To teach English is human, to teach CLIL is divine? | Jeremy Harmer.pdf

8/12/2019 To teach English is human, to teach CLIL is divine? | Jeremy Harmer.pdf

1/27

remy Harmer

T writer, presenter, teacher & trainer

teach English is human, to teach CLIL is divine?

ted byjeremyharmeronJanuary 25, 2011ed in: CLIL (Content and Language Intergrated Learning), Language. 114 Commentsn Lindsay Clandfield gave his talk at the International House World Organisation Director of Studies conference (try saying all thatkly) in early January his title was Coursebooks: whats hot and whats not.

e was one thing Lindsay didnt mention, and that was CLIL or, as you all know by now, Content and Language Integratedning. So I got to wondering . Do CLIL people (like this lot (http://www.clilconsortium.jyu.fi/)) and EFL people talk to each other

much? At all?

n I thought: is CLIL hot, lukewarm or icy cold? Is it taking the educational world by storm as some people suggest or isnt it?

uick preamble: look away now if you know anything at all about CLIL. This is just for those who haven't thought about it much.

L is (supposedly) not like teaching ordinary EFL (English as a Foreign Language) or ESOL (to speakers of other languages). It ishing the language and an academic subject at the same time, so that as you learn about physics you learn the language forsics. CLIL advocates dividing language skills into BICS (basic interpersonal communicative skills - that's familiar EFL territory)CALP (Cognitive academic language proficiency - that's, for example, the physics bit!). You can have soft CLIL (that's a bit ofhing physics and English together) and hard CLIL (delivering a lot of the physics curriculum in English and vice-versa).

L advocates say that it is different from just bi-lingual schooling. It is new and shiny because CALP and BICS have equal billing.y people have a big stake in promoting and supporting CLIL practice.]

e governments (well, education ministeries, anyway) are going crazy for CLIL. For example, in Spain it is all the rage; theernment of the United Arab Emirates has said it wants CLIL at the secondary level so university courses do not have to spendrs on foundation English courses. In other countries they are promoting CLIL as hard as they can. But Malaysia has justndoned teaching maths and science in English because, many Malaysians say, it is bad enough having to learn science without theed burden of a foreign language (English).

m. Of course there are many factors behind thedecision of Malaysia (and Korea backtracking away from something similar).e of them might be (a) does CLIL actually work? (b) where can you get teachers who are competent in both the subject and theuage? (c) the local language needs defending.

yet in an increasingly global world surely teaching subjects through English (and teaching English through subjects?) IS the wayo. Teaching English for no obvious reason(TENOR) has had itsday. CLILand English forSpecial Purposes must be the way forward.e ESOL world by the very nature of thestudents and what they need and want, theres a kind of CLIL imperative, perhaps?

yet.heres what someone said to me the other day, and it is the reason for this post:

ear lots of people talking about the advantages for Englishthat CLIL offers, but I havent heard anyone saying its a great way tohphysics(or geography or maths etc).

et your Tarot cards out, polish your crystal balls. Is CLIL the present? The Future (perfect)? The soon-to-be-past (even with thesive investment in it)?

at do you think?

4 comments on To teach English is human, to teach CLIL is divine?
http://www.clilconsortium.jyu.fi/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/category/clil-content-and-language-intergrated-learning/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/category/clil-content-and-language-intergrated-learning/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/category/language/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#commentshttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/author/jeremyharmer/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://www.clilconsortium.jyu.fi/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#commentshttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/category/language/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/category/clil-content-and-language-intergrated-learning/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/author/jeremyharmer/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/


2/27

nnabooklover on January 25, 2011 at 3:25 pm said:Very good point Jeremy! I am in the middle of a CLIL project right now, but I have my own doubts whether this is actually as goods they say.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:11 am said:Hi Anna,

I think it may be the case of a good idea not necessarily implemented well?

Jeremy

Replyophie ioannou georgiou on January 25, 2011 at 3:29 pm said:Hi Jeremy

You are right in that sometimes people tend to concentrate on the benefits CLIL has for language learning but this usually comesrom language teachers such as most of the colleagues probably reading this blog.

When CLIL is properly introduced in education, one is careful that the subject content is taught adequately. This is crucial whenCLIL is implemented the way it should be (in my humble opinion) i.e. teaching a subject in another language. If this is done so,hen teachers have to emphasise the subject and that is where students are assessed.

Unfortunately often colleagues, in their efforts to try to be up to date (?) teach content-based/topic-based English and think it isCLIL whereas in this case the teacher is not really interested whether the student learnt his/her science or geography. In essencehe student knows that too. He/she will be assessed on their English and NOT on the topic. So, this is where the problem very

ften lies.As in the countries you mention that are backing out, I think there are a range of issues to blame and not the approach as such.CLIL works but it works when a range of factors are in place and when it does the developments are evident in the subject matteroo.rom our experience in Cyprus, CLIL implementation has had a very positive effect on the subject taught.ophie

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:14 am said:Hi Sophie,

I am sure you are right. CLIL only works when the content (physics, geography etc) is as much at the heart of what is going onas the language.

Jeremy

ReplyAdam on January 25, 2011 at 3:52 pm said:

have genuinely high hopes for CLIL, more so than for dogme, I have to say (not that Im trying to directly compare the two).Perhaps my desire is based in the fact that my teaching context is highly focused on content based instruction, of which CLILeems to be a natural extension.

like the notion of there merely being different ways of expressing a notion, some linguistically sophisticate, others less so. This iswhere the traditional grammar syllabus is selling learners short. Nevertheless, I do fear for the young uns in countries like Spainhat have dived into what is essentially still a fad.

The language we use to describe a given concept is inherently connected to that concept, although I think well end up seeing twoamps develop; the hardcore CLIListas and the neo-decontextualised grammar CLILardos.

Who will win? It will be interesting to see.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 3:37 pm said:Hi Adam,

Im glad your comment made it through in the end!

I am interested in your Dogme/CLIL comparison. I see similarities in that most teachers do a bit of both, but few are totally

committed!!!

I have seen (have even written) lessons which have had CLIL elements (that is if I understand the concept correctly. But I cantimagine where I would find (in most countries I visit) teachers who could take on a long hard CLIL approach.

Of course if we CAN educate children this way, that is all to the good but for what? The concepts or the language (myoriginal questions)?
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1918http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1861#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1861http://www.yearinthelifeofanenglishteacher.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1870#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1870http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1860#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1860http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1869#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1869http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1859#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1859


3/27

Yes, the language for a concept is concept-specific. That begs a question, of course: is it a god thing to be that specific and makethings less generalisable?

Jeremy

ReplyALiCe__M on January 25, 2011 at 3:52 pm said:Teaching English for no obvious reason (TENOR) has had its day Well, maybe Ill sound very silly, but I learn English for nobvious reason (LENOR), and my students often tell me they would like to learn French for no obvious reason, just because itsbeautiful language, just for the sake of it, for the mere pleasure of speaking a foreign language, which gets bigger and bigger : the

more you can speak it, the more beautiful language snow you get, the bigger the snowball.ut nowadays the word objectives is written in such tall letters everywhere, (even on the soles of a toddlers shoes), that it seems

unreasonable not to be obsessed by it too. And so, lets dissect objectives, theyll multiply, well triple the joy. Because it ishought that the more precise the objectives, the better. But the beauty of language is not in the pointy details only, its in the

flowing, the musical, the creative nature of it. CLIL sounds like this to me : dissecting objectives, to create a new market, and anew jargon.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:18 am said:Hello Alice,

thank you for that beautiful reminder of the joy of language learning it because it is there, and because we want to andbecause maybe, one day, we can appreciate poetry and fiction in another language.

IF CLIL is just another mindless objective-driven fad then it is not a good thing. But if it really helps both language ANDcontent then it is to be welcomed?

Jeremy

Replyeremy Taylor on January 25, 2011 at 3:54 pm said:attended a CLIL discussion at an IATEFL conference a few years ago. Someone asked David Marsh (big fish in CLIL world),Could you tell us about some of the negative aspects of CLIL? His reply? No, next question?pain could look to Germany where CLIL is not a big thing at all yet German scientists are perfectly comfortable working with

English-speaking colleagues. I sometimes proofread scientific texts written by German scientists and their level of English ismazingly high. How did they manage it without CLIL? I think we should find out.t seems that CLIL is much better than EFL teaching because it has an an impressive array of SFLAs. Stupid Four Letter Acronyms.

Replysophie ioannou georgiou on January 25, 2011 at 4:06 pm said:Well there are loads of people who speak English well despite the methods they were taught through. I wonder how theymade it?what about all the people who learnt English through English translation and the Audiolingual method? Does this means themethods were great?What it means is that some motivated people will learn DESPITE the method.The question is: what about all the other people who did not learn despite being top students in audiolingual and translationclasses? etc etc

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:27 am said:Sophie,

yes your question is a good one and one that exercises the minds of everyone in language teaching and planning.Methods such as audiolingualism and GT and even the traditional structural-situational teaching that has charaterizedmuch western TEFL seemed to work well for some but not for all.Why?

!

Jeremy

jeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:22 am said:Hi Jeremy,

your story about David Marsh is instructive. Of COURSE every approach and development has some negative aspects!!Beware the anti-negative blinkers.
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1872http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1873http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1865#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1865http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1863#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1863http://www.jeremytaylor.eu/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1871#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1871http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1862#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1862http://mafaldaleflecestsondada.blogspot.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1918#respond


4/27

But in case you think Im weighing in on this I was not there so I cant comment on the actual event, my comments are onlymade in the abstract.

In order for CLIL to sweep the world it needs to be able to back up the claim that it is better for (a) English and (b) the content.

Jeremy

Replysophie ioannou georgiou on January 26, 2011 at 6:33 am said:Or simply to prove that it is just as good as other approaches for a) teaching English and b) teaching content

ophie ioannou georgiou on January 25, 2011 at 4:03 pm said:

Hi Alice

dont think it is like that at all. Learning English for no obvious reason I think would better translate into not having anymotivation for learning a language obviously this is not so for you.There are many who need some motivation to do so and need some reason to use the language. CLIL makes language learningmeaningful. Of course language learning can be make meaningful in the hands of talented teachers but so often it is exam-orientedtc

CLIL offers the possibility for learners to really communicate about something it creates real communication opportunities in thelassroom and implements most of the principles of communicative language teaching and task-based learning in an effortless

way.Obviously it is currently being exploited by the marketing departments of a number of schools and a number of publshing houses.t is a shame though to let they hype lead you to a negative stance towards it.

We (I guess the lot, Jeremy refers to or at least me and some other colleagues involved in CLIL) are sorry to see the way it iseing used and manipulated and being stretched so it fits anyone and everyone who wants to seem trendy and up to date.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:30 am said:Sophie,

yes, thats the thing. If CLIL DOES mean something it is because it is real and genuine and answers new and pressing needs.But CLIL will be diminished if it just picked up and abused by people who arent really doing it.

Jeremy

Reply

sophie ioannou georgiou on January 26, 2011 at 6:35 am said:Exactly and Im afraid this seems to be happening

Luciana on January 25, 2011 at 6:53 pm said:Hi Jeremy, I was a TENOR student and learnt in spite of it. Just recently I heard and ESOL teacher say: I am an eclectic teacher rying to make the most and pick and choose the best from each method/approach. Tell you the truth, Im no purist myself, and

do also mix and match.

When it comes to CLIL, all I can say is that I cant do maths in English, I must have the cadency of my mother language whenalculating. Food for thought?

Reply

jeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:33 am said:Hello tenor Luciana!

Yes, I am sure students can learn English for no obvious reason and enjoy it (and have great success) as you and Alice havedone!

Eclecticism HAS to be a good answer when we teach groups full of individuals.

The question about you and maths and CLIL is, for me, whether either your English or your maths would be better off if theywere taught separately or together!

Jeremy

ReplyLuciana on January 26, 2011 at 1:05 pm said:I liked maths well enough when I learnt it in my mother tongue. My knowledge of English at that time was rubbish, so Imnot sure how I would have dealt with it. I can see it causing some trouble.

What I notice is that maths and scientific topics, not being my line of work / interest, are now better understood in thelanguage I originally learnt them. So, there may be a point for CLIL. Teach them science in English early on and they mighthave less trouble dealing with these subjects in English at higher levels.
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1913http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1875#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1875http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1866#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1866http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1907http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1874#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1874http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1864#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1864http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1906http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1872#respond


5/27

But is English the most wide-spread language for science??

milyvbell on January 25, 2011 at 8:28 pm said:have to admit to being very sceptical about CLIL.

was involved in a big project which aimed at introducing CLIL. It was woefully lacking in its planning and delivery (evenhought I was involved!). At the time I didnt know much about CLIL and we were just asked to deliver a TKT course to a group ofocal school teachers. When we arrived, ready to impart knowledge on the grateful teachers, we were shocked by the bile, vitriolnd near mutiny that we encountered. Basically, nobody had thought about what the teachers needed to be able implement CLILn their classrooms and were just instructed to get the certificate or be sacked. The teachers needed language development, not ELTraining.

As Sophie says CLIL works but it works when a range of factors are in place. That was certainly not the case in my experience,nd, I think, the majority of cases. Thats why CLIL is being abandoned. I honestly dont know if it works when implementedorrectly because I have nothing to base my opinion on.

And, selfishly, I dont want to teach science!

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:54 am said:Hi Emily,

thanks for coming along.

(I dont want to teach science as it happens, though I DO appreciate real and needed content).

But your story ABSOLUTELY confirms my worries about imposing some ill-understood new paradigm on teachers who havenot asked for it and, more important, who do not have the requisite training or support to make it work.

If you want a paradigm shift you have to get teachers to buy into it first, dont you? And then amsses of support?

Jeremy

Replydarridge on January 26, 2011 at 7:45 pm said:This is common now in many countries now. Notably, in the UAE it was decided that all teachers now had to get IELTSscores of 5.5+ and teach their subjects (previously taught in Arabic their native tongue) in English.

Unbelievably stressful for the teachers, and often no financial incentives beyond do it or lose your job were given.

Michelle Worgan on January 25, 2011 at 9:34 pm said:Hi Jeremy,

This is a large and complex issue in Spain CLIL seems to be being implemented very poorly on the whole, and the main reasonsor this seem to be a) Lack of teacher training and insufficient level of L2 on the part of the teacher. (Just a B1 level is required to getteaching position at a bilingual school, which is actually nothing of the sort) and b) A quick-fix answer to the question of why

he level of second language ability in Spain is behind that of many other countries. If it is not being implemented well, it is hard toee how CLIL can be really successful.

On the other hand, I am actually doing a bit of CLIL with one of my groups of young learners (first year primary). I am an Englisheacher, but I have designed a syllabus full of content, cognitive and language objectives. Those who would like to know more,

will be able to read a guest post on http://kenwilsonelt.wordpress.com/ sometime over the next month or so!

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 12:59 am said:Hello Michelle,

great that you have come along!

I am looking forward to your guest blog!

So you are a soft-CLIL teacher!! I completely agree with that idea. But is a CLIL lesson merely a lesson using real-worldcontent? Theres nothing wrong with that of course, but it doesnt make for a brave new world does it?

`You are so so so right (I suspect) about problems when CLIL is introduced indiscriminately. For in order to be a successfulCLIL teacher you need good English and good subject knowledge and sufficient training.

My suspicion is that in most places where CLIL is enthusiastically introduced at least one or two (maybe even three?) of thoseneeds are not being met.

Jeremy
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1877http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1868#respondhttp://kenwilsonelt.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1868http://www.inspireyourlearners.blogspot.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1921http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1876#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1876http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1867#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1867


6/27

Replyophie ioannou georgiou on January 26, 2011 at 6:44 am said:think what this discussion is pointing out is that -as Jeremy puts it CLIL is being abused by a number of people.

Carried away by the enthusiasm (or the hype) they rush to implement it without having secured some basic factors (much likeuidling without proper foundations.

ome of the main factors are:) competence in the foreign language by the teacher) teachers trained in language teaching methodology) teachers trained in the specific contents methodology

Other factors are continuous support for the teachers and provision of suitable teaching materials.

think often CLIL seems to be a victim of its own success. People observe a successful CLIL lesson and it all seems to be runningo smoothly and effectively. Then other colleagues and/or policy makers want to implement it and think it is OK to just gettarted.

The reality behind a successful CLIL lesson or overall programme involves a lot of hard work and teacher training and muchmore.

We specifically require that teachers have the first three factors above, before they can start teaching CLIL.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 3:30 pm said:

Hi Sophie,

yes, thats just it. You DO need 3 competencies at least to be a CLIL teacher but as usual when governments get involved theythink they can them on the cheap.

I think it may be more fun to teach soft CLIL (because of the content). But the occasional lesson about Emperor penguins orthe process of evaporation is not so different from any other EFL lesson the content is just different. But to be a REAL CLILteacher you need deep subject knowledge at least.

Then the methodology.

And definitely, good English.

Thats a big big ask.

Jeremy

Replyeremy Taylor on January 26, 2011 at 6:56 am said:agree with the three factors that Sophie suggests above. So CLIL might be ready for introduction (in most countries) in about 10-5 years. In the meantime I have a wonderfully simple alternative: introduce more subject content into English teaching. Englisheachers will always need content of some kind do why shouldnt it be a bit of history, geography, science?

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 3:31 pm said:Jeremy,

yes I agree and in fact if you look at some better coursebooks they have always had soft CLIL in them (unless CLIL meanssomething very different, and for the life of me I cant see it yet).

So I am all for decent content which includes anything from acid rain to how the sun works etc as valid topics for any class.

But the hard stuff?! It may take years to implement, by which time the band may have marched on?

Jeremy

Replysophie ioannou georgiou on January 26, 2011 at 7:56 pm said:

Hi Jeremies : )Why do you guys assume that its going to take so many year???Teachers with double specialisations are not as rare as you think.In primary schools it is normal for teachers to be able to teach more than one subject.Many university graduates have double majors.I dont see why you are pushing readiness too far into the future. It can be done. Its just that it needs people to be aware ofwhat needs to be done so that it is implemented effectively.
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1922http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1917#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1917http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1909#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1909http://www.jeremytaylor.eu/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1916#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1916http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1908#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1908http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1877#respond


7/27

Adam on January 26, 2011 at 7:04 am said:Hi Jeremy, I left a comment here last night but I think it got lost in your spam.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 3:23 pm said:see above!

Jeremy

Replyeremyharmer on January 26, 2011 at 3:26 pm said:

Luciana :

I liked maths well enough when I learnt it in my mother tongue. My knowledge of English at that time was rubbish, so Im not sure how Iwould have dealt with it. I can see it causing some trouble.

What I notice is that maths and scientific topics, not being my line of work / interest, are now better understood in the language I originallylearnt them. So, there may be a point for CLIL. Teach them science in English early on and they might have less trouble dealing with thesesubjects in English at higher levels.But is English the most wide-spread language for science??

think English is a common language for science but the commonest? By how much? I dont know.

Dont Id enjoy maths and science in Spanish (which is my not-very-good second language) much!

am in two minds about whether or not learning science in the L2 is a good think or not

eremy

ReplyNatalia on January 26, 2011 at 3:42 pm said:n a softer version, if it is about using content in our classes and dealing with meaning first, well, as someone has already said,hen thats what we should be doing already.

As for hard CLIL, Im worried mainly because its a fad here in Brazil. For a while in Rio it seemed there was a new billboard everyday announcing that a new school had gone bilingual, teaching part of the curriculum in English. Not only am I confident thathere arent enough subject-matter specialists with fluent Academic English to go around, but Im also worried about the

deological implications of the whole thing. I dont believe that changing the language is just changing the wrapping of the sameontent. Thats too much of the conduit metaphor for me. The content will necessarily be changed whether its for the better oror the worse ir remains to be seen. What seems to happen (but I may be wrong, since Im a bystander in the whole CLILevolution here) is that the Humanities are still taught in Portuguese, while the other Sciences are taught in English. Well,onsidering the status that both technology/Sciences and English already have, this can actually undermine the view of

Portuguese as an Academic language in its own right. But then again, considering how much of our research is ignored worldwideecause of the language, then arent we (I mean me! LOL) being hypocrites by worrying with a status we have never held?

P.S.: As I said on Twitter, I just began studying about this and Id really appreciate some references about content-based learning.According to ICAO, thats what I should be teaching my students, who are all air traffic controllers. However, all I could only findwere CLIL books, which seem to focus on schools rather than in the ESP domain. But Im sure you and your readers can help me.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 27, 2011 at 9:38 am said:Natalia,

that is a very interesting perspective the idea that by teaching some subjects in English (and only the humanities in English)you undermine the status and validity of the home language (Portuguese).

The whole way in which languages clash and rub against each other is difficult to work out, isnt it (hence your commentsabout worldwide research).

I understand that a lot of CLIL focuses on schools although as people have been saying in their comments here many teachersoffer CLIL-like lessons at all levels. But air traffic control is not so much CLIL, is it, as full-on ESP. There ARE materials out

there but I dont know themwill try and find out.

Jeremy

ReplyNatalia on January 27, 2011 at 1:03 pm said:

jeremyharmer :But air traffic control is not so much CLIL, is it, as full-on ESP. There ARE materials out there but I dont knowthemwill try and find out.
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1924http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1928http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1924#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1924http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1919#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1919http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1915#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1913http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1915http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1914#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1914http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1910#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1910http://www.yearinthelifeofanenglishteacher.com/


8/27

Thank you for your help!

I may have misunderstood what you wrote, but I dont think that being full-on ESP means ATC English cant be anythingelse. After all, we can teach ESP following communicative, task-based or basically any other methodology. ICAO suggestswe do it with CBLT. I think they mean we should be teaching refresher courses such as Safety in Aviation, which ATCOshave to take anyway, in English, or perhaps we should scaffold ICAO materials and documents, which are for the most partwritten in English. (At least thats how one company understood ithttp://www.aeservices.net/English/articles_value_of_content.html)

Its the same 2-for-1 concept that CLIL has, but out of the school context, which is why I wrote that I fail to see the differencebetween CLIL and CBLT. But then again I realize I dont know enough about either.

Nicky hockly on January 26, 2011 at 9:29 pm said:CLIL has a great track record in Finland. However, we dont all teach there & our learners are not Finns. Malaysia recentlydropped clil after 10 years of it. Looks to me like the writing is on the wall for clil in countries like Spain. I wager that 10 yearsdown the line well be back where we are now Been there, done that & ( surprise!) it didnt work out

Replyjeremyharmer on January 27, 2011 at 9:43 am said:Hello Nicky!

Well you are right there about us and Finland!!

If CLIL IS to work, then Spain is the ultimate test case. English learning at school in Spain has not been, over the years,

conspicuously successful. Of course that doesnt make Spain different from many other countries (and look at foreign languagelearning in the UK if you want to get REALLY depressed!). But CLIL has been put forward as some kind of a saviour for thissituation.

Is it? I cant tell. Im not right there right in it. But the sounds coming out of it are not, as yet, encouraging. On the other handSophies enthusiasm (above) is pretty infectious.

As a mutual friend and colleague said to me the other day Im in two minds about it. Well so am I. Hence this blogpost ofcourse!

Jeremy

Reply

eremyharmer on January 27, 2011 at 9:48 am said:sophie ioannou georgiou :

Hi Jeremies : )

Why do you guys assume that its going to take so many year???Teachers with double specialisations are not as rare as you think.In primary schools it is normal for teachers to be able to teach more than one subject.Many university graduates have double majors.I dont see why you are pushing readiness too far into the future. It can be done. Its just that it needs people to be aware of what needs to bedone so that it is implemented effectively.

Thanks, Sophie, for that corrective.

Yes, of course primary schools have teachers who teach across a range of subjects. And at primary level many can do that. Butwhereas it is fairly easy to be a mistress or master of experimenting, for example, about what things float, or how to do simplemathematics, actually knowing a language means that you have to KNOW it.

Of course, if primary school EFL is just a taster then thats a different matter.

cant see reasons why good CLIL at primary shouldnt work IF you have competent English-language users. But what are theenefits for the core subjects? What for English?

eremysubjects, what for English

Replysophie ioannou georgiou on January 27, 2011 at 3:06 pm said:Of course there needs to be teacher competence in the foreign language goes without saying

I thought we talked about the benefits earlier .and there are additional benefits to those mentioned earlier. These are practical benefis such as finding the time in the schooltimetable to teach a foreign language. It is often one of the biggest problems!(This is juat and additional benefits to others mentioned above pls dont take it as the major consideration)
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1929http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1926#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1922http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1926http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1925#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1925http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1923#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1923http://www.aeservices.net/English/articles_value_of_content.html


9/27

Replyurcu Akyol on January 27, 2011 at 12:31 pm said:

Hi Jeremy,

When I look at the definition of CLIL, it looks like an ideal way of teaching/learning content and a foreign language.

CLIL refers to situations where subjects, or parts of subjects, are taught through a foreign language with dual-focused aims,namely the learning of content and the simultaneous learning of a foreign language.http://www.onestopenglish.com/clil/what-is-clil/)

However, when I look into the reality in my country, I can say that it is a fantasy. First of all, I dont know the answers of theseuestions:

Should it be the subject teacher or the English teacher who is teaching a subject through English? Or can both be possible? Even ifoth are possible, I think, neither English nor Turkish subject teachers can do it properly. The reasons are simple:. English teachers are trained to teach English and we cannot expect them to teach maths or science.. Subject teachers are trained to teach subjects and they are taught how to do it in Turkish. There are not many subject teachers

who can use English as a means of communication in the classroom or to teach a subject.

If we teach a subject through English, what should we assess? Linguistic outcomes or content area knowledge? Or both??

urthermore, I think, if a student learns subjects in their native language, the level of competence would be much higher and thetudents are more likely to produce knowledge in the further steps of their academic lives. If the content is taught in English,tudent would try to cope with both the subject area content and the linguistic content which will make it difficult to master even

ne of them.

dont think we need a single content area to teach English well and the content area teachers need a foreign language as amedium of instruction. Why should they?

as an English teacher, need to make learning English meaningful for my students and I can do this via a variety of authentic orraded materials & tasks which I choose according to the lessons linguistic aims and my students interests. I can either choose anrticle from a history magazine or a video about global warming from the National Geographic website. Without content, how canhe language I teach be meaningful? But, still, I teach language not the content. I guess this can be called a soft CLIL approach

think that working with subject teachers in the planning period and having some common projects and/or lessons is very goodor curriculum integrity but teaching the subjects through English doesnt seem logical to me

y the way, are there any Turkey trips in your agenda? I wish you were coming to ISTEK.

Have a nice weekend.

urcu

Replyjeremyharmer on January 27, 2011 at 10:03 pm said:Hello Burcu,

thanks you so much for your comments. I think you summarise (very effectively) the whole debate about CLIL.

It goes something like this:

1where CLIL is badly implemented it isnt going to work (teachers not prepared etc)

2Good teachers always include interesting content to teach English with

3it is still unclear to me whether the content is enhanced or damaged by using the L2

(But in case Sophie is worried) CLIL clearly can and does work in some situations. It may in the end be an issue of trainingand investment.

(But I cant help feeling that learning content in Turkish is pretty good for Turkish kids!!!)

Ill be in Izmir and samsun, but oh, how sad, not in Istanbul!!

Jeremy

Reply
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1933#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1933http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1927#respondhttp://www.onestopenglish.com/clil/what-is-clil/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1927http://burcuakyol.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1929#respond


10/27

ophie ioannou georgiou on January 27, 2011 at 3:18 pm said:m keeping track of this discussion and I feel sad about all the negativity. I dont know if it is because of bad publicity some CLILrogrammes are getting, because of misunderstanding of the concept or because of a hidden fear that others are tresspassing intour territories?

ometimes the argument is This is not going to work where I live or This can not work where I live. Thats fine and acceptableut one should not generalise and trash an approach simply because it will not work in their own context at this particular point inime.

udged in such a subjective/context-restricted manner, then the arguments of those in whose contexts CLIL works are equallyalid. An approach does not necessarily need to fit all contexts in order to be a worthwhile approach.

o, if it doesnt fit, then dont stretch it. But dont discard it or reject it either. One day it might fit (things change fast) and if itdoesnt, its still OK.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 27, 2011 at 9:57 pm said:Sophie,

I am sorry about the negativity too!

When I think of good primary lessons a topic stretching over many different content areas, children involved in play andstudy then CLIL sounds absolutelt right IF the langauge is there.

Of course you are right to say that CLIL approaches DO work where they do work!!

I think the negativity comes from (a) people who have an interest in EFL, (b) people who are suspicious of big changes, (c)epople who look at the activities of education ministeries and (d) people whove seen CLIL fail because its been badlyimplemented.

But I would hate you to think (this is me speaking personally) that good CLIL practice is unattractive. On the contrary itsounds wonderful!

Jeremy

Replysophie ioannou georgiou on January 28, 2011 at 1:20 pm said:

Hi Jeremy

Youve desribed CLIL in primary so well!

The only thing I can say is that hopefully people for whom the approach resonates continue to try to implement it well andshare their experiences with the rest of us. Then these experiences will help others to implement it better and avoid makingthe same mistakes.

It is easy to criticise some programmes that may not be doing well but when these were starting they were pioneers andhad no one to learn from but their own experiences and, perhaps, mistakes.

Having started our implementation five years ago, I felt lucky that we could study other programmes and learn from them.This is what its all about. Its very difficult walking in uncharted territory.

So Im thankful to the brave ones who went ahead, opening the paths for us whereas we can follow and smooth the pathand, perhaps, sort out the signposting .

For those who have an interest in EFL, I think there is no reason to worry. My belief is that CLIL will always work inaddition to language classes and not instead of language classes. Based on my personal experiences I think that is the bestway to go.

TEFL101 on January 28, 2011 at 8:54 am said:urely the problem is that CLIL in formal education inevitably tends towards a top-down exercise in developing students

declarative memories in the traditional manner of learning history or chemistry; where a clearly defined flow of knowledge fromeacher to student makes large classes workable and cost efficient.

think there is a bit of room for this; its intellectually stimulating, encourages critical thinking and makes more sophisticatedpeakers. Ultimately though, I think CLIL has to be properly integrated with TBL to be of real value in developing language skills,nd this takes quite a bit of engineering on the part of the course designer.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 30, 2011 at 3:05 pm said:Really interesting comments!
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1946http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1934#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1934http://englishskills1111.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1936http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1932#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1932http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1930#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1930


11/27

Its not just the spine of CLIL that matters, in other words; its the clothing, the flesh and bones of it, the HOW of it!

Of course that applies to all content teaching too and English teaching.

Best? A blend of experiential, declarative and reflective practice?

Jeremy

ReplyLauretta on January 28, 2011 at 9:55 am said:

was impressed by this sentence Is CLIL the present? The Future (perfect)? The soon-to-be-past (even with the massivenvestment in it)? because this idea ishas been seething in my mind in the last weeks. I have been for a long time a CLIL fan (and

eachers trainer). Then I did a doctoral research and wrote my thesis on the the CLIL subject teacher in Italy and Spain and I hadhe opportunity to study deeper the whole thing and I began to have doubts about it. Not because the initial idea was not valid Itill find it a good idea but as a matter of fact the CLIL approach has so many impications to be effective that are generally notonsidered. I must admit I have seen very few really good CLIL implementations. I think that a good CLIL imply a change ofaradigm in the curriculum that is not generally triggered (and some times it is not even possible because there is a mismatchetween innovation desire and legislation. Another point is that I think too that CLIL is already the past and the challenges forducation and teachers training are in my opinion already changing.

Replyjeremyharmer on January 30, 2011 at 3:10 pm said:Hi Lauretta,

thank you so much for you very interesting comments.I completely agree that the promise of CLIL is great. And when it works (as Sophie tells us above) it is worth celebrating.

But my who concern in this post has been to question why we want to teach core content in English, especially when in manysituations, the implementation and the resources backup just arent there.

We will see if you are right and that the future is something else!

A lot depends, I suspect, on the way in which education and technology integrate over the next few years

Jeremy

Replyhans kloibhofer on January 29, 2011 at 12:40 pm said:eremy,

s long as teachers continue to advocate CLIL as a grand way of TEACHING language and subject at the same time youre deadight in questioning the current CLIL craze!

Trying to TEACH a language or an academic subject is an approach open to many questions in first place anyway.

Lets (more) talk about METHODS.

Hans

Replyjeremyharmer on January 30, 2011 at 3:16 pm said:Hello Hans,

yes, I think you are right.

Its not what (usually), it HOW!

Jeremy

Replyeremyharmer on January 30, 2011 at 3:02 pm said:
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1945http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1948#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1948http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1942#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1942http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1947#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1947http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1935#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1935http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1946#respond


12/27

sophie ioannou georgiou :

Hi Jeremy

Youve desribed CLIL in primary so well!

The only thing I can say is that hopefully people for whom the approach resonates continue to try to implement it well and share theirexperiences with the rest of us. Then these experiences will help others to implement it better and avoid making the same mistakes.

It is easy to criticise some programmes that may not be doing well but when these were starting they were pioneers and had no one to learnfrom but their own experiences and, perhaps, mistakes.

Having started our implementation five years ago, I felt lucky that we could study other programmes and learn from them. This is what itsall about. Its very difficult walking in uncharted territory.

So Im thankful to the brave ones who went ahead, opening the paths for us whereas we can follow and smooth the path and, perhaps, sortout the signposting .

For those who have an interest in EFL, I think there is no reason to worry. My belief is that CLIL will always work in addition to languageclasses and not instead of language classes. Based on my personal experiences I think that is the best way to go.

Thats a very cheerful comment/reply, Sophie

And if something works then it should be celebrated as you have been doing in these comemnts!

As usual, with any approach, it is always possible that the people who have the biggest stake in whats going on (the CLILmachine) will over-promote what is going on, whereas others will try and climb onto the backs of all this forgetting that whateally matters (always) is the buy-in and the training and the support etc!

Your experiences sound different from all of this!

eremy

ReplyAnn on January 30, 2011 at 6:31 pm said:Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for this very interesting post. Have just linked to it on http://www.facebook.com/TeachingEnglish.BritishCouncil because

m sure that readers there will find it thought provoking. Feel free to post links there directly if you have anything youd like toaher with us.

Cheers,

Ann

ReplyJeremy Harmer on January 31, 2011 at 12:19 pm said:Hi Ann,

thanks for this.

Ill try and come round and leave something there!

Jeremy

ReplyEnglish Raven on January 31, 2011 at 8:46 am said:Good issue to address here, Jeremy.

ran a whole institute program based around CLIL (I was calling it CBI and more influenced by the Canadian and US perspectivet the time) in 2001-2003, in Korea, from kindergarten through year 8.

The results were spectacular in terms of student motivation, vocabulary uptake, and fluency, but much less spectacular in terms of

rammar accuracy. This was, in the end, the undoing of the movement in that context in a lot of ways, because the studentsontinued to be tested according to discrete language skills (and grammar in particular) in the school system, where stakes arehorrendously high. Their fluency and bilingual subject knowledge were great things, but it didnt grant any specific rewardswithin the countrys assessment system for English.

o, as with so many other aspects of EFL, a lot of this comes back to testing. Until the tests change to incorporate CLIL, or CLILfinds a way to cater to the tests that exist in certain contexts, it risks being something along the lines of an interesting diversion, butultimately a false promise to learners.
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1950http://jasonrenshaw.typepad.com/jason_renshaws_web_log/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1951#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1951http://www.jeremy-harmer.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1949#respondhttp://www.facebook.com/TeachingEnglish.BritishCouncilhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1949http://www.facebook.com/TeachingEnglish.BritishCouncilhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1945#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1936


13/27

Cheers,

Jason

ReplyJeremy Harmer on January 31, 2011 at 12:23 pm said:Hi Jason,

thanks for bringing things back to reality! It is ALWAYS testing, isnt it! If you want to change a system, change the tests. Thatsthe way it goes, and thats why so much methodological talk disappears down a testing black hole (lovely idea, yourmethodology, but my students have to pass a test).

But you also highlight one of my big questions about content-based instruction: in such an approach which benefits most? Thecontent or the language? Or neither? or both?

Of course grammar is, er, grammar.

Jeremy

Replyorja on January 31, 2011 at 9:32 pm said:

Hi Jeremy,

agree, there are many ways of putting CLIL into practice. In Spain the softer version is being implemented in most schoolsortunately. CLIL does require a different profile of teachers, different resources and a different approach. In my opinion, after 20

ears in TEFL and 7 in CLIL, CLIL makes more sense than TEFL (Teaching English as a Foreign! Language). A FOREIGNanguage? In Spain English is not a foreign language any more. University students have lectures in English. They are starting to

have the possibility of even doing their whole university studies in English. Students in bilingual high schools are getting togetherwith students from other countries to do science, geography or history projects together.in English. Professionals go to more andmore international conferences.where people speak English. Companies need to open new marketsabroadin English. Thenternet has taken over the world and most of its content is.yes, thats right! English is not a foreign language. It is not aanguage to get coffee in London in the summer any more. I have been involved in CLIL the last few years and although I knowhat it is not working perfectly it gives the students the English they need for their studies and their professional careers. It giveshem more academic English. In our CLIL lessons students aged 11-12 are discussing ecosystems, the food chain, the universe, the

human bodyin English. In our school, we focus more on the language than on the content because we are a language school buttill, students have a chance to consolidate their knowledge and to learn new things by doing projects, doing research and having

discussions in English. I think CLIL can be very effective if done properly. But the ideal programme for me is one that combines

CLIL with general English. Our students need academic English but they still need to get coffee in Londonin the summer. Sowhy not bring some content to our English programme? This is what Ive been doing the last few years. To give you somexamples: when we teach food to children aged 6 we still teach I like / dont likeMy favourite fruit is But then we go into foodrom animals and food from plants. Healthy vs unhealthy diets. Food we get proteins from.The same when we teach animals:

we talk about how many legs they have got, whether they are big or small but then we go into vertebrates vs invertebrates oriviparous vs oviparous.

There are advantages and disadvantages in CLIL but I think the balance is positive and it is the only way to go nowadaysuntilhe Chinese take over.

ReplyScott Thornbury on February 3, 2011 at 9:59 am said:While were still in Andalusia (hi, Borja) it might be worth referring to a study reported in Applied Linguistics (July 2010) on

the effect of implementing CLIL on a large scale in southern Spain, as part of the governments Pluralingualism PromotionPlan. CLIL classes in 61 primary and secondary schools were surveyed, in order to answer the question (among others) IsCLIL having any visible effect aside from that observed in L2 learning? One conclusion of the study, based on teacherquestionnaire data, is that CLIL is beneficial to the educational process in general, an opinion echoed by parents and learnersalike (p.433). However, there are no objective data on the attainment results in tests, which does still leave open the questionas to whether subject area objectives and being met. Nevertheless, the article represents serious research, and, as such, I thinkhelps move the argument beyond mere opinion and hearsay.

Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. 2010. The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Keyfindings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31, 391 417.

Reply

jeremyharmer on February 3, 2011 at 10:57 am said:Many thanks for this reference, Scott.

The article is printing out as I type. It will make extremely interesting reading.

More later!

Jeremy
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1962http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1961#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1961http://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1953#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1953http://www.stjames.es/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1952#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1952http://www.jeremy-harmer.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1950#respond


14/27

TEFL101 on February 3, 2011 at 11:05 am said:That research is pretty equivocal. In fact it says very little of substance and seems like a typical case of argument byprestigious jargon and hedging. Im not sure if I should value such non-findings over good old fashioned opinion andreason.

Borja on February 3, 2011 at 11:18 am said:Hi Scott,

Thank you for pointing out this report. I have a copy and I will read it later on.

Fiona (@fionamau) on February 3, 2011 at 11:43 am said:Hi Scott, Borja, Jeremy and everyone

Just a quick comment. My younger son was on the receiving end of the CLIL in primary ed in Andalusia thing, until wemoved this summer. I dont know if it was implemented the same way in all schools, but essentially what he did was repeatin English the class hed done in Spanish a couple of days before. Science, in his case. So if they were doing, say, flowers inSpanish, just as they were finishing that module, theyd do it in English. It reinforced his knowledge of science quite well, asthe effort of hanging words in one language onto word pegs in another seemed to work to actually gel the pegs as well asthe words HOWEVER I was totally unconvinced by the fact that his pals (my son is bilingual) couldnt say much more thanHello how are you fine thank you how are you conversationally, but had vocabulary ranging from stamen and petals tovagina and uretra in perfectly pronounced English. At age 9, theres a limited use for such stuff. Can I have a biscuit,please? is more their regular sort of line.Pros and cons, I guess.

Pingback: First they came language garden

eremyharmer on February 3, 2011 at 9:12 am said:Hi Borja,

have been thinking about your comments for a couple of days..

t is great to hear such a hugely positive view of what is going on. There is nothing more encouraging than hearing someone sayhat things are better and how well ?new ideas and content are shaping lessons.

o my reaction is one of huge relief e.g. soft CLIL in your setting is far from a waste of time.

ut I cant help thinking that CLIL (in the way you describe it) is just another form of content. Please dont misunderstand me; that

s not a criticism. Merely an observation. In other words, what seems to be happening what you seem to be saying is thatdding academic (normally science) content is for your kids is more interesting than stories about Mr Jones dropping his wallet inhe street (or some other typical EFL story). Is that right?

f that IS the case, then my friends original comment people talk about the advantage of CLIL for English teaching, but theynever talk about the advantage for physics still holds.

As for English not being a foreign language in Spain any more? Hmm. Well I agree that the need for (and use of) English forpaniards is changing. But no one has really told the majority of Spanish schoolchildren yet?

ut if CLIL is to work in Spain (or anywhere else) to achieve the kind of results that you foresee, then it has to be delivered well intate education by teachers as skilled in content methodology as they are in the provision of English.

How soon will that take?

Thanks for your great comments.

eremy

ReplyBorja on February 3, 2011 at 11:13 am said:I can see the story of Mr Jones in a coursebook. What can you see in picture 1? Who is he? Where is he? Whats happening inpicture 4? Whats Mr Jones doing in picture 5? Where is his wallet now? Is he happy?

Talking about CLIL is like taking about gazpacho or paella, we all seem to have our own recipe. And its different in every

house or restaurant. The recipe we like best. Or the recipe I can make with the ingredients I have in the fridge. Or the only one Iknow. Or the one Im being told to make. In my setting, I use CLIL to do less of Mr Jones and more content. I do think Mr Joneshas a role in the English class the same way that songs, arts and crafts, role plays, videos have their role.obviously dependingon the age of the students. I could not teach another whole year of Head, shoulders , knees and toes Whats the weatherlike today? (looking out the window) Whats Ana wearing today? (pointing to Ana). Oh! Lets make it morefun.Everybody, close your eyes. Juan, Whats Isabel wearing? Can you remember?. No, dont open your eyes Thatsteaching primary in lots of classrooms. Secondary becomes more like What did you do yesterday? Tell me about your bestholidays (yes, I know, again). With adults it might become more interesting.if we listen to the students and use their
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1964http://www.stjames.es/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1959#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1959http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://languagegarden.wordpress.com/2011/02/01/first-they-came/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1966http://bloodsweatgazpacho.blogspot.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1965http://www.stjames.es/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1963http://englishskills1111.wordpress.com/


15/27

interests, experiences, needs and knowledge in class. All this is fine butI believe students need more than that kind ofEnglish. They also need to be able to do research on the Internet where the language will not be graded like in general Englishcoursebooks, they need to write reports at university, follow lectures given by foreign professorsall in English. IntroducingCLIL in Primary and continuing throughout secondary gives the students a new dimension, especially if technology like theInternet, blogs, videos etc are also used in the CLIL class.I think the great advantages of introducing some CLIL is that English becomes more meaningful, it takes different shapes andhas new faces. You can still do a guessing activity or describe what people are wearing but then you move into something morechallenging cognitively.and you can touch different subject matters.So answering your question, yes, in my setting we are using CLIL to bring more interesting, relevant and challenging contentto the class. Content that makes people think. And it does when you ask 7 year olds if crocodiles lay eggs or have babies, forexample. Great debate! CLIL also brings language that students wouldnt probably learn before FCE: lay eggs, breathe through

gills, scales, carnivores and this makes them hopefully more competent in English.This is our recipe and I know that its probably different from any other programme somewhere else.I couldnt agree more when you say that then it has to be delivered well in state education by teachers as skilled in contentmethodology as they are in the provision of English. I believe CLIL is effective if done properly, the same way that thecommunicative approach is effective if the necessary requirements are met. To do CLIL right is very challenging. State schoolsin Spain are making an effort and it is getting better slowly but it will take a long time to succeed.

Replyjeremyharmer on February 3, 2011 at 4:33 pm said:CLIL is gazpacho!! I love that.

I agree 100% with the idea that some CLIL content is more interesting (crocodile eggs) than some of the oldstuff and onthat basis we should celebrate content-based teaching.

I dont mean to belittle the efforts of Spanish education authorities, and yes, in time who knows how things will change.Nicky thinks we will have forgotten CLIL. Im not so sure.

I am sure Borja that as you say students need more than one kind of English.

Jeremy

English Raven on February 3, 2011 at 9:37 am said:totally see where youre coming from here, Jeremy, (I think!) and it is a really challenging question. I think there is a definite see-aw sensation with CLIL:

. Is what we are doing at this point really about learning new content and subject-related skills (and if so, arent we eroding theffectiveness of this by doing it all in a second language which the learners havent mastered?)?

. Is what we are doing now more about developing better second language skills, with the content being the background musicand if so, how does/should subject content matter compared to any other content we might use)?

n my own time with a CLIL program, we stumbled onto some discoveries on account of featuring US/UK grade-level subjectontent alongside the learners own school system subject content (in terms of topics and learning goals).

ecause we were using two sources of content for the same subjects, but from different countries and cultures, two patternsmerged:

A. The learners already knew most of the content, but got to review it and extend it in the second language using the US/UK

ontent (this was pronounced for maths and science, where the Asian system was often 1-2 years ahead of the US/UK content). Inhis case, language learning took precedence and the content/subject was somewhat secondary.

. The learners hadnt been exposed to the new subject content in their L1, or only partially so (arts and humanities in particularhere). In this case explicit language learning (beyond lexis) took a back seat to learning about the new subject matter.

rom there we learned to blend things more so that all subjects got an equal mix of new content to learn (less explicit languagetudy) and content to review/extend (more explicit language study).

We werent experts in this field (of CLIL) by any means, but when we got to a stage where our supplementary outside schoolystem began to result in good language development *as well as* better results for students in their mainstream subjects studiest school, we thought we might be on to something.

What do you think? Were we?

J

Replyjeremyharmer on February 3, 2011 at 4:40 pm said:Hi Jason,
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1970http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1960#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1960http://jasonrenshaw.typepad.com/jason_renshaws_web_log/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1969http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1964#respond


16/27

I cant really tell. It SOUNDS like you were on to something!!

But why is CLIL always focused only on maths and science. What about the humanities? Does it mean that reaching kids howto received and understand language, poetry, art etc is not part of all this (and yes, language IS different of course)?

Did the kids MIND going back to the same content? You may just be saying that revision works?!!

The situation you describe does seem to be slightly unique (is that possible) in that students had already experienced thecontent (most of them).

Borja likes CLIL because kids (and CLIL is all about primary, in particular?)prefer CLIL-type content. But what about yourstudents. Was the content still fulfilling and engaging 2nd time round?

Language development measured how? Thats a real question!!

Jeremy

ReplyBorja on February 3, 2011 at 5:16 pm said:I dont think CLIL is all about primary. I do think its better to start doing CLIL with primary students and continue all theway up. Its not fair on the students to study economics in English at university or when they do a Masters Degree whentheyve never done any CLIL or academic English beforeWe are developing CLIL programmes for juniors and their response is very positive. Weve just done a survey among themand almost all of them said that they liked the combination of studying English (TEFL) and CLIL.

Regarding subject matters, the ideal CLIL programme would be one which offered a wide variety of subjects. But I thinkthat because its difficult to have teachers who are competent in both the subject and L2 its easier to focus on maybe 1, 2 or3 subjects.

jeremyharmer on February 14, 2011 at 9:14 am said:Hi Borja,

sorry I have only just come back to this.

I agree entirely. If you ARE going to do something about CLIL then starting early is the only way, really!

Jeremy

imon Greenall on February 3, 2011 at 2:16 pm said:This post is a very useful summary of some concerns Ive had about CLIL, thank you. Here are some further thoughts David Marsh in IATEFL Cardiff was trying to be witty in a debate, but taken out of context, it comes over as rather arrogant. Idont think he intended this, although I think he may have underestmated the amount of scepticism about CLIL in the hall.My (as yet unpublished) friend and colleague Anna Guazzi Valeria, who is active in CLIL in northern Italy, says it allows great

pportunities for collaborative teaching, although it tends to revert to a fairly teacher-centred methodology.To my knowledge, there is at present no comprehensive curriculum of the various subjects which also takes into consideration theanguage needed to be taught. This creates two problems. For ELT textbooks, which include an element of CLIL, its easy for thislement to be disregarded as irrelevant. For specific CLIL materials, there is a risk of a mismatch between high frequency languagetructures, low frequency lexis, and the metalanguage needed to understand the rubric. Until we get a T-level proto-curriculum ofontent and language syllabuses, its hard to supply relevant or well written material, and ironically CLIL will remain a

methodology, a way of teaching, with only arbitrary content and without systematic language knowledge and skills.ut Id love to do the protocurriculum one day!

Replyjeremyharmer on February 3, 2011 at 4:44 pm said:Hi Simon,

thank you for your very informed comments.

I think theres a real danger that when you focus on content you forget about methodology. Science and maths teaching atprimary cant all be teacher centred (well it shouldnt be, presumably), yet unless there is definite CLIL methodology, that mayhappen.

And yes, the important thing is to decide exactly WHAT language to teach and I am not currently aware that such lists exist.

I wonder what will happen!

Jeremy

ReplyLorraine Davies on February 4, 2011 at 7:18 pm said:
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1974http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1971#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1971http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1967#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1967http://[email protected]/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1988http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1972http://www.stjames.es/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1970#respond


17/27

Hello to all!

love teaching CLIL and I read up on the subject as much as possible to try to deliver lessons which are creative and motivatingor my young learners. I dont have a problem with planning my lessons as I have found a wealth of material from published CLIL

materials which I use alongside key stage 1 resources and reinforce the content matter with interactive games from the web.

or me CLIL works like a dream and the learning rate of the pupils is clearly accelerated. I feel myself to be in a privileged positions I have started this school year with first year primary pupils and am therefore able to witness the successes and also the issuesf the CLIL experiment from the beginning.

The one frustrasting and most challenging issue at my school is the resistance and lack of knowledge of CLIL from the teachingtaff. For them CLIL only means: more work after school hours, pressure to understand language teaching and methodology

argon related to CLIL, and of course their own anxieties about the language itself brings a negative aspect.

ortunately the recent vote just about went in favour for the project to be introduced for the next year 1 group, but a significantnumber voted against it primarily because they believe that sufficient evidence has not been produced to persuade them that itworks and does not affect the learning progress in the L1. They would prefer the project at the school to freeze for the time being,llowing the current CLIL groups to get to the final year and then see what they think of it all. An absurd proposal in my mind!

As I believe in the project so much I intend to start collecting data from teachers, pupils and parents from questionnaires to gatherdata on the positives and negatives of CLIL which I hope will then inspire everyone involved to help the project become more thann experiment, a phase, a trend, into a sustainable ongoing methodology. Its a start anyway!

Thank you!

Lorraine

Replyjeremyharmer on March 7, 2011 at 5:48 pm said:Hello Lorain,

I am so sorry i didnt reply to these comments before.

I am really thrilled to read of your enthusiasm. With that behind you, anything is possible.

I like that you are collecting material, evidence etc.

What really interests me is how you persuade people who are resistant (the staff that you talk about). How do you make themsee the benefits for them of using this approach? Because if they see that theyll go for it straight away, i think.

Jeremy

Replyaeed Mubarak on February 5, 2011 at 11:05 pm said:

Hello,t depends on the governments priority and their detrmination to defend their local language .Also the academic standard of theocal language .n Syria ,for instant,they have high academic standard in Arabic .So there is no need for English .But if the academic standard inhe local language is low,then the obvious option is English .

Replyjeremyharmer on March 7, 2011 at 5:50 pm said:Hello Saeed,

I am so sorry that I didnt reply before to your comments.

I think I understand your point, but Syrians need English too, perhaps? To deal with the subject specific English they mayencounter outside school.

Nevertheless, you identify one of my concerns (and that of the Malaysian government, for example). Does English actually getin the way of content delivery in some cases? Is it necessary?

Jeremy

ReplyLeahn on February 8, 2011 at 9:23 pm said:Hi Jeremy,
http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1984http://www.earlyefl.blogspot.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=2026#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-2026http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1976#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-1976http://educationland.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=2025#respondhttp://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/#comment-2025http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/http://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/to-teach-english-is-human-to-teach-clil-is-divine/?replytocom=1974#respond


18/27

ve been following this discussion for a while and I must say its been very interesting. Im a language assistant in a CLILrogramme in Spain. I work in a primary and secondary school. The other day in a co-ordination meeting I asked a maths teacher

f he thought that CLIL was only beneficial for English and what he said was very interesting. Im sure he wont mind I share itwith you!

asked him if he thought that teaching maths in English was only beneficial to English . He said that he thought it improved theeaching learning process because teaching his subject in a foreign language(English) meant that he had to pay much morettention to the lesson planning process. He said that it made him much more conscious of the cognitive steps involved and made

him think much more carefully about how to scaffold his students learning.

dont know about the value of CLIL or whether it has a future. I dont think its divine I find it all very new and confusing buthis answer started me thinking again!

Leahn

Replyjeremyharmer on March 7, 2011 at 5:54 pm said:Hello Leahn,

I feel so so bad for not having replied before to your comments.

Thank you very much indeed for sharing the maths teachers thoughts. I like the idea of CLIL impacting on the actual teachingin such a satisfactory way. I find the idea that teaching CLIL means thinking much more about scaffolding to be very exciting.

But what about general English teaching? Shouldnt we think in the same way about that?

Or a different question wouldnt you want to think like that about teaching maths in the L1 too?

Could it be that the teacher is just being challenged by the newness of it all?

No idea if I am right, but your comments got me thinking

Jeremy

ReplyKnightstower on February 13, 2011 at 10:58 am said:Good blog. I am subscribing to it.

am an English teacher and am presently working at a Spanish secondary school with a bilingual section in the E.S.O. (11-16ear olds, Compulsory Secondary Education).

The teachers who supposedly teach in English (Physical Education, Technology, Music) do not speak English well enough to holdconversation, let alone use routine classroom language. Content teaching?? Of course there is, in Spanish. In order to make it

eem like instruction is in English they give the students notes with technical vocabulary that the students memorize for themultiple choice tests they take. Some of these teachers are highly motivated and try very hard. Others seem to be going throughmotions that they do not understand. These teachers have not been trained in CLIL methodology and their only resources arehe Lectores (untrained native English speakers who come to Spain to learn Spanish)and the Internet.

We (the teachers in the English Dpt.) were supposed to have weekly planning meetings but since this was not a priority when thechedules were done no meetings are taking place.

The programacion or curriculum used by the English teachers is based on grammatical content presented in the commercialmethod (textbook) we use, and yes, we test for discrete grammatical skills. We use the same textbook for the bilingual sections

nd the other sections.The creation of bilingual sections, in my experience, has resulted in veiled streaming of students. Thus, we have the moremotivated students in the bilingual sections and other students in the regular sections.

At this moment in time I would like to confirm that the bilingual section of my school is a fraud. This is a top-down initiative ofhe various Spanish Ministries of Education and like other such initiatives, it is neither well understood or adequately supportedy the individual school communities it impacts.

Replyjeremyharmer on February 14, 2011 at 9:20 am said:I find your account very compelling and it exactly mirrors the concerns that many people share about the bandwagonnature of CLIL. My problem is that all the CLIL researchers claim huge success for CLIL classes and students. But at the otherend of the scale there is badly implemented CLIL lip-service solutions (like the one you describe). It breaks my heart really

because just learning a few English words not only isnt CLIL, but is unlikely to make kids feel enthusiastic about English.So if all these research papers say CLIL

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	martinscribd7
View:	234 times
Download:	0 times

To teach English is human, to teach CLIL is divine? | Jeremy Harmer.pdf

Documents