends up by advocating for a principled L1 use, instead of the current randomized practices.
Agustín Llach, M. P. (2009). The role of Spanish L1 in the vocabulary use of CLIL and non-CLIL EFL learners. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe (pp. 112-129). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Asher, J. (1988). Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher’s guidebook. Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Production.
Atkinson, D. (1987). The mother tongue in the classroom: A neglected resource? ELT Journal, 41, 241–247.
Auerbach, E. (1993). Reexaming English only in the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 9–32.
Butzkamm, W. (2003). We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL classrooms: Death of a dogma. Language Learning Journal, 28(1), 29–39.
Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J. (2012). Balancing content and language in instruction: The experience of immersion teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251-269.
Canagarajah, S. (2011) Codemeshing in Academic writing: identifying teachable strategies of translanguaging. The Modern Language Journal, 95, 401-417.
Coleman, J. A. (2006). English-medium teaching in European higher education. Language Teaching, 39, 1-14.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010), CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Curtis, A, (2012). Colombian teachers’ questions about CLIL: hearing their voices –in spite of “the mess”. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 5, 1-8.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-Language Integrated learning: Form practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182-204.
Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J.M. (Eds.). (2013). English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Communicative language teaching in the 21st century: The ‘principled communicative approach’. Perspectives, 36, 33-43.
García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Guk, H., & Kellogg, D. (2007). The ZPD and whole class teaching: Teacher-led and student-led interactional mediation of tasks. Language Teaching Research, 11, 281-299.
Hoare, P., & Kong, S. (2008). Late immersion in Hong Kong: Still stressed or making progress? In T. W. Fortune & D. J. Tedick (Eds.), Pathways to multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp. 242-263). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Kang, D.-M. (2008). The classroom language use of a Korean elementary school EFL teacher: Another look at TETE. System, 36(2), 214–226.
Kim, S.-H., & Elder, C. (2005). Language choices and pedagogic functions in the foreign language classroom: A cross-linguistic functional analysis of teacher talk. Language Teaching Research, 9(4), 355–380.
Lasagabaster, D & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (Eds.). (2010). CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training. Newcastle: Cambridge University Press.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64, 376-395.
Lázaro, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2012). L1 use and morphosyntactic development in the oral production of EFL learners in a CLIL context. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 50, 135-160.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littlewood, W., & Yu, B. (2011). First language and target language in the foreign language classroom. Language Teacher, 44, 64-77.
Macaro, E. (1997). Target language, collaborative learning and autonomy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Macaro, E. (2009). Teacher use of codeswitching in the second language classroom: Exploring ‘optimal’ use. In M. Turnbull & J. Dailey-O’Cain (Eds.), First language use in second and foreign language learning (pp. 35-49). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
McMillan, B., & Turnbull, M. (2009). Teachers’ use of the first language in French immersion: Revisiting a core principle. In M. Turnbull & J. Dailey-O’Cain (Eds.), First language use in second and foreign language learning (pp. 15-34). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Mehisto, P. (2012). Excellence in bilingual education: A guide for school principals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Méndez, M.C., & Pavón, V. (2012). Investigating the coexistence of the mother tongue and the foreign language through teacher collaboration in CLIL contexts: perceptions and practice of the teachers involved in the plurilingual programme in Andalusia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15, 573-592.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smit, U., & Dafouz, E. (2012). Integrating content and language in higher education: An introduction to English-medium policies, conceptual issues and research practices across Europe. AILA Review, 25, 1-12.
Storch, N., & Aldosari, A. (2010). Learners’ use of first language (Arabic) in pair work in an EFL class. Language Teaching Research, 14, 355-375.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2000). Task-based second language learning: the uses of the first language. Language Teaching Research, 4, 251-274.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2013). A Vygotskyan sociocultural perspective on immersion education: The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1, 101-129.
Swain, M., Kirkpatrick, A., & Cummnins, J. (2011) How to have a guilt-free life using Cantonese in the English class: A handbook for the English language teacher in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Research Centre into Language Acquisition and Education in Multilingual Societies, Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Truscott de Mejía, A.-M., Ordoñez, C.L., & Fonseca, L. (2006). Lineamientos para la educación bilingüe en Colombia: hacia una política coherente. Informe de investigación. Estudio investigativo sobre el estado actual de la educación bilingüe (inglés-español) en Colombia. Bogota: Universidad de los Andes.
Turnbull, M., & Dailey-O’Cain, J. (Eds.). (2009). First language use in second and foreign language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
How to Cite
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
This journal and its papers are published with the Creative Commons License Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). You are free to share copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format if you: give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made; don’t use our material for commercial purposes; don’t remix, transform, or build upon the material.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).