Specific features of the organizational models of speciality based integrated learning introduced in Ukraine

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University

SPECIFIC FEATURES OF THE ORGANIZATIONAL MODELS OF SPECIALTY BASED INTEGRATED LEARNING INTRODUCED IN UKRAINE

Iryna Levchyk PhD, Associate Professor

of the Department of Foreign Languages

Content-language integrated learning provides an opportunity to learn a foreign language on the basis of high-quality supplementation and expansion of the thematic content, which positively affects the way of thinking and knowledge processing, expands vocabulary, increases the level of all speech activities. As far as in the CLIL methodology, the content of educational material is closely related to the cognitive mechanisms and thinking, this approach promotes the use of knowledge from one content as a basis for another, i.e. stimulates the development and application of knowledge transfer skills and critical thinking.

Teaching a foreign language through the content of the future specialty creates the preconditions for the introduction of the technique of immersion in the process of teaching special professional disciplines in the language learned by students for further development of professional communication. In the Western Methodology (second) language immersion is basically defined as “a form of bilingual learning to develop additional bilingualism in which students create educational environment with sheltered language immersion, in which they receive at least half of the explanations (instructions) on the content of profile subjects in language they study as a second, foreign, hereditary or indigenous” (R. Lyster, 2007:8; L. Cammarata, D. Tedick, 2012:252). Additionally, students may receive instruction in native language in case they need it to clarify the content.

Following the definition proposed by O. Tarnopolsky (2011: 25), in the context of foreign language immersion programs for university study, we consider this specific type of integrated foreign language learning to imply teaching a course in a professional discipline, e.g. Journalism or Media Literacy, in English for development of professional communication in future specialists.

The basic principles of immersion methodology for (second) language integrated learning have been described in the works by N. Hollow, F. Genesis, W. Lambert (1983); R. Johnsen, M. Swain (1997), S. Burger (1997), D. Freeman, J. Freeman (1991), R. Johnston (2002). Various options for the application of the immersion technique have been highlighted in works by P. Hoare & S. Kong (2008), T. Fortune & D. Tedick (2008) regarding the distribution of language and content components, e.g. 50:50 or 90:10, use of foreign and native languages during a lesson, e.g. full or partial, the age of participants, e.g. early or late and the number of student groups involved, e.g. one-way or two-way. An analysis of the experience of the French-language immersion programs in Canada allowed J. Cummins (1998) to name the Additive Bilingualism Enrichment Principle and the Linguistic Interdependence Principle as the key ones, as well as to define the frame of pedagogic principles providing cognitive development of students and mastering the subject content. In the past decade the methodologists (L. Cammarata, D. Tedick, 2012; T. Fortune, D. Tedick, & C. Walker, 2008; R. Lyster, 2007) addressed the problem of definition of the optimal balance between language and content in the practice of immersion, which is determined by opposition of factors such as teacher's self-determination, expectations of stakeholders, and understanding of the relationship between language and content. While M. Met (1998); M. Bacon, K. Hakam & S. Yin (2008); L. Cammarata (2009) were focused predominantly on curriculum development and immersion curricula issues, the problem of practical use of effective strategies when providing instructions and corrections by immersion teachers has been disclosed in works by J. Cummins (2007); J. Norris & L. Ortega (2001); A. Llinares, R. Lyster (2014).

The peculiar features of the English language immersion in the Ukrainian context have been taken into account in the dissertations and monographs by the homeland researchers, namely Z. Korneva (2004, 2006), G. Turchynova (2006), O. Tarnopolsky, V. Momot, S. Kozhushko (2008), A. Vyselko (2012, 2013, 2015), also in a number of research papers by L. Fillipova (201 5), O. Tarnopolsky, N. Chernyak, S. Storozhuk (2017), I. Yakushenko (2018). The relevant issue of development of the professionally oriented English communication in students of non-linguistic departments with help of content-language integrated learning has been investigated by O. Tarnopolsky (201 1,2012, 2013), A. Krupchenko, A. Krashennikova, G. Movchan, Yu. Rudnik (2013), M. Leshchenko, Yu. Lavrysh, K. Halatsyn (2018) O. Kapustina, V. Ustimenko, T. Mironenko, L. Dobrovolska, O. Rudychik (2020), T. Putiy, O. Beregova (2020) and many others.

Conclusions. The contradictions described in the research papers of our scientists require further research to find the best correlation between the concept of the original CLIL methodology and its versions modified to the conditions of learning at the Ukrainian non-linguistic higher education institutions. Review of the theoretical and methodological provisions of integrated learning of future specialists in Ukraine revealed the main types and structure of the introduced organizational models of English language immersion in the educational process. Initial, transitional and main stage are characterized with different methods and educational goals. The influence of the environmental parameters on adaptation of CLIL to the national context is reflected in the specifics of the structure of the existing models of integrated learning. Among the characteristic features of the Ukrainian adapted CLIL models there are shift of focus on language, content and their equal evaluation at different stages of integrated learning; predominantly specialty based content (the Humanities have been chosen once); limited CLIL exposure (3 hours per week); curriculum based introduction of immersion; non-English language environment, though it is considered to be lingua franca. The described specifics require further research to resolve the issues defined in the Ukrainian context. teaching foreign language content

References

1. Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J. (2012). Balancing content and language in instruction: The experience of immersion teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251 -269.

2. Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach (Vol. 18). John Benjamins Publishing.

3. Tarnopolsky, О. B. (2011). Navchannia cherez zmist, zmistovno-movna intehratsiia ta inshomovne zanurennia u vykladanni inozemnykh mov dlia profesiinykh tsilei u nemovnykh vyshakh [Content learning, content-language integration and foreign language immersion in foreign language teaching for professional purposes at the nonlinguistic higher education establishments]. Foreign Languages, (3), 23-27.

Размещено на Allbest.ru