Content and languagethe impact of pedagogical designs on academic performance within tertiary english as a medium of instruction

  1. Antonio Jiménez Muñoz 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Oviedo
    info

    Universidad de Oviedo

    Oviedo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/006gksa02

Revista:
Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras

ISSN: 1697-7467

Año de publicación: 2016

Título del ejemplar: Innovating in the didactic second language scenario: new mobile, open and social models

Número: 1

Páginas: 111-123

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.30827/DIGIBUG.54094 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

This paper offers the results of a study on two English-taught first-year modules at a Spanish Faculty of Economics. Analysing 2010-2015 results allows measuring the impact of the methodological interventions performed on student grades, thus allowing comparisons between their effectiveness. Findings reveal the influence on grades of studentcentred, hands-on methodologies and language remedial interventions, which suggests studying Content-and-Language Integrated Learning and English-as-a-Medium-of-Instruction in terms of their pedagogical practice and not as separate approaches. Ultimately, the study stresses the need to promote language adaptation, student-centredness and independent-learning within bilingual contexts.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Aguilar, M. (2015). “Engineering lecturers’ views on CLIL and EMI”, in International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19, 2: 13-27.
  • Aguilar, M. and Muñoz, C. (2013). “The effect of proficiency on CLIL benefits in Engineering students in Spain”, in International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2, 2, 1-18.
  • Airey, J. (2004). “Can you teach it in English? Aspects of the language choice debate in Swedish higher education”, in R. Wilkinson (ed.), Integrating Content and Language: Meeting the Challenge of a Multilingual Higher Education. Maastricht: Universitaire Pers, 97–108.
  • Airey, J. (2013). “I don’t teach language: The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden”, in AILA Review, 25, 64–79.
  • Arbaugh, J. (2014). “What might online delivery teach us about blended management education?”, in Journal of Management Education, 38, 6: 784-817.
  • Clegg, J. (2001). “Towards successful English-medium education in Southern Africa”, in D. Marsh (ed.), Enhancing English-medium Education in Namibia. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, 11-13.
  • Costa, F. and Coleman, J. A. (2010). “Integrating content and language in higher education in Italy: Ongoing research”, in International CLIL Research Journal, 1, 3: 19-29.
  • Council of Europe. (2001). The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press.
  • Dafouz, E., Camacho, M., and Urquía, E. (2014). “Surely they can’t do as well: A comparison of Business students’ academic performance in English-medium and Spanish-as-first-languagemedium programmes”, in Language and Education, 28, 3: 223-236.
  • Dudley-Evans, T., and St John, M. (1998). Developments in ESP: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press.
  • Erling, E., and Hilgendorf, S. (2006). “Language policies in the context of German higher education”, in Language Policy, 5, 3: 267-293.
  • EUROSTAT. (2013). “Two-thirds of working age adults in the EU28 in 2011 state they know a foreign language”, available from: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat, accessed 1 December, 2015.
  • Flowerdew, J. (1995), Academic Listening: Research Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge U. Press. Han, C. (2015). “Investigating rater severity/leniency in interpreter performance testing: A multifaceted Rasch measurement approach”, in Interpreting, 17, 2: 255-283.
  • Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses. Harlow: Longman.
  • Jenkins, J., Cogo, A. and Dewey, M. (2011). “Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca”, Language Teaching, 44, 3: 281-315.
  • Jimenez Munoz, A. (2014). “Measuring the impact of CLIL on language skills: a CEFR-based approach for higher education”, in Language Value, 6, 1: 28-50.
  • Jimenez Munoz, A. (2015). “English as a medium of instruction: Evidence for language and content targets in bilingual education in Economics”, in International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19, 5. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/13670050.2015.1125847.
  • Kirkgöz, Y. (2009). “Students and lecturers perceptions of the effectiveness of foreign language instruction in a university in Turkey”, in Teaching in Higher Education, 19, 1: 81-93.
  • Kirkgöz, Y. (2014). “Students’ perceptions of English language versus Turkish language used as the medium of instruction in higher education in Turkey”, in International Periodical For The Languages, Literature and History of Turkish or Turkic, 9, 12: 443-459.
  • Kuteeva, M. and Airey, J. (2014). “Disciplinary differences in the use of English in higher education: Reflections on recent language policy developments”, in Higher Education, 67, 5: 533-549.
  • Lasagabaster, D. and Sierra, J. M. (2010). “Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities”, in ELT Journal, 64, 4: 367-375.
  • Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and Teaching Languages Through Content. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Margulieux, L. E., Bujak, K. R., McCracken, W. M. and Majerich, D. M. (2014). “hybrid, blended, flipped, and inverted: Defining Terms in a two dimensional taxonomy”, in Proceedings of The Hawaii 12th International Conference on Education, 12: 2394-2402.
  • Marsh, D. (2006). “English as a medium of instruction in the new global linguistic order: Global characteristics, Local Consequences”, in Proceedings of the Annual Conference for METSMaC, 2: 29-38.
  • Mehisto, P., Marsh, D. and Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. London: Macmillan. Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, Spain. (2014). “Datos y cifras del sistema universitario español 2013-2014”, available from: http://www.mecd.gob.es/prensa-mecd/, accessed 1 December, 2015.
  • OECD. (2013). Education at a Glance 2013. Paris: OECD Publishing. Picciano, A., Dziuban, C. and Graham, C. (2013). Research Perspectives in Blended Learning vol. 2. London: Routledge.
  • Robinson, P. (1991). ESP Today: A Practitioner’s Guide. London: Prentice Hall.
  • Strevens, P. (1988). “ESP after twenty years: a reappraisal”, in M. Tickoo (ed.), ESP: State of the Art. Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Centre, 1-13. Wächter, B. and Maiworm, F. (2014). English-taught Programmes in European Higher Education. The state of play in 2014. Bonn: Lemmens.
  • Wastiau, P., Blamire, R. K., Quittre, V., Van de Gaer, E. and Monseur, C. (2013). “The use of ICT in education: a survey of schools in Europe”, in European Journal of Education, 48: 11–27.
  • Young, A. (2006). Teaching Writing Across the Curriculum. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet