Propuesta teórica: explorar la simbiosis de AICLE y ABP para fomentar una experiencia de aprendizaje intercultural
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/dreh.vi19.21829Palabras clave:
AICLE; EFL; competencia comunicativa intercultural; enseñanza y aprendizaje de idiomas; PBLResumen
Con el fin de cumplir con los objetivos educativos para avanzar en el contexto del siglo XXI, los educadores e investigadores se han embarcado desde hace tiempo en la tarea de investigar y proponer diferentes métodos, modelos y estrategias de enseñanza para contribuir a mejorar las prácticas de enseñanza y así comprender mejor los factores que entran en juego en la dinámica y proceso de la enseñanza y el aprendizaje, en este caso particular de un idioma. La búsqueda por mejorar la experiencia de aprendizaje por una en la que el alumnado pueda crecer académica y profesionalmente, y, en general, como seres humanos (conscientes, conectados, interesados, atentos y activamente involucrados en su propio crecimiento) es una constante y una preocupación vigente. Para el caso que aquí se construye, se propone una reflexión teórica en relación con dos enfoques de enseñanza para mejorar la competencia comunicativa intercultural y la progresión lingüística implícita en el aula de idiomas o lenguas extranjeras. Los principios del AICLE y del ABP reúnen las condiciones necesarias para abogar por las mejores prácticas de enseñanza y aprendizaje de la lengua, el rol intercultural y su relevancia en experiencias de aprendizaje.
Se sugiere que al fusionar los principios de aprendizaje AICLE y PBL se puede sostener una estructura y experiencia de aprendizaje para mediar potencialmente la competencia comunicativa intercultural. Los principios teóricos de ambos enfoques deben integrarse en función de las necesidades específicas del contexto de enseñanza, el plan de estudios, la población y el nivel de idioma.
Descargas
Citas
Astin, Alexander W.; Vogelgesang, Lori J.; Ikeda, Elaine K.; and Yee, Jennifer A. (2000). How Service Learning Affects Students. Higher Education, 144. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/slcehighered/144
Anderson, L. W.; Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. London (UK): Longman.
Beckett, G. H.; Slater, T. (2005). The project framework: A tool for language, content, and skills integration. ELT Journal, 59(2), 108-116.
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon/ Philadelphia/ Toronto/ Sidney/ Johannesburg: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Chomsky, N. (2006). Language and mind (3rd ed.). Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511791222
Coyle, D., Holmes, B.; King, L. (2009). Towards an integrated curriculum: CLIL National Statement and Guidelines. London (UK): Languages Company.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
Cubero-Vásquez, K. (2019). Enhancing intercultural communicative competence: M-learning in a combined approach. [Conference communication]. Third international virtual conference on educational research and innovation. October 9-10, Madrid. http://www.civinedu.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/CIVINEDU2019.pdf
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Bristol (UK): Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Dale, L.; Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL activities: A resource book for subject and language teachers. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
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), 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011
Dalton-Puffer, C.; Smit, U. (2007). Introduction. In C. Dalton Puffer; U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (p.7-23). Oxford (UK): Peter Lang.
Diez-Olmedo, M. (2020). Implementing PBL and CLIL in an early childhood classroom in the United States [Master’s thesis, Universidad International de la Rioja].
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273-284. https://doi.org/10.2307/330107
Haines, S. (1989). Projects for the EFL classroom. Resource material for teachers. Nashville (USA): Nelson.
Kahn, D. (1990). Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills. Basel (Switzerland): Karger.
Klimova, B. F. (2012). CLIL and the teaching of foreign languages. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 572-576. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/82042269.pdf
Kraft, N. (2000). Project-based learning. San Rafael – CA (USA): Research Corporation.
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London (UK): Longman.
Lasagabaster, D. (2011). English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 3-18. doi:10.1080/17501229.2010.519030
Levine, G. S. (2004). Global simulation: A student centered, task-based format for intermediate foreign language courses. Foreign Language Annals, 37, 26-36.
Lier, L. V. (1996). Interaction in the language curriculum: Awareness, autonomy, and authenticity. Abingdon (UK): Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315843223
Luther, A. (2000). The “old” method of teaching vs. the “new” method of teaching. Journal of Thought, 35(2), 59-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42589616
MacGregor, L. (2016). CLIL focus: An interview with Professor Makoto Ikeda. The Language Teacher, 40(1), 18-21.
Marsh, D. (2012). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Universidad de Córdoba. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60884824.pdf
Marsh, D.; Frigols, M. (2012). Content and language integrated learning. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Los Ángeles (USA): University of California. doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal0190
Mikulec, E.; Miller, P. (2011). Using project-based instruction to meet foreign language standards. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84(3), 81-86. doi:10.1080/00098655.2010.516779.
Musumeci, D. (1996). Teacher-Learner Negotiation in Content-Based Instruction: Communication at Cross Purposes? Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 286-325. https://academic.oup.com/applij/article-abstract/17/3/286/159089
Plaza-Vidal, B. (2020). Implementing CLIL through PBL in physics and chemistry in 2ºESO: The periodic table project [Master’s thesis]. https://reunir.unir.net/handle/123456789/10221
Railsback, J. (2002). Project-Based Instruction: Creating Excitement for Learning. Portland – OR (USA): Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. http://www.nwrel.org/request/2002aug/index.html
Ravitz, J. (2010). Beyond changing culture in small high schools: Reform models and changing instruction with project-based learning. Peabody Journal of Education, 85, 290-312. doi: 10.1080/0161956X.2010.491432.
Sánchez-Palacios, M. D. C. (2017). Combining CLIL and PBL to facilitate the learning of occupational hazards in the first year of a higher vocational education and training bilingual programme in business administration and finance [Master’s thesis]. Santander: UNIR.
Simpson, J. (2011). Integrating project-based learning in an English language tourism classroom in a Thai university [Doctoral dissertation, Australian Catholic University].
Stoller, F. (2006). Establishing a theoretical foundation for project-based learning in second and foreign language contexts. In G. H. Beckett; P. C. Miller (Eds.), Project-based second and foreign language education: Past, present, and future (pp.19-40). Greenwich, Connecticut: Information Age Publishing.
Solomon, G. (2003). Project-based learning: A primer. Technology & Learning, 23(9), 20-30
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.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning. San Rafael (CA): The Autodesk Foundation.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
Yufrizal, H.; Huzairin; Hasan, B. (2017). Project based-content language integrated learning (CLIL) at mathematics department Universitas Lampung. English Language Teaching, 10(9), 131-139.
