The Effects of CLIL on Content Knowledge in Monolingual Contexts

Autor/inn/en	Hughes, Stephen P.; Madrid, Daniel
Titel	The Effects of CLIL on Content Knowledge in Monolingual Contexts
Quelle	In: Language Learning Journal, 48 (2020) 1, S.48-59 (12 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Hughes, Stephen P.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0957-1736
DOI	10.1080/09571736.2019.1671483
Schlagwörter	Monolingualism; Course Content; Interdisciplinary Approach; Teaching Methods; Second Language Learning; Language of Instruction; Academic Achievement; Comparative Analysis; Science Achievement; Elementary Secondary Education; Foreign Countries; Public Schools; Private Schools; Charter Schools; English (Second Language); Second Language Instruction; Institutional Characteristics; Bilingual Education; Spain + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Kursprogramm; Fächerübergreifender Unterricht; Fächerverbindender Unterricht; Interdisziplinarität; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Zweitsprachenerwerb; Teaching language; Unterrichtssprache; Schulleistung; Ausland; Public school; Öffentliche Schule; Private school; Privatschule; Charter school; Charter-Schule; English as second language; English; Second Language; Englisch als Zweitsprache; Fremdsprachenunterricht; Bilingual teaching; Bilingualer Unterricht; Spanien
Abstract	The adoption of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in Spain has affected educational spending and introduced modifications in learning and assessment procedures for students. While positive effects are noticeable in terms of language learning, evidence concerning the impact on non-linguistic subject areas has been less forthcoming. This study, which forms part of the wider MON-CLIL investigation into CLIL instruction in monolingual areas of Spain, aims to contribute to the developing body of knowledge by comparing academic performance in science in primary education and natural science in compulsory secondary education. In addition to comparing school results for a sample of 93 public, charter (semi-private) and private primary students and 139 public and charter secondary students (total = 232), this study also involved a stepwise discriminant analysis with other potential intervening variables in order to determine the extent to which differences might be due to instruction type or to other factors. Significant differences were detected between certain school types in favour of non-CLIL groups in primary education, while differences also existed between public secondary groups in favour of CLIL. These findings seem to indicate that CLIL instruction had no detrimental effects on the science learning of the secondary learners participating in the study. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01