Vol. 13 No. 77 (2024)
Articles

Challenges and sustainability of CLIL implementation in Ukrainian educational establishments

Tetyana Myronenko
Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University, Ukraine.
Bio
Lesia Dobrovolska
Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University, Ukraine.
Bio
Iryna Shevchenko
Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University, Ukraine.
Bio
Olena Kordyuk
Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University, Ukraine.
Bio

Published 2024-05-30

Keywords

  • bilingual education methods, CLIL approach, secondary education, tertiary education, academic achievements.

How to Cite

Myronenko, T., Dobrovolska, L., Shevchenko, I., & Kordyuk, O. (2024). Challenges and sustainability of CLIL implementation in Ukrainian educational establishments. Amazonia Investiga, 13(77), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.77.05.4

Abstract

The article analyses the issue of techniques of bilingual education by introducing CLIL comparing to ESP, EAP, EMI approaches at different levels of education – secondary and tertiary. In the article the authors studied the challenges, resilience and sustainability during the process of introduces above mentioned approaches. The CLIL approach facilitates foreign language learning by integrating language and content instruction. The authors’ investigation has a theoretical bias and different scientists’ point of view.  By analyzing the implementation of CLIL approach and authors’ experience in practical application of other approaches the comparative analysis is done that proves the priorities of using CLIL at schools and higher educational establishments.

The authors justified that CLIL is more than just language switching; it means that teaching subjects in a second language, like English, is the best way to make learning more meaningful and engaging. The benefits of CLIL in Ukrainian education system emphasize learners’ fluency in both languages - Ukrainian and English, high academic achievements, achievements in communication and development of sociocultural competencies that as a result boost learners’ motivation and bridge the language gap.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Allen, M. (2004). Reading Achievement of Students in French Immersion Programs. Educational Quarterly Review, 9(4), 25-30. https://acortar.link/753Qfq
  2. Adrián, M. M., & Mangado, M. J. G. (2015). L1 Use, Lexical Richness, Accuracy and Syntactic Complexity in the Oral Production of CLIL and NON-CLIL Learners of English. Atlantis, 37(2), 175-197. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/24757789
  3. Artsyshevska, A., Hrynya, N., & Kyznetsova, L. (2021). Implementation of CLIL Approach in a Bilingual Environment. Young Scientist, 10.1(98.1), 4-7. URL: https://molodyivchenyi.ua/index.php/journal/article/view/4070/4001
  4. Ball, P., & Lindsay, D. (2012). Language Demands and Support for English-Medium Instruction in Tertiary Education. Reflections on the Basque experience. In English – Medium Instruction at Universities. Global Challenges. Multilingual Matters.
  5. Bobyl, S. V. (2014). Content and Language Integrated Learning in the Process of Studying RKI at Technical Universities: [preprint]. Materials of the III All-Ukrainian Scientific and Practical Conference. Prydniprovsky Scientific Center of the National Academy of Science of Ukraine and the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, Kyrovohrad State Pedagogical University. Kyrovohrad, pp. 37-41. URL http://eadnurt.diit.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/3104
  6. Budko, L.V., Maksymovych, G.O., & Shulga, T.V. (2024). Content and Language Integrated Learning Model in Teaching a Foreign Language on a Non-Language University. Innovative Pedagogy, 67, 127-131. URL: http://www.innovpedagogy.od.ua/archives/2024/67/part_1/29.pdf
  7. Collins, H. (2011). Language and practice. Social Studies of Science, 41(2), 271-300. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41301905
  8. Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.
  9. Dafouz, E., & Hibler, A. (2013). “Zip Your Lips” or “Keep Quiet”: Main Teachers’ and Language Assistants’ Classroom Discourse in CLIL Settings. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 655-669. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43651698
  10. Dalton-Puffer, Ch. (2007). Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 330. URL: https://acortar.link/HIhRCj
  11. de Zarobe, Y.R. (2015). Language Awareness and CLIL. In: Cenoz, J., Gorter, D., & May, S. (eds) Language Awareness and Multilingualism. Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02325-0_13-1.
  12. Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 301 p.
  13. Douglas, M. O. (2017). Assessing the Effectiveness of Content-Based Language Instruction (CBLI) in Japanese at the College Advanced Level. Japanese Language and Literature, 51(2), 199-241. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/44508415
  14. European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union. URL: https://acortar.link/9IUzPy
  15. Graddol, D. (2006). English Next. British Council, pp. 132. URL: https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/pub_english_next.pdf
  16. Heyer, M. (2000). Creating a Language-Promoting Classroom: Content-Area Teachers at Work. In Hall, Joan Kelly and Lorrie Stoops Verplaetse (eds.) Second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction. Mahwah N.J. and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 265-285.
  17. Hura, T., Dubinina, K., Khryk, V., Kazanishena, N., & Biliavska, T. (2023). El papel de la educación a distancia en la formación de especialistas. Revista Eduweb, 17(4), 74-86. https://doi.org/10.46502/issn.1856-7576/2023.17.04.8
  18. Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A Learner-Centered Approach. Cambridge University Press.
  19. Hyland, K. (2014). English for Academic Purposes. In Leung, C. & Street, B. (eds.) The Routledge Companion to English Studies. London: Routledge, 356 p. URL: https://www.academia.edu/22895101/English_for_Academic_Purposes
  20. Khodakovska, O. O. (2016). The Peculiarities of CLIL Approach. Modern Communicative Methods of Teaching English: IVth All Ukrainian Scientific and Methodological Conference (October 28, 2016). Zhytomyr, pp. 63-67. (In Ukrainian). URL: https://dspace.nlu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/14363/1/Khodakovska_63-67.pdf
  21. Knysh, I., Palshkova, I., Balalaieva, O., Kobernyk, H., & Tiahur, V. (2024). Augmented Reality in Higher School as a Tool for Implementation of STEM Education. Amazonia Investiga, 13(74), 180-192. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.74.02.15
  22. Kuzminska, N., Stavytska, I., Lukianenko, V., & Lygina, O. (2019). Application of CLIL Methodology in Teaching Economic Disciplines at University. Advanced Education, 6(11), 112-117. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.167150
  23. Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols Martín, M. J. (2011). European Framework for CLIL Teacher Education. A framework for the professional development of CLIL teachers. European Centre for Modern Languages and its publications. URL: https://acortar.link/scrnTT
  24. Marsh, D. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Córdoba. URL: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60884824.pdf
  25. Mehisto, P. (2012). Criteria for producing CLIL learning materials. Encuentro, 12, 15-33.
  26. Moore, P., & Lorenzo, F. (2015). Task-Based Learning and Content and Language Integrated Learning Materials Design: Process and Product. The Language Learning Journal, 43(3), 334-357. DOI: 10.1080/09571736.2015.1053282
  27. Lokshyna, O. I., Shparyk, O.M., & Dzhurylo, A.P. (2015). The European Vector of School Education Content Transformations in Ukraine. Science and Education a New Dimension. Pedagogy and Psychology, III(30), 7-10. URL: https://acortar.link/dgFdAJ
  28. Roll, H., Bernardt, M., Enzenbach, Ch., Fischer, H.E., Gürsoy, E., Krabbe, H., Lang, M., Manzel, S., & Uluçam-Wegmann, I. (2019). Writing in Subject Lessons at Lower Secondary Level Including Turkish. Münster: Waxmann (Multilingualism, 48). URL: https://www.waxmann.com/?eID=texte&pdf=4088Volltext.pdf&typ=zusatztext
  29. Stoika, O., Butenko, N., Miziuk, V., Zinchenko, O., & Snikhovska, I. (2023). Information technologies in the educational process of higher educational institutions. Amazonia Investiga, 12(63), 156-163. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.63.03.14
  30. Sulym, V., Melnykov, A., Popov, M., Vechirko, O., & Malets, D. (2023). Improving education through implementation of information technologies into the educational process. Amazonia Investiga, 12(68), 281-293. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.68.08.26
  31. Tkalia, I.A., Cherkashyna, N.I., & Ognivenko, Z.G. (2020). CLIL as a Reflection of Contemporary Global Trend. Problems of Contemporary Education, 11, 59-62. URL: https://periodicals.karazin.ua/issuesedu/article/view/17648
  32. Wollf, D. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). English Studies, 23(1), 97-106. URL: https://angl.winter-verlag.de/data/article/3453/pdf/91201010.pdf