Technology and Content Integration for English Language Learners in a Vocational High School

Year 2020, Volume: 8 Issue: 15, 114 - 135, 25.03.2020

Ebru Kuzucu , Günizi Kartal

https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.656133

Cited By: 3

Abstract

This exploratory study investigated the effectiveness of technology and content integration in a foreign language class in a vocational high school with a total of 41 students. The experimental group received technology-enhanced content integrated instruction, designed specifically for learning needs based on scaffolding design guidelines for educational software. The control group followed the regular textbook. In addition to scaffolding e-books developed for the study, freely available web-based and augmented reality applications were employed. The results showed that the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group in content tests, one of the language tests, and a writing task. No significant difference was observed between the groups in the general language test, but within group comparisons showed significant increased for the experimental group for sub-test scores. Recommendations are offered for the teachers, researchers, and policy makers seeking solutions for the low foreign language achievement in vocational high schools.

Keywords

Technology-integration, scaffolding software, content-based instruction, EFL in vocational high school

References

• Agustín-Llach, M. P. (2017). The effects of the CLIL approach in young foreign language learners’ lexical profiles. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(5), 557–573.
• Alptekin, C., Erçetin, G., & Bayyurt, Y. (2007). The effectiveness of a theme-based syllabus for young L2 learners. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 28(1), 1-17.
• Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000) How people learn. Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
• Bush, M. D., & Terry, R. M. (Eds.). (1997). Technology-enhanced language learning. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.
• Carrel, P. L., & Carson, J. G. (1997). Extensive and intensive reading in an EAP setting. English for Specific Purpose, 16(1), 47-60.
• Chapelle, C., & Jamieson, J. (2008). Tips for teaching with CALL: Practical approaches to computer-assisted language learning. USA: Pearson Education.
• Coral, J., Lleixà, T., & Ventura, C. (2018). Foreign language competence and content and language integrated learning in multilingual schools in Catalonia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(2), 139–150.
• Coyle, D. (2006). Content and language integrated learning: motivating learners and teachers. Scottish Languages Review, 13, 1-18.
• Coyle, D., Hood, P. & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Crandall, J. A. (1993). Content-centered language learning in the United States. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 111-126.
• Cummins, J. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. Clevedon, England: Multilingual matters.
• Çelik, S. (2003). Niğde Üniversitesi meslek yüksekokullarındaki büro yönetimi ve sekreterlik bölümü öğrencilerinin akademik ve mesleki İngilizce gereksinimlerine yönelik bir araştırma. [A study on student needs regarding academic and vocational English at the Niğde University Vocational School] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Bilkent University, Ankara.
• Erçetin, G. (2011). Pedagogical issues in developing mobile assisted language learning materials. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education, 28(1), 22-30.
• Georgiou, S. I. (2012). Reviewing the puzzle of CLIL. ELT Journal, 66(4), 495–504.
• Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching second language learners in the mainstream classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Gierlinger, E., & Wagner, T. (2016). The more the merrier—Revisiting CLIL-based vocabulary growth in secondary education. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 9(1), 37–63.
• Graham, K. M., Choi, Y., Davoodi, A., Razmeh, S. & Dixon, L. Q. (2018). Language and Content Outcomes of CLIL and EMI: A systematic review. LACLIL, 11(1), 19-37. DOI: 10.5294/laclil.2018.11.1.2
• Gür, B. S., Özoğlu, M., Akgeyik, T., Çetimkaya, E., Karagöl, E. T., Öztürk, M., ... & Çelik, Z. (2012). Türkiye'nin insan kaynağının belirlenmesi. [Determining Turkey’s human resources] SETA.
• Haley, M. H., & Austin, T. Y. (2013). Content-based second language teaching and learning: An interactive approach. Boston: Pearson Higher Ed.
• İgrek, E. (2013). İçerik tabanlı yabancı dil öğretim yaklaşımının mesleki yabancı dil (Ingilizce) derslerinde öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına etkisi. [The effects of CBI on students’ academic performance in vocational foreign language (English) courses] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Gazi University, Ankara.
• Ismajli, H., & Krasniqi, D. (2018). Challenges for achieving learning outcomes of languages and communication curriculum area in primary education in kosovo. International e-Journal of Educational Studies (IEJES), 2(4), 81-91.
• Kasper, L. F. (2000). The Internet and content-based college ESL Instruction. In Kasper, L. F. (Ed.) Content-based college ESL instruction, (pp. 183-201). Mahwah, N. J. : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Kennedy, T. J., & Henderson, S. (2003). The GLOBE program: Bringing together students, teachers and scientists to increase scientific understanding of the Earth through research. Children, Youth and Environments, 13(2), 217-227.
• Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
• Lightbown, P. M. (2014). Focus on content-based language teaching--Oxford key concepts for the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Loewen, S. & Sato; M. (2019) Instructed second language acquisition and English language teaching. In Gao, X. (Ed.) Second Handbook of English Language Teaching. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham.
• Mackey, A., Gass, S., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive interactional feedback? Studies in second language acquisition, 22(4), 471-497.
• Manzano-Vázquez, B. (2014) Lexical transfer in the written production of a CLIL group and a non-CLIL group. International Journal of English Studies, 14(2), 57–76.
• Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols Martin, M. J. (2010). European framework for CLIL teacher education: A framework for the professional development of CLIL teachers. Graz: European Centre for Modern Languages.
• Mariani, L. (1997). Teacher support and teacher challenge in promoting learner autonomy. Perspectives: A Journal of TESOL Italy, 23 (2), 5-19.
• Maxwell-Reid, C. (2010). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): The influence of studying through English or Spanish students’ first-language written discourse. Text & Talk, 30(6), 679–699.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.
• Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., ... & Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337-386.
• Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304.
• Sabuncuoğlu, A. (2010). Meslek liselerinde özel amaçlı İngilizce öğretimine yönelik gereksinim çözümlemesi uygulaması. [Implementation of needs analysis for teaching English for a special purpose at vocational high schools] (Unpublished master’s thesis). Ankara University, Ankara.
• Sagarra, N., & Zapata, G. C. (2008). Blending classroom instruction with online homework: A study of student perceptions of computer-assisted L2 learning. ReCALL, 20(2), 208-224. Sauro, S., & Chapelle, C. A. (2017). Toward langua‐technocultural competence. In Chapelle, C. A. & S. Sauro (Ed.s). The Handbook of Technology and Second Language Teaching and Learning, (pp. 459-471). Hoboken, N.J.:Wiley Blackwell.
• Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). CLIL learning: achievement levels and affective factors. Language and Education, 21(4), 28–41.
• Short, D.J. (1991). How to integrate language and content instruction: A raining manual. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
• Snow, M. A., & Brinton, D. (Eds.). (1997). The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. White Plains, NY: Longman.
• Snow, M. A., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1989). A conceptual framework for the integration of language and content in second/foreign language instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 23(2), 201-217.
• Stryker, S. B., & Leaver, B. L. (Eds.). (1997). Content-based instruction in foreign language education: Models and methods. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Thomas, M. (Ed.). (2009). Handbook of research on Web 2.0 and second language learning. USA: IGI Global.
• Toth, S. (2010). Oral presentation rubric. Retrieved June 20, 2017, from https://studylib.net/doc/7752853/oral-presentation-rubric
• Wesche, M., & Skehan, P. (2002) Communicative teaching, content-based instruction, and task-based learning. In R. Kaplan (Ed.), Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 207-228). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. USA: Harvard University Press.
• Yalçın, Ş. (2012). Content-based instruction at the tertiary level in Turkey. In Y. Bayyurt & Y. Bektaş-Çetinkaya (Eds.), Research perspectives on teaching and learning English in Turkey: Policies and practices (pp. 217-234). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
• Yalçın, Ş. (2013). İçerik temelli yabancı dil öğretim modeli [Content-based instruction model in foreign language teaching]. Boğaziçi University Journal of Education, 30(2), 107-122.
• Yang, W. (2015). Content and Language Integrated Learning next in Asia: Evidence of learners’ achievement in CLIL education from a Taiwan tertiary degree programme. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(4), 361–382.
• Zhang, M., & Quintana, C. (2012). Scaffolding strategies for supporting middle school students’ online inquiry processes. Computers & Education, 58(1), 181-196.
• Zhao, J., & Dixon, L. Q. (2017). English-medium instruction in Chinese universities: Perspectives, discourse and evaluation. New York, NY: Routledge.