全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用：99美元
投递稿件

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

It’s Never too Late to Mend: Potentials of CLIL Pedagogical Approach to Internationalize Ethiopian Journalism Education

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2019.1010162, PP. 2246-2269

Keywords: CLIL, Journalism Education, Journalism Curriculum, Journalism Material, Journalism Classroom

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Recently, due to globalization and the consequent knowledge sharing,？there is a paradigm shift in the focus of education. English is a new wave flowing throughout the academic landscape of the world. 21st century is facing the challenges of the new status of English language as a？lingua franca. Globally, many countries have embraced English as a medium of instruction to prosper in this new world economic order. This is impacting the didactics and pedagogy in the educational systems as a consequence of which fresh winds of pedagogic changes are blowing and new approaches are knocking. Furthermore, innovative curriculums are appearing and equally rejuvenated materials are coming up. More interactive classrooms are becoming the predominant feature of the contemporary pedagogical practice. Besides, the new technologies, the multimodal ways, growing local diversity and global connectedness are calling for an educational response to the expectations of the modern age. Today, learning is moved from the acquisition of knowledge to the development of the competence, expertise and problem solution.？This article contextualizes the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)？approach to journalism education in Ethiopia. This article？begins with the conceptualization of CLIL, and justifies why CLIL is necessary for journalism education in Ethiopia. The article further signifies how CLIL philosophy is beneficial for journalism education; and how CLIL approach can be used as a journalismeducational approach. In addition, the article argues how CLIL can be contextualized for curriculum design, material development, and classroom procedure of journalism education. The article concludes that if CLIL approach is used as journalism pedagogic approach, there is a greater chance of better curriculum design, enhanced material development, and discourse-oriented classroom procedures. This will certainly lead to the academic success

 References

[1]  Anstey, M., & Bull, G. (2006). Teaching and Learning Multiliteracies. Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.
[2]  Banegas, D. L. (2011). Content and Language Integrated Learning in Argentina 2008-2011. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4, 33-50.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.4
[3]  Berhanu, H. (1999). An Evaluation of the Implementation of the Current ELT Syllabus for Grade 9 in Terms of the CLT Methodology. Master’s Dissertation, Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University. Achieving Communicative Effectiveness? Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 950-964.
[4]  Bolton, K., & Kuttiva, M. (2012). English as an Academic Language at a Swedish University: Parallel Language Use and the “Threat” of English. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 33, 429-447.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2012.670241
[5]  Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the Reasons Why and Why Not. System, 41, 587-597.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.001
[6]  Canado, M. L. P. (2010). Globalisation in Foreign Language Teaching: Establishing Transatlantic Links in Higher Education. Higher Education Quarterly, 64, 392-412.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2010.00451.x
[7]  Cardinali, R., Di Nardo, E., & Depetris, S. (2008). Applying Corpus Linguistics Methodology to an ESP Lexico-Grammatical Compendium. In D. Fernández (Ed.), Using the Language to Learn and Learning to Use the Language: What’s Next in Latin America. XXXIII FAAPI Conference Proceedings. Santiago del Estero: FAAPI.
[8]  Castellani, E., Dabove, C., & Colucci, L. (2009). Teaching EFL or Teaching Art? In D. Fernández (Ed.), XXXIV FAAPI Conference Proceedings: Teachers in Action. Making the Latest Trends Work in the Classroom. Bahía Blanca: FAAPI.
[9]  Castillo, R. (2008). Issues Involved in Context, Comprehension and Content. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 1, 15-25.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2008.1.1.2
[10]  Cendoya, A. M., & Di Bin, M. V. (2010). A CLIL Experience Based on the Use of Tasks and Different Genre Types. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 3, 11-17.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2010.3.1.2
[11]  Claudiocol (2010). CLIL Principle.
http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/blogs/claudiocol/clil-principles
[12]  Coonan, C. M. (2007). Insider Views of the CLIL Class through Teacher Self-Observation-Introspection. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 625-646.
https://doi.org/10.2167/beb463.0
[13]  Costa, F., & Coleman, J. (2010). Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education in Italy. Ongoing Research. International CLIL Research Journal, 1, 19-29.
[14]  Costa, F., & D’Angelo, L. (2011). CLIL: A Suit for All Seasons? Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4, 1-13.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.1.1
[15]  Coyle, D. (2005). Developing CLIL: Towards a Theory of Practice. APAC Monographs, 6, 5-29.
[16]  Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[17]  Cruz, E. (2009). From Understanding CLIL to Profiting from It in Our Classroom. In D. Fernández (Ed.), XXXIV FAAPI Conference Proceedings: Teachers in Action. Making the Latest Trends Work in the Classroom. Bahía Blanca: FAAPI.
[18]  Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and Special Education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.
[19]  Dafouz-Milne, E., & Sanchez-García, D. (2013). “Does Everybody Understand?” Teacher Questions across Disciplines in English-Mediated University Lectures: An Exploratory Study. Language Value, 5, 129-151.
https://doi.org/10.6035/LanguageV.2013.5.7
[20]  Dalton-Puffer, C. (2002). Content and Language Integrated Learning in Austrian Schools: Applied Linguistics Takes a Look. Views, 11, 4-26.
[21]  Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in Content-and-Language-Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.20
[22]  Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U. (2010). Charting Policies, Premises and Research on Content and Language Integrated Learning. In Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms (pp. 1-19). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.7.01dal
[23]  Davis, K. (1995). Qualitative Theory and Methods in Applied Linguistic Research. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 427-454.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3588070
[24]  De Graaff, R., Koopman, G. J., Anikina, Y., & Westhoff, G. (2007). An Observation Tool for Effective L2 Pedagogy in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 603-624.
https://doi.org/10.2167/beb462.0
[25]  Doughty, C. J., & Long, M. H. (2003). The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756492
[26]  Dupuy, B. (2011). CLIL: Achieving Its Goals through a Multiliteracies Framework. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4, 21-32.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.3
[27]  Fernández, D. J. (2009). CLIL at the University Level: Relating Language Teaching with and through Content Teaching. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 2, 10-26.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2009.2.2.11
[28]  Fortanet-Gómez, I. (2013). CLIL in Higher Education: Towards a Multilingual Language Policy. Bristol: Channel View.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847699374
[29]  Gajo, L. (2007). Linguistic Knowledge and Subject Knowledge: How Does Bilingualism Contribute to Subject Development? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10, 563-581.
https://doi.org/10.2167/beb460.0
[30]  Gefall, C. (2009). Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives on Language Learning in CLIL: Delineating Opportunities and Limitations. Master’s Dissertation, Wein: Universitat Wein.
[31]  Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. (1997). Content-Based Instruction: Research Foundations, In M. Snow, & D. Brinton (Eds.), The Content-Based Classroom. Perspectives on Integrating Language and Content (pp. 5-21). New York: Longman.
[32]  Graddol, D. (2006). English Next: Why Global English May Mean the End of “English as a Foreign Language.” London: The British Council.
[33]  Hailom, B. (1982). English Conditional Sentences: A Comparative Analysis of Structural and Communicative Approach in Teaching to Non-Native Speakers. Master’s Dissertation, Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University.
[34]  Harrop, E. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): Limitations and Possibilities. Encuentro, 21, 57-70.
[35]  Hatch, E. (1992). Discourse and Language Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[36]  Hunt, M. (2011). UK Teachers’ and Learners’ Experiences of CLIL Resulting from the EU-Funded Project ECLILT. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4, 27-39.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.1.3
[37]  Hüttner, J., & Smit, U. (2014). CLIL: The Bigger Picture. A Response to: A. Bruton. 2013. CLIL: Some of the Reasons Why and Why Not, System, 41 (2013): 587-597. System, 44, 160-167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.03.001
[38]  Ioannou-Georgiou, S. (2012). Reviewing the Puzzle of CLIL. ELT Journal, 66, 495-504.
https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs047
[39]  IMS Assessment Report. Ethiopia in Transition: Hope amid Challenges. (2018).
https://www.mediasupport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Ethiopia.final_.spread.pdf
[40]  Jarvinen, H. (2008). Issues in Promoting Language and Learning in CLIL Type Provision.
http://lici.utu.fi/materials/article_jarvinen.pdf
[41]  Katarzyna, P. (2012). The Impact of Students’ Attitude on CLIL: A Study Conducted in Higher Education. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 5, 28-56.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2012.5.2.10
[42]  Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[43]  Khan, S., & Pinyana, A. (2014). A Review of Second Language Acquisition Research in CLIL Contexts in European Higher Education. Barcelona: HEPCLIL Conference, Central University of Catalonia.
[44]  Kiely, R. (2009). The Question of Assessment.
https://www.developingteachers.com
[45]  Klimova, B. F. (2012). CLIL and the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 572-576.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.698
[46]  Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.
[47]  Krashen, S., & Biber, D. (1988). On Course: Bilingual Education’s Success in California. Sacramento, CA: California Association for Bilingual Education.
[48]  Lakachew, M. (2003). Teachers Attitude towards CLT and Practical Problems in Its Implementation. Master’s Dissertation, Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University.
[49]  Lasagabaster, D., & de Zarobe, Y. R. (2010). CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.
[50]  Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More Differences than Similarities. ELT Journal, 64, 367-375.
https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp082
[51]  Lin, A. M. Y. (2012). Multilingual and Multimodal Resources in Genre-Based Pedagogical Approaches to L2 English Content Classrooms, In C. Leung, & B. V. Street (Eds.), English—A Changing Medium for Education (pp. 79-103). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847697721-007
[52]  Long, M. H. (1983). Native/Non-Native Speaker Conversation and the Negotiation of Comprehensible Input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126-141.
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/4.2.126
[53]  Lorenzo, F. (2007). The Sociolinguistics of CLIL: Language Planning and Language Change in 21st Century Europe. Revista espanola de lingüística aplicada, 1, 27-38.
[54]  Lucietto, S. (2008). A Model for Quality CLIL Provision. International CLIL Research Journal, 1, 83-92.
[55]  Mackenzie, A. (2011). How Should CLIL Work in Practice?
http://www.onestopenglish.com/support/methodology/teaching-approaches/how-should-clil-work-in-practice/156531.article
[56]  Mardziah-Hayati, A. (1998). Problem-Based Learning in Language Instruction: A Constructivist Method. ERIC.
http://www.indiana.edu/~reading/ieo/digests/d132.html
[57]  Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential. Brussels: European Commission.
[58]  Marsh, D., & Langé, G. (2000). Using Languages to Learn and Learning to Use Languages. Jyvaskyla & Milan: TIE-CLIL.
http://clilcompendium.com/1uk.pdf
[59]  Massler, U., Stotz, D., & Queisser, C. (2014). Assessment Instruments for Primary CLIL: The Conceptualization and Evaluation of Test Tasks. The Language Learning Journal, 42, 137-150.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.891371
[60]  McDougald, J. S. (2009). The State of Language and Content Instruction in Colombia. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 2, 44-48.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2009.2.2.15
[61]  Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
[62]  Munoz, C. (2007). CLIL: Some thoughts on Its Psycholinguistic Principles (pp. 17-26). Revista Espanola de Linguistica Aplicada: Volumen monográfico.
[63]  Navés, T., & Victori, M. (2010). CLIL in Catalonia: An Overview of Research Studies (pp. 30-54).
[64]  Nikula, T., & Jarvinen, H. M. (2012). CLIL in Finland. In L. Tainio, & H. Harju-Luukkanen (Eds.), Bilingual School—The Multilingual Finland of the Future (pp. 143-167). Helsinki: Suomen Kasvatustieteellinen Seura.
[65]  Nikula, T. (2005). English as an Object and Tool of Study in Classrooms: Interactional Effects and Pragmatic Implication. Linguistics and Education, 16, 27-58.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2005.10.001
[66]  Omaggio, A. (1986). Teaching Language in Context: Proficiency-Oriented Instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
[67]  Overmann, M. (2002). Theoretische Reflexion: Konstruktivistische Prinzipiender Lerntheorie und ihre didaktischen Implikationen (pp. 27-54).
http://www.ph-ludwigsburg.de/html/2b-frnz-s-01/overmann/baf5/MultimedialeFremdsprachendidaktik27-54.doc
[68]  Pérez-Canado, M. (2012). CLIL Research in Europe: Past, Present, and Future. International Journal of Bilingual Education, 2, 37-41.
[69]  Pérez-Vidal, C. (2009). The Integration of Content and Language in the Classroom: A European Approach to Education. In E. Dafouz, & M. Guerrini (Eds.), CLIL across Educational Levels. London: Richmond.
[70]  Pica, T. (1994). Research on Negotiation: What Does It Reveal about Second language Acquisition? Conditions, Processes, and Outcomes. Language Learning, 44, 493-527.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1994.tb01115.x
[71]  Platt, E., & Frank, B. B. (2002). Task Engagement: A Turning Point in Foreign Language Development. Language Learning, 52, 365-400.
https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00187
[72]  Prasetianto, M. (2014). Language Circle. Journal of Language and Literature, 8, 151-162.
[73]  Rüschoff, B. (1999). Construction of Knowledge as the Basis of Foreign Language Learning. In B. Mi?ler, & U. Multhaup (Eds.), The Construction of Knowledge, Learner Autonomy and Related Issues in Foreign Language Learning: Essays in Honor of Dieter Wolff (pp. 79-88). Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.
[74]  Saarinen, T. (2012). Internationalization of Finnish Higher Education—Is Language an Issue? International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 216, 157-173.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2012-0044
[75]  Shoebottom, P. (2000). The Language Learning Theories of Professor J. Cummins.
http://esl.fis.edu/teachers/support/jcummins.html
[76]  Smit, U & Dafouz, E. (2012). Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education. Gaining Insights into English-Medium Instruction at European Universities (Vol. 25). AILA Review.
https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.25
[77]  Smit, U. (2010a). English as a Lingua Franca in Higher Education. A Longitudinal Study of Classroom Discourse. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110215519
[78]  Smit, U. (2010b). CLIL in English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) Classroom: On Explaining Terms and Expressions Interactively. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms (pp. 232-250). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.7.13smi
[79]  Spies, K. (2012). Intercultural Studies within a CLIL Approach. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 5, 33-45.
https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2012.5.1.3
[80]  Strohner, H. (1995). Cognitive System: Eine Einfuhrung in die Kognitionswissenschaft. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
[81]  Swain, M. (1985). Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in Its Development. In S. Gass, & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
[82]  Swain, M. (1993). The Output Hypothesis: Just Speaking and Writing Aren’t Enough. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 50, 158-164.
https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.50.1.158
[83]  Tan, M. (2011). Mathematics and Science Teachers’ Beliefs and Practices Regarding the Teaching of Language in Content Learning. Language Teaching Research, 15, 325-342.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811401153
[84]  Ting, Y. L. T. (2007). A Collective End-of-Symposium Reflection: The State of the Art of CLIL and Future Prospects. AILA CLIL-Research Network Symposium.
http://www.ichm.org/clil/pdfs/summary_symposium07.pdf
[85]  Universities and Colleges in Ethiopia (2018)
https://www.examresultethiopia.com/universities-and-colleges/
[86]  Wadsworth, B. (1996). Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive and Affective Development: Foundations of Constructivism. New York: Longman.
[87]  Wagner, S. (1990). BICS, CALP and CUP: Second Language Proficiency and Learning Theory. Teacher Today, IER, 5.
http://www.thecenterlibrary.org/cwis/cwisdocs/bics.html
[88]  Wendt, M. (1996). Konstruktivistische Fremdsprachendidaktik: Lerner-und handlungsorientierter Fremdsprachenunterricht aus neuer Sicht. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
[89]  Williams, G., Strubell, M., & Williams, G. O. (2013). Trends in European Language Education. The Language Learning, 41, 5-36.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2011.567355
[90]  Wolff, D. (2007). Eine Fremdsprache als Arbeitssprache gebrauchen: Bilingualer Sachfachunterricht und deutschsprachiger Fachunterricht (pp. 1-58).
[91]  Wolff, D. (2009). Content and Language Integrated Learning. In K. Knapp, B. Seidlhofer, & H. Widdowson (Eds.), Handbook of Foreign Language Communication and Learning (pp. 545-572). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
[92]  Yemene, D. (2007). English Teachers’ Perception and Practice of CLT in the Teachings of English as a Foreign Language. Master’s Dissertation, Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa University.
[93]  Yonas, A. (2003). Primary School Teachers’ Perceive Difficulties in Implementing Innovative ELT Methodologies in Ethiopian Context. IER Flambeau, 11, 23-55.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133