ABSTRACT

This article claims to provide evidence on whether content-subject and cognitive achievement vary in CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) and non-CLIL classrooms in the framework of a newly introduced CLIL programme in Italy. A standardized and validated science test (TIMSS) was administered to a sample 988 fourth-grade students. The sample was divided into three groups: one group learning science through English, one group through German, and a control group in which the students’ school language, Italian, was employed. In our study the lack of taking into account causal relations which prevails in many prior studies is reduced by employing a counterfactual design. Results show a slightly negative effect of CLIL on science learning in both treatment groups in comparison to the control group. However, for both CLIL groups the negative effect exclusively pertains to the learning of purely content-related knowledge, while there are no differences between the non-CLIL and the two CLIL groups with regard to two other cognitive domains: application of knowledge and reasoning. Moreover, the paper shows significantly negative CLIL effects only among low language achievers and students from less advantaged parental backgrounds.

摘要

本文声称在意大利新推出的 CLIL 项目框架内，提供了关于 CLIL（内容和语言综合学习）和非 CLIL 课堂的内容主题和认知成就是否不同的证据。对 988 名四年级学生进行了标准化和经过验证的科学测试 (TIMSS)。样本分为三组：一组通过英语学习科学，一组通过德语，以及使用学生的学校语言意大利语的对照组。在我们的研究中，通过采用反事实设计，减少了许多先前研究中普遍存在的对因果关系的缺乏考虑。结果显示，与对照组相比，CLIL 对两个治疗组的科学学习都有轻微的负面影响。然而，对于两个 CLIL 组，负面影响仅与学习纯粹与内容相关的知识有关，而非 CLIL 组和两个 CLIL 组在其他两个认知领域（知识应用和推理）方面没有差异。此外，该论文仅在语言成绩较差的学生和父母背景较差的学生中显示出显着的负面 CLIL 效应。