Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

Content and Language Integrated Learning and Task-based Learning

Second Language Teaching (SLT) has always been a field of research and
development. Learning a second language depends on, among other factors, the
desired goal of the learner as well as what is understood by being able to speak a
language. The different interpretations of these factors translate into various
approaches which ultimately change the focus of SLT. This is one of the reasons why
there exist numerous methods for language teaching. For the last 40 years, methods
have taken a more functional and communicative approach than their forerunners.
This is what is known as Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) which
emphasizes interaction as the means and the goal of learning a language. According
to Margie Berns (1984), language is interaction; it is interpersonal activity and has a
clear relationship with society (p. 5). With this in mind, in this essay I will review two
methods of SLT: Task-based Learning (TBL) and Content and language integrated
learning (CLIL). The aim of this essay is to identify some of the most useful features
of these two methods for a particular audience, as well as to contribute to the
existing literature about SLT methodology.
When discussing different methods for SLT, one question that usually arises is:
What is the role of methods? Before trying to answer this question, we should
consider the meaning of method. There is a certain disagreement on the definition of
terms such as method, methodology, approach and even language, in the language
teaching literature. Method can be defined as the way of doing something, or the
principles that embody certain techniques or strategies. Methodology, as its suffix
suggest, is the science that studies the principles of a method. Personally, I find it is
useful to compare method and methodology to theory and practice, respectively, as
1

Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

suggested by Kumaravadivelu (2006): Method is a construct; methodology is a

conduct (p. 162). Almost any activity consists of a practical and a theoretical basis.
Nearly most activities require more practice than theory, such as cooking, painting,
or playing a sport: learning a second language is one of them. This is why I chose
these two methods, TBL and CLIL, because I believe they emphasize the importance
of using the language (practice) over knowing the language (theory). Methods can
offer teachers different ways to engage students in a learning activity. Therefore, I
understand methods as a sort of guide that the teacher will use as he or she
considers best. I use the word method in plural because most teachers are eclectic,
that is, they do not follow one method in particular, but rather they use what they
consider suitable from various existing methods. As Bell (2007) suggests, teachers
attitudes to methods are highly pragmatic and their interest in methods is
determined by how far they provide options in dealing with their particular teaching
contexts (p. 142).
With the intention of obtaining narrower conclusions, I will focus my research of
methods in a particular group of learners. This reduced audience will be Spanish
students from secondary schools. The purpose of this reduction is also motivated by
other factors: I share the audiences context; Spain is one of the countries where
CLIL is relatively recent, and much research is being done; and students response
towards CLIL has been considerably positive so far. In respect to their cultural
background, Spanish students are clearly advantaged when compared to students
from other parts of the world, as for example Cambodia. This is because the majority
of developed countries share a similar lifestyle and common values. Considering
this, I move on to describe the methods chosen: CLIL and TBL.

Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

The origins of CLIL can be traced back to the middle of the 20 th century. The central
idea behind CLIL is that the L2 is used as a means of instruction to teach other
subjects such as history, math or biology. This idea derives from language immersion
programs and bilingual education. While some argue that bilingual education has
existed in one form or another for 5000 years or more" (Baker, 2006, p. 188), it is
widely agreed that the form, as put by Baker, we know today became more popular
from the 1960s. And although CLIL can be considered as bilingual education, we
should mention that there are some significant differences between immersion and
CLIL. Lasagabaster and Sierra point out, for example, that the language of
instruction in CLIL programs is a foreign language: e.g. English in Spain; but in
immersion contexts L2 is present in students local communities: e.g. Basque in
North Spain. There are also differences at the level of proficiency: in CLIL students
are not expected to master the L2, whereas in immersion students are expected to
approach native speaker competence (Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2010). The reason
behind this is that the values of education are changing. Both teachers and students
have new needs, and this is why we are motivated to explore new teaching methods.
In this respect, one motto that captures the essence of CLIL is perhaps the phrase:
learn as you use and use as you learn (Marsh, 2002, p. 10) - as opposed to
learn now for use later". But the benefits of CLIL go much further than that of
traditional language courses. In the report previously referred to, Marsh comments
on the various dimensions of CLIL such as: culture, content, environment, language,
and learning dimension. All these areas can be enhanced with CLIL and, what is
more, students are significantly more motivated in comparison to traditional language
courses, and therefore, are psychologically more prone to learn.

Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

One of the features I consider very advantageous about CLIL is the degree of
students participation in the lessons. Brbara Pea, a 5 th grade teacher from Spain,
explains that teaching Science [in English] is a very good opportunity to take it
outside the classroom (Pea B. , 2009). It seems logical that young learners would
be more motivated to learn about the body parts of an animal than the constituents in
a relative clause. Therefore by focusing on the meaning rather than the form children
develop more interest in the subject and consequently learn more. Another feature I
would highlight about CLIL is that it offers continuity on the subject studied, that is, it
advocates narrow reading. One the one hand, this is beneficial from the point of
view of content: it is more probably for students to relate and retain concepts about
one specific topic than about various random topics, as it is usually the case with
readings from language course books. On the other hand, it is also beneficial from
the point of view of language: students are more likely to learn more vocabulary by
reading more about one specific topic, given that they will probably find similar words
and idioms expressed in different ways: this is known as recycling vocabulary.
Let us now take a look at TBL: its origins, goals, and its basic lesson structure. TBL,
as the majority of methods today derive from the Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT) approach. The main idea of CLT is to teach language practicing the language,
to do so it pays systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of
language (Littlewood, 1991, p. 1). This approach to language education appeared in
the 1960s after replacing almost entirely the Situational Language Teaching
approach which principles were very different. It consisted in shaping behaviourism;
learners were expected to memorize language structures and to avoid mistakes.
Ever since then language education has been, for the most part, functional oriented.
Willis describes task as an activity with a clear purpose (Willis, 1998). The idea is to
4

Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

engage students in an interesting activity that they can enjoy and try their best to
achieve the desire goal. Therefore, TBL demands not only participation as an effort
to follow the class, but real engagement in the tasks.
One of the features I like about TBL is that the tasks seem to be more challenging
than those used for CLIL lessons, especially if we take into account Williss
description of the task cycle (Willis, 1998). Where in a CLIL lesson a task usually
requires to learn a concept and relate it in different contexts, a TBL lesson would
also require to deliver what has been learnt in a certain manner. A good teacher
would be responsible for creating an interactive task that presents the students a
challenge or, in Williss words, an adventure. These activities can be used to
construct a more dynamic and pedagogical lesson in the classroom. However, TBL
does not seem to have implication on what goes on outside the classroom. Granted,
students can develop many different skills by performing tasks, but it is quite
probable that once the lesson is over what was learnt will be soon forgotten.
Both these methods, CLIL and TBL, are good methods, after all there are not good
or bad methods, but simply better methods for SLT. Following the fact that most
teachers are eclectic and that they choose different aspect from various methods to
conduct their lessons, I will now offer my opinion as to how these to methods can
complement each other.
The main difference between these two methods is their goal. Generally speaking,
TBL focuses on form while CLIL focuses on meaning. I believe that content and
communication skills are more relevant than form and language skills; therefore I
would suggest that TBL could complement CLIL, not the other way around. For
example, CLIL lessons could obtain even better results by making tasks more

Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

challenging so that students also pay attention to the way they produce the
language. This could be done by following the TBL framework described by Willis
(Willis, 1998). This task cycle consists of three phases: task, planning and report.
This type of task could be really useful if it was applied at the end of a CLIL lesson or
a second section of that lesson. This would not only demand more effort from the
students than the usual CLIL activities, but, more importantly, it would help reinforce
the concepts learnt in the lesson. The preparation leading up to the final report can
be a good exercise for students to express what they already know, and way to
encourage them to expose it for the class.
To conclude, there is not one exact recipe for language teaching. The existence of
many different types of language teaching methods can help us find what we
consider relevant to teach a desired skill. It is, therefore, up to the teacher to find a
way to adapt his/her methodology for his audience. Both these methods can be
applicable in contexts where second language (L2) is treated as an instrument to
teach, rather than an isolated subject such as traditional language teaching methods
such as the grammar-translation method. As argued by Marsh and others, we need
to adapt ourselves to the modern globalised world. We should make sure we
understand what skills are the most relevant so that we can have a common goal. In
this respect, it seems to be that communication skills are more relevant than
language skills. Nevertheless we should make an effort to acquire both competences
at the highest possible level.

Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

References
Baker, C. (2006). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. Philadelphia:
Multilinguial Matters Ltd.
Bell, D. (2007). Do teachers think that methods? ELT journals , 61 (2), 135-143.
Berns, M. S. (1984). Functional approaches to language and language teaching:
Another look. In S. Savignon. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
Johnson, M. P. (2007). Immersion Language Education: A Model for English. Journal
of cognitive science , 5, 41-47.Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language
teaching:from method to post-method. New Jersey: Routledge.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: more
differences than similarities. ELT Journal , 64.
Littlewood, W. (1991). Communicative Language Teaching: an introduction.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littlewood, W. (2004). The task-based approach: some questions and suggestions.
ELT journal , 58/4.
Luczywek, I. (n.d.). Three Models of Integrating School Subjects in Poland.
Retrieved April 10, 2011, from CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field:
http://www.icpj.eu/?id=6
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE The european dimension. Strasbourg: European
Commission.

Assignment on methodology

TESOL

Moreno, Mario

Pea, B. (2009, October). Introduction. Retrieved April 10, 2011, from xtec:
http://www.xtec.cat/cirel/pla_le/nile/barbara_perolada/
Pea, B. P. (2009, October). ANIMAL WORLD: Types and habitats. Retrieved april
10, 2011, from XTEC: http://www.xtec.cat/cirel/pla_le/nile/barbara_perolada/
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language
teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skehan, P. (2002). A non-marginal role for tasks. ELT Journal , 56/3, 289-95.
Willis, J. (1998, July 14). Task-Based Learning: What Kind of Adventure? Retrieved
April 25, 2011, from http://www2.uniwuppertal.de/FB4/anglistik/multhaup/methods_elt/pop_ups/tbl_willis.htm