LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical background of Content and Language Integrated Learning
In 1995, the European Commission in their famous White Book on Education declared that all European citizens should be made competent in at least three European languages (including their mother tongue), educationalists, teachers and administrators have been looking for appropriate ways and means to reach this highly ambitious goal One of the most interesting proposals made is called
“teaching content subject through a foreign language” or “content and language integrated learning” (CLIL) CLIL is an umbrella term adopted by the European Network of Administrators, Researchers and Practitioners in the mid-1990s The term CLIL was coined by David Marsh, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland in 1994 who first described a methodological approach in which a foreign language tuition is integrated within subject teaching as follows: “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” Another definition is “Within CLIL, language is used as a medium for learning content, and the content is used in turn as a resource for learning languages” (European Commission, 2005, p.2) Other terms used are
“bilingual content teaching”, “bilingual subject teaching”, “content-based language teaching” and “English as medium of instruction” It encompasses any activity in which a foreign language is used as a tool in the learning of a non-language subject in which both language and subject have a joint role (Marsh, 2002, p.58) A more precise definition is given by Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010, p.1): “Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is a dual – focused educational approach in which an additional language is used for learning and teaching of both content and language That is, in the teaching and learning process, there is a focus not only on content, and not only on language Each is interwoven, even if the emphasis is greater on one or the other at a given time.” The key word in the acronym is perhaps
“integrated” and the goal of the CLIL approach is that students simultaneously learn a foreign language without neglecting the content in a content lesson Do Coyle emphasizes that “Integration is a powerful pedagogic tool which aims to ‘safeguard’ the subject being taught whilst promoting language as a medium for learning as well as an objective of the learning process itself” (2002,p.27) According to Eurydice (2006), CLIL presents “a special approach to teaching in that the non- language subject is not taught in a foreign language, but with and through a foreign language” Thus, in the CLIL classroom, the focus is not solely on promoting the learners’ progress in the FL/L2, but on developing a context which encourages making use of it and in this way, further developing it along with the non-linguistic content (Coonan, 2007; Pavón Vázquez, 2010)
The “dual-focused” objective implies that learning subject content and improving language competences happen simultaneously, making CLIL neither an approach that belongs to language learning nor one that belongs to subject teaching
It is unique approach which develops when the two teaching methodologies are merged (Ioannou-Georgiou and Pavlou, 2010, p.5) That is, students learn both another subject such as physics through the medium of a foreign language and learning a foreign language by studying a content-based subject This distinguishes CLIL from the other previous approaches in language teaching methodology in which foreign languages are used to teach and learn content subjects CLIL aims to create an improvement in both the foreign language and the non-language area competence, general categories being motivational and cognitive impact of the positive attitudes triggered by using CLIL, and the linguistic and methodological utilisation of the non-language content material It is believed that content, e.g mathematics, and a foreign language, e.g English, can be better developed through gradual interplay (25 – 100 % of the content is taught in a foreign language)
It is important to notice that “content” is the first word in CLIL This is because curricular content lead to language learning Content is defined as the information that the learner can use to construct their knowledge and skills, values, attitudes, and interests that the learner can develop in order to use their knowledge
In other words, we can also think of content as knowledge and/or skills that learners would need to acquire even if they were not also learning the CLIL language This different notion of content which is the most typical feature of the approach is of great interest in the current discussion on improving foreign language competence
First, the approach can be adapted to all levels of language teaching: primary, secondary and tertiary, for all curricula include academic content: primary curricula on a very basic level (social sciences, natural sciences, arts), secondary curricula more specifically in content subjects (history, geography, mathematics), and tertiary curricula are characterised by the fact that the content of the students’ disciplines (Information Technology, Physics, Engineering, Sociology, Arts, Design) can at least partially be introduced into their language studies And second, integrated content and language teaching saves time within the overall curriculum If content and language are learnt and taught in integration; length of study time both for language and content subject can thus be reduced considerably
It is interesting to note that it is mainly tertiary education which have opted for teaching content through a foreign language “Why can CLIL be advantageous in tertiary professionally-oriented education and what are the broad educational advantages?” This question is asked by Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg (2001, p.17) in their book Integrating Competencies for Working Life and their answer is a list of five key reasons for introducing CLIL in an academic or professional curriculum
According to them these reasons involve the development of:
4 Quality of learning and teaching in the content field
The building of an approach needs the support of a firm theoretical and practical framework in which students' needs, the society's future expectation, the consistency of the studying process and the issue of language proficiency are met
Being based on an integrated interdisciplinary approach, CLIL differs from all other approaches to language teaching and learning Many researchers highlight the fact that if it is properly implemented, it not only contributes to improving students’ language skills and subject knowledge, but also promoted multiculturalism, intercultural knowledge and understanding Fostering the development of diverse learning strategies and the application of innovative teaching methods, content related instruction facilitates students’ cognitive development and learning in general as well In order to provide high-level education for their students and increase their international rating in the educational community, many non-English speaking universities are seeking ways to introduce CLIL in their study programs
In Asian countries, people can also find an accelerating trend towards English – medium instruction in higher education Interestingly, about 20 years ago, Graddol
(1997, p 45) had already indicated that “one of the most significant educational trends world-wide is the teaching of a growing number of courses in universities through the medium of English”
The definition of CLIL has received much attention in the literature This term has been defined in a variety of ways Although these definitions may vary from this one to another one, they all come to a conclusion that a foreign language in CLIL is used as a “tool” or “vehicle”, not as an entity in itself in learning of non- language subject in which both language and subject have a joint role In this study, the researcher only presents the definition of Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010, p.1) and that viewpoint will go through this study This definition is neither too restrictive nor too broad in terms of its processes and overall aim Therefore, it provides the solid foundation needed to begin developing an understanding of CLIL approach
1.2 Core features of CLIL approach
“CLIL induces the learner to be more cognitively active during the learning process” (Van de Craen, P, Mondt, K, Alain, L and Gao, Y (2008) Such a view point is understandable because:
- Students communicate more than the teacher
- Students help set content, language and learning skills outcomes
- Students evaluate progress in achieving learning outcomes
- Favoring peer co-operative work
- Negotiating the meaning of language and content with the students
Accordingly, students take a self-motivated part in their learning Mehisto, Frigols and Marsh (2008) proposed six key features of CLIL, including:
Language learning and content learning that support each other
Authenticity in which teachers use current media to bring global issues into the classroom
Active learning in which students exchange views among themselves
Development of students’ own knowledge, skills, attitudes, interests and experience
Challenges toward students to develop themselves as scholars who have content and language knowledge
The process of teaching and learning is therefore a scaffolding process in the sense that it builds on a student’s existing knowledge, skills, attitudes, interests and experience In CLIL classes, knowledge, when taught in a foreign language, is repackaged in user-friendly ways and learners are given chance to work in their different learning styles The approach thus fosters creative and critical thinking
From the researcher’s perspective, six key features of CLIL of Mehisto, Frigols and Marsh (2008) are relatively simple but comprehensive, as it covers sufficient features of CLIL in nature
1.3 Lesson planning tools 1.3.1 The 4Cs Framework for CLIL Broadly speaking, the aims of CLIL are to improve both the learners’ knowledge and skills in a subject, and their language skills which is taught through the subject In CLIL, the two elements are interwoven and receive equal importance, although the emphasis may vary from one to another Language is used as the medium for learning subject content, and subject content is used as a resource for learning the language Some conceptual frameworks have been given that summarise the essential characteristics of good CLIL practice Perhaps the most well-known one is Coyle’s four Cs framework of key principles (Figure 1) Do Coyle’s ‘four Cs’ offer a sound theoretical and methodological foundation for planning CLIL lessons and constructing materials because of its integrative nature
Previous studies relevant to the study
so important in their daily life as well as for their future career Nevertheless, they argue that learning science and mathematics using English as medium of instruction is proven to be too demanding and difficult This is all due to the lack of student ability in understanding the content and also the language complexity used during the instructional process This study also shows that learning science in English is far more difficult than learning Mathematics In conclusion, teacher is urged to be wiser in dealing with students’ learning difficulties
Moreover, Aguilar and Rodriguez (2012) portrayed the lecturer and student perceptions on content and language integrated learning at a Spanish university The finding tells that lecturers are interested in implementing CLIL in their classes since they could practice and improve their spoken English They also feel that they are still able to deliver the materials fully though they use English as the medium of instruction Interestingly, they seem reluctant to receive any methodological training on how to teach CLIL Meanwhile, students also feel the same positive feeling when they join the CLIL courses Surprisingly, they mention that their lecturer’s English proficiency is insufficient and this indeed influences the quality of instructional process A study on CLIL teacher development: challenges and experiences carried out by Dario Banegas (2012) This article, firstly, outlines some of its challenges and drawback particularly in reference to teachers and teacher development Secondly, it describes pre- and in-service CLIL teacher development opportunities partly based on personal experiences at the University of Warwick as well as other personal experiences of workshops in Argentina Finally, the article suggests possible ways of incorporating a CLIL understanding in Argentina as an example of an EFL context
Despite the growing interest in CLIL, only a modest amount of research in Viet Nam relevant to the learning of subject through an additional language can be found in the literature Most of the studies have attempted to examine English language proficiency of the under-graduate students or difficulties that teachers are facing when implementing CLIL approach At primary education level, Phuc (2013) examined the real context of using the text book “Practice Maths 1”, the difficulties that teachers are facing when teaching Maths in English to first graders at Minh Khai 1 Primary School The problems are related to teacher’s competence, teaching and learning facilities, students’ mixed levels of proficiency in English, and students’ motivation in learning The study also suggest five solutions to overcome those difficulties including: modifying the syllabus of teaching Maths through English in Minh Khai Primary School, improving teaching and learning facilities, regrouping students in smaller classes according to levels of proficiency in English, professional development courses and workshops for teachers and adaptation of the textbook At tertiary education level, there is a distinction between English and non-English major students Being one of the first to investigate first-year students in the
Strategic Mission Project of Viet Nam National University, the study “Students Perception on factors affecting English learning motivation of students in Strategic Mission Project” (Giang, 2011) investigated the students’ motivation to learn English and factors that alter it Another study made by Van (2006) is aimed at searching out solutions to improving the English language proficiency for under- graduate students at the College of Technology (COT) – Vietnam National University, Ha Noi
Successful CLIL depends on a variety of factors Lack or insufficient development of any of them may impede wider CLIL implementation in the universities The studies reported above focuses on and attempts to tackle some of the problems associated with the introduction of CLIL that converge at the point of methodology criteria and language competences of students In addition to a shortage of research related to CLIL at tertiary level, research into teachers’ perceptions in the field of bilingual education is similarly underrepresented This can be considered as one of their limitations because foremost, teachers play a crucial role in implementing CLIL at a university Put together, those similarities have created a gap for the researcher to conduct a research with the population of the sophomores of ISP at VNU-UET with an attempt to examine teacher’s application to teach the content subject in English in general.
METHODOLOGY
The setting of the study
Since 2008, VNU has been implementing Strategic Mission Project which focuses on developing high-quality human resources of international standard in the context of globalization The aim of the Project is training under-graduate students in 16 majors and 23 specialties The program was designed based on The VNU’s regulations about building training programs: Provisions on the construction and development, specialized international standard programs (Issued together with Decision No 3599/QD-DHQGHN dated December 5, 2011 of Director of VNU)
Curriculum: implemented for the majors which VNU is ranked in the top
200 Asian universities and can be credit - conversed conveniently with other global universities
Language: Bilingual language: English and Vietnamese
Lecturer: 100% non-native and native English speaking teachers have a doctorate degree in their majors They have rich experience of teaching and have international research publications
Training procedure: 1+3 Program comprises of one year for target language and some general subjects followed by three years for studying their subjects of specialized majors at their university
Program Outcome Standard: Excellent students graduating from equivalent to 6.0 IELTS They are highly qualified graduates which are demonstrated through learning and research outcomes
SMP first-year students are placed into different classes basing on their English proficiency level Over the course of one year at VNU - ULIS, they one by one go through five modules within their English program (from English level A1 to English level C1) The target set for them is get at least 5.5 IELTS in order to move on to the second year of study at SMP During the first year, they studied mostly English and therefore it should be expected that learning English takes most of their time and is their primary concern They study English in order to use it in their studies in the subsequent years, in which courses of their major in English
CLIL streams tend to attract the most ambitious students who are likely to succeed in mastering the curricular requirements both in Vietnam and English SMP is not applied in the entire system of VNU, but is restricted to selected classes of some member universities only
The study is conducted at VNU-UET, a member university under Viet Nam National University With financial support from the “VNU Project for building and developing training programs to international standards”– a strategic mission of the VNU– UET offers several honors and international-standard programs to selected students at Bachelor Program in Electronics and Telecommunications Technology and Computer Science A significant part of the program is that content subjects are given in English language At the Program of Electronics and Telecommunication, there are 12 subjects taught in English and at the Program of Computer Science, 23 subjects are taught in English 2012 marked the milestone when the first intake of the international standard students graduates Students in these special programs are required to perform additional tasks within a course and to undertake more advanced courses not required by the standard programs These programs are designed to provide students with additional skills such as project implementation, and effective English communication Some courses are also taught by professors from well-known overseas partner universities.
Participants
In this study, the quanlitative approach included the use of questionnaires for teachers and students The purpose of the questionnaires was to obtain information on the reality of the teaching and learning of applying CLIL approach at VNU-UET and factors affecting the quality of the teaching and learning
2.2.1 Teachers The sample of the study consisted of 12 highly experienced content teachers
All of them are native speakers of Vietnamese, 6 belong to the Faculty of Electronics and Telecommunications, 6 belong to Computer Science All of the participating lecturers, non-native speakers of English, hold at least a doctorate degree in their majors They have implemented CLIL approach in their teaching and learning process for about 6 years since the implementation of SMP in 2008 They have no direct relation with language teaching pedagogically Although they are subject specialists and researchers in their professional domain; language instruction and feedback have been provided throughout the lessons where necessary
A total of 100 CLIL undergraduate students ranging from 18-22 years of age were selected at random to participate in the research questionnaire: 72 males and
28 females All the respondents were organized around content-specific areas which given in English They included 56 students from the Faculty of Electronics and Telecommunications, 44 from the Computer Science All participants agreed to take part in the study and fill in the questionnaire The students of aforementioned departments have to attend five modules of Basic English courses, named as preparatory classes to get at least 5.5 IELTS in order to move on to the second year of SMP.
Data collection instrument
or negative students’ perception is towards CLIL By designing and delivering a questionnaire, a large amount of information can be gathered from a great number of participants in a short time
This questionnaire was conducted at the end of the second semester of the second year and the closed and opened-ended questions was intended to explore teachers’ and students’ perceptions toward the use of EMI in their classes, one year after teaching and studying their specialized subjects The items in the questionnaire were developed based on Likert scales and some were given to elicit deeper responses from the teachers and students
2.3.1 The questionnaires for the students The questionnaire consists of 8 questions and was designed to get information concerning:
1 Students’ level of English proficiency (Question 1 & 2)
2 Students’ assessments towards teacher’s instruction and their level of attainment (Question 3)
3 Students’ activities implemented in English (Question 4)
4 Students’ opinions towards language used in the EMI classroom (Question 5)
5 Students’ assessments on advantages of studying content subjects in English
6 Students’ assessments on challenges when studying content in a language other than their native language (Question 7)
7 Students’ recommendations regarding effective EMI practice (Question 8) 2.3.2 The questionnaires for the teachers
The questionnaire designed for the teachers consisting of 10 questions which aim at finding out:
1 Teachers’ assessments towards their students’ commands of English (Question 1)
2 Teachers’ activities implemented in English (Question 2)
3 Teachers’ opinions towards language used in the EMI classroom (Question 3,4,5)
4 Teachers’ assessments on advantages of teaching content subjects in English
5 Teachers’ assessments on challenges when teaching content in a language other than their native language (Question 7)
6 Teachers’ kinds of CLIL training (Question 8)
7 Teachers’ recommendations to improve the quality of teaching and learning in the EMI class (Question 9&10)
Data analysis
The participants were then asked to complete the questionnaire seriously within thirty minutes in their classroom The next step was to synthesize the data obtained from the questionnaires and classified them to answer the research questions On the other hand, responses from closed-ended questions were calculated, transferred into numerial form and summarized into graphs Descriptive statistics were employed to display the findings from the survey On the other hand, responses from open-ended questions were transcribed and categorized by key words of the statements and used to supplement research questions On the basis of the data collected from the questionnaires diagrams were designed in order to present the answers clearly.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Data analysis
perspectives on the advantages and disadvantages of studying subjects in a foreign language
3.1.1.1 The students’ English competence Students’ view
Chart 1: Students’ level of English proficiency
According to the illustration of question 1 in chart 1, it can be clearly seen that most students, which account for 65% get from 5.5 to 6.0 IELTS ETS This score grants a permit for them to attend the Strategic Mission Program 30 of them who make up 30% in total say that they haven’t got 5.5 IELTS Therefore, they have to attend another examination in 4-year curriculum to get the certificate although they can attend the SMP course Only 5% say that they score more than 6.5 points for IELTS Certificate No students get other certificate of English
Chart 2: English skill students want to improve
Question 2 (chart 2) is designed with the aim of examine English skill students want to improve in their future English learning They are not very content with and want to improve the proficiency level of their English Listening was the skill that the greatest number of the students wanted to improve, followed closely by speaking, then writing, and more distantly by reading It appears that these students tend to be more confident in their receptive skills (reading and writing); in contrast, more than 66% of the students considered their proficiency in the productive skills (listening and speaking) to be poor, need improving
Chart 3: Teachers’ assessments towards their students’ commands of English
Corresponding to the students’ concern in English language learning, it can be clearly seen that most teachers, which account for 85% state that their students have stronger written communication skills, while the rest portion of 15% say that students are better at listening and speaking skills The result is nearly similar to students’ self-evaluation toward their levels of English proficiency Now classes seem to be more communicative, with a bigger emphasis on oral communication skills Listening and speaking is undoubtedly the most difficult skills which students need to practice and wish to improve The basic reason may be the methodology they experienced when they were students of English, which was mainly based on reading, writing and grammar
3.1.1.2 Teachers’ instruction and students’ level of attainment in the EMI classroom
Teachers can deliver the course in English well 0% 20% 10% 50% 20%
2 Teachers can communicate in English well 0% 50% 0% 30% 20%
3 I do understand the EMI lectures delivered 10% 40% 10% 30% 10%
I can participate in any classroom activities using English
Teachers’ English, although good, may not be specialized enough
Teachers often read from slides/lecture notes, which makes the class boring
7 Teachers’ preparation for the lesson is not really sufficient
8 Teachers do not use audio- visual aids much 10% 60% 0% 20% 10%
Table 2: Teachers’ opinions towards their instruction and their students’ level of attainment
The table above shows that in general the majority of the students thought that their teachers had sufficient competence to teach EMI Their teachers were able to deliver the course and communicate in English well However, most of students notice that many teachers do not have proper CLIL training such as: teacher monologue, insufficient preparation, lack of teaching aids and most importantly, inappropriate levels of linguistic competence in the foreign language
Besides, when English language has been used as a medium of instruction in schools, the proficiency of English is a must for respondent to understand their teachers’ instruction Unfortunately, the findings showed that students’ competence in English is at low level Many students complained that the language level used for the course material was inappropriate with their current language level
Therefore, many of them claimed that they did not understand the material delivered by the teachers and hard to participate in any classroom activities using English and so forth related to their problems in understanding content subjects in English
3.1.1.3 The usage of English in the EMI class Students’ view
The actual language practices through language use in the class as can be seen in charts below They give clues about impact of CLIL on the language proficiency development of learners
Chart 4: Students’ CLIL Classroom activities in English
The purpose of Question 4 is to find out students’ language use in the EMI classroom Most students which account for 90% and 75% use English for their oral presentation and note taking respectively 50 of them who make up 50% in total say that language use for most assessment oral tests is English 35 students chose to use English to ask and answer questions Only the rest 30 students claim that English is used in examination papers The findings revealed that majority of the respondents are not willing to take part in many learning activities with their teachers and fellow friends if they are not compulsory activities There are among several reasons why they could not improve their English language
Chart 5: Students’ opinions towards language used in the EMI classroom
Amazingly, 65% of students which account for the biggest proportion opted to have both English and Vietnamese as the medium of instruction in their classes
22% of the respondents also wrote “English” as the item that they don’t like in their current classes because they thought their English is not good enough The choice of Vietnamese as a medium of instruction in learning subjects probably due to their own everyday language that make them easier to understand subject knowledge better Only 13% in total prefer English as the most interesting point in their current classes It implied that though the students were familiar with English, the native language was still preferable In general, all students preferred to learn their subjects in Vietnamese as they agreed to the statement that learning in their native language would be easier and more likely to be understood.
Chart 6: Teachers’ CLIL Classroom activities in English
It appears obvious that the overwhelming majority of activities and materials given by lecturers were predominantly English 100% teachers used English
PowerPoint presentation as their tool of teaching The next option is that teachers chose to deliver lecturers and to ask and answer questions in English which account for 80% 6 teachers, which make up 50% in total, designed assessment oral tests in classroom in English and the rest (12%) claims that he makes use of students’ level of English proficiency to make examination papers From the chart, we can come to the conclusion that most of the teachers attempted to use English only policy in CLIL classroom
Chart 7: Teachers’ perspective on code-switching to Vietnamese
The chart above indicates teachers’ opinions towards language used in the EMI classroom As the results obtained, it can be said that that majority of teachers agree to use both English and Vietnamese during classroom talk They would code switch when necessary in order to facilitate their students’ understanding of the difficult concepts Because, there is a reality the teachers find out that students don’t know to translate the English specialized terms into Vietnamese However, other 24% of teachers believe that speaking English was compulsory throughout the class meetings, especially to explain key terms
It was maintained that students had trouble following the materials because of the language difficulties To overcome this problem, they use Vietnamese to explain difficult but important concepts (63%) 24% in total still tried simpler sentences and more familiar vocabulary in English to make their students understand specialized items Another strategy was to make use of scaffolding techniques such as pictures and/or demonstrations to explain the meaning of new words (40%) and to write the technical terms and formulas on the blackboards or slides (55%)
Chart 8: Teachers’ ways to help students understand key terms
When asked about the vocabulary, grammatical functions and pronunciation focused when teaching a specific lesson, the majority of teachers identified that the emphasis on vocabulary (80%), following grammar (60%) and pronunciation (50%) When analyzing the data above, it can be noticed that it is suitable with the features of CLIL approach in which language is approached lexically rather than grammatically
3.1.1.4 Teachers’ and students’ standpoints of the advantages of CLIL approach
The students’ responses below demonstrate their perceived advantages of CLIL as they have experienced it during the course
1 increases students’ motivation to learn
2 improves students’ English language proficiency 73% 10% 17%
3 prepares for students’ future studies and/or working life 95% 5% 0
4 gives teachers and students more access to up-to-date materials on the subjects 87% 3% 10%
5 helps teachers’ to diversify methods and forms of classroom teaching and learning 77% 10% 13%
Table 3: Students’ Perceived Advantages of CLIL
In the case of advantages, most of them think about future perspectives that CLIL may provide them with They perceive studying content subjects in English as an advantage because they assume CLIL could foster their proficiency in English
Almost all students consider CLIL instruction advantageous as a means of study and even working abroad Knowing English motivates learners because it links them to the outer world, they can reach a wider range of up-to-date resources published in English The student viewpoints clearly indicate that they obviously find themselves better situated with CLIL Moreover, basing on the large portions of selection of students’ choices, most of them suggested that this approach is beneficial for teachers to diversify methods and forms of classroom teaching and learning
Interestingly, the results in teachers’ opinions of benefits of implementing CLIL approach were relatively in the same with students’ viewpoints
3.1.1.5 Teachers’ and students’ standpoints of the disadvantages of CLIL approach
In addition to the advantages, some challenges and disadvantages perceived by the students are listed below: (see Table 4)
1 reduces students’ understanding of content knowledge 85% 5% 10%
2 makes students learn English more difficult as there are numerous terminology/unknown vocabulary items
3 means more than double the normal work load 90% 0 10%
4 discourages discussion and interaction between teacher and students
5 lacks resources for language and content learning at the same time
Table 4: Students’ Perceived Disadvantages of CLIL
Discussion of major findings
3.2.1 Teachers’ and students’ awareness of the application of CLIL approach
The results of this study described teachers’ and students’ experiences and reflections on their English-medium courses they had, teachers and students tended to have positive attitude towards CLIL although they did not think that they had a high level of comprehension of their EMI lectures It seems that many students were reluctant to participate in their EMI class It was difficult to get the students participate actively probably because most of them were passive and were accustomed to sit in traditional classrooms where teacher was supposed to be in the front to lecture while students were sitting quietly and following their teacher’s instructions Thus a teaching method that allowed freedom and student initiatives in the classroom was generally not well received There was also a possibility that the students were passive because of the language barrier They preferred to use their native language in doing their assignments or in asking and answering questions
The similar problems have also occurred to the teachers regarding the use of English language in the classroom The majority of teachers have poor command in English and lack of confident in handling teaching activities in the classroom All teachers admitted that they still needed to improve communication skills and EMI teaching methods Nevertheless, they felt that their English ability was sufficient enough to deliver their subjects
3.2.2 Teacher’s and Student’s perceived advantages in EMI courses The data revealed that whereas the real use of English in the EMI classes was not encouraging, an overwhelming majority of teachers and students acknowledged the advantages of integrating CLIL in their class, by highlighting the following advantageous aspects of CLIL: promoting language learning and content along with language learning skills, enhancing students’ motivation, making teaching more attractive by encouraging active participation Teachers were encouraged to change teaching practice and employed a variety of advanced instructional tools, as well as developed learning styles and strategies It is suggested that well planned and well- coordinated learning activities were beneficial to the success of CLIL.
The extent to which key features of CLIL were present in the EMI classes 35 3.4 Suggestions
Moreover, many students learnt English with the major aim of passing language examinations As a result, they did not have sufficient English skills or proficiency in their EMI classes Lack of a minimum level of competence in academic English would seriously hinder the ability of students to understand lessons, to read textbooks, to prepare assignments and examinations and to participate in classes actively
3.3 The extent to which key features of CLIL were present in the EMI classes
The discussions presented in this section were presented based on the survey, my classroom experience and Mehisto et.al’s recommendation of the key features of CLIL or EMI
During my classroom practice, it is found out that the major concern of the teachers was their students’ proficiency The teachers communicated in English during the whole class meeting, brought the aspects of authenticity and academic challenges in their classrooms but they were somehow ineffective because of the students’ low proficiency Some other features that could not be really implemented were the active learning, student-centered atmosphere, development of student’s own knowledge, skills, attitudes, interests and experience, and challenges toward students to develop themselves as scholars who have content and language knowledge
Because the majority of the students did not have sufficient proficiency, they did not participate actively although their teachers had encouraged them to do by asking them some questions or points to discuss in English The classroom thus had more teacher-centered atmosphere Because of their limited language proficiency, these students did not comprehend the teaching/learning materials discussed which might obstruct the development of their own knowledge, skills, attitudes, interests and experience towards both content subjects and the English language If the majority of proficient users of English attend the EMI classes, it is believed that all of the CLIL features will be more visible in EMI classes
3.4 Suggestions According to Coyle (1999) CLIL focuses both on content and language learning, so its implementation needs approaches, methodologies and learning strategies from those in traditional foreign language, so it is essential to design courses that cater for these needs
3.4.1 Content-based EAP courses for teachers and students Language proficiency was still regarded as the single most important prerequisite for effective EMI practice Cummins (1986) reports that there are two levels of language proficiency: the basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS) and academic language proficiency (CALP) The first one refers to general English, while the second one refers to the language needed to perform effectively in academic subjects It takes 2-3 years for language learners to be proficient in BICS as compared to 5-7 years in CALP Mohan (1990) also points out that students’ success in understanding their academic textbooks depends on two factors namely the content factor and the language factor As the finding of this study show, most of the students are dissatisfied with their current GE courses because the skills trained and content taught in these courses often cannot meet their real EAP needs
Students not only require more language support at their universities, but “this support should be oriented towards academic rather than general English” (Evans &
Green, 2007, p.5) Thus, the students should get extra language support to help them deal with academic content that is in English Therefore, they should be exposed to academic language proficiency (CALP) as suggested by Cummins (1986)
The EMI policy will work successfully if both students and teachers have adequate English proficiency (Coyle et.al, 2010) Teachers in charge of such program need both language and pedagogical competencies Several students complained that the reason why they were unable to have good comprehension of their English lectures was because some of their lecturers’ English although good, may not be specialized enough Hence, it is suggested that universities should also provide their lecturers involved in English-medium instruction with better resources and support Although VNU have invited speakers to give talks on how to teach content courses in English, to my knowledge, most of these talks did not focus specifically on how to use the English language effectively in lecture Instead, some proper short-or long term EAP courses have been specifically designed for lecturers teaching EMI subjects courses
3.4.2 CLIL Methodology training for teachers Teacher lacked the CLIL teaching methodology to assist their learners in the acquisition of academic literacy and language Besides, none of the teachers had received training that equiped them with skills for effectively teaching through the medium of English These findings stressed the need of organizing CLIL teacher training sessions, workshops and conferences during which the academic teachers would have ability to learn about the CLIL methodology in a practical way and also exchange teaching experience with other academic teachers
In addition to pedagogic trainings, training programs in oral English presentation skills should also be offered Teachers should also be encouraged to work collaboratively with English language teachers or their colleagues who are proficient in English This is done to strengthen the teachers’ commands of the language Those who are more proficient in English can provide language assistance, for example, to find meanings of difficult words or ways to say something in the target language
3.4.3 Bilingual education policy The findings of this study suggest that the students preferred to use Vietnamese in their classrooms although at the same time they were aware of the importance of English The teachers also admitted that they often used Vietnamese in explaining key concepts because of their students’ low proficiency This finding somehow implies that the students cannot escape the influence of their mother when the students’ mother tongue will always exist in classrooms If the use of the mother tongue is not limited and selective, the students’ language development will be affected and they will also be discouraged from using the target language In bilingual classes, both students’ native language and target language are used by the teachers A typical bilingual education class is taught 70-80% in English and 20- 30% in the students’ native language Teachers need to have capability of explaining complicated terms and concepts in simple and clear words They should be able to use the English that their students understand; otherwise they may confuse their students
This final chapter summarizes the main findings of the present study, followed by a discussion of the implications The limitations of this investigation and recommendations for further study are also explored.
Summary of the study
2009 academic year The author’s reason for conducting this study is to explore teachers and students’ experiences and perceptions with respect to the use of EMI and the benefits/challenges of implementing such an approach at the local context The findings of this study suggest that both the students and teachers recognize the importance of English and the use of English as the medium of instruction However, they also experience dilemmas in the teaching and learning process EMI teaching makes the majority of the students feel burdened when they need to communicate in English The teachers also notice that the majority of the students have insufficient English ability to cope with the material of the content subjects Thus, the language barrier seems to affect the students’ academic performances Besides, teachers’ lack of appropriate levels of linguistic competence and CLIL teaching methodology are considered to affect the quality of teaching and studying
There are some plausible solutions proposed in this study namely to provide intensive content-based EAP courses for the students, to provide pedagogical as well as the language trainings for the teachers and to have bilingual education policy instead of EMI policy In short, a lot of work remains to be done and changes must be made to improve the quality of SMP more effectively.
Summary of main findings
2.1 Teachers and students’ opinions regarding the advantages and challenges in the implementation of CLIL approach
Without a doubt, the CLIL teachers and students are aware of advantages and disadvantages of teaching content subjects in English When being asked about advantages they mostly agreed that it bring better opportunities in the future They seem to treat CLIL as a way towards achieving their goals However, lecturers and students are also in put in a dilemma in the teaching and learning process Students have encountered language problems as well as content’s problems and to overcome these problems, they need help and guidance from the teachers Emphasis should be given more on building up students’ proficiency in English before they could learn science subjects effectively Besides, teachers’ lack of knowledge concerning methodology of CLIL, teachers’ English competence, lack of proper didactic materials and facilities are also problems which teachers and students face in their teaching and learning practice
2.2 Teachers’ and students’ recommendations to improve the teaching of subject through the medium of the English language
CLIL is a challenging process and in order to gain more students who would like to study subjects in a foreign language and help them to keep positive attitude towards CLIL throughout their studies, more work needs to be done on the educational process by providing pedagogically as well as the language trainings for the teachers and how to design proper didactic materials The best way to achieve it would be to organize CLIL teacher training sessions, workshops and conferences where the teachers would have the possibility to learn about the CLIL methodology in a practical way and also exchange teaching experience with other academic teachers Administrators could pay more intention to the linguistic background of the students and how well the faculties offer facilities and educational materials accordingly to fit student needs More EAP language courses, especially content- based EAP courses should be offered to equip students with appropriate language skills to attend in their EMI classes In addition, the curriculum could be a solution if well prepared by the cooperation of content specialists and language instructors
Following a well-grounded and flexible curriculum based on the principles of CLIL could act as a key agent for the course success Last but not least, teacher should emphasize more in giving clear explanation regarding particular scientific terms and concepts Teachers should also use various techniques and interesting methods of teaching to attract students’ attention to learn science subjects
In conclusion, if CLIL’s potential is to be fully implemented, a number of measures are needed Equipping students and teachers with the necessities before and during the implementation of EMI is the responsibility of the education institutions.
Limitations of the study
It is unavoidable that the study presented in this thesis still has some limitations Firstly, only 12 teachers and 100 students from two faculties were sampled in the questionnaires, which may not be sufficient for the researcher to have precise judgments Besides, this study was carried out within the area of VNU-UET so the mentioned difficulties may not be suitable to apply to other universities because of learners’ differences in language proficiency, teacher competence and in curriculums Furthermore, the solutions suggested might be insufficient and not be applicable to all teaching context Despite such limitations, the author strongly believes that her research is successful to some extent.
Recommendations for further study
The results of the study presented above also pose further questions for further research As the present study only investigated the current situations of teaching subject matter in language at VNU-UET, it would be useful if further research considers surveying students and teachers in different types of universities, at difference education level (e.g graduate and undergraduate) of other years to investigate whether they react differently to EMI and encounter different types of problems in their EMI classrooms
Additionally, based on the findings of the present study and others on teaching EMI classrooms, it would be of greater value if further studies investigate the effective strategies used by the teachers giving English instruction to overcome their students’ difficulties
1 Aguilar, M & Rodríguez, R (2012) Lecturer and student perceptions on CLIL at a Spanishuniversity.International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(2), 183-197
2 Aziz,bin Nordin (2005) Students’ Perception on Teaching and Learning Mathematics in English Retrieved on May 29, 2010 from http://eprints.utm.my
3 Banegas, D L (2012) CLIL teacher development: Challenges and experiences Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 5(1), 46-56 http://journals.sfu.ca/laclil/index.php/LACLIL/article/view/71
4 Coonan, C (2007) Insider views of the CLIL class through teacher-self- observation-introspection International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 625-646
5 Costa, F., & D’Angelo, L (2011) CLIL: A suit for all seasons? Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4(1), 1-13
6 Coyle, D (2005) Developing CLIL: Towards a Theory of Practice, APAC Monograph 6, APAC, Barcelona
7 Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D (2010) CLIL: Content and language integrated learning Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
8 Cummins, J (1979) Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters Working Papers on Bilingualism, No 19, 121-129
9 de Graaff, R., Koopman, G J., and Westhoff, G (2007) Identifying Effective L2 Pedagogy in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Based on
“An Observation Tool for Effective L2 Pedagogy in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)” by de Graaff, Koopman, Anikina, and Westhoff, in The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism (2007), vol
10 Eurydice Report (2006) Content and language learning (CLIL) at schools in Europe Brussels: Eurydice Retrieved from http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/ resources/eurydice/pdf/ 0_integral/071EN.pdf
11 Ioannou-Georgiou, S., & Pavlou, P (eds.) (2010) Guidelines for CLIL Implementation in Primary and Pre-primary Education Cyprus: Cyprus Pedagogical Institute
12 Johnstone, R and McKinstry, R (2008) Evaluation of Early PrimaryPartial Immersion(EPPI),www.scilt.stir.ac.uk/projects/evaluationwr/documents/EPPI_
13 Genesee, F (1994) Integrating Language and Content: Lessons from Immersion Educational Practice Reports No 11 National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics
14 Graddol, D (1997) The future of English? London: British Council
15 Hillyard, S (2011) First steps in CLIL: Training the teachers Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 1-12 ISSN 2011-
16 Hughes, R (2008) “Internationalisation of higher education and language policy: Questions of quality and equity” Higher Education Management and Policy, 20, 1-18
17 Marsh, D (2002) Content and Language Integrated Learning Jyvọskylọ:
18 Marsch, D., B Marsland & K Stenberg 2001 Integrating Competencies for Working Life Jyvọskylọ: University of Jyvọskylọ
19 Mehisto P., Frigols M., & Marsh, D (2008) Uncovering CLIL New York:
20 MOET (2008) Quyet dinh ve viec phe duyet de an "Day va hoc ngoai ngu trong he thong giao duc quoc dan giai doan 2008-2020" [Decision on approving Project "Teaching and learning foreign languages in the national education system in the period 2008 to 2010] Retrieved November 1st, 2011, from http://www.chinhphu.vn/portal/page?_pageidW8,33345598&_dad=portal&_s chema=PORTAL&docidx437
21 MOET (2010) Quyet dinh phe duyet De an phat trien he thong truong Trung hoc Pho Thong chuyen giai doan 2010-2020 [Decision on approving the Project of developing the gifted high school system in the period 2008 to 2010]
Retrieved October 30th, 2011, from http://www.chinhphu.vn/portal/page?_pageidW8,33345598&_dad=portal&_s chema=PORTAL&docid359
22 Nguyen, N.G (2011) Students Perception on factors affecting English learning motivation of students in Strategic Mission Project Hanoi: ULIS
23 Nguyen, T.P (2013) Using the textbook “Practice Maths 1” to teach Maths in English to first graders at Minh Khai 1 primary school – Difficulties and some suggested solutions.Hanoi: ULIS
24 Nguyen, T.V (2006) In search of solutions to improving the English language proficiency for under-graduate students at the College of Technology (COT)- Vietnam National University, Hanoi
25 Pavón Vázquez, V & Rubio, F (2010) Teachers’ concerns and uncertainties about the introduction of CLIL programmes Porta Linguarum, 14, 45-58
26 Pavesi, M., Bertocchi, D , Hofmanová, M & Kasianka, M (2001) Teaching through a foreign language: a guide for teachers and schools to using Foreign
Language in Content Teaching, Teaching through a foreign language Milan:
M.I.U.R., Direzione Generale della Lombardia on behalf of TIE-CLIL
Retrieved from http://www.ub.es/filoan/CLIL/teachers.pdf
27 Van de Craen, P E Ceuleers, K Mondt & L Allain 2008 “European multilingual language policies in Belgium and policy-driven research” In: K
Lauridsen & D Toudic (eds) Language at Work in Europe Festschrift in Honour of Wolfgang Mackieiwcz Gửttingen: V&R Press, 139-151
28 Xanthou, M (2008) Learning subject matter through the medium of a foreign language (CLIL): On its effects on primary school learners’ L2 vocabulary development and content knowledge Retrieved February 1, 2013, from http://conferences.ncl.ac.uk/pglinguistics/2008/presentation_documents/X anthou.pdf
APPENDIX 1: SURVEY QUESTIONAIRE FOR STUDENTS
This survey questionnaire is designed to seek your perceptions and experiences regarding teaching content subjects using English as a medium of instruction (EMI) at VNU University of Engineering and Technology
Your assistance in completing this questionnaire will be highly appreciated
You can be confident that the information you provide the questionnaire will be kept confidential and used only for research purposes
For each question, please select an option only by circling on the answer that you think is right and write the answer where necessary
1 What kind of English certificate or level do you have?
2 Which English communication skill do you want to further improve?
3 Do you agree or disagree with these statements?
1 Teachers can deliver the course in English well
2 Teachers can communicate in English well
3 I do understand the EMI lectures delivered
I can participate in any classroom activities using English
5 Teachers’ English, although good, may not be
Strongly agree (SA) specialized enough
Teachers often read from slides/lecture notes, which makes the class boring
Teachers’ preparation for the lesson is not really sufficient
8 Teachers do not use audio- visual aids much
4 Which classroom activities do you do in English? (You can choose more than one)
Note-taking Questioning and answering Oral presentation
5 In your opinion, which language should your teacher use in the CLIL classroom activities?
6 Do you agree or disagree with these statements?
1 increases students’ motivation to learn English
2 improves students’ English language proficiency
3 prepares for students’ future studies and/or working life
4 gives teachers and students more access to up-to-date materials on the subjects
5 helps teachers’ to diversify methods and forms of classroom teaching and learning
7 Do you agree or disagree with these statements?
1 reduces students’ understanding of content knowledge
2 makes students learn English more difficult as there are numerous terminology/unknown vocabulary items
3 means more than double the normal work load
4 discourages discussion and interaction between teacher and students
5 lacks resources for language and content learning at the same time
8 What should be done to help improve the quality of teaching and learning in the EMI classes? (You can choose more than one)
A More English training for the students during the 4-year curriculum
B More extracurricular activities for students to learn English
C Native language teachers preferable to teach English
D More foreign academic teachers invited to teach content subjects
E More training sessions designed specifically for EMI teachers
F Textbooks published in English speaking countries preferable
G More internship program at foreign partner universities for students
APPENDIX 2: SURVEY QUESTIONAIRE FOR TEACHERS
This survey questionnaire is designed to seek your perceptions and experiences regarding teaching content subjects using English as a medium of instruction (EMI) at VNU University of Engineering and Technology
Your assistance in completing this questionnaire will be highly appreciated
You can be confident that the information you provide the questionnaire will be kept confidential and used only for research purposes
For each question, please select an option only by circling on the answer that you think is right and write the answer where necessary
1 Which English communication skills are your students better at?
Oral communication skills (Listening and Speaking) Written communication skills (Reading and Writing)
2 Which classroom activities do you do in English? (You can choose more than one)
Delivering lecturers PowerPoint presentation Questioning and answering Giving comments and feedbacks Oral tests
3 Do you agree with the statement: “Teacher’s switching to the mother tongue during the lesson is necessary, for example, explaining terminology/ specialized items”?
1=strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3 = neutral 4 = agree 5 = strongly agree
4 What do you often do to facilitate your students’ understanding of the key concepts/ formulas? (You can choose more than one)
C Write on the boards/slides
D Use visual aids (charts/ pictures)
5 When teaching subject through English as medium of instruction, which aspects of language do you often focus on? (You can choose more than one)
6 Do you agree or disagree with these statements?
Teaching subjects in English is………
1 increases students’ motivation to learn English
2 improves teachers’ English language proficiency
3 prepares for students’ future studies and/or working life
4 gives teachers and students more access to up-to-date materials on the subjects
5 helps teachers’ to diversify methods and forms of classroom teaching and learning
7 Do you agree or disagree with these statements?
1 reduces students’ understanding of content knowledge
2 makes students learn English more difficultly as there are numerous terminology/unknown vocabulary items.