Faculty of Education and Society
Degree Project with specialization in English
teaching and learning
15 credits, Second Cycle
The effectiveness of CLIL for English
language learning in Swedish primary
schools
- A study investigating Swedish teachers’ perceptions on the benefits and challenges of learning language through content.
Hur kan CLIL fungera som en effektiv metod?
Luisa Bundy
Gabriela Porc
Degree: Primary Education - Preschool class and School Years 1-3
240 hp 2020-
Examiner: Shaun Nolan Supervisor: Damon Tutunjian
2
Preface
Hereby, both authors certify that we have been equally involved in the planning, preparing and conducting of all parts in this thesis.
3
Abstract
We live in an increasingly interconnected world where being bilingual or multilingual is the norm. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is an effective way to practice important skills for global citizens. The importance of the ability to communicate across cultures in other languages is increasing globally in schools through the expanding use of languages and the inclusion of bilingual education opportunities. It is in school that students can become proficient language users while they learn the content of other language areas. This study presents an overview of four teachers' perceptions of implementing CLIL at the primary school level in Sweden. Hence, the aim is to highlight the effectiveness of CLIL and determine what underlying factors seem to be beneficial and/or challenging when using the method. Four qualitative interviews complemented with four lesson observations were conducted in three international primary schools. The results revealed several success factors, such as heightened skills in oral communication and cognition, increased intercultural awareness and language development. Although the findings showed several beneficial factors, some challenges emerged. For example, the teachers mentioned difficulties in convincing colleagues to participate and in addressing students’ different academic levels in English, as well as the potential loss of vocabulary in their first language when using English exclusively. In sum, perceptions about language and language learning have been shown to highlight both benefits and challenges in using methods such as CLIL. However, CLIL does appear on balance to be effective in that it promotes content learning as well as enhances students’ multilingual development.
4
Table of Content
Table of Content ... 4
1. Introduction ... 1
2. Aim and Research Questions ... 3
3. Background ... 4
3.1 From Past to Present ... 4
3.2 What is CLIL? ... 5
3.2.1 The 4 C’s - Content, Communication, Cognition and Culture ... 5
3.2.2 The Language Triptych ... 7
3.3 Second Language Acquisition ... 8
3.4 Sociocultural Aspects ... 9
3.5 The Steering Documents ... 10
3.6 Previous Research ... 11
3.6.1 The European Context ... 12
3.6.2 The Swedish Context ... 13
4. Methods ... 16
4.1 Participants ... 16
4.2 Materials ... 17
4.3 Ethical Considerations ... 19
4.3.1 Analysis of the Data ... 20
5. Results and Discussion ... 21
5.1 Teachers’ Previous Instruction in CLIL ... 21
5.2 Integration of Content and Language ... 22
5.3 Teachers’ Perceptions of the Beneficial Features of CLIL ... 23
5.4 Teachers’ Perceptions of the Challenges in CLIL ... 24
5
5.5 CLIL in Swedish Schools ... 26
5.6 The Effectiveness in International Schools in Sweden ... 28
6. Conclusion ... 30
6.1 Summary of Key Results ... 30
6.2 Relevance of Findings for Future Teaching ... 30
6.3. Acknowledgment of the Study’s Limitations ... 31
6.4. Future Research Directions ... 31
References ... 32
Appendix A ... 36
Appendix B ... 37
1
1. Introduction
English is an international language spoken by over a billion people worldwide. We use the English language as a primary tool for communication in today’s globalized world (McKay, 2018). Possessing a high fluency in English has several important advantages, and much work has been undertaken to identify English teaching and learning approaches that promote English language skills development. One method that is advocated is Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). CLIL refers to integrated subject and language education based on the simultaneous transmission of a subjects’ content and elements of a foreign language. In CLIL, the students are focused on acquiring applicable knowledge by using their language skills. Playing a motivational role for this thesis is the self-perceived learning outcomes of CLIL, both as students and as substitute teachers in the field. A lack of highly successful and content-oriented English education on the primary level has been observed by the authors. Interest for the method that is CLIL and its effectiveness has awoken due to the above factors.
Previous research conducted on the implementation of CLIL in the European context shows several positive outcomes. CLIL students have been shown to obtain greater oral communication, speaking fluency and social interaction skills in the foreign language, than students who only attend standard foreign language education (Serra, 2007; De Diezmaz, 2016; Dalton-Puffer, 2011; Lasagabaster, 2008; Mayo and Ibarrola, 2014; Perez Canado, 2017; Jäppinen, 2005; Arribas, 2016 and more). The outcomes of the mentioned above studies, as well as additional ones, will be further discussed in the background of this thesis.
Eurydice is an organization within the European Commission that provides those responsible for education systems and policies in Europe with research and information on the European level. The main focus of Eurydice is on how education in Europe is structured and organized. Based on the information presented in national descriptions from the 30 of the Eurydice Network member countries, Eurydice (2006, 2017) recommends the use of CLIL for the promotion of language learning and linguistic diversity. They claim that it contributes to students’ motivation to learn languages and heightens self-confidence by providing students with authentic opportunities and communication situations where they use the language they are learning. It is also claimed
2
to specifically aid those who are struggling in mainstream language education. Conclusively, CLIL is said to increase the exposure to the foreign language without taking any additional time from the curriculum.
The Swedish curriculum for compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare (Skolverket, 2011, 2018) describes the importance of the English language. It is stated that through proficiency in several languages we gain new perspectives on the world, increased opportunities for international working life and education and a greater understanding of different ways of living. It is also pointed out that the English language plays an important role in Sweden as it surrounds us in our everyday life and is used in all areas of our society.
However, in comparison to the studies conducted on CLIL in countries outside of Sweden, such as Spain, Finland or Germany, CLIL in Sweden seems to be less successful. There are a limited amount of studies conducted on CLIL in the Swedish context, with the majority having a focus on higher education, and the results show a variety of outcomes (Sylvén, 2004; Falk, 2015; Washburn,1997; CLISS, 2010-2014). This can be contrasted with research conducted on CLIL in Europe which shows highly positive outcomes (Serra, 2007; De Diezmaz, 2016; Dalton-Puffer, 2011; Lasagabaster, 2008; Mayo and Ibarrola, 2014; Perez Canado, 2017; Jäppinen, 2005; Arribas, 2016 and more.) The Swedish context studies are similar in that they all conclude that implementation of CLIL in the Swedish context is difficult since Swedish students already possess high fluency in English. Each of these studies also identifies a general lack of the Swedish language in CLIL education systems, which is argued to lead to a deficient knowledge of the Swedish language. Another issue raised in the studies is the lack of teacher training in conducting CLIL.
It is obvious from the studies on CLIL in Sweden, that many issues regarding its potential and its implementation in the Swedish context require further study. In the meantime, however, it is critical to better understand how teachers are currently working with CLIL in the Swedish context, and what their perceptions of its usefulness are. The aim of this thesis is thus not to find a conclusive answer to the question if CLIL would be successful in the Swedish context. Rather, we seek to identify how teachers’ look upon CLIL education in Sweden.
3
2. Aim and Research Questions
Previous research identifies key differences between Sweden and other European countries that affect the use and effectiveness of CLIL. It also further specifies a number of challenges for the implementation of CLIL in the Swedish context and identifies the benefits in the European context. We are thus still far from knowing with any certainty what the best way to proceed regarding CLIL is in the Swedish context, and yet teachers are faced with managing ways to deal with its implementation on a daily basis. The purpose of this thesis is to examine how teachers view CLIL as an effective method to implement in Sweden. We hope to gain knowledge regarding teachers’ perceptions of the usefulness of CLIL for developing English language proficiency in international primary schools in Sweden. We hope to examine what specific aspects seem to be beneficial and challenging from the teacher's perspective, especially given the inconclusive state of the literature. The following research questions are in focus:
• What are teachers' perceptions of the effectiveness of English teaching and learning using CLIL in primary school?
• Would CLIL be a beneficial approach? What do teachers view as challenges for the implementation of CLIL in primary schools in Sweden?
4
3. Background
To gain a better understanding of what CLIL consists of and how it should be applied to be successful, a brief historical preface on learning language through content is presented. This is followed by a definition of CLIL and an explanation of the two main components building up the method. Since CLIL also consists of learning a foreign language, theoretical unpacking of second language acquisition and the provisions for English education mentioned in the Swedish steering documents are then provided. To gain deeper knowledge on the effectiveness and challenges within CLIL, an overview of previous research is presented. Firstly, the research and its implications in European countries are described. Secondly, the research outcomes collected from various Swedish contexts are presented.
3.1 From Past to Present
“Education in a language which is not the first language of the learner is as old as education itself” (Coyle, Hood & Marsh 2010, p. 2). Historically, learning content through an additional language can be connected back to families in ancient Rome educating their children in Greek two thousand years ago. The families wanted to make sure that their children would have access to not only Greek as a language, but also the professional and social opportunities it would contribute to them in their future lives. Globally, these educational actions have been replicated throughout the centuries. Particularly, in the global uptake of English language learning. In turn, the globalization of English had a powerful impact on educators wanting to understand and examine the best practice in education. That expanding interest led to regions and countries wanting to adapt content-teaching methodologies to accomplish the best achievable results (Coyle et al., 2010). The phrase Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) was endorsed in 1994. It was described as a design for good practice in learning an additional language within diverse European school contexts (Coyle et al., 2010).
5
3.2 What is CLIL?
CLIL is an umbrella term for a method that is content-driven, and where the language is integrated into subject-teaching. CLIL helps teachers to ensure that their units and lesson plans are balanced and apply for sufficient opportunities for the application of knowledge and the development of communication. Language supportive methodologies are implemented into the approach, which activates a dual-focused form of instructions where consideration is given to both the content and the language. CLIL is neither subject teaching nor language teaching, it is a mixture of both (Coyle et al., 2010).
CLIL is a design that can be implemented for teaching content such as Music, Physical Education (PE), Art, Science, Math or History in English or any other language a school wishes to use. The universal design of CLIL consists of the four C's of CLIL. These are
content, communication, cognition, and culture. All four of the C’s are interwoven and
cooperate to create a design that allows teachers to teach multiple things at the same time. The idea is that students learn language through a subject where they can do hands-on activities and use the language as they would use it in a real-life context. In this way of learning, students are “forced” to use the language (Coyle et al., 2010).
3.2.1 The 4 C’s - Content, Communication, Cognition and Culture
According to Coyle et al., (2010), content in CLIL is the material teachers will implement to teach their unit. It should provide for progression in understanding, skills, and knowledge. The content should be multimodal, meaning that the students should be able to learn from diverse sources such as articles, videos, images, listening activities, projects, blogs, library resources, games, studies, interviews, etc. The material should be meaningful, authentic and challenging. When teaching content, teachers need to make sure it is associated with students’ prior knowledge. Scaffolding and formative assessment are included in this component as well (Coyle et al., 2010; Mayer, 2010). When thinking about communication, teachers must think about all the diverse conduits related. This includes progression in speaking, interaction, language-use, listening, writing, learning, and nonverbal communication. The communicative
6
techniques used by the teacher to convey the content must also be addressed. In CLIL, communication is differentiated into three areas: The language of learning, the language for learning and the language through learning. This will be further described in the Language Triptych (Coyle et al., 2010; Léon-Henri, 2015). If teachers want their students to produce language including all three areas, adequate support such as scaffolding must be provided. For the support to be effective teachers can use for example cooperative learning, visuals, translanguaging, and/or cognates. These approaches help the students acquire both the content and the language. Coyle et al., (2010 p. 54) describes this as: “learning to use language and using the language to learn”.
There are different types of thinking skills. These types of thinking skills can be discovered in Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy. The taxonomy presents two types of thinking skills known as higher- and lower-thinking skills. Activities that involve analyzing, evaluating, reflecting and creating should be applied for these skills to be developed. PISA (2000) examined these cognitive skills within the youths and the results showed that these skills needed to be developed and brought into the classrooms. Knowingly, students should be scaffolded with a series of challenges within their Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) allowing them to develop cognitively. There are effective techniques in CLIL to guide and help students to begin using divergent thinking, problem-solving, metacognitive aspects, as well as critical and creative thinking. A significant aspect of developing higher-order cognitive skills is adding student-centered activities where students are highly involved in their learning. Activities including building adaptable and applicable skills for the future, guiding the students in discovering learning strategies that work well for them, and knowing where to receive relevant and valid information.
The variation of culture threads in various ways depending on the theme or topic. culture can be a progression in identity, citizenship, self and other awareness, history, traditions, holidays, music, food, language, and art, to mention a few. Adding culture to the lessons helps to foster the students in connecting the subject to the world around them. Thereby, promote international understanding which helps develop life skills such as empathy, respect, diversity, tolerance and the ability to use multiple perspectives (Coyle et al., 2010; Mayer, 2010).
7
3.2.2 The Language Triptych
The Language Triptych originally stems from Coyle et al. (2010). The Triptych breaks down communication into three interrelated perspectives in CLIL: language of learning, language for learning and language through learning. The Triptych supports students’ language usage and enhances grammatical progression. The language of learning component, points to the language of the content: the language needed for students to connect elemental skills to a theme or a topic. The terms and grammar forms originate from the content, building language proficiency. In Science, this could, for example, be subject-specific vocabularies such as sun, moon, and stars. Adding the past tense in the associated verbs, teachers can use these vocabularies to enhance grammatical forms. According to Coyle et al., (2010 p. 37) using the past tense for authentic purposes in a CLIL class “arguably enables the learners to use language appropriate to the content in a meaningful way”.
The language for learning component refers to language for work with the content. Focusing on the kind of language students need, to understand and communicate in a foreign language. In a CLIL classroom, this points to the students developing a repertoire of speech acts. For example: Who has the…? Could you help me with the…? How do you say…? What was the first…? This requires a highly scaffolding environment and the students need to be supported in developing the skills needed for memorizing, describing, asking questions, cooperative group work, pair work, debating and so on for the assignments to be successful (Coyle et al., 2010; Martín del Pozo, 2016).
Finally, the language through learning component represents the emerging language that is generally unplanned. The language is based on cross-curricular principles that are not specific to one content area. During the students learning process, they capture and use language as it is needed for them to learn. Asking the teacher for help, communicating with peers, writing texts are diverse concepts that strengthen their existing knowledge, skills, and increase learning within this perspective (Coyle et al., 2010; Martín del Pozo, 2016).
8 The Language Triptych
(Coyle et al., 2010 p. 36)
3.3 Second Language Acquisition
The idea of CLIL is that students study subjects and traditional content in a language that is not their native language. Along the way, they ‘pick up’ new language. Therefore, these subjects taught in a foreign language derive a second objective which is language acquisition. According to Krashen (1982), language acquisition has two diverse and self-sufficient directions for developing skills in a second language. The first direction involves the process of acquisition: the second involves the concept of learning. The acquisition process could be described as the language that is used subconsciously that takes place as a result of interaction and input. Language acquisition could generally be connected to an almost effortless acquisition of linguistic knowledge, similarly to the way children are learning their mother tongue. They are simply not aware that they are in the process of language acquisition. In acquisition, students in a class would use language to communicate and practice their grammatical skills unconsciously, with a ‘feel’ for correctness. The language acquired would also have an unconscious grammatical feel for what ‘sounds’ right or what ‘sounds’ wrong, without necessarily knowing the possible violated rules. This was observed in classroom observations in this project as well. Krashen (1982) furthermore describes acquisition in other terms, such as, ‘picking up’ a
9
language, non-technical, informal, implicit, and natural ways of learning a second language. New language will emerge, and this can be associated with the language
through and for learning, the communication aspects which were previously explained.
Language learning, on the other hand, is more of a focused endeavor that requires a conscious knowledge of the forms and structures of the language. Similar to a language learner in a second language class presented as a student who is intending to learn, and is controlling and implicates learning activities (Sharwood Smith, 2014). And the learning process would be the conscious and intended learning of rules, structures, and lexis of the language. Krashen (1982) refers to this as; students’ ability in ‘knowing about’ a language as in rules of grammar, being able to communicate the rules to others, the explicit and formal parts of learning a second language.
As teachers, it is important to be aware of the diversity of these two concepts. Especially in teaching CLIL. Language learning and language acquisition both have a place. The complementary methods promote second language development. By having the opportunity to receive instructions and at the same time experience real-life situations where the students can acquire the language in a natural way, effective learning can be achieved.
3.4 Sociocultural Aspects
According to sociocultural theory, a language is a cultural tool needed for cognitive development. In CLIL, language is used as a tool for the students to develop their content knowledge. Based on cognitivism we know that students are actively involved in their learning by exploring and learning new principles. They do so by participating in collaborative dialogues with more skilled tutors. That dialogue is usually described by the term Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). ZPD is the difference between what learners can accomplish on their own and what they can accomplish by the help and guidance of a more skilled partner. Due to the imperfect understanding of the foreign language used in CLIL whilst teaching content, ZPD is a crucial moment for the students. Another important feature that nurtures cognitive growth in social interactions is scaffolding. Here it is important for the teacher to carefully provide the right support for the learner so they can profit from it and gain a better understanding of the problem (Shaffer & Kipp, 2014). Without the right amount of scaffolding in CLIL, the students
10
might suffer difficulties with understanding the content or the language being taught. Therefore, scaffolding is a fundamental part of CLIL.
A significant part of both CLIL and the sociocultural classroom are cooperative activities where students are engaged and encouraged to assist each other. The idea behind the cooperative tasks is that the students who are less motivated or less competent will benefit from those who are more skillful (Shaffer & Kipp, 2014). In CLIL language is an essential tool for learning. As well as in sociocultural theory it is stressed that language plays a critical role in cognitive development. Language is used as an instrument to communicate knowledge and socially valued methods of problem-solving and thinking. Language is to eventually become a powerful tool on its own (Shaffer & Kipp, 2014). We all can acquire language, however, what kind of language we learn, how fluent we become and in what situations we use it depends on what social situations we participate in (Gibbons, 2013).
3.5 The Steering Documents
Bilingualism and multilingualism are an important part of the national school system. How languages are announced to students, however, varies globally, depending on diverse language ideologies within the countries. But also, what that specific country's steering documents stipulate. In Sweden, the Education Act (SFS 2010:800) and the Swedish National Agency for Education (Skolverket, 2011, 18) stipulates that education in the school system should promote a good basis for students participating in the social community of life. The curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare (Skolverket, 2011, 18) provides primary school teachers with multiple syllabuses with educational requirements.
The steering documents dictate students having an international perspective. Hence, having an international perspective develops an understanding of national and cultural borders which creates international solidarity. Furthermore, it deepens the understanding of cultural diversity and allows students to use English as a tool for communicating, thinking and learning. The English language is a big part of our daily lives and Sweden being a bilingual and multilingual country in many aspects, these international communicative skills should be pushed for. This can be found in The Swedish National Agency for Education (Skolverket, 2011 and 2018):
11
“The internationalization of Swedish society and increasing cross-border mobility place high demands on the ability of people to live with and appreciate the values inherent in cultural diversity. Awareness of one’s cultural origins and sharing in a common cultural heritage provides a secure identity which it is important to develop, together with the ability to understand and empathize with the values and conditions of others (p.5).
Additionally, in the Syllabus for English, it says that teaching should also provide opportunities for students to develop skills in relating content to their own experiences to deal with spoken language. This includes having awareness of cultural and social phenomena and reflecting on living conditions where English is used. Interpreting and understanding the content of diverse spoken and written texts in English. Formulating and interacting for different purposes, recipients, and situations in English. Lastly, the steering documents are emphasizing the importance of interculturality playing an important role in English teaching (Skolverket, 2011 and 2018). Implementing CLIL is one contextual piece of a puzzle to enhance international solidarity in schools and realize the steering documents’ requirements.
3.6 Previous Research
Based on the research conducted in Sweden and Europe it could be speculated that the context is highly important for CLIL to be successful. CLIL is presented to be working well in countries such as Spain whereas the amount of extramural English is very low. In Sweden however, there are mixed results that could depend on the fact that there seems to be a lack of teacher education particular in CLIL and where the amount of extramural English is quite high. Below, the research conducted on CLIL in Europe and Sweden is presented to examine whether the above speculations are correct and what aspects might be affecting the effectiveness of CLIL.
12
3.6.1 The European Context
Studies conducted by De Diezmas (2016), Mayo and Ibarrola (2014) and Czura and Kolodunska (2015) show that CLIL students have access to higher exposure for the target language which leads to higher results specifically in oral production in English but also writing and reading abilities. Over three years, De Diezmas (2016) investigated the effectiveness of CLIL and non-CLIL students enrolled in the fourth year of primary education. During the first year, the ability to write was assessed, the second-year oral production and interaction were assessed, and during the third year, tests were performed for reading and writing. The results in De Diezmas’ study show that CLIL students significantly outperformed their non-CLIL-peers in the oral production of English and interaction. The CLIL students also achieved higher results in reading and writing but not at a significant level.
Serra (2007) presents features of a longitudinal study evaluating CLIL-based integrative bilingual education, implemented in three Swiss elementary schools. Blasco (2011) investigated the outcomes of the implementation of a CLIL program in a Catalan primary school, three years after the start of the execution. Both Serra (2007) and Blasco (2011) present similar outcomes: the exposure to English is heightened in the CLIL context which seems to lead to a positive effect on the students’ communication in English. They point out that the language produced by the students was at a fair level of accuracy in terms of morphology, syntax and the production of language, which was generally more complex, grammatically correct and fluent than the language spoken by their non-CLIL peers.
Perez Canado (2017) conducted an extensive longitudinal study carried out with 1033 CLIL students and 991 EFL learners in 53 public, private, and charter schools across twelve Spanish provinces and concluded that there certainly is a difference in the language competence between CLIL and non-CLIL students. Whereas the CLIL students score much higher already at the end of Primary school education. Those results were noted mainly in the receptive vocabulary and speaking. Nevertheless, at the end of secondary school, the CLIL students performed much better in all the linguistic aspects, such as writing, reading, and speaking, etc.
Additional research conducted by Graaff et al. (2007) showed that the teaching methods used in CLIL have a positive impact on the development of language
13
compensation strategies by all students. Similar features of the use of CLIL have been confirmed by a study published by Várkuti (2010). In that study, the analysis of the collected data revealed that the group implementing CLIL reaches language fluency outcomes better by 24% on average than the group that did not participate in CLIL. Both in conversational as well as academic vocabulary skills in English. Noteworthy is also the study on the cognitive development of children aged 7-15 years, conducted in Finland by Jäppinen (2005). The collected data shows that while the older age group (13-15 years old) in mathematics there are no significant differences between groups of CLIL students and the control group. However, in the group of younger children (7-12 years old) these differences are observed to be significant, in favor of the students in CLIL education.
Arribas (2016) analyzed students' motivation and attitudes towards the English language and CLIL as well as students' receptive vocabulary outcomes. The study conducted by Arribas (2016) shows that CLIL has a positive effect on the students. It was revealed that no matter the way of execution for CLIL, both the students and teachers have similar perceptions about different linguistic aspects that the students have undeniably developed significantly after participating in CLIL. Moreover, Rumlich (2014) who researched CLIL in the German context states that the interest of CLIL students and non-CLIL students for English and English as a school subject differs before starting CLIL. Their average interest was much higher at the beginning compared to students outside CLIL and regular schools without CLIL. This might be one of the factors affecting the positive impact CLIL has on students in Germany.
In summary, this implicates that CLIL is a method that helps students develop greater communication and conversational skills in a foreign language, compared to mainstream second language instruction. The research suggests that if applied correctly in similar contexts like the ones in Spain, Germany, and Finland, CLIL shows positive outcomes, especially in oral communication and interaction in the foreign language.
3.6.2 The Swedish Context
The majority of studies conducted on CLIL in Sweden show a lack of teacher training and a high amount of extramural English leading to fluency in the language (Sylvén, 2013 & 2004; Cabau-Lampa, 2007, Toth, 2018; Falk, 2015). A meta-analysis study analyzing the differences in CLIL between different European contexts was conducted by Sylvén
14
(2013). The study compiled research data regarding CLIL from four European countries, Spain, Finland, Germany, and Sweden along with the following four parameters: the policy framework, research, teacher education, age of implementation, amount of CLIL and extramural English. Sylvén (2013) concluded that Swedish students learn the majority of their English outside of school context. In the study, it is pointed out that the ability to speak English is already quite high in Sweden on account of the high amount of extramural English that is encountered in Sweden such as social media, movies, games, etc. Cabau-Lampa (2007) attempted to expand the area of language policy research in Sweden and to include issues related to language education. In the article, it is mentioned that in Sweden, English is a language encountered daily. Emphasizing that English seems to hold an overwhelming position in the Swedish education system. Notably, Toth (2018) conducted a study that collected data during three school years at a primary school in Sweden. The study was divided into three subcomponents. The first focused on established and practical language principles, the second focused on stakeholders' beliefs about the EMI program and the third focused on analyzing language choices.
Similarly to the authors mentioned above, Toth (2018) explains that English holds a high position in Sweden compared to other languages. Additionally, it was mentioned in the study that students participating in CLIL value English highly as it is expressed to be a global language used to communicate with the world. Further, Falk (2015) conducted a study that examined the ability of Swedish students to produce discourse on the subject history in a situation where historical knowledge is presented in written explanations, whereas both English and Swedish are involved. The participating students attended a CLIL program at the upper secondary level. Falk (2015) observed that while communicating, the students seem to lack vocabulary in Swedish and that there is not enough communicative freedom in CLIL classrooms in Sweden. As the subject teachers might feel insecure about their language knowledge and the language teachers about their content knowledge. It is also mentioned that in the majority of studies on CLIL conducted in Sweden, the first language is close to being invisible, even though CLIL is viewed as a bilingual education system.
Similarly to Falk (2015), Sylvén (2004) investigated incidental vocabulary acquisition amongst CLIL students, compared with mainstream students who have Swedish as the main medium of instruction. Issues similar to the ones mentioned above have been noted by Sylvén (2004) who remarks that there is a lack of teacher proficiency in CLIL in Sweden. As said, the subject teachers are usually only qualified in the specific subject
15
and not in teaching language. Hence, why they might feel unsure about their language abilities and follow a strict lesson plan to avoid making language mistakes, which leaves no space for flexibility. Toth (2018) agrees on this issue as it is mentioned that the content and language seem to be excluded from each other and that the teachers are either specialists in a specific subject or a language. Conclusively, the above studies seem to agree that there is a notable lack of CLIL instruction for teachers’ in- and pre-service and the amount of English encountered outside of school is not only high but also contributes to the students' ability to speak English fluently. Countries such as Spain and Germany differ from Sweden due to the higher amount of extramural English in Sweden. Another important difference is the teacher education in CLIL which is available both in Finland and Spain and as mentioned seems to be lacking in Sweden (Sylvén, 2013).
16
4. Methods
This section displays the qualitative materials and methods used in this study. Initially, presenting the participants and the context of the study. Thereafter, discussing the use of methodological materials and a description of the data collection process. An overview of the ethical considerations is included in the final paragraph. Aiming to examine primary school teachers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of CLIL, the materials and methods were selected by the flexibility and detail qualitative methods offer.
4.1 Participants
The choice of participants was strategic (Alvehus, 2013), in the sense that they were primary school teachers teaching English. This implied the wish to obtain participants with specific experiences in English content and language teaching. Initially, focusing on Swedish schools. However, the international schools were discovered and thereby, the chance of finding teachers who taught CLIL was higher. Furthermore, it was crucial for us that the teachers were available at short notice. Also, since we had to be able to meet the participants in real life, they had to be in an area within our reach. We contacted the headteachers of six different schools that were geographically reachable. Three schools showed interest and four teachers agreed to participate. Based on the purpose of our study the teachers were selected based on them being primary school teachers using English as the language of instruction.
The studies were conducted in three international schools in the south of Sweden. One of the schools was a public school teaching the Swedish curriculum. The two other schools adhered to the International Baccalaureate (IB) program. Meaning, the Swedish curriculum was not taught there. The students studied all of their subjects in English, except in the independent school where Swedish and Social Studies are taught in Swedish. The reason for choosing the three international schools was not to compare them but to enhance the variety of the data collected. The idea was also to find teachers with experience in CLIL or who use English as the language of instruction. That way, we could examine how they integrate their language with the content. Thereby, collecting rich data
17
and connecting it to CLIL answering our question regarding their perceptions of the effectiveness of CLIL.
4.2 Materials
For the study, data were collected via qualitative interviews and classroom observations. The qualitative interviews were conducted with a semi-structured approach. Christoffersen & Johannessen (2015) states that this type of interview is suitable when the researcher is interested in people’s experiences, opinions, feelings and perceptions regarding a certain phenomenon. The conversations in the interviews presented an opportunity to ask the teachers’ open-ended questions. Thereby, receiving answers with in-depth insight into their views and opinions. The interview consisted of 14 questions (Appendix B). The last nine questions were connected to our research questions aiming to deepen our knowledge in the effectiveness of CLIL.
Interview guides were developed to examine how CLIL is effective in learning language through content. The questions were then divided into categories to structure and secure our study more clearly. The background section was designed to reflect eventual previous instruction as we had noticed that previous research indicated that teacher training in CLIL in Sweden is lacking. Terms and conditions were produced to examine how the school’s international perspective differs from Swedish schools. This category was not used in our analysis as it was not relevant to our study’s purpose. To ensure answering our research questions we used the categories’ effectiveness for
learning and CLIL as a pedagogical method containing examining questions regarding
the benefits and/or challenges, the students’ attitudes as well as the teachers’ overall perceptions of the implementation of CLIL in a Swedish context. Finally, since scaffolding is a big part of CLIL we wished to examine how the teachers’ provided support, that is why we chose the support for learning category.
We decided to send out the interview questions in advance allowing the participants to prepare their answers more thoroughly and thought through. To document the interviews, they were recorded with a digital dictaphone provided by Malmo University to ensure GDPR compliance and the following recommendations by Christoffersen and Johannessen (2015). Before the interview, the interviewees signed a letter of consent (see Appendix A) which was constructed according to the ethical considerations that will be
18
discussed further on. To establish an informal atmosphere, we used the interview guide found in Christoffersen and Johannessen (2015 p. 86-87). Initially, asking the interviewees what language they would prefer to be interviewed in (English or Swedish). We then began each session with asking questions with easy answers. Afterwards we asked a series of transition questions which led up the key questions.
The three native speaker interviewees favored their interview being carried through in English. However, the teacher with both English and Swedish as mother tongue expressed satisfaction with being interviewed in either of the languages. English was chosen for that interview. Since the interviews were performed in English, the transcriptions were also in English. This was the most convenient approach. The interviews were expected to last about 20-25 minutes. However, one was twelve minutes, one was 16 minutes, one was 25 minutes and one was 32 minutes. The questions were asked almost identically, but the teachers’ elaborated their answers very differently. Therefore, the time varied. We, as interviewers, also changed our approach towards the questions. We spoke more freely in the interviews as time passed, which led to a more open discussion, also having an impact on the time-frame. The interviews were held in classrooms and conference rooms at the schools.
Supplementing the interviews, three days were spent observing four English lessons in the three different schools. Structured observations with total openness were chosen to gather our data. According to Christoffersson and Johannesson (2015), this type of method approach is suitable when researchers need to gain direct access to the context being investigated. The teachers were informed of the observation beforehand by emails. The observations were conducted in two Primary Year Programs (PYP) and two Middle Year Programs (MYP). We focused specifically on how the teacher integrated content with language and if any challenges or difficulties appeared. As well as if any significant aspects were observed to be effective, such as scaffolding, adaptation, language developmental teaching, etc. Additionally, if the teaching applied for language development in general, and if so, did the teacher use content-specific words to enhance the students’ language development.
An observation template (Appendix C) with a goal related scheme was produced. The scheme included predetermined themes, based on the aspects we wished to observe. The teachers’ language choice and phenomena generating further questions to later follow up within the interview were also noted. Fieldnotes of each lesson were put into the template. In these notes, we included categorized information of the lessons into boxes of themes.
19
Leading up to analyzing patterns that contributed to goal-related data material. The patterns would give information regarding whether the teachers applied the methods they would, later on, express in the interviews. Further data was gathered in the form of paper copies of instructional or pedagogical materials and as notes in the last box called ‘other.’
4.3 Ethical Considerations
To respect and protect the participants' ethical rights, the Swedish Research Council (2002) states that researchers must ensure that they have permission and approval to implement the study. Accordingly, four ethical requirements are presented as the information, consent, confidentiality and usage requirements. Firstly, the researcher must inform the participants of the study’s purpose and apply for relevant and necessary information needed to know regarding the study being made. Emails were sent out to the headteachers of the schools requesting their participation. We explained the purpose and aim of the study and how we planned for the collection of the data to be performed (interviews and observations). Further information regarding the study, as well as how we would perform the interview was given to the teachers by email conversations before the visit.
Secondly, the participants in a study have the right to decide for themselves whether they want to participate or not at all times. Before the visit, a letter of consent (Appendix A) was sent out for the participants to read. At the visit, they would sign it and give it to us before the interview was conducted. Thirdly, the highest possible confidentiality must be provided. No personal information of any participant in a study is kept so that no unauthorized person can access it. In the signed letter of consent, the teachers were guaranteed confidentiality. The teachers were informed of this orally before the interview. Lastly, all data collected in a study must only be used for research purposes. Meaning, the participants’ anonymity should at all times be respected and guaranteed. Therefore, all names of people, schools’ and cities are excluded from this thesis. Anonymity was guaranteed in the signed letter of consent. We also orally guaranteed anonymity before the interview. The anonymized citations and extracts from interviews and observations will be included in the thesis.
20
4.3.1 Analysis of the Data
To analyze our data, we manually transcribed the essential parts of the interviews. Since we had a focus on the nine key questions leading up to answering our research questions. We decided to only transcribe those parts of the interviews as some answers and questions had no relevance to the study. All pauses, irrelevant sounds, and fillers were also excluded. The notes from the observations were sorted into categories and then compiled to allow us to analyze the observed themes. The findings will be presented and discussed in the results and discussion section. The teachers are coded by Teacher A, B, C and D (TA, TB, TC & TD). This coding also represents the order of meeting the teachers.
21
5. Results and Discussion
In this section, compiled findings from the nine last key questions from the transcribed interviews (Appendix B) and the four classroom observations (Appendix C) are presented. The findings are sectioned in separate paragraphs as followed: Teachers’ previous instruction in CLIL, integration of content and language, perceptions of benefits and/or challenges in CLIL, pedagogical support, the effectiveness of CLIL in Swedish and international schools and students’ attitudes towards English being the language of instruction. The teachers are coded as Teacher A, B, C and D (TA, TB, TC & TD). Key statements from the teachers and field observations are interwoven into our presentation of the subcomponent of the results, followed by a discussion of the key findings relevant to each sub-question.
5.1 Teachers’ Previous Instruction in CLIL
The qualitative interviews showed both similarities and diversities in the teachers’ experiences and instruction in CLIL. It was mentioned by all four teachers that they had no teacher training specifically in CLIL. However, they all pointed out that when they had read about the method in the preparation of the interviews, they noticed that they were applying the method even though they may not be aware of it. Examples of how the teachers integrated the content and language are presented in forthcoming sections. TC felt that in-service training (Lärarlyftet) and study and career guidance (Studie och Yrkesvägledning) provided for CLIL similar training.
It seems that the teachers did not receive any specific training in CLIL, which is in line with the findings from previous research in Sweden (Sylvén, 2013: Toth, 2018). Teachers seem to have a vague idea of what it means to teach according to CLIL, but no in-depth knowledge of the theory. Since it is a concept containing many different features, it can be useful for teachers to receive some training in the implementation of CLIL. The teachers mentioned that much of what they do in their teaching is consistent with CLIL. Offering teachers training or continuing education within CLIL could help put words on what they are doing to improve the quality of their teaching methods.
22
5.2 Integration of Content and Language
TA taught the content and structure of a poem with booklets, diagrams, examples, as well as subject-specific vocabularies, such as: “idioms, syllabus, and rhythm”. TB used techniques of irony to teach satire, and in class, students would write their satirical pieces to enhance their language development. Furthermore, to develop students’ critical thinking skills, analyzing skills, and creative skills, the teachers had them mainly read and respond to texts such as poems and stories. TB described the integration in the following way: “Incorporating the content into the unit like looking at examples of other people’s work and then try to create their own using the techniques they’ve learned.”
TC presented detailed descriptions of how to integrate the parts of the Swedish curriculum that are not subject-specific. For example, using love and relationships as a theme, the students’ created a booklet. This assignment taught them democracy, norms and values, equality, and gender issues. TC also described how they implemented a writing format called Role Audience Format Topic (RAFT) which is a way for the students’ to improve their language development by writing an article for a newspaper that contains certain content. For example, geography or a topic based on the students’ interests. Lastly, TD expressed a high degree of communicative approaches to implementing and invigorating language learning. Finding information, talking and sharing, collaborative assignments, using their experience, hand-on work, learning by doing and excursions are all activities that permeate the students’ school days. To cite TD: “Planning seems very last minute but we have a guide where we want to get them in a topic aligned with success criteria.” Some of these examples were observed as well.
It has been observed that by integrating the content, the progression in knowledge skills, and understanding, related to specific elements of a defined curriculum has been enhanced. This is also presented in the four C’s of CLIL (Coyle et al., 2010). Based on these ideas and the data collected, it can be assumed that by using the language to learn, whilst learning to use a language, the oral skills are strengthened and apply for a meaningful second language interaction in the classroom. By responding to poems the students engage in specific content using their thinking and problem-solving skills which are presented in the four C’s (Coyle et al., 2010). Besides, a wide range of cultural contexts and exposure to alternative perspectives can be viewed in the classrooms observed.
23
5.3 Teachers’ Perceptions of the Beneficial Features of
CLIL
TA, emphasized language developmental features such as; learning strategies and techniques for writing, to immerse the students into the language. Compared to having standard grammar exercises. TA also stressed: “It’s much better to get into the language rather than always be analyzing how the language functions. TC compared CLIL with standardized teaching and expressed: “It works, it engages differently. [...] I think you just have to add some content based in it to make it real and applicable to the world.” Other beneficial features expressed by the teachers were: It gives names to things, it broadens students’ vocabulary for example in mathematics, it makes teaching more fun, it’s goal orientated, it’s easier to have objectives, relatable to future employment skills, enhances creativity both for students’ and teachers’ and it helps teachers to learn the curriculum. In summary, the interviewed teachers believed CLIL to be beneficial in a series of ways. TD stated that if applied correctly CLIL can be very beneficial as English is a global language and the students would become bilingual, if not multilingual.
Based on the answers gathered from the interviews, CLIL appears to be seen as a method contributing to students’ motivation to learn languages and heightening their self-confidence, specifically those who are struggling in mainstream language education. In Eurydice (2006, 2017) it is mentioned that CLIL provides the students with authentic opportunities and communicative situations where they use the language they are learning. Conclusively, CLIL is said to increase the exposure to the foreign language without taking any additional time from the curriculum. This aligns with the four teachers' perceptions highlighting beneficial features such as: highly engaging, broadening of the vocabulary, immersion of the second language and relatable to future employment skills. Furthermore, TA specifically stressed the benefits of the immersion of the second language which is supported by Krashen’s (1982) theory of language acquisition. Where the students learn in the process of ‘picking up’ the language. Moreover, the phrase; “it gives names to things” stated by TC is aligned with the communication conduit ‘language of learning’ in CLIL. Described by Coyle et al. (2010) as the language needed for students to connect elemental skills to a theme or a topic.
24
5.4 Teachers’ Perceptions of the Challenges in CLIL
All of the interviewed teachers expressed that the biggest challenge in applying CLIL would be to get everyone in the work teams on board. TA specifically pointed out that there is a need for it to be applied consistently and well worked out. All of the teachers need to have a clear understanding of the new method in detail and how to integrate it into the classrooms. Moreover, TA stated that this kind of change will also be time-consuming and require patience. “You need to allow it to roll out, fail, be put back together, and then maybe in five years from the point of implementation you might have something which is starting to look like something.” Not only does it take time to implement a new teaching method. But as TC mentioned, the planning of the lessons is also time-consuming as it needs to be more thorough. Especially if you are willing to work with CLIL cross-curricular with another colleague. Similar challenges have been brought up by TD who mentioned that it is important not to “just dump it on the teachers as well as the students.”
Other challenges that were brought up were students arriving at a low level of English. In subjects such as science or mathematics, there are a lot of complex keywords specific to these subjects only. The students with lower knowledge of English might have difficulty understanding. However, TC pointed out that children can adapt quite well to new situations. And that language acquisition for children usually happens quickly and on its own when it has to be done. It was also added that some guardians and teachers might feel that by instructing in English the students will lose vocabulary in their home language. An adjustment that could solve the problem of “losing vocabulary” could be to teach the same number of subjects in Swedish as well as in English. In fine, TC clarified that all pedagogical methods, even CLIL have challenging features and that there is not a method that works perfectly for everyone.
It seems to be difficult to implement new ways of teaching. CLIL can be perceived as a complex method that differentiates from how we teach in today's schools. However, when you take a closer look at the method, you realize that much of CLIL is consistent with the Swedish steering documents. The Swedish curriculum expresses a need for the ability to communicate internationally as we live in a globalized world and the borders are not as sharp as before. Students should develop a good knowledge of English, which
25
in Sweden forms a part of our daily lives. English is used as a tool to become a part of the outside world. The interviewed teachers expressed that CLIL could present problems if a student cannot speak sufficiently good English, as subjects such as mathematics and science can be difficult to comprehend. However, it is up to the school to decide which subjects will be taught in English within CLIL. If language comprehension is a threat to the students' subject knowledge, the school can focus on teaching "simple" subjects such as art or physical education in English initially. Another issue may be that the students might "lose" their Swedish vocabulary. To avoid this, teachers can implement CLIL and choose for the majority of subjects to be taught in Swedish and the rest in English to level it out. Through adjustments, the students can develop their knowledge of English, Swedish and content-subjects in the best way possible.
5.4.1 Pedagogical Support
Scaffolding is a crucial part of teaching through CLIL. The teachers presented different ways of scaffolding their students. What TA found the most important way of supporting was emotional support, being engaged with the students and being aware of what motivates them to learn. TA also mentioned that it is important to be present and available for the students at all times. The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) was also brought up, which calls for teachers to be aware of what the students can do on their own and what is needed for them to achieve in terms of higher goals given proper teacher guidance. Informing the students of what the success criteria are as well as explaining the goals clearly at the beginning and throughout a task is according to TA the first level of support. The students need to understand why and what they are doing to succeed. Different strategies used for reading and writing are presented by TC who broke down the assignments into smaller pieces to make it easier for the students to understand and remember. One of the strategies used was “show and tell” where the students together with the teacher try to find different ways of describing feelings. One such feeling could be “I am hungry” were showing it would be written as “My stomach rumbled loudly.” Various maps such as a spider diagram, charts, place maps and mind maps were frequently used as a scaffolding technique in TC’s classroom. Those maps help the students come up with ideas and gather those for their writing. Adjustments were made
26
for the students that struggle with the language, TC mentioned drawing instead of writing as one type of adjustment.
What has also been mentioned in the interviews and observed in all classrooms is feedback. Scaffolding and constructive feedback turned out to be an important part of the teaching. The students were given constructive feedback whenever in need, which helped them to improve their assignments at the very moment they were working with it. The teachers expressed feedback and scaffolding being in favor, as it helps the students to be productive and feel motivated. TD also talked about mixing classes based on the students' abilities to enhance their motivation and confidence. Another tool observed to be used by all the teachers was repetition where the same information was worked with using different types of tasks. By varying the tasks and repeating the content the students did not lose motivation and it helped them to memorize the content.
The teachers provided a variation of supporting tools for their students to succeed. It seemed as though the teacher played a supporting role and the students were the ones in the center. The students seemed to work in the ZPD, and the teachers made sure to provide diverse adequate scaffolding. Thereby, the students were given the conditions to achieve higher goals. Not only does scaffolding and ZPD belong to sociocultural theory and CLIL, but so does learning by communicating which was visible in the observed classes. The students learned and supported each other by communicating and interacting with each other using Translanguaging.
5.5 CLIL in Swedish Schools
Two of the interviewed teachers had previously worked in Swedish schools where they had applied CLIL into their teaching. TB who taught English and Literature clarified that teaching based on CLIL principles worked fine in the Swedish school. Students enjoyed English literature and learning different writing and speaking tools. TB also stated that “It is much better to get into the language rather than always just be analyzing how the language functions”. Further, the technical side of the language such as grammar also is an important part of it. However, when the students do not have a good level of fluency in English it is more important to use the language as a whole. TC, that also previously had applied CLIL in a Swedish classroom believes that it is a more fun approach in teaching and that it is more goal-oriented and easier to have objectives. TC added that
27
this type of teaching engages the students in a different way where instead of simply working with the glossary by itself such as numbers or colors, “You have to add some content-based [topics] into it to make it real and applicable to the world, otherwise, why are you learning it?” All of the teachers showed a positive attitude towards CLIL and see it as a beneficial tool for language development even if applied in Swedish schools.
When the teachers were asked about how they think CLIL could be effective in a Swedish context, they expressed that applying the method properly should work well, just as in other European countries. However, it is argued that adolescents and children in Sweden already have sufficiently good skills in the English language that they gain through activities outside the school. Here a problem appears. The language children learn through games or social media is not the same language used in school or work. It is the task of the school to provide the children with the best opportunities to learn both Swedish but also other foreign languages such as English. If English is considered a global and international language, students should have the opportunity to learn that language at school. In this case, the language the children receive outside the school should be based on, or complemented with the language they receive in school. It is mentioned that it is important to provide the students with a context where they recognize themselves and understand that learning a new language and subject should be successful.
CLIL is based on the four 4 C’s, where one of them is content. Students should be offered various activities that can enhance their understanding of the subject and language. The material used should be authentic, which is rarely the case in today's schools. English teaching is usually based on coursebooks and workbooks that circulate inventive British or American families. Part of CLIL is to provide the students with authentic materials such as articles, books, films, videos, etc. The monolingual language not only belongs to the US or UK, but English is also spoken in over a dozen countries; Ghana, Gambia, Australia, New Zealand, Dominica, Ireland, Malta, Nigeria, Singapore, Wales, and many more. Another part of the 4 C’s is communication and culture and communicative tasks should be the main part of teaching. As evidenced in sociocultural theory, children learn best by communicating with the outside world and communication is not only oral in a dialogue, it is writing, viewing, drawing, presenting, listening and more. And why is culture important in teaching? Sweden is a multicultural country and in today's society, communication and cooperation with other countries is common. By weaving culture into teaching, we help students develop their knowledge of the outside world but also the ability for empathy, respect, diversity and to see things from different perspectives.
28
5.6 The Effectiveness in International Schools in Sweden
All of the teachers agreed that integrating language and content is a useful tool. As TC stated, especially in a school whereas the majority of the subjects are taught in English. TC expressed that by integrating language into teaching content, helps to support the students’ vocabulary development a lot more than by only focusing on the content. TA explained that the children thrive better when what they are being taught makes contextual sense to them and that is achieved by the integration of language. TD emphasized that by integrating language into all the aspects of teaching, it provides a name for new and complex ideas. The integration of language into content broadens the students’ vocabulary. While introducing a new topic in math, TD has to use a broad variety of words to describe the same phenomenon. TD stated that CLIL is effective because “It gives the kids a bigger range of figuring things out” since due to the language barriers a lot of pupils might have trouble understanding some of the more complex words and phrases. Hence, why different levels of language help them understand.
The above, aligns with the construction of the Language Triptych, aiming to support students' language development in CLIL. It provides the means to take into account the need to integrate cognitively demanding content with language using and learning. The terms and the grammar forms come from the content which enhances the students' cognitive, academic, language proficiency. The basic communication skills and the cross-curricular language are used to develop their vocabulary (Coyle et al., 2010). TA explained this in the following way: “by integrating language into teaching content, it helps to support the students’ vocabulary development.” TD’s comments also support such a conclusion, stating that “CLIL is effective because it gives the kids a bigger range of figuring things out since due to the language barriers a lot of students might have trouble understanding some of the more complex words and phrases.” Conclusively, this aligns with the previous research conducted in other European studies as presented in the background.
5.6.1 Students Attitudes Towards English as the Language of Instruction
Based on the classroom observations, the students appeared to be motivated and eager to work on their tasks. The majority of the students spoke English both with each other and
29
with the teacher. However, translanguaging has also been observed to be a part of the lessons, though the amount did vary between the classes. When asked about the students’ overall attitudes towards English being the language of instruction, the teachers said they mainly observed positive feelings towards it. TC expressed that the students enjoy having teachers from all around the world, specifically English native speakers as it gives them reassurance in the correctness of what they are being taught. It was also pointed out that many teachers from abroad do not speak Swedish, which makes the students use English or translanguaging to communicate. Sometimes the students that are not quite confident in speaking English ask their friends to translate. TA acknowledged to never have come across a particularly negative attitude from the students towards English and added that the only time when some negative feelings appear is when the students’ academic ability is high but the ability to access English is quite low. The students then tend to get frustrated by not being able to achieve the academic level they wish to as they feel limited by their knowledge of the language of instruction. Adding on, that the students find English being academic and sometimes even prestigious as it has “this aura of being an international language, and that “the students see English as being useful in their day to day life as well as for their future.”
In the Swedish curriculum (Skolverket, 2011, 2018) it is stated that bilingualism and multilingualism should be an important part of the school system. Thereby, these findings fulfill not only the educational requirements, but it deepens the understanding of cultural diversity and allows students to use English as a tool for communication, thinking and learning. The English language is a big part of our daily lives and Sweden being a bilingual and multilingual country in many aspects, these international communicative skills should be pushed for. This can be found in The Swedish National Agency for Education (Skolverket, 2011, 2018). Additionally, the Education Act (SFS 2010:800) stipulates that education in the school system should promote a good basis for students participating in the social community of life. Likewise, the syllabus advocates students having an international perspective. Hence, having an international perspective develops an understanding of national and cultural borders which creates international solidarity.
