Bilingual Education and the Emergence of CLIL in Poland

Bilingual Education and the Emergence of CLIL in Poland

Anna Czura University of Wrocaw (Poland) Katarzyna Papaja University of Silesia (Poland) Magdalena Urbaniak University of Wrocaw (Poland)

Abstract The paper aims to summarise the Profile Report on Bilingual Education in Poland. Prepared in cooperation with the National Centre for Teacher Training and Development (CODN) and the British Council, the Report presents the results of qualitative research conducted in lower secondary and secondary schools (except for schools following MYP and IB programmes). The main objective of the Report was to identify operating models and examine operating features of this type of education. In the paper the researchers will outline the methodology and the outcomes of the research with focus on curricular models of bilingual education in Poland. Moreover, the observed strengths as well as implications and recommendations for future practice will be discussed. One of the major documents describing implementation of CLIL in the European countries was Eurydice’s (2006) report Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. This document placed Polish bilingual practice in a broader European context. In an attempt to gain a more detailed insight into the use of CLIL in Poland, the National Centre for Teacher Training (CODN) has been conducting research investigating teaching practice in schools using different content languages. Two reports on schools using French and English as a language of instruction have been completed and at the moment additional projects are being carried out on German- and Spanish- medium classes.

Keywords: Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), bilingual education, bilingual report, curricular models, bilingual classroom

1.

CLIL in Poland – General Information

Due to the immense popularity of CLIL all over the world, there are a significant number of schools in Poland which teach content subjects through the medium of a foreign language. Implementation of CLIL (practice) in education has been adopted under the name of bilingual education (nauczanie dwujzyczne). When this practice first started bilingual units opened only in secondary schools (nowadays students start this school at the age of 16 and finish at the age of 19), but after the Educational Reform in 1999 this type of education became present also in lower secondary schools (pupils start this school at the age of 13 and finish at the age of 16). Today there are more than 100 secondary and lower secondary schools with bilingual classes using English, German, French, Spanish and Italian as the languages of instruction in Poland. In order to be called bilingual, a school needs to offer at least two content subjects taught through a foreign language. The most popular content subjects, depending on the target language, are mathematics, physics, geography, history, biology and chemistry, and less frequently citizenship, music, physical, technical, and computer (ICT) education. Geography appears to be particularly favoured as a CLIL subject among all languages. One reason for this has been said to be the global dimension of the topics. Another is the fact that it involves a focus on concrete ‘here and now’ issues.

CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field (http://www.icpj.eu/?id=22)

172

2.

The Profile Report (English)

The Profile Report (English) presents results of a project coordinated by the National Centre for Teacher Training and the British Council, Poland. The research was conducted in autumn of 2007 in bilingual schools throughout the country. This Report provides an overview of practice in Polish secondary and lower secondary schools which teach partly, or largely, through the medium of English. Nineteen schools decided to take part in the project and the researchers visited these schools in order to conduct a classroom observation and interviews with students and staff. The schools following MYP and IB programme were excluded from the research.

2.1. Aims of the research The purpose of this study was to identify operating models, and examine operational features of bilingual education in Poland. The study should not be regarded as an evaluation, but as an overview of practice, intended to support the development of beneficial bilingual procedures within and across the schools. The project identified areas of strengths and weaknesses which helped the researchers to formulate a number of recommendations for future improvement. With a view to discerning regularities in bilingual education in Poland, the study helped to distinguish four operating curricular models, which derive from the adoption of differing approaches to bilingual education. Moreover, the research aimed at describing the implementation of bilingual practice in respect to four categories, i.e. teachers, students, schools and system, and finally, materials and resources.

2.2. Qualitative research The findings of the Report are based on the qualitative research which consisted of observation of at least one English lesson and one content subject lesson in each school. Additionally, the researchers interviewed the head teachers or coordinators of bilingual streams, teachers and students.

2.2.1. Classroom observation Each lesson was observed and described in reference to clearly stated criteria. The researchers’ task was to characterise instructional approach, classroom setting, educational resources and the use of English. In case of content lessons the researchers paid particular attention to whether English was used as an effective tool of communication, i.e. how teachers made students aware of specific language aspects of the subject, and how they provided corrective feedback, and handled pupils’ language problems. Moreover, the research team aimed at describing various teaching methods stimulating the pupils’ output. The attempt was made to evaluate how content was affected by the language of instruction in terms of creating, analysing, applying, understanding and remembering the new material. Observation of subject English language lessons additionally aimed at identifying examples of formal instruction and language learning strategy training.

2.2.2. Interviews The first part of the interview was addressed to head teachers or coordinators of bilingual sections and aimed at gaining further information about schools. One of the key issues was cooperation with external institutions and other bilingual schools in Poland or abroad. The European and international dimension of bilingual education was also emphasised. The interviewees were additionally asked to characterise how the school is supported by administration on municipal and state level. Problems concerning enrolment procedure, certification and external examination were also discussed.


173

While being interviewed, teachers were asked about their professional development and availability of training courses for bilingual teachers. They were requested to characterise cooperation with other bilingual teachers in preparing teaching materials, programmes or other initiatives. Finally, the teachers described their teaching method and attempted to indicate differences between the method used while teaching in Polish and English. Students attending bilingual classes were asked to give their subjective opinion about advantages and disadvantages of attending a bilingual school. They presented their attitude to certification, mainly controversies around the bilingual final exam - Matura. The researchers were also interested in gaining knowledge about the learning strategies used by the students and their approach to thinking and using English e.g. in group work. Other important issues were the time the students spend using English outside schools and the use of the European Language Portfolio.

3. Teachers – Students – Schools and Systems – Resources and Materials With its aim to achieve a general overview of practice in Poland, the Report not only identifies existing models of bilingual education, but it also points at the examples of good practice and reveals the areas for improvement. The findings can be categorised into four groups concerning teachers, students, schools and systems (the educational system and its operating agents Ministries, Teacher Development Agencies, and Examination Boards), and finally, materials and resources. As far as teachers are concerned, the following profile of the content and language teachers was observed. Teachers were mostly Polish with quite common experience of living and working in English-speaking countries and in some cases with experience of teaching abroad. They all showed enormous involvement in teaching, as work with bilingual classes was for them a great challenge as well as the source of personal and professional satisfaction. What was evident was their eagerness for further development. Aware of the significance of the access to resources and opportunity to exchange experiences for the achievement of best practice, the interviewees reported the great need for specific CLIL training programmes (also subjectspecific), workshops, symposia, school visits, exchanges including periods of work or study in countries where the target language is spoken. Moreover, the demand for further development of teacher work partnerships (content-language; content-content) within schools was voiced. In order to ensure it, the practical support is required, enabling proper functioning of ‘professional partnerships’. Another concern expressed by the teachers referred to lack of financial resources which are crucial for their own professional development. Students, in turn, perceived bilingual education as prestigious, broadening horizons, giving them opportunity to study abroad. Among other advantages they mentioned access to an extensive range of topics and extra language lessons, studying in better conditions (smallersized classes, better learning resources) and participation in foreign exchanges. Being aware of all the benefits, they expressed, nevertheless, their disappointment rooted in the fact that English Matura in many cases does not provide credit for university entrance. Whereas English Matura is difficult and preparation for it requires much effort, students are not granted extra points. Within the disadvantages of bilingual education they mentioned also the lower standard of content subjects in comparison with mainstream classes, as well as the use of traditional methods of teaching. Unsystematic code-switching (Polish-English) was mentioned as another drawback As for schools and systems, the European and international dimensions were one of the subjects of the analysis. Many initiatives were observed ranging from projects on multiculturalism, cultural festivals, European Union Programmes, to variety of extra-curricular activities. In spite of that, unfortunately, little networking between bilingual schools in Poland or abroad was reported. Towarzystwo Szkó Twórczych was one of few examples of such cooperation. Hence, the necessity to build the network which would enable the exchange of materials and experiences is undeniable. Creating conditions facilitating teamwork among the


174

teachers (e.g. embedding team meetings into the timetable) might also contribute to the increase of effectiveness of bilingual education. Furthermore, the need for greater external support from key stakeholders, namely national educational administration, was clearly voiced by the interviewees. Without concrete regulations concerning curricula and insight into Matura exam the standards of excellence in bilingual teaching will not be achievable. The provision of a bigger range of teacher training is also expected and awaited. Finally, within the category of resources and materials lack of clearly specified bilingual education (English) curriculum was mentioned as the problem underlying confusion among the teachers. The words of one of the content teachers seem to prove such status quo: “My feeling is that when it comes to bilingual classes, there are no rules, no sets of advice available in Poland.” As a result, one of the main observed problems concerns the preparation for the Matura exam. There is no teacher training in this field. Moreover, the Central Examination Board (CKE) does not organize mock bilingual Matura exams and denies both the teachers and the learners access to copies of bilingual Matura exam sets in content subjects used in previous years. The CKE information booklet lacks necessary information; therefore, the teachers prepare the students to bilingual Matura exams without the knowledge of its content, structure and the assessment criteria (“We prepare our students intuitively to the bilingual Matura exams, as no support is provided” English Teacher). Both students and teachers also expressed their frustration resulting from poor access to materials in English. The problem with books adjusted to Polish educational requirements was the reason for additional constraints. Because of their high price and, what is even more important, unsuitability because of culturally-bound discourse approaches, the imported course books do not satisfy Polish students and teachers’ needs. Hopefully, the situation will improve soon, as first course books written by Polish authors have been recently published. As far as other materials are concerned, undoubtedly, higher quality of teaching could be also achieved by employing technological teaching devices such as classroom data projectors and portable computers, which, unfortunately, not all schools are equipped with. Certainly much more attention should be given to the provision of quality visual materials both in language and content classrooms.

4.

Curricular models

The curricular models which are to be presented below are the outcome of the observations carried out by the research team in bilingual classes. There are four curricular models of bilingual education in Poland which are further divided into subcategories depending on the adopted educational approach.

Model A: (Teacher-based instruction with use of tasks requiring student pair / group work). Extensive English Language Medium Instruction During the classes it is mainly English which is used for teaching and learning. Polish is only used for translation of terminology and a brief summary of learning concepts. Within this model two other types were distinguished: Type A Single Focus: the main focus is on content. English and Polish are referred to only occasionally, especially in terms of pronunciation or spelling. Type B Dual Focus: the focus is on both content and language (English or Polish). While teaching content attention is given to language as well, however, the degree of focus is different form lesson to lesson. In most cases, it is the content that becomes more important.


175

Model B: (Mostly teacher-based instruction with limited use of tasks requiring student pair / group work). Partial English Language Medium Instruction (Code-switching English-Polish) English and Polish are used for teaching and learning. There is about 50% of time devoted to the use of each language. This model can be further subcategorised into two types. Type A Single Focus: the focus is only on content. The degree of code-switching between English and Polish is significant, depending on the purpose. Type B Dual Focus: the focus is on both content and language. Both languages are used during the lessons – English and Polish with a lot of switching between the two languages. While teaching content, a lot of attention is given to the English language. Like in the previous model the degree of focus is different depending on the lesson. In most cases content plays the dominant role.

Model C: (Mostly teacher-based instruction with limited use of tasks requiring student pair / group work). Limited English Language Medium Instruction (code-switching English-Polish) Both languages are used for teaching and learning (English or Polish). From 10% to 50% of time is devoted to the use of English language; code-switching is used for different functions during the process of teaching and learning. Two other types can be distinguished within this model: Type A Single Focus: the focus is mainly on the content. Polish is mainly used during the lessons with occasional instances of the English language. There is also quite a lot of switching between the languages depending on functional conventions. Type B Dual Focus: the focus is on both content and language (English or Polish). English is very often used during the lessons; however, it is the Polish language that remains the main language of instruction. There is also quite a lot of switching between the languages, however while teaching content the attention paid to languages is of lower importance. The degree of focus varies from lesson to lesson.

Model D: (Variant techniques do not allow for selecting a single type of instructional approach) Specific English Language medium Instruction English and Polish are used for teaching and learning. Only limited amount of time is allocated to the use of English. There are a few different types of model D: Type A A sequence of lessons taught in Polish is followed by a lesson conducted mainly in English. This technique aims at consolidating the material covered in the earlier course of the lessons. Type B A lesson which is mostly taught in English but concludes a lesson in Polish; as in type A above, it aims at revising the previously covered material. Type C The materials used in class are in English; however, the lesson is conducted in Polish. Type D A large portion of the content material has been acquired earlier in Polish. Then the knowledge is recapitulated in the form of project work prepared and presented by the students in English.


176

5. Concluding recommendations All the above described report findings allowed to formulate concluding recommendations. The recommendations will be divided into practice (the schools where bilingual education is implemented) and systems (the educational system, Ministries, Teacher Development Agencies and Examination Boards). In case of practice, it is important to: - help schools with stating as well as implementing objectives of bilingual education into curriculum; - form teacher and school partnerships; - encourage teachers to join professional networks connected with bilingual education e.g. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Network (CCN) by showing them the benefits of the networks; - provide the teachers with opportunities to develop their second language proficiency in all skills (B2 rank according to the Common European Framework of Reference); - encourage the teachers as well as the learners to use the European Language Portfolio; In case of systems, it is important to: - create a curriculum for Matura which can be taken in English; - provide teachers as well as learners with some preparation materials for Matura in English as well as with mock exams; - provide uniform teaching resources which would be used by all teachers in order to achieve standardization; - provide teachers with opportunities to take part in teacher trainings devoted to bilingual education; - provide teachers with opportunities to take part in meetings where they could share their experience, get access to materials or work on curriculum development; - persuade higher education institutions to take into account secondary level bilingual education streams during student application process; - help to establish and support cooperation between schools and higher education; If the above mentioned recommendations are to be implemented, there is a great chance that bilingual education will become one of the most powerful educational streams in Poland, especially in the times when knowledge of a foreign language is not enough anymore. What matters is both content and language.


177

References Dudek, M.: 2002, Kwalifikacje nauczycieli w nauczaniu bilingwalnym, in Jzyki Obce w Szkole. 2002, no. 6, CODN, Warszawa, 37-40. Eurydice: 2006, Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at school in Europe, Eurydice, Brussels. Gajo, L.: 2005, Raport ewaluacyjny - sekcje dwujzyczne z jzykiem francuskim w Polsce. Zao enia i wnioski ko cowe, CODN/French Embassy in Poland, Warszawa. Iluk, J: 2000, Nauczanie bilingwalne: modele, koncepcje, zao enia metodyczne, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu lskiego, Katowice, (Academic Papers; no. 1910). Marsh, D., Zajc, M., Golebiowska, H., Czura, A., Gapinska, A., Papaja, K., Roda, M. and Urbaniak, M.: 2008, Profile Report Bilingual Education (English) in Poland - Overview of Practice in Selected schools, CODN, British Council Poland, University of Jyväskylä, Warszawa. Multa ska, M.: 2002, Nauczanie dwuj zyczne w polskim systemie o wiaty, in Jzyki Obce w Szkole 6, CODN, Warszawa, 77-79. Wolff, D: 2002b, On the importance of CLIL in the context of the debate on plurilingual education in the European Union, in D. Marsh (ed.), Content and Language Integrated Learning: The European Dimension – Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential, University of Jyväskylä, Finland, 47-48.


178