To ensure smooth communication and collaboration, here are some troubleshooting tips to address common issues:
Check Internet Connection: Verify that you have a stable and reliable internet connection. Use a wired connection when possible, as it tends to be more stable than Wi-Fi. If using Wi-Fi, make sure you have a strong signal.
Update the Browser or App: Ensure that you are using the latest version of the web browser. Developers frequently release updates to address bugs and improve performance.
Clear Browser Cache: Sometimes, cached data can cause conflicts or issues. Clear the browser cache and cookies before joining the meeting.
Test Audio and Video: Before the meeting, check your microphone and camera to ensure they are working correctly. If you are a speaker, you can click on "Start Practice Session" button test to ensure audio and video devices are functioning.
Close Other Applications: Running multiple applications in the background can consume system resources and lead to performance issues. Close unnecessary apps to free up resources for the Dryfta meeting platform.
Restart Your Device: If you encounter persistent issues, try restarting your computer or mobile device. This can help resolve various software-related problems.
Use Supported Browsers: Ensure you are using a browser supported by the meeting platform. Recommended browsers: Chrome, Firefox, Edge, and Brave.
Allow Necessary Permissions: Make sure the Dryfta meeting platform has the required permissions to access your microphone, camera, and other necessary features.
Disable VPN or Firewall: Sometimes, VPNs or firewalls can interfere with the connection to the meeting platform. Temporarily disable them and see if the issue persists.
Switch Devices: If possible, try joining the meeting from a different device to see if the problem is specific to one device.
Reduce Bandwidth Usage: In cases of slow or unstable internet connections, ask participants to disable video or share video selectively to reduce bandwidth consumption.
Update Drivers and Software: Ensure your operating system, audio drivers, and video drivers are up to date. Outdated drivers can cause compatibility issues with the Dryfta meeting platform.
Contact Support: If none of the above steps resolve the issue, reach out to the platform's support team. They can provide personalized assistance and troubleshoot specific problems.
By following these troubleshooting tips, you can tackle many common problems encountered on Dryfta meeting platform and have a more productive and seamless meeting experience.
The role of multimodalities in assessment in CLIL: A reconceptualisation of integration
Oral Presentation[SYMP02] AILA ReN - Assessment in CLIL08:30 AM - 11:30 AM (Europe/Amsterdam) 2023/07/20 06:30:00 UTC - 2024/07/20 09:30:00 UTC
With CLIL, "there is a focus not only on the content, and not only on the language" (Coyle, Hood, & Marsh, 2010, p. 1), which presents a problematic dichotomy. Indeed, CLIL is the integration of content and language, yet, evident in classrooms around the world, the tendency is to focus on one or the other (Nikula et al., 2016; Ikeda et al., 2022). There have been advances in how the integration is dealt with, for example, conceptualising the unified construct as the intersects of content and language pedagogy (Leung & Morton, 2016), with Cognitive Discourse Functions (CDFs) (Dalton-Puffer, 2013), with literacy at the center of learning (Meyer et al., 2015), or through multimodal mediational means (Leontjev & deBoer, 2020). In this presentation, using the CDF construct and multimodalities, integration of content and language will be reconceptualised to illustrate an assessment framework (deBoer, forthcoming), based on Feuerstein et al.'s Learning Propensity Assessment Device (2010) designed to develop the learner. Empirical evidence for this presentation comes from learners in a General English course at a Japanese university as they worked on research projects, using an asynchronous online forum to communicate, share files and information, and create a presentation. Their interaction will be used to illustrate how multimodalities exemplify CDFs and how learners integrated the content and language to co-construct knowledge and advance their joint understanding. The assessment framework for CLIL will be demonstrated, providing insight into how educators can mediate learners through transduction (Kress, 1997) and CDFs to develop learners' understanding of concepts, rather than focus on content or language.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press. Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253. deBoer, M. (forthcoming). Integrating CDFs and multimodality in CLIL. Feuerstein, R., Feuerstein, R. S., & Falik, L. H. (2010). Beyond smarter. Teachers College Press. Ikeda, M., Izumi, S., Watanabe, Y., Pinner, R., & Davis, M. (2021). Soft CLIL and English language teaching: Understanding Japanese policy, practice, and implications. Routledge. Kress, G. (2005). Before writing: Rethinking the paths to literacy. In Before Writing: Rethinking the Paths to Literacy. Routledge. Leontjev, D., & deBoer, M. A. (2020). Multimodal mediational means in assessment of processes: An argument for a hard-CLIL approach. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 0(0), 1–16. Leung, C., & Morton, T. (2016). Conclusion: Language competence, learning and pedagogy in CLIL - Deepening and broadening integration. In T. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 235–248). Multilingual Matters. Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Schuck, K., & Ting, T. (2015). A pluriliteracies approach to content and language integrated learning – mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction and meaning-making. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 41–57. Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., & Smit, U. (Eds.) (2016). Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Multilingual Matters.
Presenters Mark De Boer Assistant Professor, Akita International University
Translanguaging and Transknowledging in CLIL: Revisiting the flows of disciplinary social semiotics in Public Relations
Oral Presentation[SYMP02] AILA ReN - Assessment in CLIL08:30 AM - 11:30 AM (Europe/Amsterdam) 2023/07/20 06:30:00 UTC - 2024/07/20 09:30:00 UTC
Disciplinary meaning-making in CLIL can be understood as observable and researchable material processes, with mediums and flows (Lemke and Lin, 2022) of the subject-specific language and beyond. This symposium paper reconceptualises the roles of language and multimodality (Kress & Leeuwen, 1996; Lin, 2016, Liu and Lin, 2021) in CLIL, highlighting social semiotics orchestration on discipline-specific meaning-making flows as translanguaging and trans-knowledging (Heugh, 2019). Through mediated discourse analysis (MDA) of multiple qualitative data sources (focus group discussion, indepth case informant interviews, video-aided lesson and project consultation observations and multimodal co-design of assessment, teaching and learning materials) collected in a 13-week English-medium discipline-specific subject, i.e., a Public Relations Writing course in EMI higher education. The trinocular lens of nexus analysis (Scollons, 2007) in this doctoral research ethnographically investigated the mediated social-inter-actions among different social actors (the teacher-researcher and 89 research informants in Hong Kong), along the process/ flow of discipline-specific multimodal composing for CLIL. In addition, this symposium paper presents analytical episodes of Public Relations-specific nexus of practice in shared semiotic repertoires-enriched assessment and learning designs for CLIL in Media Kit Project-making with group dynamics.
The ecological view of subject-specific languaging provides alternative theoretical groundings to re-examine the nexus analytical framework for content and language integrated learning (CLIL), addressing how disciplinary meaning-making in CLIL can be understood as observable material processes, with mediums and flows (Lemke and Lin, 2022) of subject-specific language and beyond. This symposium paper reconceptualises the roles of language and multimodality (Kress & Leeuwen, 1996; Lin, 2016, Liu and Lin, 2021) in CLIL, paying special attention to the research and pedagogical implications of social semiotics orchestration on discipline-specific meaning-making flows as translanguaging and trans-knowledging (Heugh, 2019; Lemke and Lin, 2022).Through mediated discourse analysis (MDA) of qualitative data from multiple sources (focus group discussion, indepth case informant interviews, video-aided lesson and project consultation observations and multimodal co-design of assessment materials) collected in a 13-week case study of an English-medium discipline-specific subject, i.e., a Public Relations-specific content subject provided to plurilingual, pluricultural tertiary students in an EMI higher education institute in Hong Kong, the researcher has adopted a trinocular lens of nexus analysis (Scollons, 2007) to ethnographically investigate the mediated social-inter-actions among different social actors (the teacher-researcher and 89 research informants) along the process/ flow of discipline-appropriate multimodal meaning making. In addition, this symposium paper presents analytical episodes of Public Relations-specific nexus of practice in shared semiotic repertoires-enriched assessment and learning designs for CLIL in Media Kit Project-making with group dynamics. The nexus analysis unfold disciplinary social semiotic flows entangling multimodal composing activities 'across multiple material media and multiple timescales' (Lemke and Lin, 2022) in tailormaking client-centric Public Relations materials. This doctoral research study of disciplinary social semiotics as dynamic materiality flows advances the argument for examining ecological potentials and challenges in orchestrating multimodal resources as trans-semiotic flows (Wu and Lin, 2019, Lin, Wu and Lemke, 2020, Lin, 2022). Such co-weaving trajectories of disciplinary social semiotics flows indicate road-mapping in CLIL as a social-material dialogic process turn for plurilingual, pluricultural teachers and students to co-create discipline-specific multimodality-scaffolds as resource flows among translanguaging and trans-knowledging communities of practice in CLIL (Llinares 2015; Nikula et al. 2016; Garcia, 2019; Hüttner 2020). The research findings entail the significance in overarching convergent interest in CLIL with various renovating conceptual tools, e.g., the Multimodalities-Entextualisation Cylce (MEC) (Lin, 2016; 2019) and the Pluriliteracies Model (Coyle and Meyer, 2021), for encompassing divergent theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical issues. Most importantly, this symposium paper highlights social cohesion values for promoting inclusive professional teacher development in CLIL, socioculturally connecting CLIL teachers in Asia-pacific regions, the Global South and Europe. The research analysis calls for attention to discipline-specific translanguaging and trans-knowledging flow across timescales and moment-to-moment mapping of shared semiotic repertoires (Lin, 2018, Kusters, 2021), paying a dual focus on uplifting discipline-specific trans-knowledging and raising trans-semiotic awareness for CLIL in EMI higher education with creativity and criticality.
Presenters Phoebe Siu Lecturer, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
CLIL teachers' perceptions and practices of assessment: Implications for CLIL teachers' assessment literacy
Oral Presentation[SYMP02] AILA ReN - Assessment in CLIL08:30 AM - 11:30 AM (Europe/Amsterdam) 2023/07/20 06:30:00 UTC - 2024/07/20 09:30:00 UTC
In Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) programmes, non-linguistic content knowledge is taught, learned and assessed in an additional language. Assessment in CLIL is arguably as important as teaching and learning, because CLIL assessment can reveal students' achievements in both content and language and can provide feedback to inform teachers' instruction and students' learning. However, existing studies of CLIL seem to focus largely on teachers' pedagogical practices, without paying much attention to assessment issues. The current study aims to address this gap. Through conducting individual in-depth interviews with 10 purposefully sampled CLIL teachers in Asian contexts and examining their assessment materials, this study investigates the teachers' perceptions and practices of assessment in CLIL. The findings report teachers' views of the role that language plays in CLIL assessment, how CLIL assessment tasks should be designed and implemented, and issues and challenges they encountered. By comparing the perceptions and practices of CLIL teachers with different backgrounds, the findings of this study shed light on how CLIL teachers' assessment knowledge, their identity as CLIL teachers and contextual factors influence their assessment practices. Insights into what constitutes good CLIL assessment and implications for promoting CLIL teachers' assessment literacy will also be discussed.
In Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) programmes, non-linguistic content knowledge is taught, learned and assessed in an additional language. Assessment in CLIL is arguably as important as teaching and learning, because CLIL assessment can reveal students' achievements in both content and language and can provide feedback to inform teachers' instruction and students' learning. However, it is challenging to design valid assessment tasks in CLIL, considering the inseparable relationship between content and language. Existing studies of CLIL seem to focus largely on teachers' pedagogical practices, without paying much attention to how they perceive and carry out assessment in CLIL. The current study aims to address this gap. Through conducting individual in-depth interviews with 10 purposefully sampled CLIL teachers in Asian contexts and examining their assessment materials, this study investigates the teachers' perceptions and practices of assessment in CLIL. The findings report teachers' views of the role that language plays in CLIL assessment, such as L2 being as important as content, but posing a challenge to students' comprehension and ideas expression. The findings also highlight some good CLIL assessment practices before, during and after assessment. For example, with regard to assessment task design, teachers incorporated CLIL 4C elements into assessment tasks based on the syllabus and learning objectives, promoted students' various skills development, made assessment tasks interesting and engaging; with regard to assessment implementation, teachers showed attentiveness to students' language use, offered scaffolding to help students perform better in assessment, sought intra- and inter-disciplinary collaboration in CLIL assessment; with regard to assessment result interpretation and action-taking, teachers diagnosed students' strengths and weaknesses (with students) and provided suggestions for students to make improvement. Yet, the findings also reveal some potential issues and challenges regarding CLIL assessment, such as teachers overusing L1 and overlooking the need to support students' language when assessing students' content knowledge, teachers having divergent views with colleagues on how to mark and give feedback due to different beliefs as CLIL teachers. By comparing the perceptions and practices of CLIL teachers with different backgrounds, the findings of this study shed light on how CLIL teachers' assessment knowledge, their identity as CLIL teachers, as well as contextual factors (e.g. students' ability, school policy, exam-oriented culture in the educational context) influence their assessment practices. Insights into what constitutes good CLIL assessment and implications for promoting CLIL teachers' assessment literacy (Lo & Leung, 2022) will also be discussed.
References: Lo, Y., & Leung, C. (2022). Conceptualising assessment literacy of teachers in Content and Language Integrated Learning programmes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2022.2085028
Using Legitimation Code Theory to explore the bases of achievement in assessment in content and language integrated learning (CLIL)
Oral Presentation[SYMP02] AILA ReN - Assessment in CLIL08:30 AM - 11:30 AM (Europe/Amsterdam) 2023/07/20 06:30:00 UTC - 2024/07/20 09:30:00 UTC
Assessment in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is often seen as a problematic issue by practitioners and researchers (Otto & Estrada 2020). Concerns include the weight that should be given to language performance, whether content teachers are qualified to assess language, and whether teacher assessment practices threaten equity by privileging those learners who have had more access to L2 learning opportunities. Another concern is the emphasis given to summative aspects of assessment, rather than classroom assessment for formative purposes, as noted by DeBoer and Leontjev (2020). These issues together point to the need for a knowledge base to underpin assessment literacy for CLIL. By assessment literacy, we mean the knowledge and skills required by teachers to coherently and appropriately design and implement assessment at classroom and school levels (Pastore & Andrade, 2019, pp. 134-35). For CLIL teachers, these skills involve understanding the aims of assessment when content and language learning are dual foci of instruction, the types of evidence to collect, how to provide appropriate feedback, and adjust teaching practices accordingly. Developing assessment literacy for CLIL teachers involves them being able to articulate the bases of achievement they invoke when assessing students' learning. In this contribution we use the conceptual toolkit of Legitimation Code Theory (LCT), to explore the bases of achievement invoked by CLIL teachers when they assess students' work. LCT is a sociological framework for the exploration and improvement of all types of knowledge practices (Maton, 2014). The LCT dimension of Specialization explores the organizing principles of knowledge practices in terms of epistemic relations to knowledge and learning objects, and social relations to ways of knowing and knowers. Combined, these concepts generate different specialization codes. We use these concepts to examine the ways in which content and language teachers position different types of knowledge (language and content) and knowers in their assessment practices. We analyse recorded group discussions among content and English language teachers who assessed samples of CLIL students' work using comparative judgement, and then articulated the criteria they had used in their ratings. Results show that the teachers tended to focus on language forms and content knowledge separately and invoked "knower" attributes which potentially impacted their judgements. We identify implications for the knowledge base for assessment in CLIL as a prerequisite to promoting teachers' assessment literacy and argue that deeper understanding of the bases of achievement can contribute to reducing threats to equity in assessment in CLIL contexts.
References deBoer, M., & Leontjev, D. (2020). Assessment and learning in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms: approaches and conceptualisations. Springer. Maton, K. (2014). Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge. Otto, A., & Estrada, J. L. (2019). Towards an understanding of CLIL assessment practices in a European context: Main assessment tools and the role of language in content subjects. CLIL. Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 2(1), 31-42. Pastore, S., & Andrade, H. L. (2019). Teacher assessment literacy: A three-dimensional model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 84, 128-138.
Thomas Morton Beatriz Galindo Distinguished Research Fellow, Universidad Autónoma De MadridNashwa Nashaat-Sobhy Lecturer (Profesor Contratado Doctor), Universitat Politècnica De València
Oral Presentation[SYMP02] AILA ReN - Assessment in CLIL08:30 AM - 11:30 AM (Europe/Amsterdam) 2023/07/20 06:30:00 UTC - 2024/07/20 09:30:00 UTC
The study presented here has been carried out by the group CLHIOS within an institutional project where a multidisciplinary team of English lecturers and Health Science lecturers, specifically lecturers in the fields of Medicine, Nursing and Psychology participate. The project was created to improve CLIL practices in the health science curriculum at university with the aim of observing, analyzing and improving how evaluation is faced in the curricular design of those subjects partially taught in English. According to Darn (2006) the team-teaching approach is regarded as a collaborative focus between content and language teachers. Concerning the distribution of roles and tasks, the content teachers are in charge of designing the lesson plans and selecting the materials; while, the language teachers need to provide content teachers with language structures and rubrics to support assessment practices. Considering that evaluation continues to be a controversial aspect in CLIL programmes and one of the less developed areas in CLIL (Massler 2011); the aim of this study is to improve an evaluation rubric addressed to assess students' English language delivery at the module Intensive Care in a Nursing degree. The rubric has been initially designed by the content lecturer and shared with the English language lecturers to ameliorate the items to be assessed especially those related to the English language command. The rubric included items such as empathy and communication abilities. The resulting rubric, revised by four English language lectures, improved evaluating terminology concerning language command highlighting communication abilities that had been discarded by the content lecturer. CLIL practices such as the one presented here are examples of joint work and collaboration between content and language lecturers (Llinares et al. 2012). The CLIL course practice described here has been organized in advance to develop clear assessment criteria on which the evaluation of the CLIL program will be based.
REFERENCES Darn, S. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): A European Overview. Online submission. Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Massler, U. (2011). Assessment in CLIL learning. Guidelines for CLIL Implementation in Primary and Pre-primary Education, 115-137.
Comparing CLIL teachers’ and students’ content and language assessment criteria
Oral Presentation[SYMP02] AILA ReN - Assessment in CLIL08:30 AM - 11:30 AM (Europe/Amsterdam) 2023/07/20 06:30:00 UTC - 2024/07/20 09:30:00 UTC
In the last 10 years, CLIL research has developed from a focus on students' general language proficiency to the study of their academic language proficiency, thus gradually shifting to a deeper analysis and understanding of how content and language are learnt in integration (e.g. Nikula et al., 2016). However, this research interest and the insights derived from it has not been sufficiently translated into specific and concrete training and experiences for teachers and students. This is partly due to a lack of collaboration between content and language teachers at schools, where most teachers address language from the perspective of their own discipline or not at all (in the case of many content teachers). As part of a broader project, this paper presents some of the results obtained from a joint collaborative project between content teachers, language (English) teachers and applied linguists in a CLIL school. After being teamed up in pairs (content and language) teaching the same students, the participating teachers were trained on the model of Cognitive Discourse Functions (Dalton-Puffer, 2013) and were asked to apply it in joint activities in the content and English class. The students' production in those activities was assessed by content and language teachers (using comparative judgement), and the results were discussed in monthly focus groups. The students themselves also judged their own and their classmates' texts and discussed the results with their teachers. Drawing on previous studies applying Maton's (2013, 2014) specialization (Morton & Llinares, forthcoming) and semantic dimensions (Llinares & Nashaat-Sobhy, 2021), we compared teachers' judgements and students' judgements of the same texts, the result of a joint task between biology and English teachers, and the subsequent discussion carried out between teachers and researchers (on teachers' judgments) and between teachers and students (on students' judgements). Preliminary results show that teachers emphasized both epistemic relations (knowledge, skills, and procedures) and social relations (intrinsic or cultivated aspects of the learner) in their judgments, while students placed greater emphasis on epistemic relations, leading to differences in their rankings of the texts.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253.
Llinares, A. & Nashaat-Sobhy, N. (2021) What is an ecosystem? Defining science in primary school CLIL contexts, Language Teaching for Young Learners, 3 (2): 337– 362. https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.20010.lli
Maton, K. (2013) Making semantic waves: A key to cumulative knowledge-building, Linguistics and Education, 24(1): 8–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.11.008
Maton, K. (2014) Knowledge and knowers: Towards a realist sociology of education. Routledge.
Nikula, M., Dafouz, E., Moore, P. & Smit, U. (2016). Conceptualizing Integration in CLIL and Multilingual Education. Multilingual Matters.
Morton, T. & Llinares, A. (forthcoming) Building Teachers' Knowledge of Cognitive Discourse Functions (CDFs) to Integrate Content and Language: A Semantic Analysis. In Ballinger, S., Fielding, R. & Tedick, D. (Eds.). International Perspectives on Teacher Education for Immersion and Content-Based Contexts. Multilingual Matters.
Ana Llinares Full Professor Of Applied Linguistics, Universidad Autónoma De MadridLeah Tompkins Predoctoral Researcher, Autonomous University Of Madrid
Mark De Boer
Phoebe Siu
Nashwa Nashaat-Sobhy
Leah Tompkins