Integration of Social Studies and English: Prospective Teachers’ Views “Feeding two birds with one scone?”

Year 2023, Volume: 7 Issue: 14, 225 - 242, 31.07.2023

Banu Çulha Özbaş , Berna Güryay

https://doi.org/10.31458/iejes.1224666

Abstract

This study aims to examine the process of developing interdisciplinary lesson plans for prospective English and social studies teachers using the Content-based language instruction model (CLIL) and through collaborative work. The participants of the study consisted of 30 prospective English and 10 prospective social studies teachers who were continuing their pre-service university education in one of the western provinces of Turkey. A qualitative approach was used to answer the research problem, and data collection tools consisted of questionnaires, semi-structured group interviews, and lesson plans. Both descriptive and content analysis was used to reach inferential results. As a result of the research, it was understood that pre-service teachers’ own learning experiences affect their beliefs about their teaching experiences. Besides, it was understood that the 4C model, which can be used in CLIL, is specifically suitable for social studies. In line with these results, suggestions were made for future studies.

Keywords

CLIL, ELT, social studies, teacher education

References

• Anderson, D. (2014). Outliers: Elementary teachers who actually teach social studies. The Social Studies, 105(2), 91-100. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2013.850055
• Banegas, D. L. (2016). Teachers develop CLIL materials in Argentina: A workshop experience. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 9 (1), 17-36.
• Banegas, D. L. (2020). Teacher professional development in language-driven CLIL: A case study. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 12(2), 242-264.
• Barton, K. C., & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
• Coşkun, A. (2022). Content and language integrated learning from the perspectives of English language teachers. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 11(2), 418–431. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.1068230
• Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Dallinger, S., Jonkmann, K., Hollm, J., & Fiege, C. (2016). The effect of content and language integrated learning on students' English and history competencies–Killing two birds with one stone? Learning and Instruction, 41, 23-31.
• DelliCarpini, M. (2021). Developing the C in content and language ıntegrated learning: teacher preparation that builds learners’ content knowledge and academic language through teacher collaboration and integrated pedagogical training. In C. Hemmi & D. L. Banegas (Eds.), International perspectives on CLIL (pp. 217-237). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Eisner, E. (1992). Educational reform and the ecol-ogy of schooling. Teachers College Record, 93, 610–627. Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2007). Input, interaction, and output in second language acquisition. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition (pp. 175-199). Mahwah/NJ: Erlbaum.
• Gierlinger, E. (2007). Modular CLIL in lower secondary education: Some insights from a research project in Austria. In C. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on classroom discourse (pp. 79-118). Peter Lang.
• Goodlad, J. I., & Su, Z. (1992). Organization of the curriculum. In Philip W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum, (pp. 327-344). MacMillan.
• Goris, J. A., Denessen, E. J. P. G., & Verhoeven, L. T. W. (2019). Effects of content and language integrated learning in Europe A systematic review of longitudinal experimental studies. European Educational Research Journal, 18 (6), 675-698.
• Hacieminoglu, E. (2014).How in-service science teachers integrate history and nature of science in elementary science courses. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14 (1), 353–372, http:// doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.1979.
• Holloway, J., & Chiodo, J.(2009). Social studies I.S. being taught t in elementary school: A contrarian view. Journal of Social Studies Research, 33(2), 235–261.
• Kassymov, G., & Çiftçi, H. (2020). The effect of CLIL training on Turkish EFL pre-service teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs and attitudes towards CLIL. English Langauge Education Publishing.
• Kinniburgh, L. H., & Busby, R. S. (2008). No social studies left behind: Integrating social studies during the elementary literacy block. Journal of Content Area Reading, 7(1), 55-85.
• Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. Addison-Wesley Longman Limited.
• Mathis, P.B., & Boyd, N.C. (2009).Who is teaching social studies? Pre-service teachers' reactions. Social Science Research Practice, 4(3), 76-85
• Moore, P. & Lorenzo, F. (2007). Adapting authentic materials for CLIL classrooms: An empirical study. Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3), 28-35.
• Özbaş, B. Ç., & Güryay, B. (2014). Can social studies and language lessons be integrated via global education? English language teacher candidates’ perceptions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1132-1136.
• Perez-Canado, M. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15, 315-341.