The positioning of Japanese in a secondary CLIL science classroom in Australia
Language use and the learning of content
In Australia, content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is commonly implemented as a way to encourage
innovation in language teaching. This paper explores how Japanese can also be used to innovate the teaching of content.
Qualitative data are drawn from a Year 8 science Japanese CLIL classroom in a secondary school with an opt-in CLIL program. In the
class, a monolingual (in English) science teacher was co-teaching with a Japanese language teacher. Findings from observations,
after-class reflections, teacher and student interviews, a student survey and work samples revealed that students were highly
engaged with the Japanese component of their science lessons. Kanji was further positioned as a way for students to deepen their
understanding of scientific concepts. However, there also appeared to be a separation in the way both teachers and students spoke
about Japanese language use and learning science. Implications of these findings are discussed in the paper.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Literature review
- 2.1Science and content and language integration
- 2.2Language-specific issues in using a target language to teach content
- 3.The study
- 4.Findings
- 4.1Using kanji to reinforce scientific concepts
- 4.2Learning Japanese and learning science
- 4.3Explanation and application
- 5.Discussion and conclusion
- Notes
-
References
References (52)
References
Abe, Y. (2002). 漢字という障害 [An Obstacle Named Kanji]. Shakai gengogaku, 21, 37–55.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Abe, Y. (2015). ことばのバリアフリー: 情報保障とコミュニケーションの 障害学 [Barrier-free Language: Disability studies of information assurance and communication]. Tokyo: Seikatsu shoin.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Andō, M. (1942). 日本語のむづかしさ [The difficulty of Japanese language]. Nihongo, 2(3), 4–11.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2008). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bravo, M. A. (2017). Cultivating teacher knowledge of the role of language in science: A model of elementary grade pre-service teacher preparation. In A. W. Oliveira & M. H. Weinburgh (Eds.), Science teacher preparation in content-based second language acquisition (pp. 25–40). Springer: Switzerland. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cross, R., & Gearon, M. (2013). Research and evaluation of the content and language integrated learning (CLIL) approach to teaching and learning languages in Victorian schools. Melbourne Australia: Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualizing content and language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., Lorenzo, F., & Nikula, T. (2014). ‘You can stand under my umbrella‘: Immersion, CLIL and bilingual education. A response to Cenoz, Genesee & Gorter (2013). Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 213–218. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2016). Cognitive discourse functions: Specifying an integrative interdisciplinary construct. In E. Dafouz & T. Nikula (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 29–54). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Jong, E. (2002). Effective bilingual education: From theory to academic achievement in a two-way bilingual program. Bilingual Research Journal, 26(1), 65–84. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
De Kretser, A., & Spence-Brown, R. (2010). The current state of Japanese language education in Australian schools. Melbourne: Education Services Australia.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Department of Education and Training (DET). (2017). Languages provision in Victorian Government schools, 2016. Retrieved from <[URL]>
Eurydice. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Eurydice. Retrieved from [URL]
Fernández-Sanjurjo, J., Fernández-Costales, A., & Arias Blanco, J. M. (2017). Analysing students’ content-learning in science in CLIL vs. non-CLIL programmes: Empirical evidence from Spain. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–14. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fielding, R., & Harbon, L. (2015). Implementng a content and language integrated learning program in New South Wales primary schools: Teachers’ perceptions of the challenges and opportunities. Babel, 49(2), 16+![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Fortune, T. W., & Tedick, D. J. (2008). One-way, two-way and indigenous immersion: A call for cross-fertilization. In T. W. Fortune & D. J. Tedick (Eds.), Pathways to multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp. 3–21). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual children. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Genesee, F. (2004). Dual language development and disorders: A handbook on bilingualism and second language learning. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, M. A. K., & Mattheissen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd edition), London: Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hovhannisyan, A. (2018). Japanese language education in the greater East Asia co-prosperity sphere and the Kokuji Mondai (National Script Problem). In K. Hashimoto (Ed.), Japanese Language and Soft Power in Asia (pp. 65–81). Singapore: Palgrave MacMillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hüttner, J., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2013). The power of beliefs: Lay theories and their influence on the implementation of CLIL programmes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 267–284. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Jäppinen, A. (2005). Thinking and content learning of mathematics and science as cognitional development in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Teaching through a foreign language in Finland. Language and Education, 19(2), 147–168. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lee, W., & Lee, J. S. (2017). Math instruction is not universal: Language specific pedagogical knowledge in Korean/English two-way immersion programs. Bilingual Research Journal. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lindholm-Leary, K. (2001). Dual language education. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lindholm-Leary, K., & Genesee, F. (2010). Alternative educational programs for English language learners. In California Department of Education (Eds.), Improving education for English learners: Research-based approaches (pp. 323–382). Sacramento, CA: CDE Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lyster, R., & Mori, H. (2006). Interactional feedback and instructional counterbalance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 321–341. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martin-Beltrán, M. (2010). The two-way language bridge: Co-constructing bilingual language learning opportunities. Modern Language Journal, 94(2), 254–277. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Schuck, K., & Ting, T. (2015). A pluriliteracies approach to content and language integrated learning – Mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction and meaning-making. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 41–57. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nikula, T. (2015). Hands-on tasks in CLIL science classrooms as sites for subject-specific language use and learning. System, 541, 14–27. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., & Lorenzo, F. (2016). More than content and language: The complexity of integration in CLIL and bilingual education. In T. Nikula, C. Dalton-Puffer, A. Llinares, & F. Lorenzo (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 1–25). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Oller, D. K., & Eilers, R. (2002). Language and literacy in bilingual children. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Paran, A. (2013). Content and language integrated learning: Panacea or policy borrowing myth? Applied Linguistics Review, 4(2), 317–342. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
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 logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pérez-Vidal, C., & Roquet, H. (2015). The linguistic impact of a CLIL science programme: An analysis measuring relative gains. System, 541, 80–90. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rasulo, M., de Meo, A., & de Santo, M. (2017). Processing science through content and language integrated learning (CLIL): A teacher’s practicum. In A. W. Oliveira & M. H. Weinburgh (Eds.), Science teacher preparation in content-based second language acquisition (pp. 305–322). Springer: Switzerland. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Oliveira, L. C. (2017). A language-based approach to content instruction (LACI) in science for English language learners. In A. W. Oliveira & M. H. Weinburgh (Eds.), Science teacher preparation in content-based second language acquisition (pp. 41–56). Springer: Switzerland. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Silva, C., Weinburgh, M., Malloy, R., Horak Smith, K., & Nettles Marshall, J. (2012). Toward integration: An instructional model of science and academic language. Childhood Education, March/April, 91–95. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Smala, S. (2016). CLIL in Queensland: The evolution of ‘immersion’. Babel, 50(2–3), 20.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Swain, M. (2000). French immersion research in Canada: Recent contributions to SLA and applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 201, 199–212. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tanaka, K. (2011). 漢字が日本語をほろぼす [Kanji are destroying Japanese language]. Tokyo: Kadokawa SSC Shinsho.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tedick, D. J., & Young, A. I. (2014). Fifth grade two-way immersion students’ responses to form-focused instruction. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 784–807. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement: Final report. Santa Cruz, CA/Washington, DC: Center for Research on Education, Diversity & Excellence.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Turner, M. (2013). Content-based Japanese language teaching in Australian schools: Is CLIL a good fit? Japanese Studies, 33(3), 315–330. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Turner, M. (2015). The significance of affordances on teachers’ choices: Embedding Japanese across the curriculum in Australian secondary schools. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(3), 276–290. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ullmann, M. (1999). History and geography through French: CLIL in a UK secondary school. In J. Masih (Ed.), Learning through a foreign language: Models, methods and outcomes (pp. 96–105). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Weinburgh, M. H., & Silva, C. (2010). Science content knowledge and language acquisition: Replacing, reloading, repositioning, revealing and retiring academic words. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Science Teacher Education, Sacramento, CA.
Wode, H. (1999). Language learning in European immersion classes. In J. Masih (Ed.), Learning through a foreign language: Models, methods and outcomes (pp. 16–25). London: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Gómez-Parra, María-Elena
2021.
The PETaL Approach to Bilingual and Intercultural Education in Early Childhood Education. In
Teaching Practices and Equitable Learning in Children's Language Education [
Advances in Early Childhood and K-12 Education, ],
► pp. 191 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Gómez-Parra, María-Elena
2022.
The PETaL Approach to Bilingual and Intercultural Education in Early Childhood Education. In
Research Anthology on Early Childhood Development and School Transition in the Digital Era,
► pp. 41 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Turner, Marianne & Ruth Fielding
2021.
CLIL Teacher training and teachers’ choices: exploring planned language use in the Australian context.
Language, Culture and Curriculum 34:3
► pp. 224 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 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.