Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
OnacontinuumbetweencontentandlanguageinCBI/CLIL-orientedsettings
30CBI-CLIL–explainingitstheoreticalunderpinnings
Whatevertheoriginsoftheideasforintegratingcontentandlanguage
learningandteachingwere,CBIlCLILpedagogiesweregenerallyobserved
toensureefectiveeducationalpracticeandgoodlearningoutcomes.Te
resultsofbilingualeducationalinstructionwerefoundtobeatleastasgood
asthoseofnon-bilingualteaching,eventhoughsomedeficitsconcerningthe
acquisitionofgrammarandlexicalitems,aswellasinsufcientdevelopmentof
speakingskillswerediscerned(Naves,2009).Tisgaveresearchersastimulus
tolookmorecloselyattheexplanationsofthelanguageacquisitionphenomena
characteristicofthelearningprocessinCBIlCLILcontexts.Forexample,
theacceptanceoftheabove-mentionedcontinuumbetweencontentand
language-driveninstruction,specificallywhenreferringtoitsextremeforms
ofinstructionclearlyshowsacontrastbetweenacquiringL2naturallythrough
learners’immersionintothelanguagematerialselectedonthebasisofcontent
criteriaandlearningasecondlanguagewithafocusonitsform.Innaturalistic
languagelearningconditionslearnersacquireaspectsofcontentfirst,and
onlylateronwhentheanalysisofinputisintroducedtheymaygainexplicit
knowledgeofL2.Tusimmersionlearnersautomatiseproceduralknowledge
ofalanguagewithnoworkdoneondeclarativeknowledge(Bialystok,1994;
Johnson,1996).Informaleducationalconditionswhenlanguageistaughtas
asubject,itisdeclarativeknowledgeofL2thatisrestructuredandautomatised
intoproceduralknowledgethroughpracticeandfeedback(McLaughlin,1997;
deKyser,2007),andonlywhenlearnershavegainedthecommandoflower
levelsofanL2cantheystartprocessingcontentsuccessfully.
Intheirattemptsatexplainingthesuccessofimmersionsomespecialistsalso
turnedtoKrashen’sComprehensibleInputHypothesisanditsmaintenetthat
languagedevelopsinanincidentalwaybyexposuretocomprehensibleinput.
Tehypothesis,however,wasquestionedonthegroundoftheadvancesinSLA
studieswhichshowedthatunderstandingthemeaningofanutterancedoesnot
guaranteeitssyntacticprocessingindispensableinlanguageacquisition(Gass
andSelinker,2008).Whileobservingimmersionclassesandproblemswiththe
developmentofproductivelanguageskills,Swain(1988)developedthetheory
ofoutputwhichclaimsthatlearnerscanexplicitlypayattentiontolanguage
formstheyproduceandnoticethem,andthenreformulatetheirhypotheses,
andmodifytheirperformance.Interactionbetweenlearnerswasshowntoplay
asignificantroleinlanguageacquisitionprocesses(Ellis,2009;Dalton-Pufer,
NikulaandSmit,2010).
15
