Curricular Units in English

Internationalisation strategy: Widening ESHTE’s Offer of Curricular Units in English in 1st Cycle Degrees

ESHTE has been widening its offer of curricular units in English in the 1st Cycle Degrees (undergraduate level) as part of its internationalisation strategy. From 5 curricular units in English in the academic year 2018/2019, ESHTE will more than triple this offer in the upcoming academic year, 2019/2020. These curricular units are offered both in Portuguese and in English, allowing students to choose the language in which they will complete their studies. Students enrolled in the curricular unit in English are given the option to take their assessment in either language.

This offer of curricular units in English has been following a Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach since 2014/2015, with the implementation of a pilot project funded by ReCLes.pt – the Network Association of Language Centres of Higher Education in Portugal and FCT, the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology, in which a group of five lecturers were integrated into a CLIL learning community. Since then, more than 20 ESHTE lecturers have willingly completed/will complete training in CLIL.

CLIL is a pedagogical approach that consists in teaching subjects/curricular units through a foreign-language; it is a “dual-focused educational approach (…) a fusion of both subject content and language learning” (Coyle, Hood & Marsh, 2010, p. 6). Contrary to the English as a Medium of Instruction (EMI) approach, in which content teachers usually  devise  strategies (simplifying,  classifying,  translating,  etc.) to  help  students  understand content, in CLIL there is a concern about effective classroom strategies that foster students’ learning in both language and content (Morgado & Coelho, 2013). That is why CLIL learners are more successful and more motivated than those in traditional content classrooms, as it has been identified by the European Commission (Apsel, 2012). CLIL brings a wide range of benefits that include: an interplay between the 5Cs: culture, communication, content, cognition, and context; more student-centred methodologies and attention to students’ different learning styles and ‘multiple intelligences’ (Garnder, 1983); increased student interaction and collaboration (co-learning); enhanced oral interaction and critical dialogue in a foreign language (improving language competence and oral communication skills); a focus on intercultural awareness and code switching (e.g. how the mother tongue and the foreign language work); diversified methods and forms of classroom practice; development of both LOTS (lower order thinking skills such as remembering, understanding, and applying) and HOTS (higher order thinking skills which include analysing, evaluating, and creating) (Bloom’s taxonomy); and an increase in students’ confidence and performance in both content and language, which leads to greater motivation, among others.

According to the data provided by the surveys completed by 187 students since the implementation of curricular units in English following the CLIL approach, and with regard to their learning experience in the curricular unit, 86% have mentioned that they have developed more collaborative work with other colleagues, 70% have had their communication in the foreign language facilitated, and 92% consider the learning experience to have been positive. As for their experience in relation to the CLIL methodologies, for 78% of students teaching methodologies and strategies have facilitated the integrated learning of language and content. Most students believe that CLIL benefits the integration of students in the class (67%) at the same time as it increases students’ motivation (85%). A high majority of students (over 90%) consider that CLIL facilitates the internationalisation of students and is important in the context of Portuguese higher education, find this approach important for their future career, and would like to experiment more curricular units following this approach.

Ana Gonçalves & Cláudia Viegas

References

Apsel, C. (2012). Coping with CLIL: Dropouts from CLIL Streams in Germany. The International CLIL Research Journal, 1(4), 47-56.

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

Morgado, M., & Coelho, M. (2013). “CLIL vs English as the medium of instruction: the Portuguese Higher Education Polytechnic contexto. Egitania Sciencia 7, 12, 123-145.