Towards an identification of provisos for the implementation of plurilingualism in higher education

  1. María Del Carmen Méndez García 1
  2. Sonia Casal Madinabeitia 2
  1. 1 Universidad de Jaén
    info

    Universidad de Jaén

    Jaén, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0122p5f64

  2. 2 Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Sevilla
Journal:
Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras

ISSN: 1697-7467

Year of publication: 2018

Issue Title: Adressing bilingualism in Higher Education: policies and implementation issues

Issue: 3

Pages: 47-60

Type: Article

DOI: 10.30827/DIGIBUG.54160 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras

Abstract

The ongoing internationalization of Spanish universities has led to the introduction of ICLHE (Integration of Content and Language in Higher Education), where the aim is not only learning about a given academic subject but also developing linguistic competency in a foreign language. Some factors, such as lecturers’ mastery of the language of instruction or effective teaching skills, have proved to have a clear impact on ICLHE. However, the literature reviewed reports a lack of research on clear specifications for an effective implementation of plurilingualism in higher education. This article aims at closing that gap, providing a number of provisos that may help universities to take linguistic, academic and political decisions towards a quality implementation of ICLHE. As a method to this general aim, requisites that plurilingualism demands at higher education have been analysed and categorised into four different groups: conditions, programme structure, lecturers’ and students’ skills, and methodological considerations. Findings of the article are illustrated by means of a final summary table that highlights categories and subcategories to be taken into consideration for ICLHE to be effective.

Bibliographic References

  • Aguilar, M. & Muñoz, M. (2014). The effect of proficiency on CLIL benefits in engineering students in Spain. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 1-18.
  • Alexander, R.J. (2008). International programmes in the German-speaking world and Englishization: A critical analysis, in R. Wilkinson and V. Zegers (Eds.) Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 77-95). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Arnold, W. (2010). Where is CLIL taking us? Pulso, 33, 227-233.
  • Bazo Martínez, P., González Álvarez, D., Centellas Rodrigo, A., Dafouz Milne, E., Fernández Costales, A., & Pavón Vázquez, V. (2017) Política Lingüística para la Internacionalización del Sistema Universitario Español. Available from: http://www.crue.org/Documentos%20 compartidos/Sectoriales/Internacionalizaci%C3%B3n%20y%20Coorperaci%C3%B3n/ Politica%20linguistica%20Internacionalizacion%20SUE.pdf, accessed 5 February, 2018.
  • 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, 1(4), 66-78.
  • Breeze, R. (2008). Academic writing in the Spanish university context: changing the language, changing the paradigm, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 110-118). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Cendoya, A. & Di Bin, M. (2010). A CLIL experience based on the use of tasks and different genre types. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 3(1), 11-17.
  • Costa, F. & D’Angelo, L. (2011.). CLIL: A suit for all seasons. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4(1), 1-13.
  • Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J.M. (2013). What does ‘international university’ mean at a European bilingual university? The role of languages and culture. Language Awareness, 23(2), 172-186.
  • Fernández-Costales, A. & González-Riaño, X.A. (2015). Teacher satisfaction concerning the implementation of bilingual programmes in a Spanish university. Porta Linguarum, 23, 93-108.
  • Fortanet, I. (2008). Questions for debate in English medium lecturing in Spain, in R. Wilkinson and V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 21-31). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Friedenberg, J.E. & Schneider, M. (2008). An experiment in sheltered sociology at the university level, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 155-168). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • García, O. (2009). Bilingual Education in the 21st Century. A Global Perspective. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Haines, K. & Ashworth, A. (2008). A reflective approach to HE language provision: integrating context and language through semi-structure reflection, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 201-212). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Halbach, A., Lázaro Lafuente, A. & Pérez Guerra, J. (2013). La lengua inglesa en la nueva universidad española delEEES. Revista de Educación, 362, 105-132.
  • Hughes, S. (2007). The identification of quality indicators in English Language Teaching: A study in compulsory and non-compulsory secondary level language education in the province of Granada. Doctoral Dissertation. Granada: Editorial Universidad de Granada. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284551772_The_identification_of_quality_indicators_in_English_language_teaching, accessed 11 April, 2018.
  • Karabinar, S. (2008). Integrating language and content: Two models and their effects on the learners’ academic self-concept, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 53-63). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Klaassen, R. (2008). Preparing lecturers for English-medium instruction, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 3242). Maastricht: Maastricht University,
  • Kling, J. & Hjulmand L.L. (2008). PLATE –Project in Language Assessment for Teaching in English, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education(pp. 191-200). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Koenraa, T., Hajer, M., Hootsen, G., & van der Werf, R. (2008). Towards a linguistically scaffolded curriculum. How can technology help?, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 64-73). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Lim, J.M.H. (2008). Analyzing recommendations for future research: An investigation into a hybrid sub-genre, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 131-154). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Lorenzo, F. (2007). An analytical framework of language integration in L2 content-based courses: The European Dimension. Language and Education, 21(6), 502-514.
  • Martyniuk, W. (2008). CLIL – at the core of plurilingual education?, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 13-18). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Mellion, M.J. (2008). The challenge of changing tongues in business university education, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 212-227). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Myers, M.J. (2008). Code switching in content learning, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 43-52). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
  • Pavón Vázquez, V. & Rubio, F.D. (2010). Teachers’ concerns and uncertainties about the introduction of CLIL programmes. Porta Linguarum, 14, 45-58.
  • Pérez-Cañado, M.L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315-341.
  • Poisel, E. (2012). Competence development through task-based learning, in D. Marsh & O. Meyer (Eds.), Quality Interfaces: Examining Evidence & Exploring Solutions in CLIL (pp. 251263). Eichstätt: Eichstätt Academic Press.
  • Toledo, I., Rubio, F.D. & Hermosín, M. (2012). Creencias, rendimiento académico y actitudes de alumnos universitarios principiantes en un programa plurilingüe. Porta Linguarum, 18, 213-229.
  • Valcke, J. & Pavón, V. (2015). Transmitting complex academic information effectively: A comparative study on the use of pronunciation strategies for highlighting information in university lectures, in R. Wilkinson and M.L. Walsh (Eds.), Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education: From Theory to Practice (pp. 323-341). Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang.
  • Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296.
  • Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: a conceptual framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159-180.
  • Zegers, V. (2008). When European Studies met English: A practitioner’s view on content and language integrated learning, in R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Realizing Content and Language Integration in Higher Education (pp. 228-236). Maastricht: Maastricht University.
Data source: Dialnet