CLIL in Pre-Primary Education: The Views of In-Service and Pre-Service Teachers
Abstract
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has rapidly gained ground in schools within the latest decades. Consequently, interest in analysing stakeholders’ perceptions and needs has increased. This article has a twofold aim: (1) to analyse pre-primary teachers’ CLIL knowledge, (2) to identify the expected benefits, challenges, and perceived needs that CLIL implementation in pre-primary may entail for themselves, and for their students. To do so, 129 pre-primary teachers (N=76 in-service, N=53 pre-service) responded an online survey. Answers were coded with Atlas.ti, visualisations were created with R. Results showed that most in-service teachers know what CLIL is, while pre-service teachers are rather unfamiliar with it. Teachers have positive expectations regarding the potential CLIL benefits for students and teachers. However, most do not feel ready to implement it in pre-primary, because of the lack of teacher training programmes (on methodology and FL), and the scarcity of resources (e.g., guidelines, materials, stakeholders’ support).
Keywords
Content and Language Integrated Learning, Pre-primary education, Teacher perceptions, In-service teachers, Pre-service teachersReferences
Alcazar-Mármol, G. (2018). Trained and non-trained language teachers on CLIL methodology: Teachers’ facts and opinions about the CLIL approach in the primary education context in Spain. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 11(1), 39-64. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2018.11.1.3
Amat, A., Vallbona, A., & Martí, J. (2017). Percepciones de futuros maestros de infantil y primaria sobre la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de las ciencias en inglés. [Perceptions of future pre-primary and primary teachers on the teaching and learning of science in English]. Enseñanza de las ciencias: revista de investigación y experiencias didácticas (Actas de congreso). 4931-4936.
Banegas, L. (2012). CLIL Teacher development: Challenges and experiences. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 5(1), 46-56. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2012.5.1.4
Bonnet, A. (2012). Towards an evidence base for CLIL. How to integrate qualitative and quantitative as well as process, product and participant perspectives in CLIL research. International CLIL Research Journal, 4(1), 66-78.
Borrull, M., Catrain, M., Juan-Garau, M., Salazar, J., & Sánchez, R. (2008). La enseñanza del inglés como lengua extranjera basada en contenidos: Percepciones del profesorado de educación secundaria en las Islas Baleares. [The teaching of English as a foreign language based on content: Perceptions of the secondary education teachers in the Balearic Islands]. Revista Electrònica d’Investigació i Innovació Educativa i Socioeducativa, 1(0), 105-128.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cabezuelo, P., & Fernández, R. (2014). A case study on teacher training needs in the Madrid bilingual project. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 7(2), 49-70. https://doi.org/10.5294/4220
Cammarata, L. (2009). Negotiating curricular transitions: Foreign language teachers’ learning experience with content-based instruction. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(4), 559-585. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.65.4.559
Campillo, J., Sánchez, R., & Miralles, P. (2019). Primary teachers’ perceptions of CLIL implementation in Spain. English Language Teaching, 12(4), 149-156. http://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n4p149
Cenoz, J. (2015). Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: The same or different? Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 8-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922
Coonan, C. M. (2008). Insider views of the CLIL class through teacher self-observation-introspection. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 625-646. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb463.0
Cortina-Pérez, B., & Pino Rodríguez, A.M. (2021). Analysing CLIL teacher competences in pre-service preschool education. A case study at the university of Granada. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(5), 670-688. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1890021
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press.
Dafouz, E., & Guerrini, M. C. (2009). CLIL across educational levels: Experiences from primary, secondary and tertiary contexts. Richmond.
Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL activities. A resource for subject and language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy, & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Future perspectives for English language teaching (pp. 139-157). Carl Winter.
Du Plessis, S., & Louw, B. (2008). Challenges to preschool teachers in learner’s acquisition of English as language of learning and teaching. South African Journal of Education, 28(1), 53-74.
Fleta, M. (2016). El aprendizaje de lenguas extranjeras en educación infantil en la comunidad de Madrid: Perfil, percepciones y metodologías de los docentes. [The learning of foreign languages in pre-primary education in the community of Madrid: Profile, perceptions, and methodology of the teachers]. Didáctica: Lengua y Literatura, 28, 87-111. https://doi.org/10.5209/DIDA.54090
García Esteban, S. (2015). Soft CLIL in infant education bilingual contexts in Spain. International Journal of Language and Applied Linguistics, 1, 30-36.
Goris, J. A., Denessen, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2019) Effects of content and language integrated learning in Europe. A systemic review of longitudinal experimental studies. European Educational Research Journal, 18(6), 675-695. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904119872426
Hunt, M. (2011). UK teachers’ and learners’ experiences of CLIL Resulting from the EU-Funded project ECLILT. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4(1), 27-39. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.1.3
Ikeda, M., Izumi, S., Watanabe, Y., Pinner, R., & Davirs, M. (2021). Soft CLIL and English language teaching. Understanding Japanese policy, practice, and implications. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429032332
Infante, D., Benvenuto, G., & Lastrucci, E. (2009). The effects of CLIL from the perspective of experienced teachers. In 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. 156-163). University of Jyväskylä.
Jiménez-Catalán, R. M., & Ruíz de Zarobe, Y. (2009). Content and language integrated learning: Evidence from research in Europe. Multilingual Matters.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage Publishing.
Johnson, M. (2012). Bilingual degree teachers’ beliefs: A case study in a tertiary setting. Pulso, 35, 49-74.
Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1, 31-42. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874913500801010030
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra J. M. (2009). Language attitudes in CLIL and international EFL classes. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(2), 4-17.
Llinares, A., & Morton, T. (2010). Historical explanations as situated practice in content and language integrated learning. Classroom Discourse, 1(1), 46-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463011003750681
Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. (2010). The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 418-442. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp041
Lova, M., Bolarín, M. J., & Porto M. (2013). Programas bilingües en educación primaria: Valoraciones de docentes. [Bilingual programmes in primary education: Teachers’ assessment]. Porta Linguarum, 20, 253-268. http://doi.org./10.30827/Digibug.22306
Massler, U. (2012). Primary CLIL and its stakeholders: What children, parents and teachers think of the potential merits and pitfalls of CLIL modules in primary teaching. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(4), 36-46.
McDougald, J. (2015). Teachers’ attitudes, perceptions and experiences in CLIL: A look at content and language. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 17(1), 25-41. https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2015.1.a02
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frígols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Macmillan Education.
Méndez, M. (2014). A case study on teachers’ insights into their students’ language and cognition development through the Andalusian CLIL programme. Porta Linguarum, 22, 23-29.
Navarro-Pablo, M. & López Gándara, Y. (2019). The effects of CLIL on L1 competence development in monolingual contexts. Language Teaching Research, 48(1), 18-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1656764
Navés, T. (2009). Effective Content and Language Integrated (CLIL) Programmes. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. M. Jiménez Catalán, (Eds.), Content and Language Integrated Learning. Evidence from Research in Europe (pp. 22-40). Multilingual Matters.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2019). Content analysis and thematic analysis. In P. Brough (Ed.), Research methods for applied psychologists: Design, analysis and reporting (pp. 211-223). Routledge.
Pavón, V. (2014). Enhancing the quality of CLIL: Making the best of the collaboration between language teachers and content teachers. Encuentro, 23(1), 115-127.
Pavón, V., & Ellison, M. (2013). Examining teacher roles and competences in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Linguarum Arena, 4, 67-80.
Pavón, V., Pietro, M., & Ávila, F. (2015). Perceptions of teachers and students of the promotion of interaction through task-based activities in CLIL. Porta Linguarum, 23, 75-91. https://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.53756
Pavón, V., & Rubio, F. (2010). Teachers’ concerns and uncertainties about the introduction of CLIL programmes. Porta Linguarum, 14, 45-58. http://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.31943
Pena, M. C., & Porto, M. D. (2008). Teacher beliefs in a CLIL education project. Porta Linguarum, 10, 151-161. http://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.31786
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2016). Teacher training needs for bilingual education: In-service teacher perceptions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19(3), 266-295. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2014.980778
Pladevall-Ballester, E. (2015). Exploring school CLIL perceptions in Catalonia: Students’, teachers’ and parents’ opinions and expectations. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(1), 45-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.874972
Ruíz de Zarobe, Y. (2011). Which language competences benefit from CLIL? An insight into applied linguistics research. In Y. Ruíz de Zarobe, J. M. Sierra, & F. Gallardo del Puerto (Eds.), Content and foreign language integrated learning: contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp. 129-154). Peter Long.
Saldaña, J. (2021). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications Ltd.
San Isidro, X. (2021). CLIL as a pathway for cross-cultural and translingual classroom practices: A comparative quantitative study on Scottish and Spanish teachers’ views. Language Teaching Research, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211032431
San Isidro, X., & Lasagabaster, D. (2019). Monitoring of teachers’ views on both CLIL and the development of pluriliteracies: A longitudinal qualitative study. English Language Teaching, 12(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v12n2p1
Savić, V. (2010). Are we ready for implementing CLIL in primary language classrooms? MELT - Magazine for English Language Teachers, 13, 16-19.
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Tachaiyaphum, N., & Sukying, A. (2017). EFL pre-service teachers’ perceptions of CLIL. Asian Education Studies, 2(4), 44-56. https://doi.org/10.20849/aes.v2i4.283
Published
How to Cite
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2023 Marta Segura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
