Frontiers in Educational Research, 2023, 6(16); doi: 10.25236/FER.2023.061601.
Zhonghui Huang
Hubei University of Technology, Wuhan, 430068, China
Based on the content language integration learning (CLIL) teaching practice in the third-year language and culture bilingual course for undergraduate students majoring in international Chinese education at our university, this study aims to investigate the construction process of high-quality bilingual classrooms. Specifically, it focuses on three key dimensions: curriculum objectives, classroom discourse, and teacher-student community. The ultimate objective is to facilitate the cultivation of students’ advanced cognitive abilities and foster their comprehensive development.
Content and language integration learning (CLIL); Classroom discourse; Advanced cognitive abilities; International Chinese education
Zhonghui Huang. Exploration and Practice of Bilingual Teaching Model under the CLIL Pedagogy at a Provincial University. Frontiers in Educational Research (2023) Vol. 6, Issue 16: 1-5. https://doi.org/10.25236/FER.2023.061601.
[1] Marsh D. (2002) CLIL/EMILE: The European dimension Actions, trends and foresight potential. European Commission.
[2] Coyle D., Hood P., & Marsh D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press.
[3] Coyle D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543–562.
[4] Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011) Content-and-Language Integrated Learning: From Practice to Principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/ S0267190511000092
[5] Jigang Cai. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2005(02):83-91+160.
[6] Hongde Jiang. Construction and Practice of “Immersion” Bilingual Teaching Mode [J]. Educational Development Research, 2004(06):32-34.
[7] Ping Wu. (2007). A Review of Bilingual Teaching Research in the Past Five Years [J]. China University Teaching, 2007 (1): 37-45.
[8] Danyang Qin. Exploration and Practice of Professional Bilingual “Golden Course” Construction based on EIC [J]. Heilongjiang Education (Theory and Practice), 2021(05):1-2.
[9] Junyue Chang, Zhaohao Liu. The Theoretical Support of the Concept of Content-language Integration Education [J]. Foreign Language and Foreign Language Teaching, 2020(06):85-95+150.
[10] Binhua Wang. Comparison between China and Foreign Countries: The Definition, Attributes and Objectives of Bilingual Education [J]. Education Development Research, 2005(11):49-53.
[11] Jiayang Zhou. The Enlightenment of CLIL Concept to Bilingual Teaching in Middle Schools [J]. Journal of Mudanjiang Institute of Education, 2018(05):35-36+65.
[12] Lian Zhang, Dongying Li. Collaborative Development of Language, Critical Thinking and Subject Ability under the Framework of CLIL [J]. Frontiers of Foreign Language Education Research, 2019, 2(02):16-24+90-91.
[13] Shanxin Zhang, Xueqin He. European CLIL Teacher Education Framework and Training Model and Its Enlightenment [J]. Ethnic Higher Education Research, 2019, 7(02): 70-75. DOI:10. 14045/j. cnki. rhen. 2019.02.014.
[14] Dalton-Puffer C, et al. (2018) Cognitive discourse functions in Austrian CLIL lessons: towards an empirical validation of the CDF Construct. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5.5-29.doi: 10. 1515/eujal-2017-0028
[15] Anderson L. W., Krathwohl D. R., & Bloom B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Addison Wesley Longman.
[16] Cummins J. (2000). Language, Power and Pedagogy: Bilingual Children in the Crossfire. Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853596773