With United Forces: How Design-Based Research can Link Theory and Practice in the Transdisciplinary Sphere of CLIL
Abstract
This paper intends to exemplify how a design-based research (DBR) methodology can be used to put theory into practice by reporting on a first research cycle of a larger DBR project in the context of upper secondary CLIL history education in Austria.
The project aims to identify design principles of teaching techniques and materials which both support the acquisition of subject-specific competences and language. To this end, this study draws on Dalton-Puffer’s (2013) construct of Cognitive Discourse Functions (CDFs), comprising seven key categories of academic language functions which have also been shown to be closely linked to historical competences.
In the course of this study, the researcher and a collaborating teacher systematically developed CDF-based history materials, which were then applied in the classroom and continuously evaluated, using interviews, observations, and written tasks for data collection.Results of the first research cycle suggest that students lack awareness of possible connections between content and language learning and struggle with expressing complex historical content. Both teacher and students responded positively to the intervention on a general level, but pointed out a number of potential refinements, such as a more continuous and balanced intertwining of content and language.
Keywords
CLIL history, design-based research, Cognitive Discourse Functions, integrated pedagogy, subject literacyReferences
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwoh, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete ed.). New York: Longman.
Austrian Federal Ministry for Education. (2014). Lehrplan der Handelsakademie [Curriculum of the Commercial College]. Retrieved from https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=10008944
Badertscher, H., & Bieri, T. (2009). Wissenserwerb im Content and Language Integrated Learning [Knowledge acquisition in Content and Language Integrated Learning]: Empirische Befunde und Interpretationen [empirical evidence and interpretations] (1st edition).
Bern, Stuttgart, Wien: Haupt.
Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-Based Research: Putting a Stake in the Ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1
Beacco, J.-C., Coste, D., van de Ven, P.-H., & Vollmer, H. J. (2010). Language and school subjects. Linguistic dimensions of knowledge building in school curricula: Document prepared for the Policy Forum The right of learners to quality and equity in education – The role of linguistic and intercultural competences: Language Policy Division. Directorate of Education and Languages.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives; the classification of educational goals. New York: Longmans, Green.
Cenoz, J., & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2015). Learning through a second or additional language: content-based instruction and CLIL in the twenty-first century. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28, 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000921
Dafouz, E., Camacho, M., & Urquia, E. (2014). ‘Surely they can’t do as well’: a comparison of business students’ academic performance in English-medium and Spanishas-first-language-medium programmes. Language and Education, 28, 223–236.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2013.808661
Dallinger, S., Jonkmann, K., Hollm, J., & Fiege, C. (2016). The effect of content and language integrated learning on students’ English and history competences – Killing two birds with one stone? Learning and Instruction, 41, 23–31.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.003
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Language learning and language teaching: Vol. 20. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.20
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.
https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011
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.
https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2017-0028
Dalton-Puffer, C., & Bauer-Marschallinger, S. (2019). Cognitive Discourse Functions meet Historical Competences: Towards an integrated pedagogy in CLIL history education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 7(1), 30-60.
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.17017.dal
The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry, 32, 5–8. Retrieved from http://www.designbasedresearch.org/reppubs/DBRC2003.pdf
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x032001005
Ehlich, K., & Rehbein, J. (1986). Muster und Institution [Pattern and institution]: Untersuchungen zur schulischen Kommunikation [Studies on school communication]. Kommunikation und Institution: Vol.
Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263100005696
Firestone, W. A. (1993). Alternative Arguments for Generalizing From Data as Applied to Qualitative Research. Educational Researcher, 22, 16–23.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X022004016
Gablasova, D. (2014). Issues in the assessment of bilingually educated students: expressing subject knowledge through L1 and L2. The Language Learning Journal, 42, 151–164.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.891396
Heil, W. (2012). Kompetenzorientierter Geschichtsunterricht
[competency-based history education] (2nd edition). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Körber, A., Schreiber, W., & Schöner, A. (Eds.). (2007). Kompetenzen historischen Denkens: ein Strukturmodell als Beitrag zur Kompetenzorientierung in der Geschichtsdidaktik [Competences of historical thinking: A structural model contributing to competency-based history didactics]. Neuried: ars una.
Kuckartz, U. (2016). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung [qualitative content analyis: methods, practice and computer assistance] (3rd, revised ed). Weinheim Basel: Beltz Juventa.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge language teaching library. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Maset, M. (2015). Bilingualer Geschichtsunterricht: Didaktik und Praxis [bilingual history education: didactics and practice] (1st edition). Geschichte im Unterricht. Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer. McKenney, S., Nieveen, N., & van den Akker, J. (2006).
Design research from a curriculum perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 67–90). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02504982
McKenney, S. E., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting educational design research. New York: Routledge.
McKenney, S. E., & Reeves, T. C. (2014). Methods of evaluation and reflection in design research. In D. Euler & P. F. E. Sloane (Eds.), Zeitschrift für Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik Beiheft. Design-based research (pp. 141–155). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.
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 meaningmaking. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28, 41–57.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000924
Morton, T. (2013). Critically Evaluating Materials for CLIL: Practitioners’ Practices and Perspectives. In J. Gray (Ed.), Critical Perspectives on Language Teaching Materials (pp. 111–136). London: Palgrave
Macmillan UK. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/10.1057/9781137384263_6
Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., & Smit, U. (Eds.). (2016). Bilingual education and bilingualism. Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Bristol, Buffalo: Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145
Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2016). Are teachers ready for CLIL? Evidence from a European study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39, 202–221.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104
Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2018). CLIL and pedagogical innovation: Fact or fiction? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28, 369–390.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12208
Van den Akker, J. (1999). Principles and methods of development research. In J. van den Akker, N. Nieveen, T. Plomp, K. Gustafson, & R. M. Branch (Eds.), Design Approaches and Tools in Education and Training (pp. 1–14). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. Retrieved from
http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:1111-201108211273
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4255-7
Van Drie, J., & van Boxtel, C. (2008). Historical Reasoning: Towards a Framework for Analyzing Students’ Reasoning about the Past. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 87–110.
Published
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2019 Silvia Bauer-Marschallinger
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
