Becoming “Language-Aware“ in ICLHE
Creating a space of trust for collaborative partnerships between teachers, teacher trainers and language specialists
In this paper, we present a cross-disciplinary collaboration model inspired by collaborative action research (CAR) developed at a computer science department at a University of Applied Sciences in Austria. We outline the roles which language teachers at the institution and external collaborators (teacher educators and language specialists) play in creating a space of trust for the professional development of content specialists.
Recent research (e.g. Zappa-Hollman, 2018) has called for such collaborative partnerships between language and content specialists to raise awareness among English Medium Instruction (EMI) practitioners and stakeholders that language is “the crucial semiotic resource to [...] facilitate conceptualization and problem solving in specific disciplines” (Yuan, 2021, p. 2). This demand for an integrative approach which takes the interplay of language and content into consideration has not yet received sufficient attention, neither at the institutional level nor at the level of individual teachers (Zappa-Hollman, 2018). Innovative approaches are clearly needed to improve the quality of ICLHE teaching (Kim et al., 2018).
The generally positive reactions of the content teachers to the Trust Model of Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration suggest that it can contribute to improving their understanding of the epistemic function of language and their Integrating Content and language in Higher Education (ICLHE) teaching practice.
Keywordscollaborative action research (CAR), language awareness, Trust Model of Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration, Integrating Content and language in Higher Education (ICLHE)
Brown, H. (2017). Cooperation and collaboration in undergraduate EMI: Adapting EAP to the emergence of blended academic norms and practices in a Japanese university. Integrating content and language in higher education: Perspectives on professional practice, 151-166. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-07263-1
Clarence, S. (2017). Surfing the waves of learning: Enacting a semantics analysis of teaching in a first-year Law course. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(5), 920-933. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1263831
Dannerer, M., Gaisch, M., & Smit, U. (2021). Englishization ‘under the radar’. In Wilkinson, R., & Gabriëls, R. (Eds.), The Englishization of Higher Education in Europe. Amsterdam University Press. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/51121/9789048553914.pdf#page=282
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2020). Teaching English through pedagogical translanguaging. World Englishes, 39(2), 300-311. https://addi.ehu.es/bitstream/handle/10810/49920/weng.12462.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Davison, C. (2006). Collaboration between ESL and content teachers: How do we know when we are doing it right? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(4), 454-475. https://cward48.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/21789576.pdf
Dearden, J. (2015). English as a medium of instruction-a growing global phenomenon. British Council.
Education Scotland (2015). CARS Collaborative Action Research. https://education.gov.scot/improvement/Documents/sacfi12b-CAR-overview.pdf
Fürstenberg, U. & Kletzenbauer, P. (2014): CLIL-Fortbildungsseminar für Lehrende: Methodentraining und Sprachsensibilisierung“. Moderne Sprachen, 58.
Fürstenberg, U., & Kletzenbauer, P. (2015). Language-sensitive CLIL teaching in higher education: Approaches to successful lesson planning. ELTWorldOnline.com. Special Issue on CLIL. https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/blog.nus.edu.sg/dist/7/112/files/2015/04/Language-Sensitive-CLIL-teaching_editforpdf-yreuyy.pdf
Fürstenberg, U., Morton, T., Kletzenbauer, P., & Reitbauer, M. (2021). “I Wouldn’t say there is anything language specific”: The disconnect between tertiary CLIL teachers’ understanding of the general communicative and pedagogical functions of language. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 14(2), 293-322. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2021.14.2.5
Gustafsson, M., Eriksson, A., Räisänen, C., Stenberg, A. C., Jacobs, C., Wright, J., Wyrley-Birch, B. & Winberg, C. (2011). Collaborating for content and language integrated learning: The situated character of faculty collaboration and student learning. Across the Disciplines, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.37514/ATD-J.2011.8.3.09
Hessel, G., Talbot, K., Gruber, M. T. & Mercer, S. (2020). The Well-being and job satisfaction of secondary CLIL and tertiary EMI teachers in Austria. Journal for the Psychology of Language Learning, 2(2), 73-91. https://www.jpll.org/index.php/journal/article/view/33
Kember, D. (2000). Action learning, action research: Improving the quality of teaching and learning. Routledge.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner. Deakin University Press.
Lo, Y. Y. (2020). Professional development of CLIL teachers. Springer.
Macaro, E., & Tian, L. (2020). Developing EMI teachers through a collaborative research model. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1862131
Maton, K. (2013). Making semantic waves: A key to cumulative knowledge-building. Linguistics and Education, 24(1), 8-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.005
Moate, J. M. (2011). The impact of foreign language mediated teaching on teachers’ sense of professional integrity in the CLIL classroom. European Journal of Teacher Education, 34(3), 333–346. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2011.585023
Morton, T. (2018). Reconceptualizing and describing teachers’ knowledge of language for content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 275-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1383352
Norton, L. (2009). Action research in teaching and learning: A practical guide to conducting pedagogical research in universities. Routledge.
Pappa, S., Moate, J., Ruohotie-Lyhty, M., & Eteläpelto, A. (2017). Teachers’ pedagogical and relational identity negotiation in the Finnish CLIL context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 65, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.03.008
Reitbauer, M., Fürstenberg, U., Kletzenbauer, P., & Marko, K. (2018). Towards a cognitive-linguistic turn in CLIL: Unfolding integration. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 11(1), 87-107. https://laclil.unisabana.edu.co/index.php/LACLIL/article/view/9289
Riel, M. (2019). Understanding collaborative action research. https://base.socioeco.org/docs/center_for_collaborative_action_research.pdf
Roussel, S., Joulia, D., Tricot, A., & Sweller, J. (2017). Learning subject content through a foreign language should not ignore human cognitive architecture: A cognitive load theory approach. Learning and Instruction, 52, 69–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.04.007
Wilkinson, R. (2018). Content and language integration at universities? Collaborative reflections. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(5), 607-615. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1491948
Yuan, R. (2021). Promoting English-as-a-medium-of-instruction (EMI) teacher development in higher education: What can language specialists do and become? RELC Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220980173.
Copyright (c) 2022 Petra Kletzenbauer, Ulla Fürstenberg , Margit Reitbauer
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.