Engineering lecturers' views on CLIL and EMI

The present study aims to shed some light on how engineering lecturers teaching in English at a Spanish university view their work (teaching goals) within the current European internationalisation trend of offering courses and master programmes in English. A questionnaire where content and language...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of bilingual education and bilingualism Vol. 20; no. 6; pp. 722 - 735
Main Author: Aguilar, Marta
Format: Journal Article Publication
Language:English
Published: Abingdon Routledge 19.09.2017
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Taylor & Francis
Subjects:
Anglès tècnic
Aprenentatge de llengües
Beliefs
CLIL (content and language integrated learning)
College Faculty
Competence
Content and language integrated learning
Course Content
EMI (English-medium instruction)
Engineering
Engineering Education
English (Second Language)
English as a second language instruction
English language
English proficiency
Ensenyament
Ensenyament i aprenentatge
Foreign Countries
Globalization
Higher Education
Interviews
Language
Language acquisition
Language attitudes
Language of Instruction
Language Proficiency
Language shift
Lecturer beliefs
Multilingualism
Qualitative Research
Questionnaires
Science Instruction
Second Language Instruction
Second Language Learning
Self evaluation
Spanish language
Statistical Analysis
Teacher Attitudes
Teaching
Technical English
Àrees temàtiques de la UPC
Spain
ISSN:1367-0050, 1747-7522
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The present study aims to shed some light on how engineering lecturers teaching in English at a Spanish university view their work (teaching goals) within the current European internationalisation trend of offering courses and master programmes in English. A questionnaire where content and language integrated learning (CLIL) and English-medium instruction (EMI) were differentiated and with questions on their self-attributed duties, training preferences, assessment and internationalisation issues, among others, was prepared. The 41 lecturers who participated were asked to identify the modality they were following and their views related to the key factors in their courses. Findings point to the fact that EMI is the modality they follow and that they do not want to shift to CLIL because they refuse to teach language. To gain qualitative information about their beliefs, six lecturers were later interviewed. These interviews suggested that lecturers attach no importance to language integration. More specifically, they do not usually reflect on their lecturing, they welcome the idea of distinguishing both modalities in higher education (HE), they regard English proficiency as a key factor for all stakeholders and finally they think CLIL better suits less proficient students in HE.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
ISSN:1367-0050
1747-7522
DOI:10.1080/13670050.2015.1073664