ABSTRACT

Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) programmes are increasingly popular throughout Europe, but are sometimes accused of inducing a selection bias in the pupil population, both through selection mechanisms of the schools themselves and self-selection of the pupils (and/or their parents). As a result, the outcomes of the CLIL approach may be artificially promoted, and, at the same time, such a selection bias can contribute to an elitist education model, which arguably runs counter to the aims of the approach. This paper looks into a number of background variables of both English and Dutch CLIL learners in Francophone Belgium and compares them to their non-CLIL counterparts. Results from a logistic regression indicate that there is indeed evidence of selection: the socio-economic status of the pupils appears as the main predictor of whether a pupil is in a CLIL or a non-CLIL track, whereas other, more personal, variables such as non-verbal intelligence play a minor (or additional) role. Moreover, Dutch CLIL programmes appear to be more selective than English CLIL programmes in this context. We conclude that CLIL (and particularly Dutch CLIL) in French-speaking Belgium, although a priori open to anyone, is particularly attractive to a socially privileged public.

摘要

内容和语言整合学习（CLIL）计划在整个欧洲越来越受欢迎，但有时被指控通过学校本身的选择机制和学生（和/或他们的父母）的自我选择在学生群体中引起选择偏见）。结果，可以人为地促进CLIL方法的结果，同时，这种选择偏见可能有助于建立一种精英教育模式，这可能与该方法的目的背道而驰。本文研究了比利时法语国家英语和荷兰语CLIL学习者的许多背景变量，并将其与非CLIL对应者进行了比较。Logistic回归的结果表明确实存在选择的证据：小学生的社会经济地位似乎是小学生处于CLIL还是非CLIL轨道的主要预测指标，而其他更个人化的变量（例如非语言智力）则扮演次要（或附加）角色。而且，在这种情况下，荷兰语CLIL程序似乎比英语CLIL程序更具选择性。我们得出的结论是，尽管说法语的人先天开放，但CLL（尤其是荷兰语的CLIL）虽然对所有人开放，但对具有社会特权的公众特别有吸引力。