Content and Language Integrated Learning Methodology in Optional Humanities Courses for First-Year University Students: A Case Study

Tarnopolsky, Oleg; Kabanova, Marina

doi:10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.89.51

ILSHS > ILSHS Volume 89 > Content and Language Integrated Learning...

< Back to Volume

Content and Language Integrated Learning Methodology in Optional Humanities Courses for First-Year University Students: A Case Study

Full Text PDF

Abstract:

The article analyzes using Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) for teaching one of the optional humanities disciplines to Ukrainian university students of different majors. The discipline discussed in the article as an example of using CLIL methodology is “The Fundamentals of Psychology and Pedagogy” and it is in the list of optional humanities subjects for the first-year students of Alfred Nobel University in Dnipro, Ukraine. However, unlike the other optional humanities disciplines, the methodology underlying this course is based on teaching the subject in English, instead of Ukrainian, following the CLIL approach widely used in the European education but still little known in Ukraine. The purpose of the paper is to expose and analyze the original methodology developed that conditioned the specific structure of the relevant course, and the specific learning activities used in it. The essence of the developed CLIL theory-based methodology and its practical application are manifested through learning activities that include students’ mini-lectures/workshop-type presentations, brainstorming, case-studies, discussions, and a learning project with its results summarized in students’ essays, abstracts, and summaries written in English. The students collect the information required for completing their tasks not only from the teacher’s lectures and the recommended literature but also (and mostly) by way of doing extensive Internet-search on psychological and pedagogical sites in English. All this makes CLIL in the case under discussion experiential-interactive (through personal experience in extra-linguistic subject-related activities gained in interaction with other students), blended (with the organic combination of traditional in-class learning and out-of-class online information search), autonomous (students’ autonomous learning activities-centered), and cooperative (with those activities being done in students’ cooperative interaction). As the result, students mostly self-construct their knowledge of the discipline by way of using the target language as the tool for such self-construction. This makes the elaborated course a clear-cut case of constructivism in CLIL pedagogy. Subject Classification Numbers: PACS 01.40.-d (Education)

Info:

Periodical:

International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences (Volume 89)

Pages:

51-62

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.89.51

Citation:

O. Tarnopolsky and M. Kabanova, "Content and Language Integrated Learning Methodology in Optional Humanities Courses for First-Year University Students: A Case Study", International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, Vol. 89, pp. 51-62, 2020

Online since:

December 2020

Authors:

Oleg Tarnopolsky, Marina Kabanova

Keywords:

Blended Learning, CLIL, Constructivism, Content-Based Instruction, Cooperative Learning, Experiential Learning, Learning Autonomy, Optional Humanities Subjects at Ukrainian Universities, Tertiary Education

Export:

RIS, BibTeX, Text

Distribution:

Open Access

This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References:

[1] D. Coyle, CLIL – a pedagogical approach from the European perspective, in: Nelleke van Deusen-Scholl and Nancy H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, Vol.4: Second and Foreign Language Education, Springer, 2007, New York, NY, pp.97-111.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02323-6

[2] D. Marsh (Ed.), CLIL/EMILE – the European dimension: actions, trends and foresight potential, Public Services Contract DG EAC, European Commission, Strasbourg, (2002).

[3] V. Kerikaan, G. Moreira, & K. Boersma, The role of language in the internationalization of higher education: An example from Portugal, European Journal of Education, 43 (2) (2008) 241-255.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-3435.2008.00349.x

[4] A. Labi, Europe's push to teach in English creates barriers in the classroom, Chronicle of Higher Education (2011, February 13) [Online]. Available: chronicle.com as of 20 February (2011).

[5] R. Phillipson, English: A cuckoo in the European higher education nest of languages? European Journal of English Studies, 10 (1) (2006) 13-32.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13825570600590846

[6] D.M. Brinton, M.A. Snow, & M.B. Wesche, Content-based second language instruction, Newbury House Publishers, New York, (1989).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.48.1.164

[7] F.L. Stoller, Content-based instruction, in: Nelleke van Deusen-Scholl and Nancy H. Hornberger (Eds), Encyclopedia of Language and Education, Vol.4: Second and Foreign Language Education, Springer, New York, NY, 2007, pp.59-70.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02323-6

[8] Eurydice Report. Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at school in Europe, Eurydice European Unit, Brussels, (2006).

[9] Council of Europe, Common European Framework of Reference for languages: Learning, teaching and assessment, Strasbourg, (2001).

[10] O.B. Tarnopolsky, The Fundamentals of Psychology and Pedagogy: The Notes of Lectures. Learning materials, Dnipropetrovsk University of Economics and Law, Dnipropetrovsk, (2010).

[11] P. Sharma, B. Barrett, Blended learning. Using technology in and beyond the language classroom, Macmillan, Oxford, (2007).

[12] Training workshop, Wikipedia, 2019 (year of accessing) [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Training_workshop.

[13] O. Tarnopolsky, Peer-teaching as a new type of interpersonal relationships in the language course for university students majoring in English, in: Problems of Interpersonal Relations in Conditions of Modern Requirements to Quality of Education and the Level of Professional Skills of Experts. Peer-reviewed materials digest (collective monograph), Published by IASHE, London, 2017, pp.17-19.

[14] O. Tarnopolsky, M. Kabanova, Students workshops: one of the most challenging experiential learning tasks in courses of English as a foreign language at tertiary schools, Visnyk of Kyiv National Linguistic University, Series Pedagogy and Psychology, issue 30 (2019) 17-25.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32589/2412-9283.30.2019.177432

[15] R. White, and V. Arndt, Process writing, Longman, Harlow, (1991).

[16] A. Zamel, Writing: The process of discovering meaning, TESOL Quarterly, 16 (1982) 195-209.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3586792

[17] L. Dam, Plenary: Developing learner autonomy – preparing learners for lifelong learning, in: A. Pulverness (Ed.), IATEFL 2002. York Conference Selections, IATEFL, Whitstable, Kent 2002, pp.41-52.

[18] H. Holec, Autonomy and foreign language learning, Pergamon, Oxford, (1981).

[19] C.R. Rogers, Freedom to learn for the 80s, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, Columbus, OH, (1983).

[20] V. Kohonen, R. Jaatinen, P. Kaikkonen, J. Lehtovaara, Experiential learning in foreign language education, Routledge, New York, (2014).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315840505

[21] C. Kessler (Ed.), Cooperative language learning: A teacher's resource book, Prentice Hall Regents, Englewood Cliffs, NY,(1992).

[22] O. Tarnopolsky, Constructivist blended learning approach to teaching English for Specific Purposes, Versita, London, (2012).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/9788376560014

[23] French immersion: Process, product and perspectives, Compiled by S. Rehorick and V. Edwards, The Canadian Modern Language Review, (1994).

[24] R.K. Johnson, M. Swain, Immersion education: International perspectives, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, (1997).

Show More Hide

Cited By:

This article has no citations.