The knowledge synthesis of English Teaching Based on Content and Language Integrated Learning Approach (CLIL)

  • Sujinta Khamngoen College of Education, University of Payao
  • Lumyai Seehamat College of Education, University of Payao
  • Ketsaraphan Punsriket Khongjaroen College of Education, University of Payao
Keywords: approach, English, Content and Language Integration

Abstract

The purposes of this article are to synthesize the knowledge and to present the idea based on Content and Language Integrated Learning Approach or CLIL with the teachers of English and those who teach contents in courses using English as the medium to learn the language naturally such as Sciences, Mathematics, Health education, Geography and Arts. Furthermore, this article also present the components of 4Cs of CLIL including Content, Cognition, Communication and Culture, the proportion of learning management (Hard CLIL or Soft CLIL), the benefits of CLIL, teachers and students’ roles, evaluation and assessment. In addition, this article has presented the examples of Content and Language Integrated Learning Approach used in many countries that we can apply for English teaching and learning in the future.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ปราณภา โหมดหิรัญ. (2559). ผลของโปรแกรมอบรมครูเพื่อสอนภาษาอังกฤษด้วยเนื้อหาอาเซียนและแนวคิด CLIL ที่มีต่อ

เนื้อหาความรู้ ทัศนคติและการนำความรู้ไปใช้ในกิจกรรมการสอนภาษาอังกฤษของครูภาษาอังกฤษ มัธยมศึกษา

สังกัดองค์กรปกครองส่วนท้องถิ่นแห่งประเทศไทย. วารสารครุศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, 44 (3), 114-130.

สถาบันภาษาอังกฤษ. (2557). คู่มือการจัดการเรียนการสอนภาษาอังกฤษแนวใหม่ตามกรอบมาตรฐานความสามารถทางภาษาอังกฤษ

ระดับมัธยมศึกษา. กรุงเทพฯ: โรงพิมพ์องค์การสงเคราะห์ทหารผ่านศึก.

อาทิตย์ ศรีจันทร์ดร. (2560). ผลของการสอนตามแนวทฤษฎีบรูณาการเนื้อหาและภาษา (CLIL) ที่มีต่อ ความสามารถในการ

ฟัง-พูดและความสนใจในการเรียนภาษาอังกฤษของนักเรียนชั้นมัธยมศึกษาปีที่ 2. วารสารศาสตร์การศึกษา

และการพัฒนามนุษย์, 1(2), 174-186.

Bailey. N. (2015). Attaining Content and Langauge Integrated Learning (CLIL) in the Primary School Classroom.

American Journal of Educational Research, 3(4),418-426.

Ball, P. (2009). Does CLIL work?,in D.Hill and P.Alan (eds), The Best of Both Worlds : International Perspectives on CLIL. Norwich Institute or Language Education : Norwich.

Bentley, K and Phillips. (2007). Teaching Sciences in CLIL. unpublish raw data.

Bentley, K. (2009). The TKT Course : CLIL Module. Cambrigde University Press, Cambridge.

Black, P. and William, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education,

(1),1-74.

Brown, H.D. (2015). Teaching by Principles : An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. White Plains,

New York : Pearson Education.

Cimermanova, I. (2017). A Dialogue between the Language and Subject Teachers. Retrieved April 5, 2019, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322992382_CLIL-

Coyle, D., Hood, P. and Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dale, L. and Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL A CLIL Activities : A Resource for Subject and Language Teachers. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content and Language Integrated Learning : From Practice to Principle?, Annual

Review of Applied Linguistics, 31(8), 182-204

Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., and Sierra, J.M. (2014). CLIL and motivation: the effect of individual and contextual variables. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 209-224.

Graddol, D. (2006). English Next. London: British Council Pu

blications.

Ikeda. (2013). Does CLIL Work for Japanese Secondary School Students? Potential for the “Weak” of CLIL.

International CLIL Research Journal. 2(1), 2013.

Lasagabaster, D. and Linguarum, P. (2015). The impact of type of approach (CLIL versus EFL) and methodology (Book-based versus project work) on motivation. Porta Linguarum23. 41-57.

Lasagabaster, D, and Sierra, M. J. (2009). Language attitudes in CLIL and Traditional EFL Classes. International

CLIL Research Journal, 1(2), 4-17.CLIL – a Dialogue between the Language and Subject Teachers.

Marsh, D. (2002). Content and Language Integrated Learning : The European Dimension /Actions , Trends

and Foresight Potential. Retrieved April 5, 2019, from http;//Europa.eu.int/comm/education/languages/index.html

Paraja, K. (2014). Focus on CLIL : a qualitative evaluation of content and language integrated learning

(CLIL) in Polish secondary education. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambride Scholars Publishing.

Pica, T. (2002). Subject-Matter Content : How Does It Assist the International and Linguistic Needs of

Classroom Language Learner?. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 1-19.

Rea-Dickins, P. (2004). Understanding teachers as agents of assessment. Editorial : Language Testing, 21(3),

-258.

Ross, S.J. (2005). The Impact of Assessment Method on Foreign Language Proficiency Growth. Applied Linguistics,

(3), 317-342.

Skeet, J. (2011). Reflections on CLIL. Retrieved April 5, 2019, from

http;//clilreflections.blogspot.hk/2011/12/8-cs-of-clil.html

Stevie, D. (2016). Teaching Techniques for CLIL Teacher’s Soul. Retrieved April 7, 2019, from https://www.fluentu.com/blog/educator/clil-teaching/

Published
2020-04-27
How to Cite
Khamngoen, S., Seehamat, L., & Punsriket Khongjaroen, K. (2020). The knowledge synthesis of English Teaching Based on Content and Language Integrated Learning Approach (CLIL). Journal of Roi Et Rajabhat University, 14(1), 249-260. Retrieved from https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/reru/article/view/197717
Section
Academic Articles