This document provides an overview of an ECML project called ConBaT+ that aims to integrate plurilingualism and culturalism into CLIL or Content and Language Integrated Learning. It discusses the challenges of plurilingualism and CLIL, defines CLIL, and outlines the rationale for CLIL and plurilingualism in Europe. It also reviews the status and developments of CLIL in countries like Ireland, discusses research on CLIL, and areas that require more research.

1. Integra(ng
Plurilingualism/culturalism
into
CLIL:
an
overview
of
ConBaT+,
an
ECML
project
Áine
Furlong
afurlong@wit.ie
IRAAL
April
25th
2012

2. Personal
and
professional
background
Post-­‐primary
educa(on
Primary
educa(on
Distance
educa(on
Teacher
educa(on
Third
level
educa(on
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

3. 21st
Century
challenges
for
language
learning
and
teaching
The
challenge
of
Plurilingualism
The
challenge
of
CLIL
Identity vs Identities

5. CLIL
defini(ons
Content
and
Language
Integrated
Learning
(CLIL)
is
a
dual-­‐focused
educa&onal
approach
in
which
an
addi(onal
language
is
used
for
the
learning
and
teaching
of
both
content
and
language
(Mehisto,
Marsh
&
Frigols,
2009)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

6. CLIL
is
a
language-­‐sensi(ve
approach
to
content
(Clegg
2002)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012
Language
Content

7. Ra(onale
for
CLIL
and
plurilingualism
in
Europe
• European
na(on-­‐states
can
no
longer
be
viewed
as
monolingual
en((es.
• Communica(on
is
now
interna(onal
• European
popula(on
is
characterised
by
mobility
and
migra(on
• Europe
needs
to
invest
in
its
diversity
• CLIL
provides
an
authen(c
L2
learning
context
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

8. Ra(onale:
CLIL
to
transform
the
language
learner
into
a
language
user

9. Arguments
in
favour
of
CLIL
from
an
SLA
perspec(ve
(Navés
2009)
• Creates
condi(ons
for
naturalis(c
language
learning
(focus
on
meaning
more
than
form)
• Gives
a
purpose
for
language
use
in
the
classroom
• Increases
exposure
(me
to
the
L2
• Promotes
the
development
of
BICS
and
CALP
(Cummins)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

10. European
CLIL
map
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012
Status
of
CLIL
provision
in
primary
and
general
secondary
educa&on,
2004/05

11. CLIL
in
Ireland
–
Irish
• Immersion:
-­‐
Gaelscoileanna
(Irish
medium
primary
schools):
32,551
pupils
in
2010
-­‐ Gaelcholáis_
(Irish
medium
post-­‐primary
schools):
8,620
pupils
in
2010
• CLIL
-­‐
Irish
CLIL/par(al
immersion
Project:
50
teachers
in
art
and
science
(Harris
2006)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

12. CLIL
ac(vity
in
Ireland:
Collabora(on
between
Irish
and
Modern
languages
• Since
2007-­‐8:
-­‐
NUI
Galway:
Dioplóma
Gairmiúil
san
Oideachas
(DGO),
for
post-­‐primary
educa(on
through
the
medium
of
Irish
and
Waterford
Ins(tute
of
Technology
for
CLIL
exper(se.
• Current
developments:
2
CLIL
modules
for
pre-­‐
and
in-­‐service
teachers
by
WIT
and
NUI
Galway
(Irish
and
Modern
languages)
• Conference
in
NUI
Galway,
February
2010:
CLIL
agus
an
Teagasc
Trí
Ghaeilge
(Irish
and
European
experts)
• Conference
on
Ini(al
Teacher
Educa(on,
St
Patrick’s
College,
Drumcondra,
July
2011
-­‐
O’Dhuibhir:
The
Role
of
Content
and
Language
Integrated
Learning
in
Ini(al
Teacher
Educa(on
-­‐ Furlong,
Mac
Mahon
and
Ní
Ghuidhir:
Irish
and
Modern
Languages
for
re-­‐imagined
perspec(ves
in
Ini(al
Teacher
Educa(on
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

13. CLIL
in
Ireland
for
modern
Languages
at
primary
and
third
levels
• Modern
Languages
in
Primary
Schools
Ini(a(ve
• NCCA
pilot
project:
6
primary
schools
• Individual
ini(a(ves:
DCU:
Bruen
&
Wagner
(2008)-­‐
prepara(on
for
study
abroad
WIT:
(Furlong
et
al,
2009)
Art
&
Design,
Film
Studies,
Architecture,
Intercultural
Communica(on,
Marke(ng,
Communica(ons
(Italian,
Spanish,
German
and
French).
Ajendance
at
CLIL
ECML
workshops
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

14. Report
on
European
CLIL
research
(Ruiz
de
Zarobe,
Jiménez
Catalán,
2009;
Ruiz
de
Zarobe,Sierra,
Gallardo
del
Puerto
2011)
• Focus
on
language
ajainment
in
CLIL
• Content
does
not
seem
to
be
affected
by
a
CLIL
experience
• Controversy
in
Spain
(Moore
2009,
Bruton
2011)
Reported
gains
are:
• Recep(ve
skills
• Vocabulary*
• Quan(ty
,
Crea(vity
,
Risk-­‐taking
• Emo(ve,
affec(ve
factors*
• Lack
of
speaking
angst
(Dalton-­‐Puffer
2007,
2008)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

15. Inconclusive
and
non-­‐existent
L2
CLIL
research
• Syntax
(accuracy)
• Wri(ng
(accuracy)
• Informal,
non-­‐technical
language
• Pronuncia(on
• Pragma(cs
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

16. More
research
and
development
in:
• Cogni(ve
engagement
of
learners,
• Affec(ve
dimensions,
artudes
and
mo(va(on
• Specific
situa(on
of
CLIL
teachers
(needs
and
solu(ons)
*
Teacher
mo&va&on
through
quality,
CLIL
specific
teacher
educa&on,
appears
to
be
central
to
successful
CLIL
programmes
(Ball
and
Lindsay,
2010,
see
also
Harris
et
al,
2006)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

17. CLIL
models
• The
context
determines
the
type
of
CLIL/EMILE
programme
that
will
be
adopted.
• The
programme
will
be
situated
along
a
con(nuum
from
language
driven
to
content-­‐driven
and
should
aim
to
be
dual-­‐
focused.
Language
driven
Content-­‐driven
content
is
used
to
teach
content
is
more
L2
structures
and
skills
important
than
the
language
(immersion
and
bilingual
and
earlier
CLIL
programmes)

18. CLIL
models
• Theme-­‐based
module
• Subject
–based
learning
(
content
and
language
teachers
cooperate)
• Schools
in
different
countries
share
the
teaching
of
a
specific
course
or
module
• Bilingual
educa(on
(a
significant
part
of
the
curriculum
is
taught
for
a
number
of
years
through
CLIL)
• Language-­‐based
approach:
language
teacher
scaffolds
content
language
(authen(c
experience
during
language
class)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

19. More
CLIL
models
• Voca(onal
CLIL
(closely
related
to
competence-­‐
based
approach)
• Plurilingual
educa(on
(more
than
one
language
is
used
through
CLIL
during
different
years)
• *Adjunct
CLIL
(language
teaching
runs
parallel
to
content
teaching,
but
is
subject-­‐specific)
• Language-­‐embedded
courses
developed
from
the
beginning
with
language
development
objec(ves
(Content
and
language
specialists
work
together).
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

20. CLIL
pedagogies
Key
principles
Framework
for
CLIL
Finding
the
right
pitch
Planning
for
a
CLIL
lesson
Pedagogical
tools
A
CLIL
experience
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

21. Key
principles
for
CLIL
Methodology
is
at
the
core:
a
language-­‐sensi&ve
approach
to
everything
we
do
• Re-­‐thinking
how
and
when
certain
types
of
subject
majer
and
language/s
are
taught
• Interdisciplinary
mindset
• The
major
concern
is
Educa&on,
not
mul(lingualism
(mul(lingualism
is
the
added
value)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

22. A
framework
for
CLIL:
Do
Coyle’s
4/5
Cs
(2010)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012
Culture
Culture
Culture
Content
Communica(on
Cogni(on
Context
Context
Context
Context

23.
Rosie
Tanner’s
and
Jason
Skeet’s
+
4
Cs
=
8
Cs
(December
2011)
Collabora&on
Choices
Crea&vity
Connec&ons
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

24. Preparing
for
a
language-­‐sensi(ve
approach
BICS
x
Y
CALP
Low
Cogni(ve
demand
High
contextualisa(on
Low
contextualisa(on
High
Cogni(ve
demand
Adapted
from
Cummins
(1984)
3
4
2
1
High
cogni&ve
demands
Low
cogni&ve
demands
Adapted
from
the
CLIL
matrix
project
(2004-­‐06)
Low
linguis&c
demands
High
linguis&c
demands

25. You
need
a
plan!

26. CLIL
classics:
Graphic
Organisers

27. Reading
strategies,
e.g.
awareness
of
text
structures
(LICI
handbook
–
available
online)

28. Learning
strategies
(LICI
handbook)

29. The
CLIL/EMILE
programme
chosen
by
Waterford
Ins(tute
of
Technology
(Furlong,
2008)
• Parallel
teaching
of
the
language
and
the
subject
(adjunct
model)
• 16
learners,
Business
degree,
Year
2
with
French.
The
subjects
are:
• Marke(ng
/
French
– Marke(ng
=
36
hours
per
semester
– French
=
48
hours
per
semester
including
20
hours
of
CLIL/EMILE

30. Did
you
enjoy
the
experience?
• Language
(n
=
2):
Increases
my
vocabulary.
Helps
me
to
speak
about
business
related
subjects
in
French
• Content
(n
=
4):
More
challenging
topics
and
more
variety.
Broader
understanding
of
marke(ng
Teaches
relevant
material.
More
interes(ng
than
grammar.
Because
you
could
relate
it
to
the
marke(ng
module
• Methodology
(
n
=
9):
The
style
of
teaching
encourages
a
more
relaxed
approach.
Liked
it
a
lot.
Different
way
of
teaching.
More
comfortable
rela(on
between
teacher
and
students.
Bejer
group
atmosphere.
I
wanted
to
go
to
French;
before
I
never
liked
going
to
French
classes.
Interes(ng,
new.
Enjoyed
learning
in
an
unconven(onal
manner.
Pleasant,
interac(ve
methods
while
learning
• 1
class
a
week;
other
classes
could
be
devoted
to
French
culture,
transla(ons
and
grammar
(n
=
1)

31. I
did
not
enjoy
the
experience
• I
don’t
like
marke(ng
as
a
subject
(n
=
2)
• Difficult
to
do
the
oral
work
about
marke(ng
(n
=
2)
• Irrelevant
(n
=
1)
• At
(mes
complicated
and
confusing
(
n
=
1)

32. Do
you
believe
CLIL
will
help
you
in
your
marke(ng
studies?
• Broader
understanding
of
content
(n
=
5):
Insight
into
how
French
marke(ng
operates.
Gives
a
broader
view
of
marke(ng.
Learn
some
things
that
are
not
covered
in
marke(ng
class
x
3
• Deeper
understanding
of
content
(n
=
4):
Knowledge
of
and
being
familiar
with
specific
marke(ng
terms
is
important.
Went
through
marke(ng
in
a
lot
of
detail.
I
understand
the
marke(ng
topics
bejer
now
x
2
• Beer
recall
of
content
(n
=
8):I
learn
the
material
twice
x
2.
I
have
become
familiar
with
the
topics
x
2.
Another
way
to
revise.
Because
you
already
know
it,
it
is
easier
to
translate
into
French
and
learn.
Helped
me
to
remember
aspects
that
I
may
not
have
spent
a
lot
of
(me
on.
There
are
things
I’d
remember
from
French
class
that
I
would
need
in
a
marke(ng
exam

33. CLIL
will
not
help
me
in
my
marke(ng
studies
• I
did
not
think
marke(ng
through
French
overlapped
much
with
my
marke(ng
class
(n
=
1)

34. Do
you
find
you
are
learning
French
in
this
way?
• It
has
helped
me
to
use
more
technical
phrases
and
words
(n
=
11)
• I’ve
learned
a
lot
of
new
words
this
semester
• You
get
to
hear
some
of
the
words
in
other
classes,
so
you’ll
remember
them
faster
• I’ve
learned
different
registers
of
language
• I’ve
learned
to
make
formal
presenta(ons

35. Does
your
knowledge
of
marke(ng
help
you
during
French
class?
• Memory
(n
=
1):
it
makes
it
easier
to
remember
• Input
becomes
Comprehensible
(n
=5)
:
Easier
to
understand
and
relate
to
texts.
I
could
make
an
intelligent
guess
as
to
what
we
had
to
do.
It
facilitates
the
access
to
French,
through
English
and
marke(ng
vocabulary.
I
was
aware
of
certain
terms
that
I
would
not
have
known
if
I
did
not
study
marke(ng.
I
already
knew
the
SWOT
analysis;
with
this
knowledge
I
could
understand
more
easily

36. Does
your
knowledge
of
marke(ng
help
you
during
French
class?
• Topics
were
difficult
to
apply
to
the
French
class
(n
=
1)

37. What
do
you
like
best
in
French
class?
• Output
(n
=
11
):
Group
discussions
x
5
(par(cularly
on
marke(ng).
Debates.
Pair
work
(because
you
share
ideas
and
language).
Presenta(ons
because
you
have
to
talk
and
answer
ques(ons
you
are
not
prepared
for.
Presenta(ons
improve
confidence
and
oral
French.
Oral
work.
Wrijen
exercises
,
Assignments
• Content
(
n
=
1):
Marke(ng
(helps
to
relate
to
the
business
course
in
general)
• Language
(n
=
1):
The
“core”
of
French

38. What
do
you
like
least
in
French
class?
• Language
(n
=2):
Not
enough
grammar
.Would
prefer
to
focus
on
the
language
• Output
(n
=
1):
Having
to
re-­‐write
ar(cles
in
our
own
words
and
then
present
them
to
the
class
• Group
work
(
n
=
1):
some
people
make
other
people
work

39. Average
marks
2006-­‐07
42
students
including
15
French
learners
Marke&ng
(+
French)
Marke&ng
(-­‐
French)
55.5%
49%
Economics
Economics
58%
46%
Accoun(ng
Accoun(ng
76%
59%
HRM
HRM
67%
64%

40. Culture
in
CLIL
• A
learning
space
for
intercultural
competence
is
not
automa(cally
present
in
CLIL
classrooms
(Dalton-­‐Puffer
2009)
• Culture
is
a
poten(al
in
CLIL
(Coyle
2010)
• CLIL:
not
the
purveyor
of
culture
(Ball
2010)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

41. Culture
in
21st
Century
=
Diversity
and
dynamism
Because
There
is
no
culture
of
one
because
Culture
is
communica;on
and
communica;on
is
culture
(Hall,
1959,
p.
186)

42. ConBaT+
aims
– To
raise
plurilingual,
pluricultural
and
intercultural
COMPETENCE
among
primary
and
secondary
school
teachers
and
their
pupils.
– To
empower
teachers
to
create
QUALITY
cross-­‐curricular
materials
in
English,
French,
and
Spanish,
as
an
L2,
for
primary
and
secondary
school
learners.
– To
introduce
the
LANGUAGES
and
CULTURES
present
in
the
classroom
into
a
number
of
subjects.
– To
mo(vate
teachers
to
IMPACT
on
a
reform
of
language
learning
and
teaching.
– To
strengthen
professional
NETWORKS
by
providing
several
interna(onal
and
na(onal
mee(ngs.
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

43. So…
How
can
we
reconcile
content
+
languages
+
cultures?
1.
"CLIL
is
methodologically
neutral”
(Lijle
2003)
2.
A
plurilingual
approach
is
not
content-­‐
dependent
(Candelier,
ALA
2006)
Therefore,
any
subject
may
introduce
a
plurilingual
aspect
to
the
content.

44. An
integrated
pedagogy
for
Conbat+,
1.
A
competence-­‐based
approach
with
a
focus
on
tasks
+
2.
Focus
on
tasks
accommodates
a
focus
on
content:
text
or
input
+
3.
A
plurilingual
approach
focusing
on
languages
and
their
speakers
–
i.e.
the
learners
=
Development
of
posi(ve
artudes
++++++++++++++++++++++++

45. Model
for
an
integrated
pedagogy:
ConBaT+
Content
Tasks
LanguageS
hjp://conbat.ecml.at/

46. Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

47. Example
of
a
language-­‐sensi&ve
approach
to
content
• ‘You
need
to
become
real
experts,
so
use
as
many
strategies
as
you
can
to
become
more
and
more
familiar
with
the
content
of
the
expert
card:
one
of
you
explains,
the
others
listen
and
help,
ask
each
other
ques(ons,
quiz
each
other...
• When
your
teacher
tells
you
to,
work
in
pairs
with
someone
from
your
“expert”
group.
Take
turns
explaining
the
text
to
each
other
without
looking
at
it.
The
listener
can
look
at
the
text
and
help
the
speaker
(from
A
symphony
of
frac;ons
by
Oriol
Pallares
and
Carlota
Pe(t,
ConBaT+).
All
language
strategies
are
s(mulated
to
make
the
content
accessible.
Reading,
listening,
speaking
skills

48. Progressing
to
a
languageS-­‐sensi&ve
approach
• Allegro, π, mezzo forte, ß, Lied … . Can you think of languages and
cultures that are important in the world of music? And in the world of
maths?
• In some of the expert cards some languages and cultures are
mentioned. In teams, take one of the languages you consider
important in the world of music, and make a new expert card which
contains new relations between music and/or maths and the new
language you have chosen.
• What about your mother tongue? And what about other languages
you may know?
• Taking everything you have learnt in this first and second part of the
project, think of how many of these new music and maths concepts
you can say in the languages you know. Make a word cloud like the
one in activity 1. You can use the online tool Wordle
(www.wordle.com).
• (from “A symphony of fractions” by Oriol Pallares and Carlota Petit)
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

49. CLIL
and
plurilingualism/culturalism
at
third
level
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012
Transformez ce texte trilingue en texte monolingue
The pratice du coût-plus-marge est-elle loighciúil ? En
général, non. Une approche qui ne considers ni de la
demande ni de value-based pricing, ni de competitors
dans la fixation des luachanna a peu de chances de
conduire au profit maximal, qu’il soit à court ou à long terme.
Cette approche perd son sens si les díolteanna ne
correspondent pas aux anticipations.
la valeur perçue tient compte
la concurrence la pratique
logique prix ventes

50.
Successful
CLIL
programmes
rely
on:
• Varied
language
teaching
and
learning
methodologies
• Op(onality
• Dedicated
teacher
educa(on
characterised
by
materials
development
• Collabora(on
• Stability
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

51. CLIL
and
Plurilingualism
in/for
unpredictable
(mes
• Develop
‘new’
arguments
for
language
learning:
cogni(on,
crea(vity,
risk-­‐taking,
diversity
management,
informa(on
management,
coping
with
the
unknown.
• Highlight
the
poten(al
contribu(ons
of
L2
pedagogies
to
wider
curriculum
(McMurry,
S.
M.
(2010).
Mathema;cs
as
a
language:
Understanding
and
using
maths)
Irish
and
English
and
Modern
Languages
Primary
curriculum,
2
subjects
at
post-­‐primary
level,
TY,
modular
system
at
third
level,
interdisciplinarity
European
language
developments
over
the
past
20
years:
por~olio,
learner
autonomy,
study
abroad,
tandem
language
learning,
technology
for
L2
learning
and
teaching,
CLIL,
Plurilingualism/
culturalism
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012
Look
at
what
we
have…

60. Bibliography
Ball,
P.
&
Lindsay,
D.
(2010).
Teacher
training
for
CLIL
in
the
Basque
country:
The
case
of
the
Ikastolas
–
an
expediency
model.
In
D.
Lasagabaster
&
Y.
Ruiz
de
Zarobe
(Eds.),
CLIL
in
Spain:
Implementaion,
results
and
teacher
training
(pp.162-­‐187).
Newcastle
upon
Tyne:
Cambridge
Scholars
Publishing.
Baetens
Beardsmore,
H.
(2008)
Mul(lingualism,
Cogni(on
and
Crea(vity.
Interna;onal
CLIL
Research
Journal
Vol.
1(1,)
4-­‐19.
Accessible
at
hjp://www.icrj.eu/11-­‐73
Bernaus,
M.,
Furlong,
A.,
Jonckheere,
S.
&
Kervran,
M.
(2012).
Plurilingualism
and
pluriculturalism
in
content
based
teaching.
Graz:
ECML.
Bruen,
J.
and
Wagner,
T.
(2008)
Content
and
Language
Integrated
Learning:
reflec(ons
on
a
pilot
module.
Teanga.
The
Irish
Yearbook
of
Applied
Linguis(cs.,
Special
edi(on
,
76-­‐91.
Bruton,
A.
(2011)
Are
the
Differences
between
the
CLIL
and
non-­‐CLIL
groups
in
Andalusia
due
to
CLIL?
A
Reply
to
Lorenzo,
Casal
and
Moore
(2010).
Applied
Linguis;cs,
32
(2),
236-­‐241.
Candelier
,
M.(2006)
Key
note
address
at
the
ALA
conference
at
the
Université
du
Maine,
July
2006,
Le
Mans,
France.
Clegg,
J.
(2002)
‘Towards
Successful
English-­‐medium
Educa(on
in
Southern
Africa’.
In
D.
Marsh,
A.
Ontero,
T.
Shikongo
(eds)
Enhancing
English-­‐medium
educa;on
in
Namibia
Finland:
University
of
Jyväskylä.
CLIL
Matrix
Project.
(2004-­‐2007).
ECML’s
second
medium
term
programme
of
ac(vi(es.
Retrieved
from
hjp://archive.ecml.at/mtp2/CLILmatrix
ConBaT+
project:
Content-­‐Based
Teaching
and
Plurilingualism
hjp://conbat.ecml.at
Coste,
D.,
Moore,
D.
and
Zarate,
G.
(1997).
Plurilingual
and
pluricultural
competence,
Strasbourg
:
Council
of
Europe.
Cots,
J.M.
and
Tusón,
A.
(1994).
Language
in
educa(on:
an
interview
with
Leo
Van
Lier.
Sintagma
6,
51-­‐65.
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

61. Coyle,
D.
(2007).
Content
and
language
integrated
learning:
Towards
a
connected
research
agenda
for
CLIL
pedagogies.
Interna;onal
Journal
of
Bilingual
Educa;on
and
Bilingualism,
10,
543-­‐562.
Coyle,
D.,
Hood,
P.,
&
Marsh,
D.
(2010).
CLIL:
Content
and
language
integrated
learning.
Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
Press.
Cummins
(1984)
Cummins,
J.
(1984)
Bilingualism
and
special
educa;on.
Clevedon
:
Mul;lingual
Majers.
Dalton-­‐Puffer,
C.
(2007)
Discourse
in
CLIL
Classrooms.
Amsterdam:
Benjamins
Dalton-­‐Puffer,
C.
(2009)
Communica(ve
competence
and
the
CLIL
classroom.
In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe &
R.M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.). Content and language integrated learning. Evidence from research in
Europe (197-214). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Eurydice
(2006)
CLIL
at
School
in
Europe.
Brussels:
COE.
Furlong,
Á.,
Cisneros,
A.,
Cummins,
N.,
Fraioli,
P.,
Molloy,
R.&
O’Neill,
D.
(2009)
Challenging
assump(ons
in
language
learning
and
teaching.In
J.
Murphy
and
B.
Higgs,
Teaching
and
Learning
in
Higher
Educa;on:
Challenging
Assump;ons.
NAIRTL
Furlong
Á.,
MacMahon,
B.
and
Ní
Ghuidhuir,
S.
(forthcoming)
Irish
and
Modern
Languages:
Collabora(on
in
Ini(al
Teacher
Educa(on.
Conference
Proceedings
of
Re-­‐imagining
Ini(al
Teacher
Educa(on.
Perspec(ves
on
Transforma(on,
St
Patrick’s
College,
Drumcondra,
June
31st-­‐July
2nd
2011.
Furlong,
Á.
(2008)
Insights
into
a
third
level
CLIL
experience.
AILA
World
Congress.
Essen,
DE.,
August
24th-­‐
29th
2008.
HALL
Edward
T.
(1959).
The
Silent
Language.
New
York:
Doubleday
Harris,
J.,
Forde,
P.,
Archer,
P.,
Nic
Fhearaile,
S.,
&
O’Gorman,
M.
(2006).
Irish
in
primary
school:
Long
term
na;onal
trends
in
achievement.
Dublin:
Department
of
Educa(on
and
Science.
Harris,
J.
and
O’Dhuibhir,
P.
(2011)
Effec;ve
Language
Teaching:
A
Synthesis
of
Research.
Dublin:
NCCA.
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

62. Järvinen,
H.,
Furlong,
Á.,
Corsain,
M.,
Barbero,
T.,
Liubiniene,
V.,
Sygmund,
D.,
Parvainen,
H.
&
Pakozdi,
M
(2009).
Language
in
Content
Instruc;on
.
Turku:
University
of
Turku.
Retrieved
from
hjp://lici.utu.fi/
Lasagabaster
D.
&
Ruiz
de
Zarobe,
Y.
(Eds.).
(2010).
CLIL
in
Spain:
Implementaion,
results
and
teacher
training.
Newcastle
upon
Tyne:
Cambridge
Scholars
Publishing.
Lijle,
D.
(2003).
Languages
in
the
post-­‐primary
curriculum:
A
discussion
document.
Dublin:
NCCA.
Lijle,
D.
(2007).
Language
learner
autonomy:
some
fundamental
considera(ons
revisited.
Innova;on
in
Language
Learning
and
Teaching,
1,
14–29.
Lorenzo,
F.,
Casal
,S.
and
Moore,
P.
(2010)
The
Effects
of
Content
and
Language
Integrated
Learning
in
European
Educa(on:
Key
Findings
from
the
Andalusian
Sec(ons
Evalua(on
Project.
Applied
Linguis;cs,
31,
418-­‐42.
McMurry,
S.
M.
(2010).
Mathema;cs
as
a
language:
Understanding
and
using
maths.
Dublin:
Living
Edi(on.
Mehisto,
P.,
Marsh,
D.
&
Frigols,
M.J.
(2008)
Uncovering
CLIL:
Content
and
Language
Integrated
Learning
in
Bilingual
and
Mul;lingual
Educa;on.
Oxford:
Macmillan
Educa(on.
Mitchell,
R.
(2000).
Anniversary
ar(cle.
Applied
linguis(cs
and
evidence-­‐based
classroom
prac(ce:
The
case
of
foreign
language
grammar
pedagogy.
Applied
Linguis;cs,
21(3),
281-­‐303.
Mohan,
B,
(1986)
Language
and
content.
Reading,
MA:
Addison-­‐Wesley
Moore,
F.
P.
(
2009)
On
the
Emergence
of
L2
Oracy
in
Bilingual
Educa;on:
A
compara;ve
Analysis
of
CLIL
and
Mainstream
Learner
Talk.
Sevilla:
Universidad
de
Sevilla.
Unpublished
Doctoral
Disserta(on.
Navés,
T.
(
2009)
Effec(ve
content
and
Language
Integrated
Learning
(CLIL)
programmes.
In
Y.
Ruiz
de
Zarobe
and
R.M.Jiménez
Catalán
(Eds),
Content
and
language
Integrated
learning:
Evidence
from
Research
in
Europe
(pp.22-­‐40).
Bristol:
Mul(lingual
Majers,
22-­‐40.
;
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012

63. Ó
Duibhir,
P.
(2009).
The
spoken
Irish
of
sixth-­‐class
pupils
in
Irish
immersion
schools.
Unpublished
PhD,
Trinity
College,
Dublin
Rubenfeld,
S.,
Clément,
R.,
Lussier,
D.,
Lebrun,
M.,
Auger,
R.
(2006).
Second
language
learning
and
cultural
representa(ons:
beyond
competence
and
iden(ty.
Language
Learning
56/4,
December
2006,
609-­‐632.
Ruiz
de
Zarobe,
Y.
and
Jiménez
Catalán,
R.
M.
(2009)
Content
and
language
Integrated
learning:
Evidence
from
Research
in
Europe.
Bristol:
Mul(lingual
Majers
Ruiz
de
Zarobe,
Y.
,Sierra,J.
M.,
Gallardo
del
Puerto,
F.
(2011)
Content
and
language
Integrated
learing:
Contribu(ons
to
Mul(lingualism
in
Euroepan
Contexts.
Bern:
Peter
Lang.
Skeet,
J.
and
Tanner,
R.
(13
December
2011)
The
8
Cs
of
CLIL?
Reflec&ons
on
CLIL
hp://clilreflec&ons.blogspot.com/search?q=8+Cs
Seikkula-­‐Leino,
J.
(2007).
CLIL
learning:
Achievement
levels
and
affec(ve
factors.
Language
and
Educa;on,
21(4),
328
-­‐
341.
Van
Lier,
L.
(1988).
The
classroom
and
the
language
learner.
Ethnography
and
second-­‐language
classroom
research.
Harlow:
Longman.
Wiesemes,R.
(2009)
Developing
Theories
of
prac(ces
in
CLIL:
CLIL
as
post-­‐method
pedagogies?
In
Y.
Ruiz
de
Zarobe
and
R.M.
Jiménez
Catalán
(Eds),
Content
and
language
Integrated
learning:
Evidence
from
Research
in
Europe
(pp.
41-­‐62).
Bristol:
Mul(lingual
Majers.
Wolff
D.
(2002).
Languages
across
the
curriculum:
a
way
to
promote
mul(lingualism
in
Europe.
In
The
European
dimension:
CLIL
EMILE
-­‐
The
European
dimension;
ac;ons,
Trends
and
Foresight
Poten;al.
Jivâskylâ:
UNIcom.
Áine
Furlong
IRAAL
April
2012