Textbook analysis for literacy development in CLIL

Cynthia Pimentel-Velázquez; Maria Ellison

doi:10.30827/portalin.vi45.32245

Authors

Cynthia Pimentel-Velázquez University of Córdoba (Corresponding author) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7840-7028
Maria Ellison Universidade do Oporto https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9060-4147

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi45.32245

Keywords:

CLIL textbooks, literacy development, tasks, genres, cognitive discourse functions

Abstract

The flourishing of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL/bilingual) programs in Spain has led national and international textbook publishers to see a market niche and to launch into publishing textbooks for CLIL contexts (López-Medina, 2016). The general objective of this study is to analyze the contents of 24 CLIL textbooks used for the teaching and learning of the subject of biology and geology as an academic discipline in the region of Andalusia (Spain) in order to identify their internal coherence with respect to the methodological principles related to the cognitive discourse functions (CDFs) and the textual genres that predominate in the work plans (tasks, activities and academic questions) present in these textbooks that characterize the subject of biology and geology.

Overall, in relation to the text genres present, in most work plans (tasks, activities and questions) no text genre was specified; moreover, results also reveal a preponderance of the CDF "describe". The implications of the results are that sole reliance on textbooks could be detrimental to the development of academic literacy if CDFs and genres to which students should be exposed are limited.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Cynthia Pimentel-Velázquez, University of Córdoba (Corresponding author)

Lecturer in the Department of English and German Philology at the University of Córdoba (Spain). She holds a PhD from the University of Córdoba, her thesis entitled “Coursebook provision for literacy learning opportunities in science in bilingual secondary school contexts in Andalusia”. Her interests concentrate on CLIL programmes, the creation and analysis of teaching materials in bilingual schools, English teaching methodology and English Phonetics and Phonology. She is part of the research group HUM-1021: Attention to diversity and bilingual education(AD-EB).

Maria Ellison, Universidade do Oporto

Assistant Professor of didactics at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, University of Porto (FLUP). She is a member of the Centre for English, Translation and Anglo-Portuguese Studies (CETAPS) and the convener of the Working CLIL research strand of CETAPS which connects communities of researchers and teachers of CLIL across the country. Her main research interests include action research in pre-service teacher education, dimensions of teacher reflection, teaching English to young learners, subject-specific literacies, and CLIL.

References

Ávila-López, J. (2020). Materials Development: A Constituent Element of Teacher Training for EMI in Higher Education. En M. M. Sánchez-Pérez (Ed.), Teacher Training for English-Medium Instruction in Higher Education (pp. 298-319). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J. (2016). Putting CLIL into Practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Banegas, D. L. (2010). Three frameworks for developing CLIL materials. Folio, 13(1), 12-14.

Banegas, D. L. (2014). An investigation into CLIL-related sections of EFL coursebooks: Issues of CLIL inclusion in the publishing market. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 17(3), 345-359.

Banegas, D. L., & Tavella, G. (2021). Language-driven CLIL in Primary Education: An Analysis of General English Coursebooks in Argentina. En C. Hemmi & D. L. Banegas (Eds.), International Perspectives on CLIL (pp. 239-258). Springer.

Breen, M. (1989). The Evaluation Cycle for Language Learning Tasks. En R. K. Johnson (Ed.), The Second Language Curriculum (pp. 187-206). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies Teaching for Deeper Learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Czura, A. (2017). Translation is not enough-The need for pedagogical adaptation in CLIL textbook development. Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras, 27, 35-46.

Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL Activities with CD-ROM: A resource for subject and language teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms (Vol. 20). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216-253.

Dalton-Puffer, C., Bauer-Marschallinger, S., Brückl-Mackey, K., Hofmann, V., Hopf, J., Kröss, L., & Lechner, L. (2018). Cognitive discourse functions in Austrian CLIL lessons: Towards an empirical validation of the CDF Construct. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 5-29.

Dalton-Puffer, C., Smit, U., & Nikula, T. (2010). Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Derewianka, B., & Jones, P. (2016). Teaching Language in Context. Victoria, Australia: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

European Commission. (2017). Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe–2017 Edition. Brussels, Belgium: Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2797/04255

Guerrini, M. (2009). CLIL Materials as Scaffolds to Learning. En D. Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. J. Frigols-Martin, S. Hughes, & G. Langé (Eds.), CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field (pp. 74-84). Finland: CCN: University of Jyväskylä.

Harwood, N. (2010). English Language Teaching Materials. Theory and Practice. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.

Karabassova, L., & Oralbayeva, N. (2023). CLIL Material. From theory to practice. En L. D. Banegas & S. Zappa- Hollman (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Content and Language Integrated Learning (pp. 328-340). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Littlejohn, A. (2011). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan Horse. En Materials Development in Language Teaching (pp. 179-211). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

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

López- Pérez, M., & Galván Malagón, C. (2017). Creating materials with ICT for CLIL lessons: A didactic proposal. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 237, 633-637.

Lopez-Medina, B. (2016). Developing a CLIL Textbook Evaluation Checklist. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 9(1), 159-173.

Lopriore, L. (2020). Reframing teaching knowledge in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): A European perspective. Language Teaching Research, 24(1), 94-104.

Lorenzo, F. (2013). Genre-based curricula: Multilingual academic literacy in content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 375-388.

Mäkiranta, P. (2014). CLIL teachers as materials designers [Master’s Thesis, University of Jyväskylä, Finland]. https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/43689

Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE. The European dimension. Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential. UniCOM. Finland: Continuing Education Centre, University of Jyväskylä.

Marsh, D. (2013). The CLIL Trajectory: Educational Innovation for the 21st Century Igeneration: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Servicio de Publicaciones, Universidad de Córdoba.

Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2008). Genre Relations: Mapping Culture. London & Oakville: Equinox Publishing Ltd.

McGrath, I. (2002). Materials Evaluation and Design for Language Teaching. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.

Mehisto, P. (2012). Criteria for producing CLIL learning material. Encuentro, 21, 15-33.

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. (2010). Towards Quality CLIL: successful planning and teaching strategies. Pulso: Revista de Educación, 33, 11-29.

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.

Mikk, Jaan. (2000). Textbook: Research and Writing. Peter Lang.

Moore, P., & Lorenzo, F. (2007). Adapting authentic materials for CLIL classrooms: An empirical study. VIEWZ: Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3), 28-35.

Morton, T. (2020). Cognitive discourse functions: A bridge between content, literacy and language for teaching and assessment in CLIL. CLIL. Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 3(1), 7-17.

Nikula, T. (2016). CLIL: A European approach to Bilingual Education. En N. V. Deusen-Scholl & S. May (Eds.), Second and Foreign Language Education (pp. 1-14). Springer International Publishing.

Noriega, A. O., Costales, A. F., & Sánchez, F. H. (2024). A rubric model to analyse CLIL textbooks in Primary Education. Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras, 41, 16.

Oakes, J., & Saunders, M. (2002). Access to Textbooks, Instructional Materials, Equipment, and Technology: Inadequacy and Inequality in California’s Public Schools. UCLA: ’s Institute for Democracy, Education, and Access.

Pavón Vázquez, V. (2018). Innovations and Challenges in CLIL Research: Exploring the Development of Subject-Specific Literacies. Theory Into Practice, 57(3), 204-211.

Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2018). CLIL and pedagogical innovation: Fact or fiction? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 369-390.

Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315-341.

Pimentel-Velázquez, C. Y., & Pavón-Vázquez, V. (2020). The Pedagogical Dimension and the Use of Materials in English-Taught Programs in Higher Education. En M. del M. Sánchez-Pérez (Ed.), Teacher Training for English-Medium Instruction in Higher Education (pp. 320-339). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT journal, 42(4), 237-246.

Tomlinson, B. (2012). Materials development for language learning and teaching. Language teaching, 45(2), 143-179.

Travé-González, G., Pozuelos-Estrada, F. J., & Soto-Rosales, A. (2015). Profesores y materiales curriculares en la enseñanza de la realidad social y natural. Análisis de concepciones sobre la práctica reflexionada del profesorado andaluz (España). Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(56), 2-33.

Veel, R. (1997). Learning how to mean—Scientifically speaking: Apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. En C. Frances & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School (pp. 161-195). London, UK: Continuum.