The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Negotiating political positions: subject-specific oral language use in CLIL classrooms

Negotiating political positions: subject-specific oral language use in CLIL classrooms
Negotiating political positions: subject-specific oral language use in CLIL classrooms
While extant research on CLIL suggests positive impacts on lexical proficiency and on spoken language, the crucial question of the effect of CLIL on advanced learners, both in terms of language proficiency and content knowledge, has received less attention. Of particular interest here is the nexus between these in the area of spoken subject-specific language use, where the potential of CLIL as providing an additional language learning focus is particularly promising, yet under-researched. We argue here that the ability to negotiate a factual position appropriately is a key element of subject specific language use, relating to both content (through presenting and supporting claims based on an understanding of the underlying ideas) and to foreign language ability (by using formulations acceptable within the subject-specific use of the L2). As a theoretical framework for understanding these negotiations of generally opposing standpoints, we use argumentation theory.

The study was conducted in upper-secondary CLIL classes on European economics and politics in Austria. The classroom data consists of 16 hours of video-recorded classroom data, comprising different classroom events, i.e. teacher-whole class interactions, group work, and role plays. From these data, episodes of argumentation were extracted and analysed. Two types of argumentation patterns emerge, with one focused more on the joint construction and learning of new subject-specific content and language knowledge, and the other one on the enactment of such knowledge in interactions. Findings show that students’ engagement in these argumentations gives clear evidence of their subject-specific language proficiency in both prepared and unprepared oral production. As the type of classroom event has an effect on the specific argumentation patterns, the need for exposing students to a diversity of educational practice is underlined.
CLIL, upper secondary education, oppositional talk, argumentation, subject-specific language, social sciences at school
1367-0050
287-302
Huettner, Julia
bb0cd345-6c35-48e1-89f7-a820605aaa2c
Smit, Ute
ece9dbc7-c85d-42f0-8e85-6ab49554f9bb
Huettner, Julia
bb0cd345-6c35-48e1-89f7-a820605aaa2c
Smit, Ute
ece9dbc7-c85d-42f0-8e85-6ab49554f9bb

Huettner, Julia and Smit, Ute (2018) Negotiating political positions: subject-specific oral language use in CLIL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21 (3), 287-302. (doi:10.1080/13670050.2017.1386616).

Record type: Article

Abstract

While extant research on CLIL suggests positive impacts on lexical proficiency and on spoken language, the crucial question of the effect of CLIL on advanced learners, both in terms of language proficiency and content knowledge, has received less attention. Of particular interest here is the nexus between these in the area of spoken subject-specific language use, where the potential of CLIL as providing an additional language learning focus is particularly promising, yet under-researched. We argue here that the ability to negotiate a factual position appropriately is a key element of subject specific language use, relating to both content (through presenting and supporting claims based on an understanding of the underlying ideas) and to foreign language ability (by using formulations acceptable within the subject-specific use of the L2). As a theoretical framework for understanding these negotiations of generally opposing standpoints, we use argumentation theory.

The study was conducted in upper-secondary CLIL classes on European economics and politics in Austria. The classroom data consists of 16 hours of video-recorded classroom data, comprising different classroom events, i.e. teacher-whole class interactions, group work, and role plays. From these data, episodes of argumentation were extracted and analysed. Two types of argumentation patterns emerge, with one focused more on the joint construction and learning of new subject-specific content and language knowledge, and the other one on the enactment of such knowledge in interactions. Findings show that students’ engagement in these argumentations gives clear evidence of their subject-specific language proficiency in both prepared and unprepared oral production. As the type of classroom event has an effect on the specific argumentation patterns, the need for exposing students to a diversity of educational practice is underlined.

Text
Huettner_and_Smit_july2017_final - Accepted Manuscript
Download (91kB)
Text
Huettner and Smit_AAM
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
Text
Proof_submission_IJBEB
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy

More information

Submitted date: 30 March 2017
Accepted/In Press date: 15 July 2017
e-pub ahead of print date: 24 October 2017
Published date: 3 April 2018
Keywords: CLIL, upper secondary education, oppositional talk, argumentation, subject-specific language, social sciences at school

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 413895
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/413895
ISSN: 1367-0050
PURE UUID: 6191c0a7-2ca8-492c-ba54-1691a9fb0b73

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Sep 2017 16:31
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 05:16

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Julia Huettner
Author: Ute Smit

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×