Towards a Cognitive-Linguistic Turn in CLIL: Unfolding Integration
Keywords:CLIL, integration, knowledge, cognitive load theory, cognitive linguistics
The aim of this paper is to unfold the process of integration in CLIL by describing the role of the cognitive processes involved in the construction of knowledge. While there has been extensive research of various aspects of CLIL, the actual process of integration of content and language has largely been neglected. Therefore, this paper argues that the role of language in building knowledge has to be stressed further and made transparent to CLIL practitioners, particularly in “hard” versions of CLIL. Raising teachers’ awareness of the epistemic function of language and drawing their attention to the human cognitive architecture can help them achieve a higher level of understanding of the process of integration of content and language. Using the example of a task taken from a training course for CLIL teachers, this paper describes how a focus on the cognitive architecture of learners can improve the integration of content and language in CLIL.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Beacco, J.-C., Coste, D., van de Ven, P.-H., & Vollmer, H. (2010). Language and school subjects – Linguistic dimensions of knowledge building in school curricula. Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/16805a0c1b
Beacco, J.-C., Fleming, M., Goullier, F., Thürmann, E., Vollmer, H., & Sheils, J. (2016). A handbook for curriculum development and teacher training. The language dimension in all subjects. Retrieved from https://rm.coe. int/a-handbook-for-curriculum-development-and-teacher-training- the-languag/16806af387
Becker-Mrotzek, M., Schramm, K., Thürmann, E., & Vollmer, H. (2013). Sprache im Fach. Sprachlichkeit und fachliches Lernen. Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
Bolitho, R., & Tomlinson, B. (1980). Discover English: A language awareness workbook. London, UK: Heinemann Educational Books.
Bonnet, A., Breidbach, S., & Hallet, W. (2009). Fremdsprachlich handeln im Sachfach: Bilinguale Lernkontexte. In G. Bach & J.-P. Timm (Eds.), Englischunterricht (pp. 172–198). Tübingen, Germany: Francke.
Byrnes, H. (2005). Reconsidering the nexus of content and language: A mandate of the NCLB legislation. Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 277–282.
Carloni, G. (2015). Content and language integrated learning in higher education: An English input-rich learning environment for digital-age learners. In F. J. Garrigos-Simon, C. Rueda-Armengot, I. Gil-Rechuan, & S. Estelles-Miguel (Eds.), Strategies for teaching in the XXI century (pp. 28–43). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in Content and Language Integrated (CLIL) Learning: Current research in Europe. In W. Delanoy, & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Future perspectives in English language teaching (pp. 7–23). Heidelberg, Germany: Carl Winter.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualizing content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253.
Dalton-Puffer, C. & García, O. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualizing content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics. 1(2), 216–253. http://doi:10.1515/eujal-2013-0011
Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2007). Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse. Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang.
Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2013). Content and language integrated learning: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 46(4), 545–559.
Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U. (Eds.). (2010). Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.
De Graaff, R. (2016). Integrating content and language in Education: Best of both worlds? In T. Nikula, & E. Dafouz (Eds.), Conceptualizing integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. xiii–xvi). Bristol, UK: CPI Books Group Ltd.
De Zarobe, Y. R. (2013). CLIL implementation: From policy-makers to individual initiatives. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 231–243.
Ericsson, A., & Pool, R. (2016). Peak. Secrets from the new science of expertise. London, UK: Penguin Random House.
Frigols, M. J, & Marsh, D. (2007). CLIL as a catalyst for change in languages education. Babylonia, 3(07), 33–37.
García, O. (2009). Education, multilingualism and translanguaging in the 21st century. In A. Mohanty, M. Panda, R. Phillipson, & T. Skutnabb- Kangas (Eds.), Multilingual education for social justice: Globalizing the local (pp. 128–145). New Delhi, India: Orient Blackswan.
Heine, L. (2010). Problem solving in a foreign language: A study in Content and Language Integrated Learning. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton.
Hüttner, J., & Smit, U. (2014). CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning): The bigger picture. A response to: A. Bruton. 2013. CLIL: Some of the reasons why… and why not. System, 44, 160–167.
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential. Brussels, Belgium: The European Union.
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL content and language integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Oxford, UK: Macmillan.
Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Schuck, K., & Ting, T. (2015). A pluriliteracies approach to content and language integrated learning–mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction and meaning- making. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 41–57.
Miller G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
Mohan, B., Leung, C., & Slater, T. (2010). Assessing language and content: A functional perspective. In A. Paran & S. Lies (Eds.), Testing the untestable in language education (pp. 217–240). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Moate, J. (2010). The integrated nature of CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(3), 30–37.
Nikula, T., Dafouz E., Moore, P., & Smit, U. (2016a). Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., & Lorenzo, F. (2016b). More than content and language: The complexity of integration in CLIL and bilingual education. In T. Nikula, & E. Dafouz (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 1–25). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., & García, A. L. (2013). CLIL classroom discourse: Research from Europe. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 70–100.
Peterson, L. R., & Peterson, M. J. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(3), 193–198.
Roussel, S., Joulia, D., Tricot, A., & Sweller, J. (2017). Learning subject content through a foreign language should not ignore human cognitive architecture: A cognitive load theory approach. Learning and Instruction, 52, 69–79. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.04.007
Skinnari, K., & Nikula, T. (2017). Teachers’ perceptions on the changing role of language in the curriculum. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 223–244.
Somers, T., & Surmont, J. (2012). CLIL and immersion: How clear-cut are they? ELT Journal, 66(1), 113–116.
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (2013). A Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on immersion education: The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content- based Language Education, 1(1), 101–129.
Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychological Review, 22, 123–138.
Sweller, J. (2015). In academe, what is learned, and how is it learned? Current Directions in Psychological Science. 24(3), 190–194.
Sweller, J., & Sweller, S. (2006). Natural information processing systems. Evolutionary Psychology, 4, 434–458.
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. New York, NY: Springer.
Sylven, L. K. (2017). Motivation, second language learning and CLIL. In A. Llinareas, & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied perspectives on CLIL (pp. 51–65). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Van der Walt, C., & Ruiters, J. (2011). Every teacher a language teacher? Developing awareness of multingualism in teacher education. Journal for Language Teaching= Ijenali Yekufundzisa Lulwimi= Tydskrif vir Taalonderrig, 45(2), 84–98.
Zwiers, J. (2007). Teacher practices and perspectives for developing academic language. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17, 93–116. doi:10.1111/j.1473–4192.2007.00135.x
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).