Symposium Presentation slides from Professor Philip Shaw's lecture given at Sophia University in Tokyo, 26th of March 2014

1. Dimensions of integrating
language learning and
disciplinary learning at
tertiary level
Philip Shaw
Department of English, Stockholm University
Philip.shaw@english.su.se
2014-03-26 1

2. CLIL and Second-Language-Medium Instruction
• CLIL
– language + disciplinary content are equally targets of the
learning process.
– Learning outcomes for both targets,
– both are tested
– teaching adapted to the demands of both learning
processes.
• SLMI ( = English-medium instruction in this
context)
– use of L2 to learn a discipline.
– Incidentally  L2 proficiency improvement in some areas,
but not a specified learning outcome.
– Teaching adapted for maximum communicative efficiency
2014-03-26 2

3. Learning objectives
2014-03-26 3
100% language
Second-language medium instruction
Content and language integrated
learning
100% content
Languages for Specific
Purposes

4. Contents
• Differentiating ’CIL in Europe’
– Social and institutional context
• Four issues
– Lingua franca, disciplinary discourse, constructive
alignment, inequality
• Some examples
– Framing courses as CLIL or ELF, Spain,
Switzerland, Sweden
• Discussion of good practice advice for EMI
and CLIL teachers tertiary level.
2014-03-26 4

5. Determinants of L2 teaching
2014-03-26 5
Language
of textbook
of lectures
of seminars
of administration
of exam questions/ essay prompts
of exam answers/ essays
Learning Situation + learning objectives
Course design and teaching practices
Adaptation of language level
Choice of written and spoken tasks
Focus on form
Degree of bilingual cross-reference
Social context

6. The social context of instruction in Engish
• Reasons for using L2?
• L1 sociopolitical status?
• Previous L1 disciplinary knowledge
(discourse)?
• Similarity of terminology in L1 and L2?
• General exposure to L2 in speech or
writing?
• Teacher/learner confidence and proficiency
in L2?
2014-03-26 6

7. Institutional demands and learning objectives
• Instructor does not know L1 (L2 may
or may not be his/her first language)
• Students do not know L1 (L2 may or
may not be their first language)
• Students and instructor know L1 but
course elements (e.g. textbook) are
in L2
• Students and instructor know L1 but
choose to use L2
2014-03-26 7
Learning
objectives may or
may not include L2
learning
Learning objectives
presumably include
L2 learning, not
necessarily CLIL

8. Context: L1 status
• ’developed large’ with all resources for undergraduate
education available?
• ’developed small national’ with most resources available to
some extent?
• ’undeveloped’, often ex-colonized, with limited resources or
domains,?
• ’developed minority’ local languages that have been
excluded from many domains?
• ’immigrant minority’ languages that here are not used in
most domains (submerged!)
2014-03-26 s8

9. Social context: academic biliteracy How much
disciplinary knowledge do they have already?
• Do we need to think about developing
basic understanding, terms, and discourse
in L1?
Or
• Have they already got them?
• Do they not really need them?
2014-03-26 9

10. Social context: positive transfer of L1 academic
literacy
How similar is terminology in L1 and L2?
Transfer of basic technical terms in either
direction will make things easier; non-
cognates (in ’old subjects’) need special
attention to make the connection
Hydrogen
2014-03-26 10
Väte
Wasserstoff
hydrogène
suiso
idrogeno
huògen
hidrógeno

11. Social context: L2 exposure
• How much exposure have students had to
L2 in speech or writing?
• Are they familiar with films, books,
television, Wikipedia in the second
language?
(affects speed, fluency, vocabulary size
(academic and general), cultural knowledge,…)
2014-03-26 11

12. Social context: How confident and proficient are
teachers and learners in the L2?
2014-03-26 12
Instructor
proficiency
High
Low
High
Learner
proficiency
Lingua franca
Native-like
Mis-match problems:
Instructor is ’too good’
Need for
tolerance
Danger zone
CLIL zone

13. Four issues that affect CLIL/EMI and its aims
• Lingua franca
• Academic biliteracy
• Constructive alignment
• Democracy/equality
2014-03-26 13

14. Lingua-franca skills
• - being sensitive to other accents and varieties (what does
an Indian mean by the in-charge is not here?);
• - correspondingly, trying to avoid expressions not widely
used in the English-speaking world (British fortnight, Swedish
it would be nice with a cup of coffee);
• - using any unambiguous pronunciation, (so that an equal-
stress version of photography would be as good as one with
strongly-reduced unstressed vowels);
• - adopting strategies for comprehensibility, (these people
you saw, what were they wearing?).
2014-03-26 14

15. What one might get from a lingua-franca
environment
• Yves, exchange student in Stockholm (Royal Institute of
Technology)
2014-03-26 15
• When I was in England I learnt
masses of new words, here I've got
more fluent but I think I've forgotten
words........
• And my French accent has got
worse

16. Native-like English is not always good lingua-
franca English
2014-03-26 16
My English has got worse..
What do you mean?
I just use simple words that my
colleagues can understand
Are there any people that you
avoid communicating with?
Yes, Americans.....and also
Australians. They are very
friendly but I can't understand
them.
Priya (Mauritius, English-
educated, native-like)
Maite (Spain) final interview

17. Academic biliteracy: cognitive-academic
registers of L1 and L2
• One of the four C’s of CLIL is Cognition
• Students need to learn the language of the
university in general and the discourse of
the discipline in particular
• LF environments do not necessarily
develop these registers
2014-03-26 17
never the first language for anybody, even
for the children of the educated classes"
(Bourdieu & Passeron, 1965, p. 18)

18. Disciplinary discourse and L2 medium
Studying in higher education is a process of
learning a discourse. Studying in a second
language may lead to:
• shallow or simplistic L2 academic discourse
• Inadequate L1 academic discourse
• Special attention needs to be paid to this,
especially in EMI, and it therefore needs to
be a formal expected outcome
2014-03-26 18

19. Constructive alignment or washback? Who’s
boss, the exam or the expected outcomes?
In constructive alignment, we start with the
outcomes we intend students to learn, and
align teaching and assessment to those
outcomes
Http://www.johnbiggs.com.au/constructive_alignment.html
Can we have CLIL locals and exchange
students in the same class?
2014-03-26 19

20. Washback (Watanabe) and constructive
alignment
2014-03-26 20
teaching
testing
Expected
outcomes
Summative
evaluation
washback
Constructive alignment
Constructive alignment

21. The inequality issue
• EMI creates an A-team for privileged
students
• (in Sweden this is the top 80% of the
group)
2014-03-26 21

22. Student proficiency/exposure and L2 instruction
at tertiary level
2014-03-26 22
’weak’ CLIL as part
of English tuition
Classic CLIL
for local-L1
students
Post-colonial
/multilingual EMI
(L1s varied/
undeveloped +
colonial tradition)
English-
medium
instruction for
international
students (L1s
varied)
L2-medium
instruction for
local-L1
students
Lower
proficiency
Higher
proficiency
Partial
authenticity
Full
authenticity

23. BREAK!
2014-03-26 23

24. Some examples
• Framing similar courses in different ways
• CLIL without English, Swiss examples
• Scandinavia – the parallel-language
university
2014-03-26 24

25. Two framings of courses for hotel staff and
tourism
• Tertiary level course for tourism (Taiwan,
Yang & Gosling 2013) or hotel management
(Austria, Smit 2010).
• International + local students, English-
medium.
• Yang & Gosling frame as CLIL, Smit as
ELF/EMI.
• What difference does this framing make?
2014-03-26 25

26. Effects of course framing
ELF CLIL (strong or weak)
Participant roles ”user” ”learner”
Explicit outcome
focus
content Language + content
Teacher linguistic
adaptation
LF clarification/
simplification/ adaptation
(if any)
Target language modelling,
repetition, rephrasing,
development
Content targets Core Can be optional extras
Language/
discourse targets
Academic literacy in English Improved proficiency and
academic literacy in English
Institutional
motivation
Accommodate international
students
Improve local students’ English
proficiency
Teacher identity Subject specialist Hybrid, varied
Lx use Useful but not always
practical
Depends on relative status of
L1, L2 and especially learner
development in L1
2014-03-26 26

27. Switzerland. The aims of German CLIL in a
French-speaking university
• Geneva - in French-speaking Switzerland
but with more than 40% foreigners and
more than 20% German-Swiss
• .“.The students in the bilingual stream are
expected to be able to use specialist
vocabulary competently in French and
German and to be able to communicate in
both languages at the highest level in both
speech and writing“ (Rittberger)
2014-03-26 27

28. Comments of Spanish teachers after a CLIL
teaching experience
Vallbona & Khan 2012
• ….teachers perceived that they had been unable to include
as much content as intended,…
• …time for language support, particularly with regard to
written or oral tasks.
• ……….students’ attention span in CLIL classes was much
shorter, requiring them to break down their lectures.
• ………. the mixture of language levels among students,
• …… teachers who had been concerned with their own
language level did not mention this factor after teaching
their subject.
2014-03-26 28

29. L2-medium instruction for local-L1 students
• The ’parallel-language university’ in the
Nordic region:
– Books in English
– undergraduate teaching in local-L1 (except for
classes with exchange students, som business
studies courses)
– Masters level predominantly English
• English-medium higher education available
in the Netherlands, and e.g. Poland ,
Hungary, Slovakia, Latvia, and Turkey,
targeting both local and international
students.
2014-03-26 29

30. English permeates the North European ’parallel-
language’ university
2014-03-26 30
There are three reasons why my
slides are in English. The first is that I
generally give these lectures in
English. The second is that even
when the lecture is in Swedish some
of you may not be so good at
Swedish and prefer English. And the
third is that those of you who are
completely Swedish will get the
English terms and the Swedish ones
at the same time so you’ll
understand when you read.

31. Four points in the parallel-language university
• Lecturers switch between languages and
often (at Master’s level) lecture in L2
• Slides and books are often in L2, even
when lecturing is in L1 (or vice versa
sometimes)
• Audiences are linguistically diverse
• Academic bilngualism is expected
2014-03-26 31

32. Parallel-language is not CLIL
• Most teachers set English-language reading
• Most of these see one of their purposes as
allowing acquisition of the English-
language terms of the subject
• Some of these set up the course to
encourage such learning
• Few have explicit language-learning
outcomes in course descriptions
• (Pecorari et al 2011)

33. Student attitudes towards English texts
• A plurality approved of English-language
texts in general
• English texts were perceived as more
visually attractive.
• English texts were perceived as harder to
read.
• A quarter objected, often strongly, to being
assigned English-language texts.

34. Mismatch of lecture and reading
• English terms given in the reading are most
effectively learnt from lectures which
explicitly use both language forms.
• But teachers rarely refer to the reading
related to the lecture, and only some of
them cross-reference English and Swedish
terms (e.g. slides in English, lecture in
Swedish).

35. Research findings for discipinary learning
Most research is at secondary-school level
and shows modest language advantages for
CLIL without serious content losses (Ikeda
2013).
At university (undergraduate or Master’s)
• Uncontextualized experiments/tests
• Naturalistic observations
2014-03-26 35

36. 36
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
6-16 17-24 25-28 29-33 34-38
%pådennanivå
軸ラベル
Nelson-Denny Reading Comprehension
(Edinburgh median 33)
Stockholm 133
Edinburgh 73
Hong Kong 24
Better comprehension

37. Better comprehension
37

38. Faster reading
38
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
%ofgroupinthisband
words per minute
Words per minute as estimated by Nelson-
Denny (% of each group)
Stockholm 82
Edinburgh 73
Hong Kong 23

39. Ucontextualized experiment: engineers in the
Netherlands
• In the Netherlands Klaassen (2001) taught
an experimental group of engineers in
Dutch, in English (testing in English) and in
English (testing in Dutch)
• Those taught in Dutch scored significantly
better than either English-medium group
(21 points vs 18 **). There was no
significant difference due to testing
language.
2014-03-26 39

40. Research findings : Physics lectures in English
and Swedish (Airey 2008)
• Students said ’Language makes no
difference’.
• In fact ,fewer questions ,lower-quality
notes after lecture in English
• Better preparation, more reading for
lecture in English
• Learning results were similar
• First-year students could not retell in
English what they had learnt in Swedish,
but second-years could.
• Airey (2008)
•
2014-03-26 40

41. Engineers in the Netherlands learning in English
(Klaassen 2001) (naturalistic observation)
• no difference in exam results due to
language of instruction.
• ” Students, irrespective of their background
or other variables that might form an
obstacle to them, make sure they pass”
• Some evidence of more superficial learning
in first EMI year, not in second.
• Students who choose EMI are often better
motivated.
2014-03-26 41

42. English as an academic lingua franca at the
Royal Technical Institute in Stockholm
(Björkman 2010)
• Effective lingua franca among students in
group work and as medium of instruction.
• Subject expertise rather than language
proficiency determines dominance
• Errors cause few problems (except
unclearly marked questions). Casual topics
may be abandoned for linguistic reasons,
not group goals.
• Teacher ’errors’ arouse some but not much
irritation (word order stands out).
2014-03-26 42

43. Sweden and Spain: L2MI and CLIL (at university
level)
• Swedish students see themselves as
’knowing’ and ’using’ English.
• Spanish students see themselves as
’learning’ English.
• So L2MI is common in Sweden and CLIL is
common in Spain.
2014-03-26 43

44. Course design: teaching practices
• Adaptation of language level
• Choice of written and spoken tasks
• Focus on form – ( discussion of grammar and vocabulary)
• Degree of bilingual cross-reference
2014-03-26 44

45. Practical measures to maximise learning
• Standardized ’lingua franca’ communication
– Avoid native-speakerisms (complexity, slang, fast
presentation, wide vocabulary, references to Anglo-
Amercan culture, excessively anglo etc lecturing style)
– Avoid localisms (accent, false friends, presuppositions
about local knowledge, presuppositions about learning
style)
– Structure lectures explicitly. Mark parts, transitions,
asides. Say Now, next, I have three points, the reason
is, this is an example of , So that was…., now let’s move
on to…
2014-03-26 45
• If the aim is EMI -- disciplinary learning with an international
group (+ incidental language improvement)

46. Practical measures to maximise learning
• Genuine comprehension checks
– In lectures, check questions for brief discussion
every few minutes
– Specified questions on reading for e.g. on-line forum
answers
• Multiple media and cross-referencing
– Collect suggestions from students for L1 on-line
(etc.) sources
– In lectures, refer to pages in reading.
– Always show written form of terms (Powerpoint etc)
– Use instructional (not decorative) visuals, examples,
– Give references for follow-up reading2014-03-26 46
• If the aim is 2LMI -- disciplinary learning with an international
group (+ incidental language improvement)

47. Practical measures to maximise learning
• Group work as comprehension check, change of pace.
• Explicitly address potential cross-linguistic terminology
problems (’What do you call this in Chinese?’ ’ sodium, which
is called natrium in many languages’) . Use student
knowledge (allow them to negotiate L1 terms etc).
• Use the local language as well as L2, but carefully, and
possibly with translation.
• Provide language support for writing and/or speaking tasks if
in L2.
• Check that students are developing disciplinary discourse in
some language (some productive tasks which are not
2014-03-26 47
• If the aim is 2LMI -- disciplinary learning with an
international group (+ incidental language improvement).

48. Practical measures to maximise learning
1. Active student written use to develop CALP:
• several reports
– in well-defined genre (exam answer, report,
scientific article, instructional material?)
– professional register – appropriate style, tense
usage, nominalizations, etc.
– format.
• Different tasks, focusing on deep as well as replicative
learning
• Support from language teachers, writing centres
2014-03-26 48
If the aim is language learning along with disciplinary learning (CLIL)

49. Practical measures to maximise learning
2. Active student oral use of language to develop CALP:
• presentations to groups or class with credit for form and
content , with focus on professional register and format.
• problem-solving tasks for credit with maximal interaction
among students in international groups where possible
• (take advice from language teachers)
•
2014-03-26 49
• If the aim is language learning along with disciplinary learning (CLIL)

50. Practical measures to maximise learning
If the aim is language learning along with disciplinary learning
(CLIL)
3. Focus on key words
• especially ’General Academic’ -- scope, topic, theme,
issue, classify, comparison, range, perhaps especially
focusing on false friends important, qualify.
• technical terms of the discipline, where not transparent
– momentum, moment, torque, force, power
• connectors similarly, by contrast, therefore, thus
• genre/register-specific idioms it has been found that, it
was found that
• Picking them out of the texts they read and doing
exercises?
2014-03-26 50

51. Practical measures to maximise learning
Pre-tasks:
• Brainstorming
• Key vocabulary or
Glossary
• Mental maps
• Gap filling
• Matching
• Watching videos
• Etc.
•
Post-tasks:
• Multiple choice test
Sequencing paragraphs
Sentence-making
Summarizing
Find the wrong bits and
rewrite
Finding errors about
learned contents
Writing a report
Oral production
Etc.
2014-03-26 51
Pre-lesson and post-lesson activities

52. References
• Aguilar, M. & C. Muñoz. 2013. “The effect of proficiency on CLIL benefits in Engineering students in Spain.” International
Journal of Applied Linguistics. doi: 10.1111/ijal.12006.
• Airey, J. & C. Linder. 2006. “Language and the experience of learning university physics in Sweden.” European Journal of
Physics, 27:553-560.
• Biggs J. & C. Tang. 2011. Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Bucking-ham: Open University Press/McGraw Hill.
• Björkman, B. 2011. “Pragmatic strategies in English as an academic lingua franca: ways of achieving communicative
effectiveness?” Journal of Pragmatics 43:950-964.
• Björkman, B. 2013. English as an academic lingua franca. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
• Bourdieu, P. & J.-C. Passeron. 1965. “Introduction: Langage et rapport au langage dans la situation pédagogique.” In
Bourdieu, P., J.-C. Passeron & M. de Saint Martin (Eds.). Rapport pédagogique et communication. Paris: Mouton.
• Costa, F. & J.A. Coleman. 2010. “Integrating content and language in higher education in Italy: ongoing research.”
International CLIL Research Journal, 1/3:19-29.
• Creese, A. & A. Blackledge. 2010. “Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: a pedagogy for learning and teaching?” The
Modern Language Journal, 94:103-115. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00986.x.
• Huang, F. 2006. “Internationalization of curricula in higher education institutions in comparative perspectives: Case studies
of China, Japan and the Netherlands.” Higher Education, 51/4:521-539.
• Klaassen, R.G. 2001. The international university curriculum: Challenges in Eng-lish-medium engineering education.
(Doctoral dissertation). Delft, The Nether-lands: Delft University of Technology.
• Kuteeva, M. 2011. “Teaching and learning in English in parallel-language and ELF settings: Debates, concerns and realities
in higher education”. Ibérica, 22:5-12.
• Laufer, B. & J. Hulstijn. 2001. “Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second lan-guage: the construct of task-induced
involvement”. Applied Linguistics 22/1:1-26.
• Llinares, A. & E. Dafouz. 2010. “Content and Language Integrated Programmes in the Madrid Region: Overview and
research findings”.” In Lasagabaster, D. & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.). CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher
Training. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 95-114.
2014-03-26 52

53. • Mauranen, A. 2012. Exploring ELF: Academic English Shaped by Non-native Speakers. Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press.
• Ortigosa, P., J. Redondo, S. Salaberri-Ramiro & E. Garzón. 2011. “Design of CLIL activities for computer engineering courses
at the university.” EDULEARN11 Proceedings (3rd International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies),
2311-2319.
• Pecorari, D., P. Shaw, A. Irvine, H. Malmström & Š. Mežek. 2012. “Reading in tertiary education: Undergraduate student
practices and attitudes.” Quality in Higher Education, 18/2: 235-256.
• Pecorari, D., P. Shaw, H. Malmström & A. Irvine. 2011. “English textbooks in parallel-language tertiary education.” TESOL
Quarterly, 45: 313-333.
• Pecorari, D., Shaw, P., Irvine, A. & Malmström, H (2011): English for Academic Purposes at Swedish universities: Teachers’
objectives and practices Ibérica 22 55-78.
• Pecorari, D., Shaw, P., Irvine, A. & Malmström, H. (2011). English textbooks in parallel-language tertiary education. TESOL
Quarterly 45/2, 313-333.
• Rittberger, Marc (2004) Zweisprachiger Studiengang Information und Dokumentation an der HEG Genève Information 55
23-24
• Seidlhofer, B. 2001. “Closing a conceptual gap: the case for a description of Eng-lish as a lingua franca.” International
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11/2:133-158.
• Shaw, P. & A. MacMillion. 2011. “Components of success in academic reading tasks for Swedish students.” Ibérica, 22:141-
162.
• Shaw, P. (2013) Adjusting practices to aims in integrated language learning and disciplinary learning. Les cahiers de
l’Apluit" (volume XXXII N°3, Oct. 2013), " La pédagogie de l’EMILE en questions : Modalités et enjeux pour le secteur
LANSAD ". 15-29
• Tatzl, D. 2011. “English-medium masters’ programmes at an Austrian university of applied sciences: Attitudes, experiences
and challenges.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10:252-270.
• Thøgersen, J. & J. Airey. 2011. “Lecturing undergraduate science in Danish and in English: A comparison of speaking rate
and rhetorical style.” English for Spe-cific Purposes, 30/3:209-221.
• Vallbona, A. & S. Khan. 2012. “First steps towards CLIL: Perceptions and training at a Catalan university.” In TRICLIL 2012
Proceedings: Better CLIL:More Op-portunities in Primary, Secondary and Higher Education. Barcelona: UAB, 132-137.
2014-03-26 53

54. •Thank you!
Philip.shaw@english.su.se
2014-03-26 54

55. Penetration of English in small-language
Northern Europe
• I have a friend (Scottish) working as a vikarie in a friskola in
Göteborg subbing for maths/science classes, 4-9 year olds.
He says that he uses Eng/Swe is all of his classes though the
degree of usage depends really on the age of the students.
Some of the older students have told him that they would
prefer to be addressed in English and so can/will explain
things in English (he always repeats it in Swedish afterwards),
while with the younger ones (4-6 yr olds) he will only "throw
in the odd phrase here and there
2014-03-26 55