La integración de lengua y contenidos afines a diferentes carreras universitarias

Pablo Marcelo Oliva Parera; María Pilar Nuñez Delgado

doi:10.5294/4486

Autores/as

Pablo Marcelo Oliva Parera Autor/a Monterey Institute of International Studies
María Pilar Nuñez Delgado Autor/a University of Granada, Granada, Spain

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5294/4486

Palabras clave:

Autonomy, curriculum development, portfolios, content and language integrated learning, motivation.

Resumen

En este artículo se presenta la descripción de una experiencia por parte de un grupo de estudiantes de nivel universitario al currículo de una clase AICLE (Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y de Lengua Extranjera) en español. Un aporte en esta dirección lo constituye el tener en cuenta los intereses de los estudiantes, o como en este caso particular, el itinerario de estudios en carreras universitarias. En este caso, un grupo de estudiantes está cursando una clase de español en el nivel -Intermedio medio y alto- (ACTFL, 2012), y cuya concentración de estudios son diferentes maestrías (política internacional, medioambiente, negocios) en una universidad en Estados Unidos. Los estudiantes tuvieron la oportunidad de trabajar con contenidos afines a sus carreras durante un semestre. Como parte de la medición de las habilidades, el instructor a cargo de los cursos utilizó el portafolios de lenguas europeo adaptado al contexto universitario estadounidense.

Palabras claves: autonomía, desarrollo curricular, portafolios, AICLE, motivación.

Abstract

This article will show the description of an experience involving a group of graduate- university students taking a CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) course in Spanish as a Foreign Language. An important contribution in this study is to show that it is possible to achieve the integration of content and language by incorporating the content of the students’ interests related to the concentrations of their master’s degrees. This group of students is taking a Spanish class -low and mid- Intermediate- (ACTFL, 2012). Their fields of their Masters varied from international policy to environmental studies, business. The students had the opportunity to work with content related to their careers during a semester. The instructor resorted to an adaptation of the European Language Portfolio in order to measure part of their performance in class.

Key words: autonomy, curriculum development, portfolios, Content and Language Integrated Learning, motivation.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Pablo Marcelo Oliva Parera, Monterey Institute of International Studies

Assistant Professor at the Monterey Institute of International Studies in Monterey, California, a Graduate school of Middlebury College. PhD candidate at the Universidad de Granada in Granada, Spain. I obtained my Master of Arts in Educational Leadership at East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina (2000). I am currently teaching Spanish through Content-based Instruction at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, a graduate school of Middlebury College.

María Pilar Nuñez Delgado, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

Researcher and Professor at the University of Granada in Granada, Spain. She received her PhD in philology at the Universidad de Granada. She has been leading the research group “Étimo” since October 2008. This group is in charge of research and publications related to the Didactics of the Spanish Language.

Citas

ACTFL (2012). ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Recuperado de http://www.actfl.org/publications/guidelines-and-manuals/actfl-proficiency-guidelines-2012].

Arter, J., & Spandel V. (1992). Using Portfolios of Student Work in Instruction and Assessment. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Education Laboratory.

Bailey, K., & Nunan, D. (2009). Exploring Second Language Classroom Research: A Comprehensive Guide. Kentucky: Cengage.

Benson, P. (2007). Autonomy in language teaching and learning.Language Teaching, 40,21–40.

Breeze, R. (2014). Identifying student needs in English- medium university courses. En Integration of theory and practice in CLIL (pp.143-160). Amsterdam, Nueva York:

Rodopi.

Bruner, J. (1983). Child’s Talk: Learning to use Language Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carrasco, J., & Calderero Hernández, J. (2000). Aprendo a investigar en educación.RIALP.

Clément, R., & Kruidenier, B. (1983). Orientations in second language acquisition: The effects of ethnicity, milieu, and target language on their emergence. Language Learning, 33, 273-291.

Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for language:Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Coyle, D., Hood, P., &Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL. Londres: Cambridge University Press.

Crandall, J., & Kaufman, D. (2003). Content-based instruction in Higher Education Settings. Alexandria: TESOL.

Cummins, J. (1989). Empowering minority students. Sacramento: California Associationfor Bilingual Education.

Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. En C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp.114-138). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Dörnyei, Z, &Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow:Longman.

Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 Motivational Self System. En Z. Dörnyei y E. Ushioda (Eds.)Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp.9-42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual Differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J.M. (2013)(Eds). English-Medium Instruction at Universities. Global Challenges. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.

Dupuy, B. (2000). Content-based instruction: Can it help ease the transition from beginning

to advanced foreign language classes? Foreign Language Annal, 33, 205-223.

Fortanet-Gómez, I. (2013). CLIL in Higher Education: Towards a Multilingual Language Policy (Bilingual Education and Bilingualism). New York: Multilingual Matters.

Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning: Teaching ESL children in the Mainstream Classroom. Porstmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Gómez Camacho, A. (2013). El aprendizaje integrado de la lengua española y los contenidos de áreas no lingüísticas en los proyectos lingüísticos de centro. Porta Linguarum 20, 103-115.

Grabbe, W., & Stoller, F. (1997). A six T's approach to content based instruction. En M.Snow y D. Brinton. (Eds.). The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content (pp. 78-94). New York: Longman.

Hoyos Pérez, M. (2013). La enseñanza integrada de lenguas y contenidos en formación profesional. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos,19,109-145.

Jourdenais, R., & Springer, S. (Eds). (2005). Content Tasks and Projects in the Language Classroom: 2004 Conference proceedings. Monterey, CA: Monterey Institute of

International Studies.

Klenowsky, V. (2012). Desarrollo de Portafolios: para el aprendizaje y la evaluación.Madrid: Narcea, SA.

Lantolf, J., & Thorne, S. (2006). Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. En W. Van Patten & J. Williams. (Eds.). Theories in second language acquisition (pp.201—224). New Jersey: Erlbaum.

Lasagabaster,D., & Rúiz de Zarobe, Y. (Eds.). (2010). ClIL in Spain; implementations, results and teacher training. Newcastle: Cambridge University Press.

Lyster, R., & Ballinger S. (2011). Content-based language teaching: Convergent concerns across divergent contexts. Language Teaching Research, 15, 279-288.

McDonough, S. (1981). Psychology in foreign language teaching. London: Alien and Unwin.

Nuñez Delgado, M.P., González Vázquez A., & Trujillo Sáez F. (2006). La formación del

profesorado de español como Segunda Lengua. Situación actual y propuestas,Textos de Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literatura, 42, 65-80.

Papai, N. (2000). Literacy development through content-based instruction: A case study.Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 16, 81-95.

Shaw, P, (1997). With One Stone: Models of Instruction and Their Curricular Implications in an Advanced Content-Based Foreign Language Program. En S.B. Stryker & B. L. Leaver (Eds.). Content-Based Instruction in Foreign Language

Education: Models and Methods (pp.261-282). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Ushioda, E. (2006). Language motivation in a reconfigured Europe: access, identity, autonomy, Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 27, 148–161.

van Lier, L. (2004). The Ecology and Semiotics of Language Learning: a Sociocultural Perspective. Boston; Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

Vygostsky, L. (1978). Problems of Method, Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 52–75. Trad. M. Cole.

Woźniak, M. (2013). CLIL in Pharmacy: A case of collaboration between content and

language lecturers. Language Value, 5,107-128.