Addressing social equity by making explicit the implicit value systems within content and language learning: A pedagogical framework for culture within CLIL

Russell Cross
The University of Melbourne

Despite efforts to redress the problem of social inequity within education, data reveals the student attainment gap continues to widen on the basis of socioeconomic background, particularly within Anglophone contexts (OECD, 2019OECD (2019) PISA 2018 results (Vol. II). OECD Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarOECD (2019) PISA 2018 results (Vol. II). OECD Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2009) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). Allen Lane.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2009) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). Allen Lane.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Bourdieu’s (1986) (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar concept of ‘cultural capital’ has been one especially powerful concept for understanding the causes of such inequity as it relates to social class, and how entrenched patterns of privilege within institutions, such as schools, value certain forms of cultural capital – and associated ways of knowing, being, and doing – over others. Much of the existing CLIL research on social (in)equity has tended to examine either the impact of programmatic conditions on dis/advantage (e.g., streaming, access; see also Evniskaya & Llinares, this issue), or the role of language for enabling more inclusive instructional practices (e.g., differentiation, scaffolding). Both lines of inquiry have produced valuable insights on how CLIL can contribute to more equitable outcomes, but this paper aims to offer a third line, focusing on how greater equity can be achieved through the conceptualization of culture within CLIL contexts. Informed by Bourdieu’s concept of ‘cultural capital’ which has helped advance class-based understandings of inequity, the paper develops a pedagogic framework that explicitly accounts for culture when there is a simultaneous focus on both language and content, drawing on examples from instructional practice.

Publication history

Date received: 10 October 2022

Date accepted: 17 February 2023

Published online: 30 June 2023

Table of contents

Introduction

The impetus for this paper was a broader concern and longer-term agenda (Bower et al., 2020Bower, K., Cross, R., & Coyle, D. (2020) CLIL in multilingual and English-background contexts. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 3–21). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBower, K., Cross, R., & Coyle, D. (2020) CLIL in multilingual and English-background contexts. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 3–21). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) that content and language integrated learning (CLIL) evolves in ways conducive to enhancing social equity. A long-standing problem within education has been the attainment gap between the advantaged and disadvantaged – especially, but not limited to, dis/advantage based on class – and this gap continues to widen (OECD, 2019OECD (2019) PISA 2018 results (Vol. II). OECD Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarOECD (2019) PISA 2018 results (Vol. II). OECD Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2009) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). Allen Lane.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2009) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). Allen Lane.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Further, as I discuss later (and also in the Editorial of this Special Issue (Llinares & Cross)), CLIL and other forms of bilingual education have been heavily critiqued for contributing to this problem, rather than helping redress it. One development that has helped understand why inequity persists, particularly in relation to class, is Bourdieu’s (1986) (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar concept of ‘cultural capital’: forms of accumulated knowledge and ‘ways of being’ valued by dominant social groups and their institutions, such as education systems, that contributes to persistent, long-term patterns of generational disadvantage among marginalised social groups.

Whereas much of the research on CLIL and equity has examined either the effects of problematic conditions that impact dis/advantage (e.g., streaming (see, for example, Fernández-Agüero & Hidalgo-McCabe, 2020Fernández-Agüero, M., & Hidalgo-McCabe, E. (2020) CLIL students’ affectivity in the transition between education levels: The effect of streaming at the beginning of secondary education. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarFernández-Agüero, M., & Hidalgo-McCabe, E. (2020) CLIL students’ affectivity in the transition between education levels: The effect of streaming at the beginning of secondary education. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Llinares & Evnitskaya, 2021Llinares, A., & Evnitskaya, N. (2021) Classroom interaction in CLIL programs. TESOL Quarterly, 55 (2), 366–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarLlinares, A., & Evnitskaya, N. (2021) Classroom interaction in CLIL programs. TESOL Quarterly, 55(2), 366–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; McCabe, 2020Hidalgo-McCabe, E. A. (2020) Streaming in CLIL and its effects on students’ socialisation in school. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. UAM Repository. https://​repositorio​.uam​.es​/bitstream​/handle​/10486​/692813​/hidalgo​_mccabe​_elisa​.pdf​?sequence​=1​&isAllowed​=yHidalgo-McCabe, E. A. (2020) Streaming in CLIL and its effects on students’ socialisation in school. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. UAM Repository. https://​repositorio​.uam​.es​/bitstream​/handle​/10486​/692813​/hidalgo​_mccabe​_elisa​.pdf​?sequence​=1​&isAllowed​=y; Tompkins, 2022Tompkins, F. L. (2022) Socioeconomic status, English exposure and CLIL motivation in high and low exposure CLIL groups. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 5 (1), 41–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarTompkins, F. L. (2022) Socioeconomic status, English exposure and CLIL motivation in high and low exposure CLIL groups. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 5(1), 41–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar)), or the role of language for enabling more inclusive practices (e.g., differentiation (Nikula et al., 2022Nikula, T., Skinnari, K., & Mård-Miettinen, K. (2022) Diversity in CLIL as experienced by Finnish CLIL teachers and students. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarNikula, T., Skinnari, K., & Mård-Miettinen, K. (2022) Diversity in CLIL as experienced by Finnish CLIL teachers and students. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Pérez Cañado et al., 2019Pérez Cañado, M. L., Coyle, D., Ting, T., Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Matz, F., & Jerez Montoya, T. (2019) ADiBE Project. Retrieved 10 October 2022 from https://​adibeproject​.com/Pérez Cañado, M. L., Coyle, D., Ting, T., Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Matz, F., & Jerez Montoya, T. (2019) ADiBE Project. Retrieved 10 October 2022 from https://​adibeproject​.com/; Roiha, 2014Roiha, A. S. (2014) Teachers’ views on differentiation in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Language And Education, 28 (1), 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarRoiha, A. S. (2014) Teachers’ views on differentiation in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Language And Education, 28(1), 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Siepmann et al., 2021Siepmann, P., Rumlich, D., Matz, F., & Römhild, R. (2021) Attention to diversity in German CLIL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarSiepmann, P., Rumlich, D., Matz, F., & Römhild, R. (2021) Attention to diversity in German CLIL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Tiihonen, 2020Tiihonen, N. (2020) Differentiation in CLIL mathematics in the first and second grade. University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarTiihonen, N. (2020) Differentiation in CLIL mathematics in the first and second grade. University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar)), this paper draws on cultural capital to (re)consider how ‘culture’ might be more fully and transparently understood in CLIL contexts, and its role in contributing to more equitable outcomes from schooling. Although social inequity has many causes (including, but not limited to, ableness, gender, and race), the framework proposed in this paper is informed by understandings of class.

Given its nomenclature, it is perhaps unsurprising that most CLIL research to date has focused primarily on ‘content’ and ‘language’, together with implications for cognition, given its association with ‘learning’. These three concepts – content, communication (through language or other means), and cognition – comprise not only some of the most readily identifiable themes within the CLIL literature (i.e., being three of the four elements identified in Coyle’s (2007)Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar ‘4 Cs’ CLIL framework) but are also well-established priorities in contexts beyond those focused on bi/plurilingual learning. Mainstream education research, for example, has long acknowledged the need to understand how language works across the curriculum (Bullock, 1975Bullock, A. (1975) A language for life. HM Stationery Office.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBullock, A. (1975) A language for life. HM Stationery Office.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Schleppegrell, 2004Schleppegrell, M. (2004) The language of schooling. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarSchleppegrell, M. (2004) The language of schooling. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Unsworth, 2000Unsworth, L. (2000) Investigating subject-specific literacies in school learning. In L. Unsworth (Ed.), Researching language in schools and communities (pp. 245–274). Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarUnsworth, L. (2000) Investigating subject-specific literacies in school learning. In L. Unsworth (Ed.), Researching language in schools and communities (pp. 245–274). Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), as well as the significance of content-specific pedagogical knowledge – distinct from either subject-matter knowledge, or general instructional ‘know how’ (Gess-Newsome & Lederman, 2001Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.) (2001) Examining pedagogical content knowledge. Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarGess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G. (Eds.) (2001) Examining pedagogical content knowledge. Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Shulman, 1987Shulman, L. (1987) Knowledge and teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (1), 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarShulman, L. (1987) Knowledge and teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) – as well as the value of pedagogies specifically aimed at fostering higher-order cognitive engagement (Zohar, 2004Zohar, A. (2004) Elements of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge regarding instruction of higher order thinking. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15 (4), 293–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarZohar, A. (2004) Elements of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge regarding instruction of higher order thinking. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15(4), 293–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, 2006 (2006) The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of teaching higher order thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15 (3), 331–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (2006) The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of teaching higher order thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 331–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar).

However Coyle (2007)Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar argues that culture is central to CLIL; indeed, her 4 Cs model depicts this well with ‘culture’ in the centre of the pyramid upon which the vertices of content, communication, and cognition rest. Despite the significant focus on content, communication, and cognition outlined above, however, there has generally been far less focus on this ‘fourth C’: culture. Further, although a significant body of research on culture exists within languages education (i.e., TESOL and world languages), there is, akin to CLIL, a similar dearth of research on culture as it specifically relates to bilingual education,11.Throughout this paper, “bilingual” (e.g., bilingual learning, bilingual education, bilingual settings) is used as a generic term to refer to various settings with a focus beyond language learning alone (e.g., CLIL, EMI programs, immersion schooling, content-based instruction, etc.). Within this range of possibilities, “CLIL” refers to specific situations where there is explicit attention to teaching new language and new content as dual learning outcomes (e.g., Coyle et al., 2010Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Lasagabaster, 2022Lasagabaster, D. (2022) English-medium instruction in higher education. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarLasagabaster, D. (2022) English-medium instruction in higher education. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Macaro, 2018Macaro, E. (2018) English medium instruction. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMacaro, E. (2018) English medium instruction. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). with the important and notable exception of minority language groups and culture (e.g., Council of Europe, 2020Council of Europe (2020) Good practices of multilingual and minority language medium education. Council of Europe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCouncil of Europe (2020) Good practices of multilingual and minority language medium education. Council of Europe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Gorter et al., 2014Gorter, D., Zenotz, V., & Cenoz, J. (Eds.) (2014) Minority languages and multilingual education. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarGorter, D., Zenotz, V., & Cenoz, J. (Eds.) (2014) Minority languages and multilingual education. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Soto, 1997Soto, L. D. (1997) Language, culture, and power. State University of New York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarSoto, L. D. (1997) Language, culture, and power. State University of New York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Valdiviezo & Nieto, 2015Valdiviezo, L. A., & Nieto, S. (2015) Culture in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. In W. E. Wright, S. Boun, & O. García (Eds.), The Handbook of Bilingual and Multilingual Education (pp. 92–108). Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarValdiviezo, L. A., & Nieto, S. (2015) Culture in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. In W. E. Wright, S. Boun, & O. García (Eds.), The Handbook of Bilingual and Multilingual Education (pp. 92–108). Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Wang & Lehtomäki, 2022Wang, L., & Lehtomäki, E. (2022) Bilingual education and beyond. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25 (6), 2256–2268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWang, L., & Lehtomäki, E. (2022) Bilingual education and beyond. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(6), 2256–2268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Wiese & García, 1998Wiese, A.-M., & García, E. E. (1998) The Bilingual Education Act: Language minority students and equal educational opportunity. Bilingual Research Journal, 22 (1), 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWiese, A.-M., & García, E. E. (1998) The Bilingual Education Act: Language minority students and equal educational opportunity. Bilingual Research Journal, 22(1), 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Rather, most research on culture with respect to bilingual settings remains limited to culture as it relates to the languages aspect of these programs, rather than what might be particular given the additional focus on content (e.g., Centre of Italian Studies, 2022Centre of Italian Studies (2022) The importance of bilingual education in a multi-cultural society like Australia. Centre of Italian Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCentre of Italian Studies (2022) The importance of bilingual education in a multi-cultural society like Australia. Centre of Italian Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Khudobina et al., 2018Khudobina, O., Fedulov, I., & Bondarenko, E. (2018) Cultural approach in bilingual training of international students. SHS Web of Conferences. Khudobina, O., Fedulov, I., & Bondarenko, E. (2018) Cultural approach in bilingual training of international students. SHS Web of Conferences. ; Kuo & Lai, 2006Kuo, M.-M., & Lai, C.-C. (2006) Linguistics across cultures: The impact of culture on second language learning. Journal of Foreign Language Instruction, 1 (1), 1–10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarKuo, M.-M., & Lai, C.-C. (2006) Linguistics across cultures: The impact of culture on second language learning. Journal of Foreign Language Instruction, 1(1), 1–10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Rochanavibhata, 2022Rochanavibhata, S. (2022) Language development in bilingual preschoolers. Northwestern University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarRochanavibhata, S. (2022) Language development in bilingual preschoolers. Northwestern University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar).

The paper begins by examining how culture is currently understood within the field of languages education and developments around the notion of ‘intercultural’ competence. It then considers how this relates to CLIL, where the integrated, simultaneous focus on content and communication carries not only additional demands for cognition, but also the often implicit, normative practices that suggest how one should engage, behave, and ‘be’; i.e., the cultural assumptions around not just ‘being a user of language’, but also ‘being a learner’, acquiring specific forms of ‘know how’ identifiable with a particular disciplinary community. Largely under-theorized in existing literature, I outline a three-part framework that delineates each of these dimensions with respect to the societal, disciplinary, and pedagogical cultures of CLIL. In doing so, the paper also brings into conversation implications from a social equity perspective given Bourdieu’s class-based understanding that these ways of being, knowing, and doing are often not explicitly taught, yet are implicitly expected and rewarded. The paper concludes by arguing that CLIL, with culture at its centre as Coyle (2007)Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar asserts, is uniquely positioned to powerfully disrupt the normative practices of schooling driven by cultural assumptions that would otherwise be rarely articulated, let alone scaffolded, along with the language used to mobilise them.

Intercultural languages teaching

Within languages education, culture has, until relatively recently, been conventionally understood in terms of ‘high’ or ‘Capital C’ culture (McCarthy & Carter, 1994McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (1994) Language as discourse. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMcCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (1994) Language as discourse. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), where culture “[resides] primarily in the text itself” (Liddicoat, 2004 (2004) The conceptualisation of the cultural component of language teaching in Australian language-in-education policy. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 25 (4), 297–317. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (2004) The conceptualisation of the cultural component of language teaching in Australian language-in-education policy. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 25(4), 297–317. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 299). This is exemplified in the classic pairing of ‘language’ and ‘cultures studies’, with the latter focused on literature, art, music, and their historical contexts. Italian Culture Studies at the University of Melbourne (2022)The University of Melbourne (2022) Italian Cultural Studies A (ITAL20009). Retrieved 27 August 2022 from https://​handbook​.unimelb​.edu​.au​/2022​/subjects​/ital20009The University of Melbourne (2022) Italian Cultural Studies A (ITAL20009). Retrieved 27 August 2022 from https://​handbook​.unimelb​.edu​.au​/2022​/subjects​/ital20009, for example, analyses “literary texts and other materials [to] examine critically various aspects of Italian history and culture”, while the BA in Languages and Cultures at the School of Oriental and Asian Studies (The University of London, 2022The University of London (2022) BA Languages and Cultures. Retrieved 27 August 2022 from https://​www​.soas​.ac​.uk​/languages​-cultures​-linguistics​/programmes​/ba​-languages​-and​-cultures/The University of London (2022) BA Languages and Cultures. Retrieved 27 August 2022 from https://​www​.soas​.ac​.uk​/languages​-cultures​-linguistics​/programmes​/ba​-languages​-and​-cultures/) “introduces students to the cultures and societies … through the study of languages, film, literature and cultural studies”. In the context of school-based languages programs, this has been further reduced to the synecdoche of “food, festival, folklore, and fashion” (Montgomery, 2006Montgomery, J. (2006) Multiculturalism. Childhood Education, 83 , 58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMontgomery, J. (2006) Multiculturalism. Childhood Education, 83, 58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 58).

Although this notion of (high) culture remains prominent, including how students often understand culture themselves (Chavez, 2002Chavez, M. (2002) We say “culture” and students ask “what?”. Die Unterrichtspraxis, 35 (2), 129–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarChavez, M. (2002) We say “culture” and students ask “what?”. Die Unterrichtspraxis, 35(2), 129–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Du, 2021Du, L. (2021, October 21). A study of the role of foreign culture in Chinese international high school students’ English. International Conference on Public Relations and Social Sciences (ICPRSS 2021). Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarDu, L. (2021, October 21). A study of the role of foreign culture in Chinese international high school students’ English. International Conference on Public Relations and Social Sciences (ICPRSS 2021). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), new understandings of how languages are learned have led to more nuanced accounts of culture as it relates to the deeper contribution of languages learning to students’ overall educational experience and the development of intercultural competence: “competences which enable them to mediate/interpret the values, beliefs, and behaviours (the ‘cultures’) of themselves and of others and to ‘stand on the bridge’ or indeed ‘be the bridge’ between people of different languages and cultures” (Byram, 2006Byram, M. (2006, July 4). Language teaching for intercultural citizenship. Keynote address to New Zealand Association of Language Teachers Association Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.Byram, M. (2006, July 4). Language teaching for intercultural citizenship. Keynote address to New Zealand Association of Language Teachers Association Conference, Auckland, New Zealand., p. 12). This intercultural turn has repositioned how culture sits in relation to language learning, and its implications for developing learner agency and identity. The Australian Curriculum (National Curriculum Board, 2009National Curriculum Board (2009) The shape of the Australian curriculum (May, 2009). National Curriculum Board.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarNational Curriculum Board (2009) The shape of the Australian curriculum (May, 2009). National Curriculum Board.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), for example, refers to “intercultural language learning” (ICLL) in ways that suggest it now supersedes “communicative language teaching” as the dominant framing for how languages are taught, with the key distinction being a focus on not simply “making meaning”, but that students engage with culture to further reflect on and how and why language comes to have the meaning that it does (Kohler, 2020Kohler, M. (2020) Developing intercultural language learning. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarKohler, M. (2020) Developing intercultural language learning. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). With greater awareness of the typically unthought assumptions that inform different possibilities for understanding the world, learners can then deliberate on its implications as meaning-makers in their own relationships with others. For intercultural learning, the goal is to not valorise either the learner’s culture (C1) or the culture of the other language (C2) as better or worse, but to arrive at C3: a genuinely new space for understanding that results from a synthesis of both (Liddicoat, 2002Liddicoat, A. (2002) Static and dynamic views of culture and intercultural language acquisition. Babel, 36 (3), 4–11, 37–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarLiddicoat, A. (2002) Static and dynamic views of culture and intercultural language acquisition. Babel, 36(3), 4–11, 37–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). This outcome, intercultural awareness, thus goes beyond ‘understanding different cultures’ as something students do for ‘tolerance’ or even ‘acceptance’, but instead affords a new form of competence which enables learners to make informed agentic language choices with transformative potential on how they interpret and respond to prevailing social structures (i.e., both C1 and C2), given a new perspective (C3).

Three key insights unfold from this understanding of culture. First, it confirms long-standing critiques of culture as neither static nor monolithic (Kramsch, 2004Kramsch, C. (2004) Language, thought, and culture. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 235–261). Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarKramsch, C. (2004) Language, thought, and culture. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 235–261). Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Intercultural language learning instead highlights the inseparability of culture from language, with culture realised in and through the agentic, creative choices learners make as active language users (Cross, 2012Cross, R. (2012) Creative in finding creativity in the curriculum. Australian Educational Researcher, 39 (4), 431–445. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCross, R. (2012) Creative in finding creativity in the curriculum. Australian Educational Researcher, 39(4), 431–445. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Second, (collective) culture is inseparable from (individual) identities, backgrounds, and ‘lifeworlds’ that learners bring as meaning-makers (Gutiérrez & Rogoff, 2003Gutiérrez, K., & Rogoff, B. (2003) Cultural ways of learning. Educational Researcher, 32 (5), 19–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarGutiérrez, K., & Rogoff, B. (2003) Cultural ways of learning. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Third, and related to both preceding points, ‘learning culture’ is not receptive work. ‘High culture’, conceived as canonical knowledge and artefacts, provides the foundation for passive, transmission-driven pedagogies, critiqued by Freire (1970Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarFreire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, pp. 71–72) as the basis for a “banking” model of schooling where knowledge is positioned as a ‘gift’ transferred from those who ‘have’ to those “consider[ed] to know nothing”. From the perspective of equity and social justice, such pedagogies rely on social positioning that bestows power and dominance on one group over another simply by virtue of cultural background. This is a point I develop in the sections that follow, with reference to Bourdieu’s (1986) (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar concept of cultural capital.

Cultural capital is not, in itself, a new concept within the field of applied linguistics (e.g., Block, 2014Block, D. (2014) Social class in applied linguistics. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBlock, D. (2014) Social class in applied linguistics. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), but an explicit focus on how language teaching might help remedy class-based problems is relatively recent. As Vandrick (2014Vandrick, S. (2014) The role of social class in English language Education. Journal of Language, Identity, & Education, 13 (2), 85–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarVandrick, S. (2014) The role of social class in English language Education. Journal of Language, Identity, & Education, 13(2), 85–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 189) observes, although “language educators are often advocates for social justice and often focus on learners’ identities, such as race, gender, and ethnicity … they tend not to employ a social class lens in analyzing students, teachers, classrooms, and institutions”. Most class-based analyses focused on bilingual education to date have attended to macro-societal concerns, such as access (e.g., Fernández-Agüero & Hidalgo-McCabe, 2020Fernández-Agüero, M., & Hidalgo-McCabe, E. (2020) CLIL students’ affectivity in the transition between education levels: The effect of streaming at the beginning of secondary education. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarFernández-Agüero, M., & Hidalgo-McCabe, E. (2020) CLIL students’ affectivity in the transition between education levels: The effect of streaming at the beginning of secondary education. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Heller, 2006Heller, M. (2006) Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography (2nd ed.). Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarHeller, M. (2006) Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography (2nd ed.). Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) and mobility (e.g., Black et al., 2016Black, S., Wright, J., & Cruickshank, K. (2016) The struggle for legitimacy. Critical Studies in Education, 59 (3), 348–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBlack, S., Wright, J., & Cruickshank, K. (2016) The struggle for legitimacy. Critical Studies in Education, 59(3), 348–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Smala et al., 2013Smala, S., Paz, J., & Lingard, B. (2013) Languages, cultural capital and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34 (3), 373–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarSmala, S., Paz, J., & Lingard, B. (2013) Languages, cultural capital and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(3), 373–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Wright et al., 2016Wright, J., Cruickshank, K., & Black, S. (2016) Languages discourses in Australian middle-class schools. Discourse, 39 (1), 98–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWright, J., Cruickshank, K., & Black, S. (2016) Languages discourses in Australian middle-class schools. Discourse, 39(1), 98–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Palmer’s (2009)Palmer, D. K. (2009) Middle-class English speakers in a two-way immersion bilingual classroom: “Everybody should be listening to Jonathan right now…”. TESOL Quarterly, 43 (2), 177–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarPalmer, D. K. (2009) Middle-class English speakers in a two-way immersion bilingual classroom: “Everybody should be listening to Jonathan right now…”. TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 177–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar findings on how middle- and working-class students differently navigate dual language classrooms in the United States, however, resonates closely with issues relevant to this paper, and how even a tacit knowledge of the dynamics of classroom culture contributes to a greater capacity for some students to benefit over others in terms of turn-taking, gaining teacher attention, and the mobilisation of class resources.

The passive, transmission-based model of teaching mentioned above with regard to high-C culture also sits at odds with contemporary understandings of learning and the agentic role of learners who engage with others to collaboratively mediate new stages of development (Alexander, 2017Alexander, R. (2017) Towards dialogic teaching. Dialogos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarAlexander, R. (2017) Towards dialogic teaching. Dialogos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Culture, from an intercultural perspective, instead emphasises inter“action”, since it is through collaborative social action that culture is created, carried, and revealed. ‘Action’ is also central within CLIL. Although Coyle’s (2007)Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar 4Cs helps to clarify what is to be taught (i.e., the demands that emerge when new knowledge and skills and their associated communicative functions, cognitive processes, and cultural assumptions are brought together), it is a foundation that then informs how: practices that scaffold learners’ capacity to access, build, and (re)create this (new) knowledge, through (new) language (Cross, 2012Cross, R. (2012) Creative in finding creativity in the curriculum. Australian Educational Researcher, 39 (4), 431–445. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCross, R. (2012) Creative in finding creativity in the curriculum. Australian Educational Researcher, 39(4), 431–445. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, 2016 (2016) Language and content ‘integration’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48 (3), 388–408. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (2016) Language and content ‘integration’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(3), 388–408. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar).

Coyle et al. (2010)Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar outlines principles that characterise the qualities of pedagogic interventions which support effective dual-focused instruction, with an emphasis on techniques that promote cognitive-driven engagement. One of these principles – “The relationship between cultures and languages is complex. Intercultural awareness is fundamental to CLIL” (p. 42) – resonates strongly with the more expansive account of culture above, explicitly acknowledging the intercultural. Studies such as Méndez García (2012Méndez García, M. C. (2012) The potential of CLIL for intercultural development. Language and Intercultural Communication, 12 (3), 196–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMéndez García, M. C. (2012) The potential of CLIL for intercultural development. Language and Intercultural Communication, 12(3), 196–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, 2013 (2013) The intercultural turn brought about by the implementation of CLIL programmes in Spanish monolingual areas. Language Learning Journal, 41 (3), 268–283. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (2013) The intercultural turn brought about by the implementation of CLIL programmes in Spanish monolingual areas. Language Learning Journal, 41(3), 268–283. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) and Gómez-Parra (2020)Gómez-Parra, M. E. (2020) Measuring Intercultural Learning through CLIL. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9 (1), 43–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarGómez-Parra, M. E. (2020) Measuring Intercultural Learning through CLIL. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9(1), 43–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar provide empirical evidence of CLIL’s capacity to develop such awareness, including the ability to compare and make connections between cultural perspectives, share greater empathy with others, and a sense of critical self-awareness between how they and others make sense of their worlds. CLIL thus understands culture as practice-based, situated in the context of learning a shared body of disciplinary knowledge within a community of language users.

The sections that follow take up this understanding of culture to propose a three-part framework to delineate its implications more clearly for CLIL pedagogy. Akin to Coyle’s (2007)Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar triptych that expands ‘communication’ within the 4Cs to clarify communicative functions with respect to language for, of, and through learning within CLIL contexts, the paper expands the 4th C, ‘culture’, with respect to societal, disciplinary, and pedagogical cultures referring to the cultures of the language speaking community, content experts, and the classroom respectively. Each of these are unpacked with attention to how they are manifest in CLIL contexts and their implications for CLIL pedagogy. In so doing, I also draw out implications for social equity, arguing that CLIL offers a powerful framework for enabling teachers to problematise (and make visible) otherwise taken-for-granted notions of culture that shape, define, and position learners in the context of schooling.

Societal culture

Societal culture, the first of the three dimensions comprising the triptych, refers to that most typically associated with languages learning: the culture of the language speaking community (such as ‘Japanese’ culture, implying the ‘culture of Japanese speaking people’; ‘German’ culture, ‘the culture of German speaking people’; etc.). Yet this is complicated for at least two reasons. First, the fallibility of assigning cultural ‘ownership’ to any group based on language. The ‘English’ speaking community, for example, extends well beyond ‘England’, let alone the cultures of Australia, Canada, and America, just to name those comprising Kachru’s (1985)Kachru, B. (1985) Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism. In R. Quirk & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world (pp. 11–36). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarKachru, B. (1985) Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism. In R. Quirk & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world (pp. 11–36). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar ‘inner’ English language community, let alone communities of English-speakers in the ‘outer’ (Singapore, India, etc.) and ‘expanding’ (Central America, North-East Asia, etc.) contexts. Second, there are significant differences within these communities, even if the general language community itself can be broadly identified. There are cultural variations across Britain, for example, let alone further differences within cities and towns given variations in ethic-backgrounds, social class, and other markers of socio-cultural-ethnic diversity – even when united, at least ostensibly, through language.

Societal culture is thus difficult, if not impossible, to distill. Essentialised accounts of culture, like that implied by ‘high C’ culture earlier, are problematic for this reason: they fail to capture culture as lived by those using the language. In contrast, CLIL engenders learning through the meaningful, authentic application of how ‘speakers of the language’ use language to get their own needs met, such as using language while carrying out experiments to test an hypothsis, or responding to a piece of art to share interpretation or critique. It facilitates an approach to culture that not only recognises, but also pedagogically facilitates, spaces for individual variation.

For CLIL, the intercultural model thus offers a useful account of how societal culture can be framed in ways that are generative in relation to language use. Culture, from an intercultural perspective, is understood as dependent on – and constructed through – choices about how individuals use language guided (rather than prescribed) by normative patterns and expectations. From an intercultural perspective, the aim of learning is to develop a greater awareness of these normative expectations, resulting in more personally self-aware, agentic choices for how one makes sense of their world, and to be understood within it. Similarly, within CLIL, language, integrated with content, is functional: the purposeful use of language as learners decide how language is used to achieve an outcome, driven by content. Although this overlaps with usage as it relates to both content (i.e., the culture of the discipline) and learning (i.e., the culture of the classroom) which I address separately below, it nevertheless still includes the fundamental interpersonal functions of being, knowing, and relating as members of the general community: the ‘societal’ dimension of culture.

The following examples illustrate how societal culture is always present in the classroom, even when the primary focus may include content beyond language. The first is a dialogue between teachers and Japanese language learners, learning about places in Japanese:

Excerpt 1.Japanese/Geography classroom discourse. (Source: Annenberg Learner, 2012Annenberg Learner (2012) Teaching foreign languages library clip. Annenberg Learner. https://​www​.youtube​.com​/watch​?v​=J4rk5zfKrgMAnnenberg Learner (2012) Teaching foreign languages library clip. Annenberg Learner. https://​www​.youtube​.com​/watch​?v​=J4rk5zfKrgM)

ex1.svg

Evident above is the societal cultural practice of addressing others using honorifics, signified in Japanese by suffixes. In the case of the teacher addressing a female student (Crystal), we see the use of the suffix (ProperName+) , whereas in the case of a male student (Eric), we see the use of (ProperName+) . However, when addressing the teacher, students simply use the word that indicates the role: This contrasts with inner-circle English-speaking conventions of using no titular honorifics when addressing students, but having to address a teacher by title or proper name (e.g., ‘Sir’, or ‘Mr Smith’) – but never simply by role, “teacher”.

The second example, below, draws from a history lesson on feudalism. It exemplifies how high representations of societal culture – the “culture of Japan” – is also carried through CLIL materials:

Excerpt 2.Japanese/History classroom discourse. (Source: Language Learning Space, 2021Language Learning Space (2021) CLIL: A toe in the water. Education Services Australia. Retrieved on 20 February 2023 from https://​lls​.edu​.au​/teacherspace​/professionallearning​/2186​?sectionid​=123Language Learning Space (2021) CLIL: A toe in the water. Education Services Australia. Retrieved on 20 February 2023 from https://​lls​.edu​.au​/teacherspace​/professionallearning​/2186​?sectionid​=123)

ex2.svg

The concept being taught in Excerpt (2) – feudalism – travels across societies, but its representation here, with references to shogun and daimyo, is culturally specific to the societal setting of the Japanese speaking community (in contrast to merchants, artisans, and farmers, shared with European understandings of the same historical concept). Although situated in the context of a history lesson, it is also important to separate these points – on shogun and daimyo as Japanese cultural references for discussing history – from what can also be further distinguished as ‘disciplinary culture’, which I expand upon separately below. However, it is important to not under-estimate the value the “right” societal knowledge can make for a non-native language learner, to return to Bourdieu’s (1986) (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar point on cultural capital. It is through this domain of knowing – the sensibility to use “kun” when addressing a younger male rather than “san”, or the difference between “samurai, “daimyo”, and “shogun” (often collapsed into the interchangeable concept of “warlords” in English) – that helps distinguish between “insiders” and “outsiders” within language communities, and thus expand possibilities for wider acceptance, inclusion, and belonging (or conversely, enable exclusion).

Disciplinary culture

In contrast to societal culture, signifying the normative sense-making practices of the language community, disciplinary culture refers to normative expectations shaped by practices and ways of being that identify the content area being taught. In its simplest sense, disciplinary culture can be understood as the ways of ‘being a mathematician’, ‘historian’, or ‘musician’, for example. It refers to the sense-making lens of those working with knowledge and skills comprising a recognisable area of expertise (and, by extension, the practices and associated language to undertake that work).

However, as culture, it also goes beyond language to an understanding of the capital that carries value within the system of social relations that define each disciplinary field. Building on Marx’s (1887/1970)Marx, K. (1887/1970) Capital. Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMarx, K. (1887/1970) Capital. Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar understanding of capital as assets that carry value within economic markets, Bourdieu (1986 (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977) Education, society and culture. Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977) Education, society and culture. Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) developed ‘cultural capital’ to understand how certain signifiers carry value within fields of social relations. These signifiers can be objectified (e.g., works of art, instruments, and pieces of equipment (e.g., work tools, compared to high-end laptops, etc.)), institutional (credentials, awards, qualifications, etc.), or embodied, with the latter revealed through ‘ways of being’ that include attitudes and mannerisms, choices of self-presentation (the clothes we eat and food we order, etc.), and practices which show familiarity with particular bodies of knowledge.

This capacity to mobilise particular knowledge and skills – to embody, in practice, valued forms of cultural capital – helps determine sociocultural membership and status: ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’. For disciplinary communities, it helps to differentiate degrees of mastery and expertise. Like the capacity to use language effectively for interpersonal communication within the societal realm, disciplinary cultural capital helps distinguish beginners from proficient within the disciplinary space. It therefore demands specific pedagogic attention. In the work of the Graz pluriliteracies group, for example, CLIL is used to make visible the interrelationship between language, learning, and the demands of academic literacies in the context of disciplinary know-how. As Coyle and Meyer (2021Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021) Beyond CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021) Beyond CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 78) explain, pluriliteracies “involves a growing awareness of disciplinary cultures that are a prerequisite to successfully communicating knowledge across subjects, cultures and languages”.

Central to this work has been concept-driven, cognitive-focused notions for working with language and learning, such as Dalton-Puffer’s (2013)Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013) A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1 (2), 216–253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarDalton-Puffer, C. (2013) A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar “cognitive discourse functions” given the disciplinary demands of texts, and Linares et al.’s (2012)Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012) The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarLlinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012) The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar work on genres and the lexicogrammar of specific disciplines. Informed by systemic functional linguistics, these perspectives understand the use of language – and particularly its organisation into predictable patterns of “texts” (whether spoken or written) – as cultural artefacts, with an identifiable purpose. Language within CLIL is therefore informed by the perspective of disciplinary cultures. To illustrate, the example below identifies the “language of” history, such as “‘would’ to talk about past habits” and “past and past perfect tenses to recount past events”:

Figure 1.Sample text and comments for history (Dale & Tanner, 2012Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012) CLIL activities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarDale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012) CLIL activities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 62)
Figure 1.

Yet as significant as this language is for enabling students to ‘talk about’ history, it is not on its own sufficient to ‘be’ – as in a disposition to ‘think’ and ‘do’ – as a historian. One could challenge whether this should be the aim; i.e., ‘learning about’ history’ cf. ‘learning to be a historian’. However, if the former is reduced to ‘learning (to talk) about history’, teaching, and related learning, risks becoming superficial, residing at the level of content reproduction. Specialists in history education caution against this, instead arguing for authentic learning focused on students’ deeper capabilities to ‘think’ (and then ‘do’) ‘as historians’, as these are the capabilities that bring students into higher planes of achievement (Monte-Sano & Reisman, 2015Monte-Sano, C., & Reisman, A. (2015) Studying historical understanding. In L. Corno & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 295–308). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMonte-Sano, C., & Reisman, A. (2015) Studying historical understanding. In L. Corno & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 295–308). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Similarly, in the context of mathematics, Williams’ (2012)Williams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80 (1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWilliams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar findings on secondary school students’ transition into university level course draws attention to the critique of “students [who] have been taught instrumentally – ‘understanding’ is now at a premium … while their grades got them into a course to study a mathematically demanding subject, the use of their mathematics often then proves suspect” (p. 60, emphasis added).

Williams (2012)Williams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80 (1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWilliams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar draws on Vygotsky’s thesis of the “cultural development of the mind” (p. 70, emphasis added) to argue academic excellence is marked by the cultural appropriation of knowledge, not mere understanding. To return again to history for an example, Whitehouse (2020Whitehouse, J. (2020) The role of questions and sources in promoting historical thinking. In T. Allender, A. Clark, & R. Parkes (Eds.), Historical thinking for history teachers (pp. 60–71). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWhitehouse, J. (2020) The role of questions and sources in promoting historical thinking. In T. Allender, A. Clark, & R. Parkes (Eds.), Historical thinking for history teachers (pp. 60–71). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 61) explains that historical inquiry is “driven by questions about the past”. A ‘good’ student of history is therefore expected (i.e., normatively inclined to act and practice) to ask questions of the past. But where is this reflected in language of/for learning earlier? To be fair, this knowledge – and related language and skills – may well be built up around this text and, in the case of Figure 1 above, for example, Dale and Tanner (2012Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012) CLIL activities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarDale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012) CLIL activities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 60) stress the importance of having students “think, talk, and write like historians” in their commentary for how teachers should work with the text. The point, however, is the need for these disciplinary cultural ‘practices’ to be identified and planned for as specific skills to be scaffolded and developed, beyond the immediately identifiable language features of these texts alone.

Indeed, Dalley-Trim (2012)Dalley-Trim, L. (2012) Popular culture in the classroom. In R. Henderson (Ed.), Teaching literacies in the middle years (pp. 81–110). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarDalley-Trim, L. (2012) Popular culture in the classroom. In R. Henderson (Ed.), Teaching literacies in the middle years (pp. 81–110). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar adopts a radical stance on the concept of genre, arguing for not only the study of purpose and form in the conventional sense (e.g., to hypothesise using conditionals and modals; to outline a procedure using sequence words and imperatives; etc.), but to foreground ‘social purpose’ as the emphasis when working with text; that is, building students’ knowledge of how disciplinary texts do social/cultural work (even ‘Genre’ in Dalley-Trim’s index redirects to ‘Social purpose of texts’ as the main heading). One suggested activity for texts in Geography and Science, for example, is to have students examine “ways in which these texts work to construct what ‘comes to count’ as discipline knowledge, e.g., What counts as Science? What counts as Geography? ” (p. 92). Such questions go beyond a linguistically-oriented focus on teaching language of the discipline, to deep epistemic understanding – tied to culture (Sulimma & Cools, 2009Sulimma, M., & Cools, E. (2009) Relations between epistemological beliefs and culture classifications. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, 3 (1), 74–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarSulimma, M., & Cools, E. (2009) Relations between epistemological beliefs and culture classifications. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, 3(1), 74–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) – that differentiates which students excel, marked by confidence in “how we know what we know” (Cetina, 1999Cetina, K. (1999) Epistemic cultures. Harvard University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCetina, K. (1999) Epistemic cultures. Harvard University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 1, emphasis in original).

Classroom culture

The third aspect of culture relevant to CLIL concerns the classroom; namely, what it means to participate in the learning environment and expected ‘ways of being’ that signify membership of that community. In the same way Bourdieu’s (1986) (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar cultural capital highlights the value of disciplinary ‘know-how’ with respect to the content being taught, this cultural domain can be understood as the valued ‘culture of learning’ and associated practices that are rewarded as a learner within the classroom community.

This is a fundamental domain of culture across the curriculum in any school context, irrespective of the language of instruction: a knowledge of what ‘good’ learners do, and the expected terms of engagement (Christie, 2002Christie, F. (2002) Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarChristie, F. (2002) Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Yet, as is typical of culture, much of this know-how risks being rarely, if ever, explicitly taught. Successful students, for example, instead sense how to differentiate between display and genuine questions, as well as how to respond to these differently. Webb et al. (2014)Webb, N., Franke, M., Ing, M., Wong, J., Fernandez, C., Shin, N., & Turrou, A. (2014) Engaging with others’ mathematical ideas. International Journal of Educational Research, 63 , 79–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWebb, N., Franke, M., Ing, M., Wong, J., Fernandez, C., Shin, N., & Turrou, A. (2014) Engaging with others’ mathematical ideas. International Journal of Educational Research, 63, 79–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar emphasise that a culture of inquiry-based practices is crucial for success in mathematics, yet Makar et al. (2015Makar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015) Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM, 47 (7), 1107–1120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMakar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015) Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM, 47(7), 1107–1120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 1118, original emphasis) found a “dearth of knowledge about how teachers develop and progress, from scratch, inquiry-based norms in their classroom in the process of teaching”. In their study of how such norms can be established, it took more than a year of “meaningful and long-term scaffolding” that included the deliberate teaching of “active listening, justifying and explaining to peers, sharing incomplete ideas (intellectual risk-taking), and building on others’ ideas. Doing so […] helped foster classroom practices in which students went beyond explaining, evidenced in anticipating critique and valuing feedback” (p. 1118).

However, as Makar et al. (2015)Makar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015) Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM, 47 (7), 1107–1120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMakar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015) Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM, 47(7), 1107–1120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar and her colleagues also identify, because these classroom norms are often implicit rather than explicitly taught, many students find out too late “they may have been playing the wrong game” (Williams, 2012Williams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80 (1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWilliams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 70). Jorgensen (2016Jorgensen, R. (2016) Playing the game of school mathematics. Intercultural Education, 27 (4), 321–336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarJorgensen, R. (2016) Playing the game of school mathematics. Intercultural Education, 27(4), 321–336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 324), elaborating on Bourdieu’s ‘game’ metaphor, explains such “games inevitably have winners and losers but the game of schooling [should seek] to establish rules, protocols, activities that enable more students to enter and play the game successfully”.

CLIL provides tools to ‘play the game well’ to some extent through its explicit attention to ‘language for learning’: language that enables learners to be learners. However, although helpful in clarifying what linguistic-based knowledge is essential, broader cultural considerations can easily be overlooked. This also happens in mainstream, non-CLIL contexts, as Williams (2012)Williams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80 (1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWilliams, J. (2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar and Makar et al. (2015)Makar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015) Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM, 47 (7), 1107–1120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMakar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2015) Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM, 47(7), 1107–1120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar show above, but in bilingual contexts, with more obvious cultural ‘gaps’ (i.e., given the different language speaking community, or ‘societal culture’ as referred to in this paper), the need to explicitly teach classroom culture risks being even more easily overlooked.

This is becoming even more significant as CLIL expands across contexts. Although Canadian immersion traditionally operated on the principle that classrooms should continue to operate in ways that reflect the “local culture” (Swain & Johnson, 1997Swain, M., & Johnson, R. (1997) Immersion education. In R. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education (pp. 1–16). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarSwain, M., & Johnson, R. (1997) Immersion education. In R. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education (pp. 1–16). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 8), CLIL is now used in settings with increasingly complex cultural and linguistic profiles, such as CLIL to support English additional language learners in mainstream contexts (Bower et al., 2020Bower, K., Cross, R., & Coyle, D. (2020) CLIL in multilingual and English-background contexts. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 3–21). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBower, K., Cross, R., & Coyle, D. (2020) CLIL in multilingual and English-background contexts. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 3–21). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), or dual-language immersion programs where the language being used at any given point – even when ‘flipped’ – will almost always be the background language for some but never all students (Meier, 2020Meier, G. (2020) Supporting peer collaboration and social cohesion in multilingual classrooms. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. N. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 165–186). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMeier, G. (2020) Supporting peer collaboration and social cohesion in multilingual classrooms. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. N. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 165–186). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). This makes the need to consciously determine which rules of classroom engagement are expected and valued, along with teaching the language to then enable such participation, even more of an imperative. Although set in a mainstream context, Cabiles’ (2020)Cabiles, B. (2020) Participation and cultural and linguistic diversity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Melbourne.Cabiles, B. (2020) Participation and cultural and linguistic diversity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Melbourne. Bourdieusian analysis of an Australian classroom shows how challenging meaningful participation is to achieve for students from minority linguistic backgrounds. Even when the local school culture is maintained, confusion may reign from the perspective of students with heritage in the language being used. The ‘look and feel’ of a Japanese CLIL classroom in Melbourne might suggest patterns of engagement that have worked well in a seemingly similar context before (e.g., schools in Japan), yet the unspoken reality is a very different set of expectations (schools in Melbourne).

There is a need for these cultural expectations, and the language through which they are expressed, to therefore be attended to explicitly. Returning to the Japanese/Geography lesson example earlier, the underlined areas in Excerpt (3) identifies language for learning (Coyle, 2007Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 553) relevant to the task; namely, ‘Where is it?’, ‘It is …’, and ‘Do you understand?’. However, beyond this, also essential is understanding the language for (the culture of) learning; namely, the normative expectations that students bow ( ), sit when told ( ), raise their hands to show they know ( ), and clap in appreciation ( ).

Excerpt 3.Japanese/Geography language for learning. (Source: Annenberg Learner, 2012Annenberg Learner (2012) Teaching foreign languages library clip. Annenberg Learner. https://​www​.youtube​.com​/watch​?v​=J4rk5zfKrgMAnnenberg Learner (2012) Teaching foreign languages library clip. Annenberg Learner. https://​www​.youtube​.com​/watch​?v​=J4rk5zfKrgM)

ex3.svg

Similarly, Excerpt (4) from a Japanese/Geography lesson in an Australian secondary school, students a preparing to give presentations but less important is the content being studied, than awareness of language for the culture the teacher is establishing on how he expects students “to be” – how they should interact and behave:

Excerpt 4.Japanese/Geography classroom discourse.(Source: Cross & Lo Bianco, 2009Cross, R., & Lo Bianco, J. (2009) Melbourne Collaborative Research Grant: Sustainable models of content and language integrated learning in Asian languages. The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCross, R., & Lo Bianco, J. (2009) Melbourne Collaborative Research Grant: Sustainable models of content and language integrated learning in Asian languages. The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar)

ex4.svg

Like the collaborative, encouraging classroom intended by the teacher’s language in Excerpt (3), Excerpt (4) similarly depends on having students understand expectations that form this teacher’s culture of learning (kindness, gentle to each other, and encouraging/supportive), and the language needed to do so ( ).

Much of this seems common-sense or ‘normal’. Yet, as CLIL has powerfully demonstrated through previous research revealing the significance of ‘making visible’ what, in monolingual contexts, often seems to be so obvious it should not need to be taught – such as language needed for, of, and through learning (Coyle, 2007Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) – these ‘normative’ patterns of behaviour seem obvious to those with the experience and perspective that comes from having already successfully navigated these cultures themselves. Yet missing these cues and rules that are otherwise rarely if ever articulated is precisely why some students never fully learn the ‘rules of the game’, instead concluding that success at school – ‘being a successful learner’ – is simply “not for the likes of us” (Bourdieu, 1984Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 471).

CLIL: An opportunity to ‘do culture better’, and achieve a more level playing field for learners

As outlined in the introduction, concerns about educational equity are increasingly prevalent as the achievement gap between students continues to widen. Of even more concern given the context for our work in languages, strong models of bilingual education, such as CLIL, have been singled out as directly contributing to this problem (Smala et al., 2013Smala, S., Paz, J., & Lingard, B. (2013) Languages, cultural capital and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34 (3), 373–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarSmala, S., Paz, J., & Lingard, B. (2013) Languages, cultural capital and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(3), 373–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Students are often overrepresented by socially well-positioned groups who stand to gain even further from the advantages such programs offer. Even when strategies are in place to randomise selection outcomes, such as lotto systems, Marcus (2021)Marcus, M. (2021) Perceptions of access to dual language education programs. International Multilingual Research Journal, 16 (1), 78–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMarcus, M. (2021) Perceptions of access to dual language education programs. International Multilingual Research Journal, 16(1), 78–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar confirms bilingual programs continue to disproportionately enroll those from socially advantaged backgrounds given their ability to navigate ‘niche offerings’ within school systems. Existing cultural capital enables these families to appraise the value such programs stand to offer, which might not be apparent to those with less time, capacity, and resources to seek alternate options beyond the mainstream (Wright et al., 2016Wright, J., Cruickshank, K., & Black, S. (2016) Languages discourses in Australian middle-class schools. Discourse, 39 (1), 98–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWright, J., Cruickshank, K., & Black, S. (2016) Languages discourses in Australian middle-class schools. Discourse, 39(1), 98–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar).

CLIL and similar ‘strong’ models of bilingual provision, such as immersion, are also often presumed to require ‘specialist’ skills and knowledge compared to ‘normal’ programs: they are perceived as programs for ‘not just anyone’ – they carry implicit prestige. Voluntarily choosing to study the local curriculum in another language, when it could be done ‘more easily’ in one’s ‘own language’, is an aspiration beyond the lifeworlds (Zipin, 2009Zipin, L. (2009) Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy. Discourse, 30 (3), 317–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarZipin, L. (2009) Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy. Discourse, 30(3), 317–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, and discussed further below) of many students, especially those who may have had few opportunities to travel, or social networks limited to their immediate family and local community (Black et al., 2016Black, S., Wright, J., & Cruickshank, K. (2016) The struggle for legitimacy. Critical Studies in Education, 59 (3), 348–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBlack, S., Wright, J., & Cruickshank, K. (2016) The struggle for legitimacy. Critical Studies in Education, 59(3), 348–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar).

Yet educational inequity, and the widening achievement gap between students, happens irrespective of the medium of instruction. It is now well established that some students have a greater likelihood of failing in school simply, and tragically, based on their social background (Mills & Gale, 2010Mills, C., & Gale, T. (2010) Schooling in disadvantaged communities. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMills, C., & Gale, T. (2010) Schooling in disadvantaged communities. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; OECD, 2019OECD (2019) PISA 2018 results (Vol. II). OECD Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarOECD (2019) PISA 2018 results (Vol. II). OECD Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Wilkinson & Pickett, 2009Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2009) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). Allen Lane.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarWilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K. (2009) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). Allen Lane.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). These students fail, even in the mainstream – not because of CLIL. Entrenched patterns of social disadvantage instead lie in the mismatch between the cultural capital valued in schools, as discussed throughout this paper, in contrast to the alternate forms of capital some students bring to the classrooms given their different social backgrounds. As Mills and Gale (2010Mills, C., & Gale, T. (2010) Schooling in disadvantaged communities. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMills, C., & Gale, T. (2010) Schooling in disadvantaged communities. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 57) lament,

Perhaps the cruellest trick of all is that schooling, enshrined in the doctrine of equality of opportunity, can contribute to social inequality by giving success to those groups who possess existing cultural advantage, while appearing to reward individual intelligence and effort.

Zipin (2009)Zipin, L. (2009) Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy. Discourse, 30 (3), 317–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarZipin, L. (2009) Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy. Discourse, 30(3), 317–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar draws on Moll et al.’s (1992)Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992) Funds of knowledge for teaching. Theory Into Practice, 31 (2), 132–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMoll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992) Funds of knowledge for teaching. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar concept of “funds of knowledge” – the “historically-accumulated and culturally-developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for household or individual functioning and well-being” (p. 133) – to recognise students’ wider experiences beyond the classroom (their ‘lifeworlds’) which may have “use value” in some contexts (e.g., home and other places of importance to them), but lack “exchange value” in the context of the classroom. Zipin uses this to differentiate between cultural capital from funds of knowledge, with the former having established exchange value (i.e., fiat “capital”, legitimated by dominant groups) while the latter opens up alternate possibilities for how students’ resources might still be deployed to have meaningful use in the classroom. To do so puts the onus on those in power to recognise the potential of these alternate funds and (re)engage accordingly. However, as Zipin (2009)Zipin, L. (2009) Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy. Discourse, 30 (3), 317–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarZipin, L. (2009) Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy. Discourse, 30(3), 317–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar also acknowledges, the solution is not to simply or naively embrace one set of knowledge/practices over another. As Gale et al. (2017Gale, T., Mills, C., & Cross, R. (2017) Socially inclusive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 68 (3), 345–356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarGale, T., Mills, C., & Cross, R. (2017) Socially inclusive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(3), 345–356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, p. 351) argue, the goal should instead be that of “providing access to, and enabling critical engagement with, dominance … the aim instead becomes that of developing a counter-hegemonic (Connell, 1993Connell, R. W. (1993) Schools and social justice. Toronto: Our Schools/Our Selves Education Foundation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarConnell, R. W. (1993) Schools and social justice. Toronto: Our Schools/Our Selves Education Foundation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) pedagogy that accounts for both dominance and difference”.

CLIL is well positioned to achieve this goal. In distilling the cultural assumptions embedded across language community, the discipline community, and learning community as illustrated below in Figure 2, the pedagogic imperative is to empower agentic individuals by making visible the terms of engagement for how learning happens, how concepts are constructed, and how language is used to do this, beyond a mere surface-level understanding of grammatical rules and vocabulary that students simply reproduce.

Figure 2.The Cultural triptych in content and language integrated learning
Figure 2.

Sociologically-informed research has established an evidence-base for CLIL’s potential to ameliorate the effects of socioeconomic advantage, across sites without being conditional on material advantage (Lorenzo et al., 2021Lorenzo, F., Granados, A., & Rico, N. (2021) Equity in bilingual education. Applied Linguistics, 42 (3), 393–413. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarLorenzo, F., Granados, A., & Rico, N. (2021) Equity in bilingual education. Applied Linguistics, 42(3), 393–413. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Considering such evidence, perhaps one of the strongest conclusions of all is that social inequity may be best addressed by facilitating as wide as possible access for all to CLIL, as a priority for education systems.22.I thank one of the anonymous reviewers for this reflection (see also Coyle, 2020 (2020) Exploring the potential of a pluriliteracies approach. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 205–210). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (2020) Exploring the potential of a pluriliteracies approach. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 205–210). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Bower, Coyle et al., 2020Bower, K., Coyle, D., Cross, R., & Chambers, G. N. (2020) Afterword. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 187–204). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBower, K., Coyle, D., Cross, R., & Chambers, G. N. (2020) Afterword. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 187–204). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). However, like any pedagogy, outcomes depend on the quality of its application in practice. While CLIL as a theoretical model may be sound, practitioners’ inattentiveness to these demands on students – made even more complex in the context of simultaneously learning new language and new content – has obvious potential to exacerbate these problems further. As Bourdieu has shown us in context of the mainstream, culture is the unseen cause for social inequity from the perspective of class-based differences, by reproducing these inequities through the practices of teaching and learning. It needs to be redressed, by making these cultural frameworks more transparent. CLIL’s explicit attention to the interrelationship between communication, content, cognition, and culture helps make visible what can be harder to appreciate (and more easily neglected) than settings where the language used as the medium of learning, and means of accessing the curriculum, may be taken-for-granted.

Conclusion

Perhaps by virtue of its name, communication and content have both featured heavily in much of the literature on CLIL, alongside attention to how teachers’ skills, knowledge, and capacity can be supported to better integrate ‘content’ and ‘language’ for learners. This, in turn, has similarly informed priorities for professional learning, further compounding the emphasis that teachers place on these elements when working in CLIL contexts (Morton, 2017Morton, T. (2017) Reconceptualizing and describing teachers’ knowledge of language for CLIL. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21 (3), 275–286. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMorton, T. (2017) Reconceptualizing and describing teachers’ knowledge of language for CLIL. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 275–286. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Yet, as subsequent research and new concepts have also shown, such as CDFs with respect to cognition (Dalton-Puffer, 2016 (2016) Cognitive discourse functions. In T. Nikula, Dafour, E., Smith, P., & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 29–54). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (2016) Cognitive discourse functions. In T. Nikula, Dafour, E., Smith, P., & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 29–54). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), both ‘other Cs’ remain integral for how content and language can be brought together successfully.

This paper has addressed the ‘fourth C’, culture, which is fundamental to CLIL (Coyle, 2007Coyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D. (2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) but has remained largely under-theorized in the literature to date, relative to content, communication, and cognition. Arguing for a tripartite model comprising culture understood in relation to the language speaking community (society), content area (discipline), and learners (classroom), the framework aims to clarify how culture – as normative, often tacit expectations of what it means to ‘know, be, relate, and do’ – influences the related domains of communication, content, and cognition being taught. The goal is to help further strengthen CLIL as a more deliberative, intentional model of pedagogy.

The intent is to enable all students’ greater success; not only in CLIL contexts, but as learners generally. In any social situation unstated expectations are expectations nonetheless, yet learning these norms is complex and often dependent on circumstance (and good fortune), as well as then having appropriate social and cultural tools (including language) to capitalise on those opportunities when they do occur. For education to meaningfully disrupt the root causes of social inequity, this cultural dimension of learning – and access to opportunities and the language then needed to do so – cannot be left to individual circumstance, but will rely on deliberative pedagogic intervention. CLIL, with culture at its centre, is an innovative instructional model affording powerful opportunities to achieve this.

Notes

1.Throughout this paper, “bilingual” (e.g., bilingual learning, bilingual education, bilingual settings) is used as a generic term to refer to various settings with a focus beyond language learning alone (e.g., CLIL, EMI programs, immersion schooling, content-based instruction, etc.). Within this range of possibilities, “CLIL” refers to specific situations where there is explicit attention to teaching new language and new content as dual learning outcomes (e.g., Coyle et al., 2010Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarCoyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Lasagabaster, 2022Lasagabaster, D. (2022) English-medium instruction in higher education. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarLasagabaster, D. (2022) English-medium instruction in higher education. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Macaro, 2018Macaro, E. (2018) English medium instruction. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarMacaro, E. (2018) English medium instruction. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar).
2.I thank one of the anonymous reviewers for this reflection (see also Coyle, 2020 (2020) Exploring the potential of a pluriliteracies approach. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 205–210). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar (2020) Exploring the potential of a pluriliteracies approach. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 205–210). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar; Bower, Coyle et al., 2020Bower, K., Coyle, D., Cross, R., & Chambers, G. N. (2020) Afterword. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 187–204). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google ScholarBower, K., Coyle, D., Cross, R., & Chambers, G. N. (2020) Afterword. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 187–204). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar).

References

Alexander, R.
(2017) Towards dialogic teaching. Dialogos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Annenberg Learner
(2012) Teaching foreign languages library clip. Annenberg Learner. https://​www​.youtube​.com​/watch​?v​=J4rk5zfKrgM
① ②
Black, S., Wright, J., & Cruickshank, K.
(2016) The struggle for legitimacy. Critical Studies in Education, 59 (3), 348–363. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Block, D.
(2014) Social class in applied linguistics. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Bourdieu, P.
(1984) Distinction. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
(1986) The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory of research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J.
(1977) Education, society and culture. Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Bower, K., Coyle, D., Cross, R., & Chambers, G. N.
(2020) Afterword. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 187–204). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Bower, K., Cross, R., & Coyle, D.
(2020) CLIL in multilingual and English-background contexts. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 3–21). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Bullock, A.
(1975) A language for life. HM Stationery Office.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Byram, M.
(2006, July 4). Language teaching for intercultural citizenship. Keynote address to New Zealand Association of Language Teachers Association Conference, Auckland, New Zealand.
①
Cabiles, B.
(2020) Participation and cultural and linguistic diversity (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Melbourne.
①
Centre of Italian Studies
(2022) The importance of bilingual education in a multi-cultural society like Australia. Centre of Italian Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Cetina, K.
(1999) Epistemic cultures. Harvard University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Chavez, M.
(2002) We say “culture” and students ask “what?”. Die Unterrichtspraxis, 35 (2), 129–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Christie, F.
(2002) Classroom discourse analysis: A functional perspective. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Connell, R. W.
(1993) Schools and social justice. Toronto: Our Schools/Our Selves Education Foundation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Council of Europe
(2020) Good practices of multilingual and minority language medium education. Council of Europe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Coyle, D.
(2007) Content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ② ③ ④ ⑤ ⑥ ⑦ ⑧
(2020) Exploring the potential of a pluriliteracies approach. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 205–210). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D.
(2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Coyle, D., & Meyer, O.
(2021) Beyond CLIL. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Cross, R.
(2012) Creative in finding creativity in the curriculum. Australian Educational Researcher, 39 (4), 431–445. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
(2016) Language and content ‘integration’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48 (3), 388–408. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Cross, R., & Lo Bianco, J.
(2009) Melbourne Collaborative Research Grant: Sustainable models of content and language integrated learning in Asian languages. The University of Melbourne.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Dale, L., & Tanner, R.
(2012) CLIL activities. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Dalley-Trim, L.
(2012) Popular culture in the classroom. In R. Henderson (Ed.), Teaching literacies in the middle years (pp. 81–110). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Dalton-Puffer, C.
(2013) A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1 (2), 216–253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
(2016) Cognitive discourse functions. In T. Nikula, Dafour, E., Smith, P., & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 29–54). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Du, L.
(2021, October 21). A study of the role of foreign culture in Chinese international high school students’ English. International Conference on Public Relations and Social Sciences (ICPRSS 2021). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Fernández-Agüero, M., & Hidalgo-McCabe, E.
(2020) CLIL students’ affectivity in the transition between education levels: The effect of streaming at the beginning of secondary education. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Freire, P.
(1970) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Gale, T., Mills, C., & Cross, R.
(2017) Socially inclusive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 68 (3), 345–356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. G.
(Eds.) (2001) Examining pedagogical content knowledge. Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Gómez-Parra, M. E.
(2020) Measuring Intercultural Learning through CLIL. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9 (1), 43–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Gorter, D., Zenotz, V., & Cenoz, J.
(Eds.) (2014) Minority languages and multilingual education. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Gutiérrez, K., & Rogoff, B.
(2003) Cultural ways of learning. Educational Researcher, 32 (5), 19–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Heller, M.
(2006) Linguistic minorities and modernity: A sociolinguistic ethnography (2nd ed.). Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Hidalgo-McCabe, E. A.
(2020) Streaming in CLIL and its effects on students’ socialisation in school. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. UAM Repository. https://​repositorio​.uam​.es​/bitstream​/handle​/10486​/692813​/hidalgo​_mccabe​_elisa​.pdf​?sequence​=1​&isAllowed​=y
①
Jorgensen, R.
(2016) Playing the game of school mathematics. Intercultural Education, 27 (4), 321–336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Kachru, B.
(1985) Standards, codification, and sociolinguistic realism. In R. Quirk & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the world (pp. 11–36). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Khudobina, O., Fedulov, I., & Bondarenko, E.
(2018) Cultural approach in bilingual training of international students. SHS Web of Conferences.
①
Kohler, M.
(2020) Developing intercultural language learning. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Kramsch, C.
(2004) Language, thought, and culture. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 235–261). Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Kuo, M.-M., & Lai, C.-C.
(2006) Linguistics across cultures: The impact of culture on second language learning. Journal of Foreign Language Instruction, 1 (1), 1–10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Language Learning Space
(2021) CLIL: A toe in the water. Education Services Australia. Retrieved on 20 February 2023 from https://​lls​.edu​.au​/teacherspace​/professionallearning​/2186​?sectionid​=123
①
Lasagabaster, D.
(2022) English-medium instruction in higher education. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Liddicoat, A.
(2002) Static and dynamic views of culture and intercultural language acquisition. Babel, 36 (3), 4–11, 37–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
(2004) The conceptualisation of the cultural component of language teaching in Australian language-in-education policy. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 25 (4), 297–317. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Llinares, A., & Evnitskaya, N.
(2021) Classroom interaction in CLIL programs. TESOL Quarterly, 55 (2), 366–397. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R.
(2012) The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Lorenzo, F., Granados, A., & Rico, N.
(2021) Equity in bilingual education. Applied Linguistics, 42 (3), 393–413. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Macaro, E.
(2018) English medium instruction. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Makar, K., Bakker, A., & Ben-Zvi, D.
(2015) Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom. ZDM, 47 (7), 1107–1120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ② ③
Marcus, M.
(2021) Perceptions of access to dual language education programs. International Multilingual Research Journal, 16 (1), 78–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Marx, K.
(1887/1970) Capital. Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
McCarthy, M., & Carter, R.
(1994) Language as discourse. Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Meier, G.
(2020) Supporting peer collaboration and social cohesion in multilingual classrooms. In K. Bower, D. Coyle, R. Cross, & G. N. Chambers (Eds.), Curriculum integrated language teaching (pp. 165–186). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Méndez García, M. C.
(2012) The potential of CLIL for intercultural development. Language and Intercultural Communication, 12 (3), 196–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
(2013) The intercultural turn brought about by the implementation of CLIL programmes in Spanish monolingual areas. Language Learning Journal, 41 (3), 268–283. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Mills, C., & Gale, T.
(2010) Schooling in disadvantaged communities. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N.
(1992) Funds of knowledge for teaching. Theory Into Practice, 31 (2), 132–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Monte-Sano, C., & Reisman, A.
(2015) Studying historical understanding. In L. Corno & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 295–308). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Montgomery, J.
(2006) Multiculturalism. Childhood Education, 83 , 58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Morton, T.
(2017) Reconceptualizing and describing teachers’ knowledge of language for CLIL. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21 (3), 275–286. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
National Curriculum Board
(2009) The shape of the Australian curriculum (May, 2009). National Curriculum Board.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Nikula, T., Skinnari, K., & Mård-Miettinen, K.
(2022) Diversity in CLIL as experienced by Finnish CLIL teachers and students. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
OECD
(2019) PISA 2018 results (Vol. II). OECD Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ② ③ ④
Palmer, D. K.
(2009) Middle-class English speakers in a two-way immersion bilingual classroom: “Everybody should be listening to Jonathan right now…”. TESOL Quarterly, 43 (2), 177–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Pérez Cañado, M. L., Coyle, D., Ting, T., Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Matz, F., & Jerez Montoya, T.
(2019) ADiBE Project. Retrieved 10 October 2022 from https://​adibeproject​.com/
①
Rochanavibhata, S.
(2022) Language development in bilingual preschoolers. Northwestern University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Roiha, A. S.
(2014) Teachers’ views on differentiation in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Language And Education, 28 (1), 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Schleppegrell, M.
(2004) The language of schooling. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Shulman, L.
(1987) Knowledge and teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 57 (1), 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Siepmann, P., Rumlich, D., Matz, F., & Römhild, R.
(2021) Attention to diversity in German CLIL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Smala, S., Paz, J., & Lingard, B.
(2013) Languages, cultural capital and school choice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34 (3), 373–391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Soto, L. D.
(1997) Language, culture, and power. State University of New York Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Sulimma, M., & Cools, E.
(2009) Relations between epistemological beliefs and culture classifications. Multicultural Education & Technology Journal, 3 (1), 74–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Swain, M., & Johnson, R.
(1997) Immersion education. In R. Johnson & M. Swain (Eds.), Immersion education (pp. 1–16). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
The University of London
(2022) BA Languages and Cultures. Retrieved 27 August 2022 from https://​www​.soas​.ac​.uk​/languages​-cultures​-linguistics​/programmes​/ba​-languages​-and​-cultures/
①
The University of Melbourne
(2022) Italian Cultural Studies A (ITAL20009). Retrieved 27 August 2022 from https://​handbook​.unimelb​.edu​.au​/2022​/subjects​/ital20009
①
Tiihonen, N.
(2020) Differentiation in CLIL mathematics in the first and second grade. University of Jyväskylä.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Tompkins, F. L.
(2022) Socioeconomic status, English exposure and CLIL motivation in high and low exposure CLIL groups. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 5 (1), 41–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Unsworth, L.
(2000) Investigating subject-specific literacies in school learning. In L. Unsworth (Ed.), Researching language in schools and communities (pp. 245–274). Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Valdiviezo, L. A., & Nieto, S.
(2015) Culture in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. In W. E. Wright, S. Boun, & O. García (Eds.), The Handbook of Bilingual and Multilingual Education (pp. 92–108). Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Vandrick, S.
(2014) The role of social class in English language Education. Journal of Language, Identity, & Education, 13 (2), 85–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Wang, L., & Lehtomäki, E.
(2022) Bilingual education and beyond. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25 (6), 2256–2268. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Webb, N., Franke, M., Ing, M., Wong, J., Fernandez, C., Shin, N., & Turrou, A.
(2014) Engaging with others’ mathematical ideas. International Journal of Educational Research, 63 , 79–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Whitehouse, J.
(2020) The role of questions and sources in promoting historical thinking. In T. Allender, A. Clark, & R. Parkes (Eds.), Historical thinking for history teachers (pp. 60–71). Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Wiese, A.-M., & García, E. E.
(1998) The Bilingual Education Act: Language minority students and equal educational opportunity. Bilingual Research Journal, 22 (1), 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
Wilkinson, R. G., & Pickett, K.
(2009) The spirit level: Why more equal societies almost always do better (Vol. 6). Allen Lane.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ② ③ ④
Williams, J.
(2012) Use and exchange value in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80 (1–2), 57–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ② ③ ④
Wright, J., Cruickshank, K., & Black, S.
(2016) Languages discourses in Australian middle-class schools. Discourse, 39 (1), 98–112.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ②
Zipin, L.
(2009) Dark funds of knowledge, deep funds of pedagogy. Discourse, 30 (3), 317–331.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
① ② ③
Zohar, A.
(2004) Elements of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge regarding instruction of higher order thinking. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15 (4), 293–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①
(2006) The nature and development of teachers’ metastrategic knowledge in the context of teaching higher order thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15 (3), 331–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
①

Address for correspondence

Russell Cross

Melbourne Graduate School of Education

The University of Melbourne

L913 100 Leicester Street

VIC Victoria 3010

Australia

[email protected]
ORCiD logo with linkhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1424-560X
 
Authentication
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-dark jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold-light jbe-platform.quadraat-sans-bold prag Twitter_Logo_Blue