Project Work in CLIL: A Bibliographical Review

Ricardo Casan-Pitarch

doi:10.5294/5775

Autores/as

Ricardo Casan-Pitarch Autor/a Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5294/5775

Palabras clave:

AICLE, trabajo del proyecto, bilingüismo, enseñanza de idiomas, educación.

Resumen

El aprendizaje de lenguas extranjeras se ha convertido en una necesidad en la sociedad actual, aunque la mayoría de las políticas gubernamentales para promover el multilingüismo parecen haber sido insuficientes. De hecho, la Comisión Europea señala que solo el 35% de los europeos utiliza regularmente lenguas extranjeras en su vida cotidiana. Como resultado, existe una necesidad real de nuevos enfoques de enseñanza de idiomas que mejoren el sistema educativo actual. El enfoque AICLE se ha considerado una alternativa a otros métodos más tradicionales, ya que implica la integración de lenguaje y contenido. Además, el trabajo de proyectos se puede utilizar en apoyo a AICLE con el fin de aumentar la interacción entre los participantes y promover la autonomía en el aprendizaje, haciendo de este un método atractivo en los programas AICLE. Para examinar las cuestiones relacionadas con el trabajo de proyectos en AICLE más de cerca, este trabajo proporciona revisión bibliográfica que analiza la aplicación del trabajo de proyectos en AICLE e identifica sus principales características y posibles beneficios

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Biografía del autor/a

Ricardo Casan-Pitarch, Universidad Católica San Antonio de Murcia

Ricardo Casan-Pitarch is a professor in the Department of Modern Languages at the Universidad Católica San Antonio in Murcia, Spain.

Citas

Anderson, L. & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman.

Applebee, A. N. (1986). Problem in Process Approaches: Toward a Reconceptualization of Process Instruction. In A. R. Petrosky & D. Bartholomae (eds.), The Teaching of Writing, pp. 95-113. Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.

Ausubel, D. (1978). In Defense of Advance Organizers: A Reply to the Critics. Review of Educational Research, 48, pp. 251-257.

Banegas, D. (2013). The Integration of Content and Language as a Driving Force in the EFL lesson. In E. Ushioda (ed.), International Perspectives on Motivation: Language Learning and Professional Challenges, pp. 82-97.New York: Palgrave Macmillan

Bauersfeld, H. (1995). The Structuring of the Structures: Development and Function of Mathematizing as a Social Practice. In L.P. Steffe & J. Gale (eds.), Constructivism in Education, pp. 137-158. Hillsdale: Lawarence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. New York: David McKay.

Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating Project-Based Learning: Sustaining the Doing, Supporting the Learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, pp. 369-398.

Brumfit, C. (2001). Individual Freedom in Language Teaching. Oxford: OUP.

Bruner, J. S. (1978). The Role of Dialogue in Language Acquisition. In A. Sinclair, R. J. Jarvelle, & W. J. M. Levelt (eds.), The Child's Concept of Language, pp. 241-256. New York: Springer.

Byrd, D. (2014). Learning to Teach Culture in the L2 Methods Course. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 11, pp. 76–89.

Byrne, D. (1984). Teaching Writing Skills. London: Longman.

Chamot, A. U., and O’Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

Coffey, H. (2008). Project Based Learning. Learn NC. Retrieved April 24, 2015 from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/pages/4753

Coyle, D. (2005). CLIL: Planning Tools for Teachers. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.

Coyle, D. (2009). Promoting Cultural Diversity through Intercultural Understanding: A Case Study of CLIL Teacher Professional Development at In-Service and Pre-Service Levels. In M.L. Carrió-Pastor (ed.), Content and Language Integrated Learning: Cultural Diversity, pp. 107-126. Berlin: Peter Lang.

Coyle, D., Marsh, D. & Hood, P. (2010). Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press.

Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and Special Education: Issues in Assessment and Pedagogy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Cummins, J. (2005). Using IT to Create a Zone of Proximal Development for Academic Language Learning: A Critical Perspective on Trends and Possibilities. In C. Davison (ed.), Information Technology and Innovation in Language Education, pp. 105-126. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University.

Curtain, H. (1991). Methods in Elementary School Foreign Language Teaching. Foreign Language Annals, 24, pp. 323-329.

De Graaf, E., and Kolmos, A. (2003). Characteristics of Problem-Based Learning. International Journal of Engineering Education, 19, pp. 657-662.

Eaude, T. (2013). Primary Education: A Literature Review. The Hague: International Baccalaureate

European Commission (2012). Europeans and their language: Special Eurobaromenter 386. Retrieved June 25, 2015 from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_386_en.pdf.

Fried-Booth, D.L. (1986). Project Work. Oxford University Press.

Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/Decoding. In Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (ed.), Culture, Media, Language: Working Papers in Cultural Studies, pp. 128-38. London: Hutchinson.

Istanto, J. W. (2013). Implementing Project-Based Approach to Nurture Learners’ Cultural Awareness at the Beginner Level. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10, 276–291.

Jones, B. F., Rasmussen, C. M., and Moffitt, M. C. (1997). Real-Life Problem Solving: A Collaborative Approach to Interdisciplinary Learning. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Juárez, M. M. (2013). Teaching and Learning Science in Context. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 19, pp. 183-208.

Kramsch, C. (2014). The Challenge of Globalization for the Teaching of Foreign Languages and Cultures. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 11, 249–254.

Krashen, S. D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. New York: Longman

Kolmos, A. (1999). Progression of Collaborative Skills. In J. Conway, & A. Williams (eds.), Themes and Variations in PBL: Refereed Proceedings of the 1999 Bi-ennial PBL, Conference, July 7-10, 1999, Montreal, Canada.

Kubon, V., Lopatkova, M., & Mirovsky, J. (2013). A Case Study of a Free Word Order. Proceedings of the 27th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation, pp. 222-231, National Chengchi University, Taipei.

Lauder, N. (2008). CLIL with Childre. English Teaching profesional, Retrieved June, 24 2015 from http://ofslides.com/storage/s1/video/0f/72/0f72ceab5627c1d5f8b02771790d7316/slides.pdf.

Llinares, A., Morton, T. and Whittaker, R. (2012). The Roles of Language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Long, M.H. (1983). Native Speaker/Non-native Speaker Conversation and the Negotiation of Comprehensible Input. Applied Linguistics, 4, pp. 126-141

Long, M.H. (1996). The Role of the Linguistic Environment in Second Language Acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (eds.), Handbook of Research on Language Acquisition, 2, pp. 413-468. New York: Academic Press.

Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Content and Language Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Oxford: Macmillan Education.

Muñoz, C. (2007). CLIL: Some Thoughts on its Psycholinguistic Principles. In F. Lorenzo, S. Casal, V. de Aba & P. Moore (eds.), Models and Practice in CLIL. Monográfico de la Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, pp. 17-26.

Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative Tasks and the Language Curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25, pp. 279-295.

Oura, G. K. (2001). Authentic task-based materials: Bringing the real world into the classroom. Sophia Junior College Faculty Bulletin, 21, pp. 65-84.

Peirce, C. S. (1960). Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Cambridge: Harvard University.

Pérez Vidal, C. (1997). Language Teacher Training and Bilingual Education in Spain. Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona.

Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL Research in Europe: Past, Present, and Future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15, pp. 315-341.

Prince, M. (2004). Does Active Learning work A Review of the Research. Retrieved April, 28 2015 from http://www4.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Prince_AL.pdf

Richards, J. and Theodore, S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. A Description Analysis. New York: C.U.P.

Saussure, F. (1922). Cours de Linguistique Générale. Payot: Paris

Searle, J. R. (2002). Consciousness and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sierra, J. M. (2011). CLIL and Project Work: Contributions from the Classroom: Content and Language Integrated Learning. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, J.M. Sierra & F. Gallardo del Puerto (eds.), Contributions to Multilingualism in European Contexts, pp. 211-239. Berlin: Peter Lang,

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development. In S. Gassand & C. Madden (eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition, pp. 235-253. Rowle: Newbury House.

Thomas, J.W. (2000). A Review of Research on Project-Based. Retrieved April 25, 2015 from http://www.newtechnetwork.org.590elmp01.blackmesh.com/sites/default/files/dr/pblresearch2.pdf