簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 陳欣怡
Chen, Hsin-Yi
論文名稱： 國中教師執行CLIL課程之質性研究
Tapping on Junior High School Teachers' Viewpoints About the Implementation of CLIL: A Qualitative Study
指導教授： 常紹如
Chang, Shau-Ju
口試委員： 常紹如
Chang, Shau-Ju
戴雅茗
Tai, Ya-Ming
羅美蘭
Lo, Mei-Lan
口試日期： 2022/07/25
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 英語學系英語教學碩士在職專班
Department of English_In-service Teacher Master's Program of Teaching English as A Second Language
論文出版年： 2022
畢業學年度： 110
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 55
中文關鍵詞： 雙語 、雙語國家 、學科內容與語言整合學習教學法 、國中
英文關鍵詞： bilingual, bilingual nation, CLIL, junior high school
研究方法: 半結構式訪談法
DOI URL： http://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202201195
論文種類： 代替論文：專業實務報告（專業實務類）
相關次數： 點閱：178  下載：36 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 行政院在2018年通過國家發展委員會所提的「雙語國家政策發展藍圖」，並且以2030年為目標打造台灣成為雙語國家。伴隨著推動「強化國人英語力」、「提升國家整體競爭力」的理念，活化啟動台灣的雙語教育體制。在政策的推動下，學科內容與語言整合學習(Content and Language Integrated Learning , 簡稱CLIL)教學法逐漸受到關注，提升了學習者學習語言的效能與使用語言的更多機會，象徵著更多學習語言的可能性。
    本研究為質性研究，研究對象為四位已經在執行CLIL課程的國中教師。透過訪談方式，探討CLIL教師如何準備CLIL課程、CLIL課程的益處以及CLIL課程的挑戰。研究結果發現，第一，CLIL需要學科及語言教師的互相合作，但不以協同教學模式來執行。第二，CLIL提供了學生多元使用語言的機會，完善了學科本質的學習。更提升了學生的課堂學習動機與自信，強化了英語聽力與英語口說的能力。第三，CLIL非常考驗學科教師的語言能力，因此在與語言教師共備課程時很耗時。另外，因為沒有一個語言融入學科的準則依據，CLIL教師的教學進度規劃很難掌控，常常使得學生落後學習進度。最後，本文亦針對政府CLIL政策的推動與執行以及未來CLIL研究方向提出相關建議。

    In 2018, the Executive Yuan announced a blueprint to develop Taiwan into a bilingual nation by 2030. Along with the promotion to “improve demand-driven English proficiency among the general public” and “enhance the nation’s overall competitiveness”, Taiwan’s bilingual education is going to thrive. Meanwhile, through political promotion, CLIL has become well known. CLIL not only elevates the efficiency of learning progress but also creates more opportunities of language application. Without a doubt, CLIL symbolizes a path for more possibilities of language learning.
    This study was categorized as a qualitative research. Specifically, four CLIL teachers in a junior high school were the main targets in this research. Through direct interviews with the four teachers, we were able to further explore their preparations for CLIL classes and the benefits of CLIL and the challenges of CLIL. Therefore, after conducting this research, some highlights could be finalized below. First, CLIL required both subject and language teachers to work together, but not in co-teaching mode. Second, CLIL offered more opportunities for students to use language, making a sufficient content learning. Moreover, students gained more learning motivation and confidence, improving their English listening and speaking ability. Third, CLIL highly challenged instructors’ language skills, making them spend more time and efforts on preparing CLIL lessons. Without an official guideline for language integration, CLIL teachers had difficulty planning CLIL, and this often made students’ learning schedule fall behind. Lastly, this study offered junior high school teachers some practical skills to implement CLIL and also provided policy-makers with useful suggestions to accelerate CLIL implementation.

    CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background and Purpose of the Study 1 1.2 Research Questions 3 1.3 Significance of the Study 4 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 5 2.1 The Development of CLIL 5 2.1.1 The Origin of CLIL (1965s-1990s) 5 2.1.2 The Prevalence of CLIL (1990s-)6 2.2 General Features of CLIL 7 2.3 The 4Cs Conceptual Framework for CLIL 9 2.4 The Benefits of CLIL 11 2.5 The Challenges Presented by CLIL 12 2.6 CLIL in Practice in Taiwan 13 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 16 3.1 Research Design 16 3.2 Research Site 16 3.3 Participants 17 3.4 CLIL Subjects 18 3.5 Instruments 18 3.6 Data Analysis 20 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 22 4.1 Teachers’ Preparations of CLIL Classes 22 4.1.1 Content in Charge by Subject Teachers and English by Language Teachers 22 4.1.2 Struggles over Finding Suitable Materials 24 4.1.3 Flexible and Diverse Ways to Integrate Language into the Class 26 4.1.4 All Three Components in the Language Triptych Found 27 4.2 The Benefits of CLIL to Local Junior High School Students 29 4.2.1 Subject Knowledge Solidified Through Different Language Practices 30 4.2.2 Two Language Learning Benefits 31 4.2.2.1 English Listening and Speaking Skills Enhanced 31 4.2.2.2 English Learned in Natural Contexts 32 4.2.3 Active Participation Induced by Different Language Practices and Close-to-Life Learning Materials 33 4.3 The Challenges of Teaching CLIL in Junior High School 35 4.3.1 Three Major Challenges Before the Class 35 4.3.1.1 Discrepancy in CLIL Teachers’ Language Proficiency 35 4.3.1.2 A Lack of CLIL Guideline for Language Integration 37 4.3.1.3 A Time-consuming and Stressful Task of Co-teaching 38 4.3.2 Two Major Challenges During the Class 39 4.3.2.1 Unexpected Language Issues in Instruction 39 4.3.2.2 Conflicts Between Subject and Language Teachers from Co-teaching 41 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS 44 5.1 Conclusion 44 5.2 Implications for Future CLIL Teaching and Policies 46 5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research 47 REFERENCES 49

    Admiraal, W., Westhoff, G. & de Boot, K. (2006). Evaluation of bilingual secondary education in the Netherlands: Pupils’ language proficiency in English. Educational Research and Evaluation 12/1, 75-93.
    Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
    Brown, D. H. (2002). English language teaching in the “post-method” era: Toward better diagnosis, treatment, and assessment. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (1st ed., pp. 9-18). Cambridge University Press.
    Castro-García, D. (2017). Three forms of bilingual education: Immersion, Dual Language, and CLIL. Ediciones de la Escuela de Literaturay Ciencias del Lenguaje.
    Çekrezi, R. (2011). CLIL and teacher training. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3821-3825.
    Coyle, D. (1999). Supporting students in content and language integrated learning contexts: Planning for effective classrooms. In J. Masih (Ed.), Learning through a foreign language: Models, methods and outcomes (pp. 46–69). Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.
    Coyle, D. (2005). CLIL: Planning tools for teachers. University of Nottingham.
    Coyle, D. (2006). Content and language integrated learning: Motivating learners and teachers. Scottish Languages Review, 13, 1-18.
    Coyle, D., Holmes, B., & King, L. (2009). Towards an integrated curriculum–CLIL National Statement and Guidelines. London: The Languages Company.
    Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press.
    Cross, R. (2014). Best-evidence synthesis: Current approaches to language education. http://hdl.handle.net/11343/55777
    Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Future perspectives for English language teaching (pp.1-19). Carl Winter.
    Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content and language integrated learning: From practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204.
    https://doi.org/ 10.3726/978-3-0351-0171-3
    Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U. (2010b). Language use and language learning in CLIL: Current findings and contentious issues. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 279–291). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.7.14dal
    European Commission (2012). Content and language integrated learning. European Commission for Languages. http://ec.europa.eu/languages/language-teaching/content-and-language-integrated-learning_en.htm
    Eurydice. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. European Commission.
    Gabillon, Z. (2020). Revisiting CLIL: Background, Pedagogy, and Theoretical Underpinnings. Contextes et didactiques. Revue semestrielle en sciences de l’éducation, (15).
    Graddol, D. (2006). English next (Vol. 62). British Council.
    Hanesová, D. (2015). History of CLIL. CLIL in Foreign Language Education: e-textbook for foreign language teachers, 7-16.
    Harrop, E. (2012). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Limitations and possibilities.
    Hemmi, C., & Banegas, D. L. (2021). CLIL: An Overview. In International Perspectives on CLIL (pp. 1-20). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
    Hong, Rui-Qin (2017). Sixty-one Elementary Schools Started to Ran an Enterprise to Teach the First Graders to Learn English2. https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/local/paper/1110901. 2017.06.15 　
    Hsu, Chia-Ching (2020). An Action Research Approach to the Development and Implementation of CLIL-oriented Experimental Bilingual Curriculum3, [CLIL 取向雙語實驗課程發展與實施歷程之行動研究].National Taipei University of Education. Taipei.
    Huang, Yu-Wen (2018). A Case Study of CLIL Co-teaching of Curriculum Design and Implementation3, [ CLIL 協同教學課程設計與實施個案研究].National Taipei University of Education. Taipei.
    Indicator of the Quality and Condition of Education.
    K-12 Education Administration, Ministry of Education (2018). Immersion English Education Project for Primary and Secondary Schools. Taipei: Ministry of Education.
    K-12 Education Administration, Ministry of Education (2020). Implementation Project of Bilingual Instruction in Some Domains of Primary and Junior High School Education. Taipei: Ministry of Education.
    Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod condition: (E)merging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 27–50.
    Kumaravadivelu, B. (2003). Forum critical language pedagogy: A postmethod perspective on English language teaching. World Englishes, 22(4), 539-550.
    Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT journal, 64(4), 367-375.
    Lasagbaster, David (2008): Foreign Language Competence in Content and Language Integrated Course. In: The Open Applied Linguistics Journal 1, 31-42.
    Lin, Xiao-Yun (2019). To Become a Bilingual Country, the Ministry of Education Plans to Cultivate a lot of Whole-English Teaching Teachers . https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/life/breakingnews/2687426. 2019.01.30
    Lorenzo, F., & Moore, P. (2010). On the natural emergence of language structures in CLIL:Towards a theory of European educational bilingualism. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 23–38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    https://doi.org/ 10.1075/aals.7.02lor
    Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. (2009) The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 418-442. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp041
    Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. (2009). The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 418–442. doi:10.1093/applin/amp041
    Luo, Jia-Luan (2007), The Implementation of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in Elementary School English Teaching: An Action Research Study3, [探討CLIL實施於小學英語教育的初階發展可行性之行動研究].National Taipei University of Education. Taipei.
    Maillat, D. (2010). The pragmatics of L2 in CLIL. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms (pp. 29–58). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.7.03mai
    Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential.
    Marsh, D. (2012) Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). A Development Trajectory. University of Córdoba.
    Marsh, D., Maljers, A., & Hartiala, A. K. (2001). Profiling European CLIL Classrooms. Centre for Applied Language Studies.
    Mehisto, P. (2008). CLIL counterweights: Recognising and decreasing disjuncture in CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 93-120.
    Mehisto, P. (2012). Criteria for Producing CLIL Learning Material. Online Submission.
    Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008) Uncovering CLIL: Content and language integrated in bilingual and multilingual education. McMillan Education.
    Ministry of Education (2018). Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education for Elementary School, Junior High and General Senior High Schools, Subject of English in the Domain of Language. Taipei: Ministry of Education.
    Moore, P. (2011). Collaborative interaction in turn-taking: a comparative study of European bilingual (CLIL) and mainstream (MS) foreign language learning in early secondary education. International Journal of Education and Bilingualism, 1-19.
    Nikula, T., & Mård-Miettinen, K. (2014). Language learning in immersion and CLIL classrooms. Handbook of pragmatics, 18, 1-24.
    Pinner, R. (2013). Authenticity of purpose: CLIL as a way to bring meaning and motivation into EFL contexts. Asian EFL Journal, 15(4), 138-159.
    Pokrivčáková, S., Babocká, M., Bereczky, K., Bodorík, M., Bozdoğan, D., Dombeva, L., ... & Zavalarit, K. (2015). CLIL in Foreign Language Education: e-textbook for foreign language teachers. Constantine the Philosopher University.
    Rangarajan, S. (2017). Trialling the 4C framework in an Indian grade 3 mathematics classroom. Department of Education University of Jyväskylä.
    Teaching in Tainan3, [國小教師對CLIL的觀點研究].Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology.
    The Executive Yuan (2018). Blueprint for Developing Taiwan into a Bilingual Nation by 2030. Taipei: The Executive Yuan.
    The National Development Council (2018). Bilingual Nation 2030. Taipei: The National Development Council.
    Tsai, Yu-Hsin (2019). CLIL in First Grade Music Class: An Action Research , [CLIL應用於一年級音樂課之行動研究]. National Taipei University of Technology. Taipei.
    University Cambridge ESOL Examination. (2008). Teaching Science ESOL Examination. Cambridge University Press.
    Wesche, M. B. (2002). Early French immersion: How has the original Canadian model stood the test of time. In A. Rohde, H. Wode, T. Piske & P. Burmeister (Eds.), An integrated view of language development: papers in honor of Henning Wode (pp. 357-379). Wissenschaftlicer Verlag Trier.
    Wolff, D. (2012). The European framework for CLIL teacher education. Synergies Italie, (8), 105-116.
    Xie, Cheng-Han (2020). A Study of Elementary Teachers’ Perceptions toward CLIL
    Yang, W. (2015) Content and language integrated learning next in Asia: evidence of learner’s achievement in CLIL education from a Taiwan tertiary degree programme. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(4), 361-382.
    Yang, W. (2016). An Investigation of Learning Efficacy, Management Difficulties and Improvements in Tertiary CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) Programmes in Taiwan: A Survey of Stakeholder Perspectives. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 9(1), 64-109.
    Zou, Wen-Li, & Gao, Shi-Mei (2018). Exploring CLIL: A Resource Book. Shtabook.

    下載圖示
    QR CODE