Table Of Content

Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching Department of English Studies, Faculty of Pedagogy and Fine Arts, Adam Mickiewicz University, Kalisz SSLLT 5 (2). 2015. 251-272 doi: 10.14746/ssllt.2015.5.2.4 http://www.ssllt.amu.edu.pl CLIL and non-CLIL students’ beliefs about language Liss Kerstin Sylvén University of Gothenburg, Sweden [email protected] Abstract This article presents the findings of an innovative qualitative study involving one CLIL (content and language integrated learning) student and one student in a parallel, non-CLIL strand at high school level in Sweden. The aim of the study was to investigate differences in students’ beliefs about language. The success of second (L2) and foreign language (FL) learning depends to a large degree on individual differences (Dörnyei, 2005; Skehan, 1991). Differences are normally elicited through questionnaires, interviews, and/or observa- tions. In the present study, the aim was to get direct access to the informants’ own perspectives, without the content being too directed through predeter- mined questions. In this study, students were asked to take photos illustrating how they view (a) their L1 (Swedish), and (b) the FL/L2 English. Then the photos were thematically organized by the researcher. Subsequently, the thematic organization and the photos themselves were discussed with each of the informants during an interview. The informants were asked to elaborate on each theme and/or picture as to why and how it illustrates the respective language for them. The findings reveal substantial differences between the two informants in their views on their L1 and FL/L2, with the CLIL student high- lighting communication rather than seeing the two languages as separate sys- tems, and the non-CLIL student seeing language rather the other way around. Keywords: individual differences, learner beliefs, CLIL, visual narratives 251 Liss Kerstin Sylvén 1. Introduction The role of individual differences (IDs) in language learning has been recognized for a long time. Dörnyei (2005) identifies creativity, willingness to communicate, aptitude, motivation, self-esteem, language learning styles and strategies, personality traits,anxiety, andlearner beliefs as the most salient IDs to take into account when trying to understand the process of second (L2) and foreign language (FL) learning. For this paper, the ID learner beliefs is the focus of the study, as il- lustrated in learners’ photographs and narrated in the subsequent interviews. The growing interest in learner beliefs in the area of language learning is evidenced, among other things, in the increasing number of publications taking into account both teacher and learner (Barcelos & Kalaja, 2011; Ellis, 2008; Fer- reira Barcelos & Kalaja, 2013; Kalaja, Menezes, & Barcelos, 2008; see also Bar- celos, this volume). All these studies add pieces to the patchwork of understanding the importance of learner beliefs, what they are, how they interact with other IDs and factors relevant for language learning, and how best to deal with them. The present study aims at filling a gap in this field of research, namely, how FL/L2 learners perceive their first language (L1) and their FL/L2 (in this context English) through the camera lens. Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is an umbrella term cover- ing methods used in educational settings to combine the teaching of a subject, such as history or biology, with the learning of an FL/L2 (Marsh, 2002; Tedick & Cammarata, 2012). In the Swedish context, English is by far the most common target language used in CLIL. English is also frequently encountered in Swedish everyday life, and there is an ongoing debate whether it should be considered as an L2 or an FL in Sweden (Hyltenstam, 2004; Viberg, 2000). Officially, it is still seen as an FL, even though for certain individuals, it may very well be an L2 (Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2014). As a consequence, when referring to English in this paper, the abbreviation FL/L2 is used. As we know very little about learner beliefs in connection with CLIL, the present study aims at investigating any possible differences in students’ views on language by using a qualitative approach involving one CLIL student and one student in a parallel, non-CLIL (where the L1 Swedish is used as the medium of instruction, and the FL/L2 English is studied as a separate subject) strand in upper secondary school in Sweden. The intent is to gain insights into the thoughts about language among adolescent FL/L2 learners in order to identify possible underlying assumptions that might influence the language learning process and further add to our understanding of CLIL and non-CLIL students. 252 CLIL and non-CLIL students’ beliefs about language 2. Theoretical and contextual framework 2.1. Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) Learning an FL is most likely easiest when surrounded by people using that language and in an environment where the FL is virtually the only means at hand to make oneself understood. Under such circumstances, large amounts of authentic language input are available for the learner, as well as opportunities for output and interaction with others in the FL. All these factors, input, output, and interaction, are considered vital for successful learning to take place (e.g., Gass, 1997; Long, 1981). Such ideal conditions, however, are rarely available for the individual FL learner, who rather has to settle for language classes offered in an educational setting. The immersion method in Canada (Genesee, 1987) and, later, CLIL in Europe (Marsh, 2002) and elsewhere (Lin & Man, 2010) are ap- proaches which aim to increase the amount of both input, output, and interaction for FL learners by using the FL as the medium of instruction in school subjects such as biology, history, and mathematics. Immersion, CLIL and other types of bilingual education have attracted a great deal of interest from the research community, evident not least from the number of edited volumes (Dalton-Puffer, Nikula, & Smit, 2010; Mehisto, Marsh, & Frigols Martín, 2008; Ruiz de Zarobe, Sierra, & Gallardo del Puerto, 2011), specialist journals and symposia as well as thematic strands devoted to CLIL at large international conferences. The principle aim of CLIL is to increase learners’ exposure to a target language and, in so doing, also increase chances for more successful learning. Several studies have reported that this intended aim is being met. For instance, Navés and Victori (2010) showed that CLIL students in grades 7 and 9 outperform their non-CLIL peers in higher grades in English fluency, lex- ical complexity and accuracy. Admiraal, Westhoff and de Bot (2006) and Navés (2011) both found positive effects of CLIL on reading comprehension. Further- more, Jimenéz Catalán, Ruiz de Zarobe and Cenoz (2006) investigated vocabulary knowledge among Spanish students and found CLIL students to have a larger English lexicon than their non-CLIL peers. Similar findings have been reported in studies from other contexts (Klippel, 2003; Zydatiss, 2007). However, CLIL is not always the panacea to L2 learning, as it sometimes has been depicted, as there may be other factors influencing the positive outcomes reported. Bru- ton (2011), for instance, criticizes the lack of baseline data in many studies, and Rumlich (2013) highlights the fact that students opting for the CLIL approach seem to be higher achievers than those choosing non-CLIL. As pointed out by Sylvén (2013), CLIL has not led to an increase in English proficiency compared to non-CLIL education in the Swedish context, which may be explained by four factors: 253 Liss Kerstin Sylvén lack of framework, lack of teacher training, late introduction, and large amounts of exposure to English outside of school. One of the underlying assumptions about CLIL is that by using language in social interaction in the classroom in order to construct meaning of a specific subject content, the language will more or less automatically be learnt. How- ever, in order for any CLIL approach to be more successful, Lyster (2007), among others, calls for a counterbalanced approach, where authentic input of the L2 is offered together with explicit language learning including grammar, in order to facilitate and improve the L2 learning process. The stance taken in this paper is that although language is co-constructed in a social context, the cognitive process of L2 learning takes place within the individual L2 learner’s mind. It is therefore of interest to learn more about individuals’ own idiosyncratic beliefs and assumptions as they influence the learning process (e.g., Cotterall, 1995; Dweck, 2006; Skehan, 1991), and, further, to see if there are possible differences at group level between CLIL and non-CLIL students. 2.2. Learner beliefs Learner beliefs “play a central role in learning experience and achievements” (Cotterall, 1999, p. 494), and are an important factor to account for in FL/L2 learning research. Many studies, therefore, focus on beliefs in connection with language learning. To do this, a widely used instrument is the Beliefs about Lan- guage Learning Inventory (BALLI) questionnaire (Horwitz, 1987), which was specifically designed for the purpose of tapping into learner beliefs about language learning. Horwitz (1999) reviews several studies using BALLI where possible differences between cultural groups are investigated and finds that rather than specific groups being different from one another, large intergroup variations were found suggesting that individual factors such as age and language learning context play a crucial role in learner beliefs. Cotterall (1999) uses her own set of questions to investigate subareas of learner beliefs in need of further investigation and finds that learners hold beliefs about metacognitive strategies, feedback, self-efficacy, self-esteem and their own ability as a language learner. These would thus be fruitful areas for further research to extend our understanding of the broader concept of beliefs. In this paper, the focus is on the subarea of learners’ beliefs about languageper se. In an in-depth meta-analysis of three studies on learner beliefs, Ellis (2008) concludes that not only do the dynamic and situated beliefs among learners influence the language learning process, but also that teachers’ beliefs are important to take into account. Ellis suggests that becoming aware of both learners’ and teachers’ beliefs would be beneficial in the FL/L2 classroom. In a 254 CLIL and non-CLIL students’ beliefs about language CLIL context, these may be relevant findings to take into account, where an FL/L2 is used as the medium of instruction and language is learned in nontraditional ways. Studies looking into learner beliefs have typically used questionnaires to elicit data. However, as pointed out by Kalaja, Alanen, and Dufva (2008), other measures than questionnaires are perhaps needed in order to get a better understanding of individuals’ beliefs about language learning, and thus they call for more qualitative methods such as written narratives or more specifically visual narratives. They feel that traditional methods were inadequate in their quest for a more in-depth understanding of beliefs and therefore find the visual nar- rative approach innovative and useful. Others have followed suit with this approach (Alanen, Kalaja, & Dufva, 2013; Dufva, Kalaja, & Alanen, 2011), and, most recently, Kalaja (in press) asked students attending the teacher training pro- gramme in Finland to illustrate themselves as in-service teachers in the future, teaching a foreign language class by drawing a picture. By combining visual and oral narratives richer renderings of the “multiplicity of meanings present in the views held by a learner” (Kalaja et al., 2008, p. 198) can be captured. Whereas photographs are used in other fields of research, such as eth- nography, as a method of gathering valuable empirical data, they have not been used to any great extent within the field of FL/L2 learning. One of the very few studies using photographs taken by the informants themselves, and thus similar in approach to the present study, was conducted by Nikula and Pitkänen-Huhta (2008), who focused on informal L2 learning among 14-15 year-olds. A total of seven students took photographs illustrating objects, places and events in their everyday lives where English played a role. The authors found that English indeed plays an important role in these young people’s lives, and that they en- counter English daily in school as well as outside, through the entertainment industry, tourism and also in many of their hobbies. By asking the informants to use the camera, the researchers were able to get access to their everyday activities in connection with English in a way that would have been very difficult oth- erwise. In a similar vein, looking into the narratives of identity among young learners of English in Hong Kong, Besser and Chik (2014) asked learners to photograph their everyday English learning opportunities. They find socio-economic class to be an important indicator of identity development and argue that the use of photographs is a fruitful way of capturing participants’ thoughts in richer detail. An aspect which is not addressed in the studies accounted for above is learners’ thoughts and beliefs about language per se. The present study uses photographs to elicit learner beliefs about language and thereby aims at filling that gap. 255 Liss Kerstin Sylvén 2.3. Individual differences and CLIL This article reports on findings from students involved in CLIL and non-CLIL settings respectively and examines their beliefs about languages. Whilst there are no studies about learner beliefs and CLIL, there has been work on other IDs which is of relevance. The most commonly researched ID in connection with CLIL is motivation. In many studies, a preconception seems to be that motivation is an inherent characteristic of CLIL (Fehling, 2008; Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2009). However, without having baseline data at the pre-CLIL level, it is difficult to claim any such intrinsic feature of CLIL. Recently, Sylvén and Thompson (2015) found that CLIL students are significantly more motivated than their non-CLIL peers already from the commencement of CLIL. These findings corroborate Rumlich (2013), who refers to the selection of students into CLIL versus non-CLIL strands as “a creaming effect” (p. 185). In other words, it is the cream of the crop, or the most able and motivated students, who opt for CLIL. Another ID studied in connection with CLIL is Willingness to Communicate (WTC). Menezes and Juan-Garau (2014) focussed on WTC in a study including CLIL and non-CLIL students and administered two questionnaires. The results clearly show the CLIL students to have a significantly higher WTC than the non- CLIL ones. Similarly, Pihko (2007) found the level of WTC to be higher among CLIL than non-CLIL students. Neither of these studies reported baseline, pre-CLIL data, though, and it is therefore difficult to know whether the findings are the result of CLIL or were pre-existing among those who chose the CLIL option. Anxiety is yet another ID studied in CLIL contexts. Thompson and Sylvén (in press) investigated CLIL and non-CLIL students at the beginning of a CLIL pro- gramme, and the results indicate that already before the start of CLIL there are significant differences in levels of anxiety between the two groups. The CLIL students suffer less from anxiety and have higher levels of self-confidence as re- gards L2 use in comparison to the non-CLIL students. In other words, when CLIL is an optional choice, students opting for CLIL are less anxious and more self-con- fident than their non-CLIL peers already before CLIL starts. Needless to say, this is crucial information to take into account when analysing possible effects of CLIL. Indeed, whenever CLIL is an optional choice (as is the case in the Swedish context) and not mandatory for all students, such findings are not at all surpris- ing. Rather, it is to be expected that students who are more proficient in and less anxious about English are also the ones choosing CLIL where English is the target language. What is important is therefore to be aware of these baseline differences whenever effects of CLIL are analysed. Given the importance of learner beliefs and other IDs in the language learning process and the alleged language learning benefits of CLIL, it was decided in 256 CLIL and non-CLIL students’ beliefs about language this study to take a closer look at CLIL and non-CLIL students’ beliefs about language. The specific research questions addressed by this study are: 1. What beliefs are reflected in adolescent students’ photos of their L1 and the FL/L2 English? 2. Are there differences between CLIL and non-CLIL students? 3. Methodology The present study is part of a large-scale longitudinal research project, the CLISS project,1 the overall aim of which is to study the proficiency and progress in written academic English and Swedish among CLIL as well as non-CLIL upper secondary level students (grades 10-12) in Sweden (for details, see Sylvén & Ohlander, 2014). 3.1. The Swedish context Sweden, where the present study was conducted, is a fairly small country, with approximately 9 million inhabitants, located in the very northern part of Europe. Swedish is the official majority language, and there are five official minority languages (Finnish, Yiddish, Meänkeli, Romani and Sami). Altogether, more than 150 languages are spoken in Sweden, according to the website of Institutet för språk och folkminnen (http://www.sprakochfolkminnen.se). In the country, there has long been an awareness of the need to learn other languages and nowadays English is introduced as the first foreign language in school already in grade 1 (Skolverket, 2014). English is also encountered to a great extent outside of school in everyday life, and there is an ongoing debate whether English should be regarded as a second rather than a foreign language (Hyltenstam, 2004; Viberg, 2000). For instance, English TV productions and movies are subti- tled rather than dubbed, English words and phrases are often found in ads, new terms in sports and IT, among other areas, are used in their original English form rather than being translated into a Swedish equivalent. Studies have shown that young people spend a lot of their spare time doing things in English on the computer, for instance, playing digital games, and that this extramural exposure to English correlates positively with their learning outcomes in English in school (Oscarson & Apelgren, 2005; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2012, 2014; Sylvén & Sundqvist, 2012). Indeed, in many of these studies, it is shown that learners believe they learn most of their English outside of school. Therefore, an important background 1 Funded by the Swedish Research Council, project number 2010-5376 257 Liss Kerstin Sylvén factor to control for in any study involving FL/L2 learning is the amount of extramural exposure to that language. In the CLISS project, this is done by using a so-called language diary in which students are asked to indicate all types of encounters they had with English during one week. Information from this diary was also used to identify prospects for participation in the present study, as explained below. 3.2. Procedure The present study takes an emic perspective, giving the students themselves the chance to interpret the task, take the photographs, and, in the subsequent interview, talk about what the photographs illustrate. As students’ exposure to English outside of school was deemed to be a decisive factor to control for in the present study, information gained from a language diary as described above was used and a list was established where students with high amounts of exposure were found at the top, and those with the least at the bottom. Individuals with high and low exposure to English outside of school were targeted, and an even distribution between gender and CLIL versus non-CLIL was aimed for. A total of 20 individuals were identified, and an e-mail was sent out to them, outlining the details and aims of the present study and asking for voluntary participation. A reward of two movie tickets and something to eat and drink during the interview were offered for those who were willing to take part. The mail was sent out during the very last semester before graduation, which had a detrimental effect on the number of affirmative re- sponses. Many students replied that they were too involved in studying for ex- ams and/or taking part in various activities in connection with the final term. However, eight students replied that they were willing to participate in the study, four girls (two CLIL, two non-CLIL) and four boys (two CLIL, two non-CLIL). For this paper, two of the boys, one CLIL and one non-CLIL, were selected for de- tailed analysis. The reason for choosing these individuals was that they were the ones who shared most commonalities (see below for further details about the participants) as evidenced in a background questionnaire and the language diary. It was therefore deemed as particularly interesting to investigate if their beliefs may help explain why one of them chose the CLIL option and the other did not. When an agreement about participation was reached, an e-mail was sent out to each of the students. In this e-mail, the study was outlined, and the specific task was presented. The students were informed that participation was voluntary, that they could opt out at any time, and they were ensured anonymity in the subsequent dissemination of results. More specifically, the task the participants were asked to do was to take approximately five photos per day and per language during one week illustrating (a) their L1 (Swedish), and (b) their 258 CLIL and non-CLIL students’ beliefs about language FL/L2 (English). Several of the participants asked for information about how the task should be interpreted. As it was deemed important to gain access to participants’ own views and thoughts and not steer them in any particular direction (cf. Benson & Lor, 1999; Kalaja, in press; Ryan & Mercer, 2012), no such further information and/or elaboration was offered, but it was left for the students themselves to make their own interpretations. The photographs were sent in to the researcher, who then organized them thematically. The photos were printed out on separate sheets of paper and placed in piles, where each pile represented one theme. Each pile was then analysed again, and some reordering of the photographs took place. This was repeated until no further reordering was deemed necessary, and enough themes had been found to cover all photographs. Sub- sequently, the thematic organization and the photos themselves were discussed with each of the informants during an interview. The interviews were all conducted on a one-to-one basis in Swedish, and they were audio-recorded. No other guide than the photographs, with their respective themes, was used during the interviews. We met either at a local coffee shop or in the school cafeteria and the interviews took between 30 and 60 minutes. During the interviews, the informants were asked to elaborate on each theme and/or picture as to why and how it illustrates the respective language to them. The recordings were tran- scribed using the software NVivo. The transcripts were subject to analysis using the themes of the photographs as the starting point. The interpretation of the photographs was supported by quotes from the interviews, and in some cases, the photographs were reorganized so as to fit the intended meaning, rather than the interpretation made by the researcher. The coding of the photographs, together with the interview transcripts was repeated until saturation was reached, and no fresh codes could be assigned as inspired by grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). The grounded theory approach to data analysis was used in order to allow the data to “speak for itself” and to reduce the influence of preconceived notions on the process. In order to ensure anonymity for the participants, all personal information has been removed from the photos included here as illustrations and pseudonyms have been used throughout. 3.3. Participants As described above, two individuals were selected for analysis in this paper. They are two boys, here referred to by the pseudonyms Eric and Vincent, one in a CLIL class and the other in a non-CLIL class. Both are in their final term of upper secondary school. They have both grown up in the area where they presently live and are both enrolled in the natural science strand, which is academically the most demanding strand in Swedish upper secondary school, theoretically 259 Liss Kerstin Sylvén rather than practically oriented, and one of the preparatory strands for higher education. Both Eric and Vincent report their wish to enrol in engineering studies and plan on entering higher education after the summer break. Both of them have high levels of exposure to English outside of school, as evidenced in their language diaries (see above). Although obviously IDs mean that the two can differ in personality and other aspects, in terms of their contextual circumstances both share many commonalities. Eric said that he found the task of photographing “English” and “Swedish” fun but challenging, and he was not quite sure he had done it the way he was supposed to. Vincent said that he thought the task had been intriguing and ap- pealing to him from the start, much because he likes and spends much time photographing in his everyday life. It was clarified that there were no “rights” or “wrongs” about how to do this, but it was up to each individual to make his/her own interpretation of the task to illustrate Swedish and English in a number of photographs (see the procedure section above). 4. The photographs 4.1. Eric In the interview, Eric explained that he joined the CLIL program initially because he thought it would be nice to learn more English than what would be possible only in the language arts classes. He was good at English already from an early age and claims that before joining the CLIL program, he learnt most English outside of school. In 4th to 6th grade, for instance, he played a great deal of digital games in English and in doing so acquired a large English vocabulary. His photos were the- matized into two themes: school (7 photographs) and screens (12 photographs). The screen theme consists of photographs of computer and TV-screens. Some of the photos depict ongoing games, and he recalls from his younger gaming career:“I was really motivated to understand what was happening in the game.” He recalls how he learnt words and phrases he would never even have encountered anywhere else than in these games. He offers the phraseexcavation site as an example of something he learnt from one of his gaming experiences. He still continues to play digital games, but to a lesser extent, and says that he now also learns a great deal of English in school. Pointing to photos taken in chemistry and math class, Eric says:”I definitely think we get better at this kind of English.” Several of Eric’s photos are from the history, chemistry and English classrooms, subjects which are all taught in English. He says he enjoys using English as the medium of instruction in school and says he has no problems doing so. Apparently, 260