Integrating content and language learning : an ethnographic study of instructional practices and professional development

Abstract

Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), a dual-focused approach which brings together content learning and language development goals, has become increasingly popular. This integrated approach, however, lends itself to challenges in terms of how teachers could integrate both goals during teaching. The success of CLIL, as a result, often lies in individual teachers’ instructional practices. In the case of international schools in China, it is necessary to examine the professional development (PD) of CLIL teachers, especially how integration might be achieved using classroom-based evidence. To this goal, this study takes an ethnographic perspective into four CLIL teachers’ situated instructional practices through a professional development program. More specifically, this study examined CLIL teachers’ instructional practices mediated by the interventions. The first stage of this study focused on needs analysis through lesson observations and semi-structured interviews with CLIL teachers in the first two months. Departing from teachers’ needs, the second stage involved collaborative PD activities including pre- and post-lesson interviews and reflective practices in the following ten months. Interview sessions after lesson observations provided opportunities for commentaries and feedback, which fueled further development. Observational data were collected and analyzed to examine teachers’ instructional practices. The findings suggest that when teachers mobilized multiple available resources, CLIL created authentic learning opportunities for language and literacy development through the negotiation of meaning. It was also found that teachers adopted or fine-tuned instructional practices to integrate language-focused episodes in disciplinary learning. The study also speaks to the complexity of instructional shifts and teacher change. While CLIL teachers initially tended to identify themselves as content teachers and privileged disciplinary content over opportunities for language learning, PD experiences provided space for reflective practices that impacted their perceptions of the role of language. That said, the process of learning to teach was never static and was in constant interaction with personal, institutional, and societal factors, so that teachers should be placed at the center of any PD programs. The findings corroborate with the literature that speaks to the importance and urgency of providing PD opportunities for in-service CLIL teachers. This study emphasizes inquiry driven by real-life problems through collaboration between the researcher and practitioners. It sheds light on how qualitative empirical evidence could provide grounds for reflection. Through the analysis of multiple cases, this study expands the dialogue of professional development in CLIL settings and alike. Future research should be aware of the need to provide support for CLIL teachers at the institutional level and beyond, while acknowledging teachers’ agency in making positive instructional shifts. When CLIL brings with it affordances and challenges to today’s classrooms, what should always remain at the core of all efforts is an everlasting pursuit of improving the quality of teaching and learning.