Speakers
Description
This study examines how A2/B1-level students develop their group discussion in CLIL. Audio recordings from three classes were analyzed using a two-layered analytical framework to examine cognitive discourse functions (Dalton-Puffer, 2013) and discourse moves (Pastrana et al., 2018). The findings show that while students sometimes expanded feedback using shared experiences, discussions often remained disputational (Pastrana et al., 2018) without elaboration. The study suggests that staged discussions and explicit instruction in elaboration may promote deeper discussion.
Abstract section 2: Contribution/research questions
Building on previous research on classroom discourse in CLIL, the present study focuses on discussions conducted by lower-intermediate students. By analyzing their group interactions in detail, this study examines whether discussion development and collaborative knowledge construction can also be observed at this proficiency level. This study investigates the following research questions:
1) How do A2/B1-level students develop their group discussions?
2) How do they construct their thinking through interaction?
Abstract section 3: Content/method
Audio recordings of 18 group discussions from three A2/B1-level CLIL classes at a Japanese university were analyzed using a two-layered analytical framework. The first layer examined CDFs (Dalton-Puffer, 2013) to identify what students communicated. The second layer analyzed discourse moves (Eggins & Slade, 1997; Pastrana et al., 2018) to investigate how they communicated with each other. Finally, we examined the relationship between the two to find out how discourse moves elicited specific CDFs.
Abstract section 4: Outcomes/results
The findings show that students engaged in dialogic interaction by expanding feedback (Llinares et al., 2012) through shared classroom experiences. However, discussions often stayed at the level of disputational talk (Pastrana et al., 2018), focusing mainly on agreement and disagreement with limited issue elaboration. Although challenges and idea development appeared later in discussions and led to some deepening, exploratory talk (Pastrana et al., 2018) was mostly restricted to adding examples. Overall, a lack of elaboration moves resulted in fewer extended contributions. Pedagogically, the findings suggest that staging discussions and explicitly teaching elaboration moves may support deeper discussion among A2/B1-level learners.
Abstract section 5: References
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualizing content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011
Eggins, S., & Slade, D. (1997). Analysing casual conversation. Cassell.
Fukasawa, E., Aikawa, H., & Hemmi, C. (forthcoming). Co-construction of knowledge through critical evaluation and elaboration in CLIL group-work activities. In T. Sato, & C. Hemmi (Eds.), Critical thinking and creativity in CLIL. Routledge.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.
Pastrana, A., Llinares, A., & Pascual, I. (2018). Students’ language use for co-construction of knowledge in CLIL group-work activities: A comparison with L1 settings. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 21, 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-017-0802-y
Abstract section 1: Relevance
This study addresses a gap in research on classroom interaction in CLIL lessons. Although group discussion is a primary activity in CLIL, few studies have closely examined how discussions actually develop. Findings from a recent study (Fukasawa et al., forthcoming) with more advanced learners showed that students used various cognitive discourse functions (CDFs; Dalton-Puffer, 2013) to accomplish a defining task, with different types of discourse moves (Pastrana et al., 2018). Self- and other-initiated elaboration play a crucial role in deepening discussion. However, it remains unclear whether similar interactional processes occur among lower-level learners, indicating the need for further research.
| Title | The role of elaboration in deepening CLIL group discussion |
|---|---|
| Teaching Context | College and university education |