Dialogic Interactions in the English-Mediated Classroom: A Case Study of a Social Science Class for Engineering Students in Korea

Abstract

In this paper, we explore the role of dialogic interactions in enhancing L2 undergraduate students' classroom participation at a university in South Korea. Previous studies on English-mediated instruction (EMI) have focused primarily on the efficiency of instruction, as evaluated in terms of the skills and proficiency levels of the students or instructors, based on the assumption that L2 linguistic competence is the primary prerequisite for successful EMI classes. However, drawing upon survey and interview data of students' perceptions of dialogic teaching and classroom observation data, we demonstrate the success of dialogic teaching. Our findings suggest that L2 speakers can participate effectively in interactions in English when the class is designed systematically to allow multiple responses built upon their previous knowledge.

The effects of L1 use and dialogic instruction on EFL writing

“…In this context, the participants in this study had positive perceptions towards the DI activities particularly in the pre-stage including discussions, student talk with reasoning and interactions with their peers. This finding supported the previous research conducted by Choi, Tatar, and Kim (2014) who claimed the importance of dialogic interactions in improving L2 students' construction of new ideas depending on their background knowledge. In addition, as suggested by Alexander (2013), DI is a medium for broadening learners' reasoning skills and propelling their learning.…”

Analysis of Teaching Physics Through Interim Language as Preconditions for Humanitarian Training of Science Teachers for Differentiated Approach in CLIL

“…Many researchers (Airey, 2012;Couto-Cantero & Bobadilla-Pérez, 2018;Dalton-Puffer, 2011;Dimova, 2021;Hudson, 2009;Kampen, Admiraal & Berry, 2018;Kunioshi et al, 2015;Lipkova, 2020;Martín del Pozo, 2017;Mcdougald, 2016;Piacentini, Simões & Vieira, 2019;Ramankulov et al, 2020;Urmeneta, 2019) pay attention to the fact that CLIL science teachers are subject experts and for them, the language of instruction is usually non-native. Sometimes, according to student's opinions, the latter could be the reason for the insufficient effectiveness of teaching a subject through interim language (Arnándiz & Portolés, 2019;Choi, Tatar & Kim, 2014;Macaro et al, 2018). While training CLIL science teachers for teaching not in but through the interim language, they should become ready for creating conditions under which non-native language of instruction will be support for education but not an obstacle to study (Airey & Linder, 2006;Arnándiz & Portolés, 2019;Dalton-Puffer, 2011;Kewara, 2017;Macaro et al, 2018).…”

“…The linguistic component of CLIL teacher training should consider specific instructional contexts (Gustafsson, 2018;Kewara, 2017). CLIL teachers should also be able to notice difficulties connected to students' language proficiency and be able to apply verbal and non-verbal tools to improve the comprehension of science content (Bier, 2016;Choi et al, 2014;Hillyard, 2011;Hu & Gao, 2020;Kampen, Admiraal & Berry, 2018;Macaro et al, 2018;Papaja, 2015;Robles & Espinet, 2013;Tarasenkova et al, 2020).…”

“…In this regard, the CLIL science teacher should be prepared to teach the students whose language and subject knowledge level is below the average level (Gustafsson, 2018;Hu & Gao, 2020;Perez, 2019;Ramankulov et al, 2020;Urmeneta, 2013). Since learning science depends on knowledge of the language of instruction (Airey & Linder, 2006;McDougald, 2015) then while teaching the subject content through a foreign language, it is also necessary to support and balance the language of instruction between the student's and teacher's linguistic abilities as well as balance language and content in CLIL classrooms (Cabezuelo & Pavón, 2019;Choi et al, 2014;Cimermanova, 2017;Hu & Gao, 2020;Kewara, 2017;Lipkova, 2020;Lo et al, 2018;Meyer et al, 2018;Perez, 2019;Vilkancienė & Rozgienė, 2017). In CLIL education, students' content knowledge in a non-native language is usually assessed (Lo et al, 2018), and there is a problem in dividing difficulties to those with content and language cores.…”

“…Indeed, evaluating achievements in a subject through a non-native language is quite a difficult task (Couto-Cantero & Bobadilla-Pérez, 2018), and it is evident that it is determined not only by the subject and training of the teacher but also by students' knowledge and skills (Hu & Gao, 2020;Papaja, 2015). On the one hand, CLIL science teachers do not expect students to be proficient in language but rather to be able to understand the written texts or oral speech and explain the phenomena or processes (Choi et al, 2014;Cimermanova, 2017). On the other hand, one of perhaps the most challenging aspects of training a contemporary CLIL teacher is the readiness to create material and tools for content learning assessment (Airey, 2012;Perez, 2019), evaluate, and compare the effectiveness of using various scaffoldings in teaching science using CLIL approach (Kampen, Admiraal & Berry, 2018;Kewara, 2017;Lo et al, 2018;Rodríguez & Saray, 2018;Urmeneta & Evnitskaya, 2014).…”