Name : IRFAN RUSMAR

Student ID : 211076913
Course Code : E700/ ESM700

Table I: From foreign language instruction to immersion-ways of combining content and language
teaching

Focus and Model/ Type of Teacher Time frame Materials

language Approach language and levels
learning
My self Language and Foreign Explicit Language Long-term Authentic
culture language language teacher from materials,
instruction learning primary language
FL and L2 level textbooks
upwards
In Aceh Contextualized Topic Explicit Language Short-term ESL topic
(at the language approach in language teacher or long books
school ESL learning and (subject term written for
where I L2 implicit teacher as particular
had content informant) secondary language
previously learning level,
taught) example:
teaching
English
through
science and
mathematics
topics
Explanation

Foreign language in Aceh was far from an interesting thing for people in the time I learned, about 12
years ago. The practical foreign language competence was only because of a pressure from parents who
want their children to be more active in other languages, other than the mother tongue. What is clear,
there was no desire from ourselves to learn the foreign language (English). Personally, I learned English
was only for style without any consideration about the use of English in the next future for me.
However, 12 years later through a scholarship from Aceh government, I got a chance to learned English
in Penang Malaysia with the specialist English teacher. Although the type of language learning is still
‘explicit language learning’ and using the authentic materials, English has become a second language
(L2) in that time. In which, English is useful in everyday life and for other lessons, including mathematics
and science.

Based on the experiences in teaching Mathematics in bilingual classes in some schools in Aceh, I
conclude that the using of English in such subjects is still at the level contextualized language. It is
because the content of lessons, such as mathematics and science, are included as a topic in the ESL/
English lesson. So that, students are learning about content and language integrated learning only
through the English lesson taught by the English teacher, with the subject teachers are only as the
informant for the English teacher. Meanwhile, in the process of learning mathematics and science,
students and teachers still using Bahasa Indonesia as the core of learning. English is only as an
introduction of teaching and learning process.

Positive aspects of CLIL

a. The Learning Situation

Based on the experiences in teaching Mathematics in English, the main thing that usually prepared by
the teachers are the complex materials which completed with proper English without Indonesian
language inside. The materials are usually taken from the university library that provides a lot of English
books, especially for mathematics and science, which originally comes from the countries publisher,
besides the bilingual textbooks. On the positive side, I noted that the materials were often given more
concern by the teachers whether in preparing or presenting it. The reason is, because of language
should be easier accessible in English by the teachers and learners.

b. The Yield

In Northern Germany, two students from two different groups compared at the Kiel University in the
skill about communicative problem solving situation. The result reveals that the student who had
participated in the content and language integrated learning class has known more synonyms in English
than who had no participated in CLIL class (Klipple 2003:73). Therefore, the positive side is CLIL can
make the learners rich in language.

c. The Learner

There is no real evidence that shown that learners’ motivation receive a significant increase in subject
taught in foreign and second language in Aceh. However, the data from Scholarship Commission Aceh
reveals that the increasing number of overseas scholarship applicants in Aceh as evidence of the
increasing motivation of the learners. Moreover, parents in this case also encourage their children to
take an extra English class outside of the regular class, although the children have learned in the
bilingual class. The reason is to get scholarships from the local or international foundation to take study
overseas. Then, some learners are actually perceived a positive results in particular subjects when these
are taught in a foreign language (Klipple 2003: 74). Therefore, the influence of English whether in the
contents of other lessons or in English itself has given a lot of positive results for the learners.

d. The Educational Framework

After Tsunami came to Aceh in 2004, the use of English has evolved not only as a foreign language, but
also as a second language. The communicative approach and practical language competence seeped in
every part of the people life. It is not surprising that therefore the language educators were
instrumental formed a new linguistic Aceh order as a formal policy about English at schools.
Through several schools, students are required to learn English implicitly inside the content of other
lessons. This is named a bilingual learning process. In short, for the minister of education, there are a lot
of advantages which can be obtained from this situation. First, in the case of they do not have to form a
new national curriculum system for improve students’ ability in English and second, in the context of
saving budget cuts and saving a program in state of education (Klipple 2003: 74).

Problematic aspects of CLIL

a. The Learning Situation

In teaching any subjects in other languages, teachers need to deal with the term of terminology of the
languages. Not only the natural science and mathematics but also the social science, even in physical
education and arts, contain a lot of term which can confuse learners. If the teachers are not fluent
enough in foreign or second language, they will look silly in teaching, because they will rely on notes and
textbooks.

b. The Yield

The Canadian and Finnish experiments (Vollmer 1992; Rymarczyk 2003: 29ff) show that teaching
content and language integrated learning in classroom often leads students to focus more in oral
presentation than to develop the writing skills accuracy (Klipple 2003: 77). So that, the students likely to
be disproportionate in developing their ability of communication and writing skills.

c. The Learner

Not every school pupil has an equal opportunity and ability to learn other subjects through a foreign
language, such as the pupils in the city. For students who live in the remote areas, foreign languages and
second languages still as a huge burden to carried out because their school located far from the city and
lack of facilities.

d. The Educational Framework

Books literature are still as the main problem in application foreign language as a content language in
teaching and learning process. Besides of that, other materials for all levels and the learning process
system need to be reviewed to create an appropriate system, such as in assessment for a start.

Conclusion

The main purpose of language is to communicate with other people, in other words, because of that
language is the most important thing education. CLIL has given us a lot of important chance for
interdisciplinary relationship across the arts and science. However, sometimes we as a teacher,
researcher, and student find some difficulties of teaching and learning languages. Therefore, discussing
CLIL can make every person learn and solve the problem that seeped among people in this world, so
that language will be general public issue.
Reference

Klippel, F. (2003). New Prospects or imminent danger?: The Impact of English medium instruction on
education in Germany. Prospect, 18(1), 68 – 81. Retrieved September 28, 2010, from publisher
site database.

Rymarczyk, J 2003. Kunst auf Englisch? Ein Plaedoyer fuer die Erweiterung des bilingualen
Sachfachkanons. (MAFF 6) Muenchen: Langenscheidt-Longman

Vollmer, H J 1992. ‘Immersion und alternative Ansaetze des Fremdsprachenerwerbs in Nordamerika:

Probleme des Transfers in die Bundesrepublik Deutschland’. Zeitschrift fuer
Fremdsprachenforschung, 3:5 – 38