В поисках методологии обучения дисциплинам на английском языке в вузе

Английский язык как средство обучения — преподавание/изучение научных дисциплин на академическом английском языке в университете — приобретает все большую популярность во всех странах мира, невзирая на отсутствие консенсуса в отношении концептуализации феномена и применимых к нему принципов преподавания, а также несмотря на множество практических вызовов, с которыми сталкиваются преподаватели и студенты в аудиториях. Именно эти вызовы подтолкнули ряд исследователей образования высказать опасения по поводу потенциально негативного влияния англоязычных программ на освоение содержания научной дисциплины и, как следствие, на качество получаемого образования в целом. Разработанные и предлагаемые в настоящее время методологические и педагогические подходы к данному феномену в основном опираются на прикладную лингвистику, что и логично, учитывая, что обучение проходит на иностранном (неродном) для преподавателей и студентов языке. Однако в данной статье, опираясь на диалектическое единство речи (слова) и сознания (мышления), а также недавние примеры успешного применения идей Л.С. Выготского в обучении иностранному языку, мы предлагаем расширить теоретический подход, используя симбиоз двух теорий — культурно-исторической и системно-функциональной лингвистики. Статья смещает акцент с наиболее исследованной темы в изучении феномена — английского языка — на процесс обучения с целью предложить потенциальное методологическое и педагогическое решение существующих противоречий.

1. Airey J. The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the Disciplines, 2011, no. 8. Available at: http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/clil/airey.cfm (Accessed 27.10.2020).
2. Airey J. EAP, EMI or CLIL? In Hyland K., Shaw P. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes. London: Routledge, 2016, pp. 71—83. DOI:10.4324/9781315657455
3. Ball P., Lindsay D. Language Demands and Support for English-Medium Instruction in Tertiary Education. Learning from a Specific Context. In Doiz A., Lasagabaster D., Manuel Sierra J. (eds.), English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 2013, pp. 44—61. DOI:10.21832/9781847698162-007
4. Banks M. Exploring EMI lecturers’ attitudes and needs. In Curado A. (ed.), LSP in Multi-disciplinary contexts of Teaching and Research. Papers from the 16th International AELFE Conference, 2018. Vol. 3, pp. 19—26. Available at: https://easychair.org/publications/open/k9B5 (Accessed 27.10.2020).
5. Block D., Moncada-Comas B. English-medium instruction in higher education and the ELT gaze: STEM lecturers’ self-positioning as NOT English language teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,2019. DOI:10.1080/13670050.2019.1689917
6. Briggs J., Dearden J., Macaro E. English medium instruction: Comparing teacher beliefs in secondary and tertiary education. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2018. Vol. 8, no. 3. DOI:10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.3.7
7. Byrnes H. Systemic-functional reflections on instructed foreign language acquisition as meaning-making: An introduction. Linguistics and Education, 2009. Vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1—9. DOI:10.1016/j.linged.2009.01.002
8. Chapple J. Teaching in English Is Not Necessarily the Teaching of English. International Education Studies, 2015. Vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1—13. DOI:10.5539/ies.v8n3p1
9. Coleman J.A. English-medium teaching in European higher education. Language Teaching, 2006. Vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 1—14. DOI:10.1017/S026144480600320X
10. van Compernolle R.A. The Emergence of Sociolinguistic Competence in L2 Classroom Interaction. In Markee N. (ed.), The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, 2015, pp. 265—280. DOI:10.1002/9781118531242.ch16
11. van Compernolle R.A., Williams L. Sociocultural theory and second language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 2013. Vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 277—281. DOI:10.1177/1362168813482933
12. Cots J. Introducing English-Medium Instruction at the University of Lleida, Spain: Intervention, Beliefs and Practices. In Doiz A., Lasagabaster D., Manuel Sierra J. (eds.), English medium instruction at universities: Global challenges. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 2013, pp. 196—210. DOI:10.21832/9781847698162-007
13. Coyle D., Hood P., Marsh D. CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2010. 184 p.
14. Curle S., Yuksel D., Soruç A., Altay M. Predictors of English Medium Instruction academic success: English proficiency versus First language medium. System, 2020. DOI:10.1016/j.system.2020.102378
15. Dafermos M. Rethinking Cultural-Historical Theory: A Dialectical Perspective to Vygotsky. Singapore: Springer, 2018. 309 p. DOI:10.1007/978-981-13-0191-9
16. Dafouz E., Camacho M., Urquía E. ‘Surely they can’t do as well’: a comparison of business students’ academic performance in English-medium and Spanish-as-first-language medium programmes. Language and Education, 2014. Vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 223—236. DOI:10.1080/09500782.2013.808661
17. Dafouz E. English-medium instruction in multilingual university settings-An opportunity for developing language awareness. In Garrett P., Cots J.M. (eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness (1st edition). Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2018, pp. 170—185. DOI:10.4324/9781315676494-11
18. Dalton-Puffer C. A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualizing content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2013. Vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 216—253. DOI:10.1515/eujal-2013-0011
19. Dalton-Puffer C., Bauer-Marschallinger S., Brückl[1]Mackey K., Hofmann V., Hopf J., Kröss L., Lechner L. Cognitive discourse functions in Austrian CLIL lessons: towards an empirical validation of the CDF Construct. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2018. Vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 5—29. DOI:10.1515/eujal-2017-0028
20. Dalton-Puffer C., Bauer-Marschallinger S. Cognitive discourse functions meet historical competences. Towards an integrated pedagogy in CLIL history education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 2019. Vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 31—61. DOI:10.1075/jicb.17017.dal
21. Davydov V.V. Psikhologicheskaya teoriya uchebnoi deyatel’nosti i metodov nachal’nogo obucheniya, osnovannykh na soderzhatel’nom obobshchenii [Psychological theory of learning activity and methods of primary education based on content generalization]. Tomsk: Peleng, 1992. 59 p. (In Russ.).
22. Dearden J. English as a medium of instruction-a growing global phenomenon: Phase 1. London: British Council, 2014. Available at: https://www.britishcouncil.es/sites/default/files/british_council _english_as_a_medium_of_instruction.pdf (Accessed 27.10.2020).
23. Dearden J., Macaro E. Higher education teachers’ attitudes towards English medium instruction: a three country comparison. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2016. Vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 455—486. DOI:10.14746/sllt.2016.6.3.5
24. Dimova S., Kling J. Current Considerations on Integrating Content and Language in Multilingual Universities. In Dimova S., Kling J. (eds.), Integrating Content and Language in Multilingual Universities, 2020, pp. 1—12. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-46947-4_1
25. Donato R. Sociocultural Theory and Content-Based Foreign Language Instruction: Theoretical Insights on the Challenge of Integration. In Cammarata L. (ed.), Contentbased Foreign Language Teaching: Curriculum and Pedagogy for Developing Advanced Thinking and Literacy Skills. New York: Routledge/Taylor Francis, 2016, pp. 25—50. DOI:10.4324/9780203850497
26. Edwards A. Cultural Historical Theory and Pedagogy: the influence of Vygotsky on the field. In MacLean R. (ed.), Handbook on Life in Schools and Classrooms: Past, present and future visions. Dordrecht: Springer, 2017, pp. 153—166. DOI:10.1007/978-981-10-3654-5_10
27. Engeness I., Lund A. Learning for the future: Insights arising from the contributions of Piotr Galperin to the cultural historical theory. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2020. Vol. 25. DOI:10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.11.004
28. Engeness I., Lund A. The contribution of Piotr Galperin to the cultural-historical theory and implications for contemporary educational research and practice. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2020. Vol. 25. DOI:10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.01.005
29. Gablasova D. Learning technical words through L1 and L2: Completeness and accuracy of word meanings. English for Specific Purposes, 2015. Vol. 39, pp. 62—74. DOI:10.1016/j.esp.2015.04.002
30. Halliday M.A.K. Towards a Language-Based Theory of Learning. Linguistics and Education, 1993. Vol. 5, pp. 93—116. DOI:10.1016/0898-5898(93)90026-7
31. Halliday M.A.K., Matthiessen C.M.I.M. Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge, 2013. 808 p. DOI:10.4324/9780203431269
32. Halliday M.A.K. Aspects of Language and Learning. Edited by Webster J.J. Springer-Verlag: Berlin Heidelberg, 2016. 149 p. DOI:10.1007/978-3-662-47821-9
33. Hedegaard M. Cultural minority children’s learning within culturally-sensitive classroom teaching. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 2003. Vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 133—152. DOI:10.1080/14681360300200164
34. Hill K. Cognitive Linguistics, Sociocultural Theory and Content and Language Integrated Learning: Researching Development of Polysemous L2 Lexis. Language and Sociocultural Theory, 2020. Vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 133—157. DOI:10.1558/lst.35805
35. Hu Guangwei. English medium instruction in higher education: Lessons from China. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 2019. Vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1—11. DOI:10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.1.1.1
36. Hu Jingjing, Gao Xuesong. Understanding subject teachers’ language-related pedagogical practices in content and language integrated learning classrooms. Language Awareness, 2020. DOI:10.1080/09658416.2020.1768265
37. Johnson J.H., Picciuolo M. Interaction in spoken academic discourse in an EMI context: the use of questions. Sixth International Conference on Higher Education Advances, Polytechnic University of Valencia Congress, June 2020. DOI:10.4995/HEAd20.2020.11018
38. Lantolf J.P., Beckett T. Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 2009. Vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 459—475. DOI:10.1017/S0261444809990048
39. Lasagabaster D. Fostering team teaching: Mapping out a research agenda for English-medium instruction at university level. Language Teaching, 2018. Vol. 51, no. 3, pp. 400—416. DOI: 10.1017/S0261444818000113
40. Llinares A., Morton T., Whittaker, R. The Roles of Language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press, 2012. 352 p.
41. Llinares A., McCabe A. Systemic functional linguistics: the perfect match for content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2020. DOI:10.1080/13670050.2019.1635985
42. Lund A., Engeness I. Galperin’s legacy and some current challenges of educational research and practice: Agency, technology, and design. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2020. DOI:10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100427
43. Lyster R. Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamin’s, 2007. 172 p. DOI:10.1075/lllt.18
44. Macaro E., Akincioglu M., Dearden J. English Medium Instruction in universities: A collaborative experiment in Turkey. Studies in English Language Teaching, 2016. Vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 51—76. DOI:10.22158/selt.v4n1p51
45. Macaro E. English Medium Instruction: Content and language in policy and practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2018. 336 p.
46. Mahn H. Classroom Discourse and Interaction in the Zone of Proximal Development. In Markee N. (ed.), The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, 2015, pp. 250—264. DOI:10.1002/9781118531242.ch15
47. Mahn H., Reierson S.C. Research Methods and Sociocultural Approaches in Second Language Acquisition. Psychology, 2012. DOI:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1006
48. Mandili W.E. A Cultural-historical Study on English speech Development of Saudi Students through Investigating EFL Teaching Strategies in Primary Schools: Ph.D. Diss. Australia: Monash University, 2019. Arab World English Journal, May 2020, pp. 1— 255. DOI:10.24093/awej/th.255
49. Meyer O., Coyle D. Pluriliteracies Teaching for Learning: conceptualizing progression for deeper learning in literacies development. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2017. Vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 199—222. DOI:10.1515/eujal-2017-0006
50. Moncada-Comas B., Block D. CLIL-ised EMI in practice: issues arising. The Language Learning Journal, 2019. DOI:10.1080/09571736.2019.1660704
51. Morton T., Llinares A. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): Type of programme or pedagogical model? In Llinares A., Morton T. (eds.), Applied Linguistics Perspective on CLIL. John Benjamin’s Publishing Company, 2017, pp. 1—16. DOI:10.1075/lllt.47.01mor
52. Morton T. Afterword: SFL, theoretical pluralism and content and language integration at the levels of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2020. DOI:10.1080/13670050.2020.1806781
53. Morton T. Cognitive Discourse Functions: A Bridge between Content, Literacy and Language for Teaching and Assessment in CLIL. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 2020. Vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 7—17. DOI:10.5565/rev/clil.33
54. Negueruela-Azarola E., García P., Buescher K. From Interaction to Intra-action: The Internalization of Talk, Gesture, and Concepts in the Second Language Classroom. In Markee N. (ed.), The Handbook of Classroom Discourse and Interaction. John Wiley & Sons, 2015, pp. 233—249. DOI:10.1002/9781118531242.ch14
55. Nikula T., Dalton-Puffer C., Llinares A. CLIL classroom discourse: Research from Europe. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 2013. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 70—100. DOI:10.1075/jicb.1.1.04nik
56. Pecorari D. English Medium Instruction: Disintegrating Language and Content? In Dimova S., KlingJ. (eds.), Integrating Content and Language in Multilingual Universities. Educational Linguistics, vol. 44. Springer, Cham, 2020, pp. 15—36. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-46947-4_
57. Poehner M., Infante P. Mediated Development and the internalization of psychological tools in second language (L2) education. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 2019, Vol. 22. DOI:10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.100322
58. Rose H., Curle S., Aizawa I., Thompson G. What drives success in English medium taught courses? The interplay between language proficiency, academic skills, and motivation. Studies in Higher Education, 2019. DOI:10.1080/03075079.2019.1590690
59. Schmidt-Unterberger B. The English-medium paradigm: a conceptualisation of English-medium teaching in higher education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2018. Vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 527—539. DOI:10.1080/13670050.2018.1491949
60. Shanahan T., Shanahan C. Teaching Disciplinary Literacy to Adolescents: Rethinking Content-Area Literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 2008. Vol. 78, no. 1, pp. 40—59. DOI:10.17763/haer.78.1.v62444321p602101
61. Shanahan T., Shanahan C. What is Disciplinary Literacy and Why Does It Matter? Topics in Language Disorders, 2012. Vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 7—18. DOI:10.1097/TLD.0b013e318244557a
62. Smagorinsky P. Vygotsky and literacy research: A methodological framework. Boston: Sense, 2011. 346 p. DOI:10.1007/978-94-6091-696-0
63. Veresov N. Introducing Cultural-Historical Theory: Main Concepts and Principles of Genetic ResearchMethodology. Кul’turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural-Historical Psychology, 2010. Vol. 4, pp. 83—90.
64. Veresov N. Experimental-Genetic Method and Psychology of Consciousness: In Search of the Lost (Part One). Кul’turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural Historical Psychology, 2014. Vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 121—130. (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.).
65. Veresov N. Experimental-Genetic Method and Psychology of Consciousness: In Search of the Lost (Part Two). Кul’turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural Historical Psychology, 2015. Vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 117—126. (In Russ., Abstr. in Engl.). DOI:10.17759/chp.2015110113
66. Veresov N. ZBR and ZPD: Is there a difference? Кul’turno[1]istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural-Historical Psychology, 2017. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 23—36. DOI:10.17759/chp.2017130102
67. Veresov N. Discovering the Great Royal Seal: New Reality of Vygotsky’s Legacy. Кul’turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural-Historical Psychology, 2020. Vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 107—117. DOI:10.17759/ chp.2020160212
68. Vinke A.A. English as the medium of instruction in Dutch engineering education. Doctoral dissertation: Ph.D. Diss. The Netherlands: Delft University of Technology, 1995. 206 p. Available at: http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:491b55f9-fbf9-4650-a44d-acb9af8412a8 (Accessed 27.10.2020).
69. Vygotskii L.S. Sobranie sochinenii: V 6 t. T. 3 [Collected Works: in 6 vol. Vol. 3]. Moscow: Pedagogika Publ., 1983. 368 p.
70. Vygotsky, L. Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1996. 392 p.
71. Wells G. The Complementary Contributions of Halliday and Vygotsky to a “Language-Based Theory of Learning”. Linguistics and Education, 1994. Vol. 6, pp. 41—90. DOI:10.1016/0898-5898(94)90021-3
72. Wilkinson R. English-medium instruction at a Dutch university: Challenges and pitfalls. In Doiz A., Lasagabaster D., Manuel Sierra J. (eds.), English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 2013, pp. 3—24. DOI:10.21832/9781847698162-005
73. Williams L., Abraham L., Negueruela-Azarola E. Using concept-based instruction in the L2 classroom: Perspectives from current and future language teachers. Language Teaching Research, 2013. Vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 363—381. DOI:10.1177/13621688113482950
74. Xie W., Curle S. Success in English medium instruction in China: Significant indicators and implications. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2019. DOI:10.1080/13670050.2019.1703898

PlumX

Метрики публикации