Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Vol. 6:1 (2018) ► pp.113–137
Perspectives on New Research

Assessment for learning in the CLIL classroom

| Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

This article summarizes the findings of a corpus-based study investigating assessment for learning (AfL) and its relationship to motivation in CLIL contexts. Using a mixed methods approach, classroom recordings from bilingual primary schools in Madrid, Spain, were analyzed to identify motivational strategies used by teachers. The relationship between these strategies and the AfL techniques implemented by teachers was then examined.

The findings show that the implementation of AfL coincided with an increase in frequency, length of time of use, and variety of teacher motivational strategies. This led to classes in which activities were supported by a more motivational discourse. A qualitative analysis of the corpus shows that the incorporation of AfL techniques coincided with several motivational strategies for language learning. The findings contribute to an understanding of how the use of AfL techniques may contribute to integrating motivational strategies in a more systematic way in the CLIL educational context.

Keywords: assessment for learning (AfL), content and language integrated learning (CLIL), bilingual education in Spain, motivation, mixed methods, corpus based empirical research
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Conceptual background: Assessment for learning (AfL)
  • 3.Conceptual background: Motivation
  • 4.Research context
  • 5.The study
    • 5.1Participants
    • 5.2Instrument
    • 5.3Corpus
    • 5.4Methodology
  • 6.Selected findings
    • 6.1Overview of teachers’ use of motivational strategies
    • 6.2Real time analysis of teacher motivational strategies by subject
    • 6.3Qualitative comparison of selected motivational techniques
      • 6.3.1MOLT category: Signposting
      • 6.3.2MOLT category: Display and referential questions
      • 6.3.3MOLT strategy: Elicitation of peer and self-correction
  • 7.Discussion and conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 26 January 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.17025.bas
References
Alvarez, L., Ananda, S., Walqui, A., Sato, E., & Rabinowitz, S.
(2014) Focusing formative assessment on the needs of English language learners. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.Google Scholar
Ames, C.
(1992) Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84 (3), 261–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, J. W.
(1964) An introduction to motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Barbero, T.
(2012) Assessment tools and practices in CLIL. In F. Quartapelle (Ed.), Assessment and evaluation in CLIL (pp. 38–56). Retrieved from: [URL].
Bingham, G., Holbrook, T., & Meyers, L. E.
(2010) Using self-assessments in elementary classrooms. Phi Delta Kappan, 91 (5), 59–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Birenbaum, M., Kimron, H., Shilton, H., & Shahaf-Barzilay, R.
(2009) Cycles of inquiry: Formative assessment in service of learning in classrooms and in school-based professional communities. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 35 (4), 130–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Black, P., & Wiliam, D.
(1998a) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in education, 5 (1), 7–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998b) Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappa, October 1–13. Retrieved from [URL].
(2003) In praise of educational research: Formative assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 29 (5) 623–637. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T., & Madaus, G. F.
(1971) Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Broadfoot, P. M., Daugherty, R., Gardner, J., Harlen, W., James, M., & Stobart, G.
(2002) Assessment for learning: 10 principles. Cambridge, UK: University of Cambridge School of Education. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clegg, J.
(2012) Preface. In F. Quartapelle (Ed.), Assessment and evaluation in CLIL (pp. 5–7). Retrieved from: [URL].
Consejería de Educación, Comunidad de Madrid
(2016) Bilingual schools in the Comunidad de Madrid. Retrieved from: [URL].
Coyle, D.
(1999) Theory and planning for effective classrooms: Supporting students in content and language integrated learning contexts. In J. Masih (Ed.), Learning through a foreign language: Models, methods and outcomes (pp. 1–26). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.Google Scholar
(2010) Assessment issues in CLIL. In D. Coyle, P. Hood, & D. Marsh (Eds.), CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Csizér, K., & Dörnyei, D.
(2005) Language learners’ motivational profiles and their motivated learning behavior. Language Learning, 55 (4), 613–659. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M.
(1992) The initiation and regulation of intrinsically motivated learning and achievement. In A. K. Boggiano & T. S. Pittman (Eds.), Achievement and motivation: A social-fevelopmental perspective (pp. 9–36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z.
(1998) Motivation in second and foreign language learning. Language Teaching, 31 1, 117–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001) Motivational strategies in the foreign language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005) The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S.
(1999) Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality and development. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L.
(1988) A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95 (2), 256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eurydice
(2006) Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice.Google Scholar
Flórez, M. T., & Sammons, P.
(2013) Assessment for learning: Effects and impact. Evaluative Report. CfBT Education Trust, University of Oxford (England), Department of Education.Google Scholar
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E.
(1972) Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Gobierno de España, Ministerio de la Presidencia
(1990) Ley Orgánica de Ordenación General del Sistema Educativo [Organic Act on the General Organization of the Education System]. Retrieved from: [URL].
Guilloteaux, M. J., & Dörnyei, Z.
(2008) Motivating language learners: A classroom oriented investigation of the effects of motivational strategies on student motivation. TESOL Quarterly, 42 (1), 55–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guion, L. A., Diehl, D. C., & McDonald, D.
(2002) Triangulation: Establishing the validity of qualitative studies. University of Florida IFAS Extension. Retrieved from [URL].
Halbach, A.
(2009) The primary school teacher and the challenges of bilingual education. In E. Davouz & M. Guerrini (Eds.), CLIL across educational levels: Experiences from primary, secondary and tertiary contexts (pp. 19–26) Madrid: Richmond-Santillana.Google Scholar
Harlen, W.
(2007) Assessment of learning. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Heritage, M., Walqui, A., & Linquanti, R.
(2013, April). Formative assessment as contingent teaching and learning: Perspectives on assessment as and for language learning in the content areas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Hönig, I.
(2010) Assessment in CLIL: Theoretical and empirical research. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A.
(2007) Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1 (2), 112–133. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kellard, K., Costello, M., Godfrey, D., Griffiths, E., & Rees, C.
(2008) Evaluation of the Developing Thinking and Assessment for Learning Development Programme. Cardiff: Welsh Assembly Government.Google Scholar
Kiely, R.
(2009) CLIL – The question of assessment. Retrieved from: [URL].
Kirton, A., Hallam, S., Peffers, J., Robertson, P., & Stobart, G.
(2007) Revolution, evolution or a Trojan horse? Piloting assessment for learning in some Scottish primary schools. British Educational Research Journal, 33 (4), 605–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasagabaster, D.
(2008) Foreign language competence in content and language integrated learning courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1 1, 30–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011) English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5 (1), 3–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R.
(2012) The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Maggi, F.
(2012) Evaluation in CLIL. In F. Quartapelle (Ed.), Assessment and evaluation in CLIL (pp. 57–75). Retrieved from: [URL].
Maljers, A., Marsh, D., Coyle, D., Hartiala, A., Marsland, B., & Perez-Vidal, C.
(2001) CLIL: Compendium. Retrieved from: [URL].
Marsh, D.
(2002) CLIL/EMILE – The European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential. Jyväskylä, Finland: University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar
McCallum, B., Hargreaves, E., & Gipps, C.
(2000) Learning: The pupil’s voice. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30 (2), 275–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mehan, H.
(1979) What time is it, Denise? Asking known information questions in classroom discourse. Theory into Practice, 18 (4), 285–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Natrillo, G.
(1987) The impact of evaluation processes on students. Educational Psychologist. 22 (2), 155–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D.
(2006) Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31 (2), 198–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Donnell, M.
(2008) The UAM CorpusTool: Software for corpus annotation and exploration. In B. Callejas et al. (Eds.), La lingüística aplicada hoy: Comprendiendo el lenguaje y la mente [Applied linguistics now: Understanding language and mind] (pp. 1433–1447). Almería, Spain: Universidad de Almería.Google Scholar
Pérez-Cañado, M. L.
(2012) CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15 (3), 315–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raynor, J. O., Atkinson, J. W., & Brown, M.
(1974) Subjective aspects of achievement motivation immediately before an examination. In J. W. Atkinson & J. O. Raynor (Eds.), Motivation and achievement (pp. 155–171). Washington DC: Winston & Sons.Google Scholar
Ross, P. M., Siegenthaler, S. L., & Tronson, D. A.
(2006) Assessment for learning and motivation. Proceedings of the UniServe Science Assessment Symposium (pp. 120–125). Sydney: University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Sadler, D. R.
(1989) Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18 1, 119–144. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schunk, D. H., & Swartz, C. W.
(1993) Goals and process feedback: Effects on self-efficacy and writing achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18 (3), 337–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schunk, D. H.
(1996) Goal and self-evaluative influences during children’s cognitive skill learning. American Educational Research Journal, 33 1, 359–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
To, J., & Carless, D.
(2016) Making productive use of exemplars: Peer discussion and teacher guidance for positive transfer of strategies. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 40 (6), 746–764. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tunstall, P., & Gipps, C.
(1996) Teacher feedback to young children in formative assessment: A Typology. British Educational Journal, 22 (4), 389–404. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
UK Department for Education
(2013) Primary assessment and accountability under the new National Curriculum. Retrieved from: [URL].
Webb, M., & Jones, J.
(2009) Exploring tensions in developing assessment for learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 16 (2), 165–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wewer, T.
(2014) Assessment of young learners’ English proficiency in bilingual content instruction CLIL. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Turku, Turku, Finland. Retrieved from: [URL].
Williams, M., & Burden, R. L.
(1997) Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yin, Y., Shavelson, R., Ayala, C., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Brandon, P., & Furtak, E.
(2008) On the impact of formative assessment on student motivation, achievement, and conceptual change. Applied Measurement in Education, 21 (4), 335–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Young, E.
(2005) Assessment for learning: Embedding and extending. Retrieved from: [URL].
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Liu, Jiajia Eve, Yuen Yi Lo & Jieting Jerry Xin
2023. CLIL teacher assessment literacy: A scoping review. Teaching and Teacher Education 129 ► pp. 104150 ff. DOI logo
Schellekens, Lonneke H., Harold G.J. Bok, Lubberta H. de Jong, Marieke F. van der Schaaf, Wim D.J. Kremer & Cees P.M. van der Vleuten
2021. A scoping review on the notions of Assessment as Learning (AaL), Assessment for Learning (AfL), and Assessment of Learning (AoL). Studies in Educational Evaluation 71 ► pp. 101094 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.