1

Bloom's Taxonomy in CLIL Concept:A Possible Theoretical Approach

Zdenek Vasicek

(CzechRepublic)

Motto: “Translation is the language of Europe.”(Umberto Eco)

Abstract

My teaching programme “Piano playing as CLIL” has been implemented atthePrimaryArtsSchoolinTisnov in the period 2000-2010.The best pupils have communicated using hundreds offoreign-language (English or German)lexical units especially including music terminology.An important task for the future can be seen in using Bloom’s taxonomy (BT) ofeducational objectives.A possible theoretical approach can be expressed as follows:to use the BT not – as usual– in only pairs of two words (= verb + noun), i. e. in a limited way, butin (relatively) complete tabular organized families (of parts of speech). Several chosen word families of individual taxonomic levels (from verbs: 1. “to describe”, 2. “to explain”, 3.“to apply”, 4. “to compare”, 5. “to critique” and 6. “to invent”) should gradually be introduced. Further word families and synonyms should follow.The question for the ongoing action research is: “Is there a mental barrier for the pupil using (relatively) complete foreign-language word families of BT in CLIL?”This questionis to be verified on agroup of research subjects – a samplegroup of motivated female pupils aged around 15 years and having previouslearning experience in English as well asCLIL with English.

Keywords

English, German, CLIL, Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives, theoretical approach, Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, educational research

1.ParticularCLIL Implementation

CLIL implementation should be undertaken at a real school (and not only theoretical) level (Maalouf, 2008, p. 25). English as a lingua franca is the language of globalization (compare in: Marsh, 2006, p. 1/29). The CLIL concept enables to gradually introduce English as animportant part ofallthe standard educational subjects at Czech primary schools (compare in: Content..., 2009).

My teaching programme “Piano playing as CLIL” has been implemented atthePrimary Arts SchoolinTisnov (Czech Republic, South Moravian Region) in the period 2000-2010 (compare in: Vasicek, 2003, 2007, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2010).This programme involving communication in a foreign language (English or German)has been intended especially forvery motivated pupils.It was appropriate to focus on a particular language component (CEFR, 2001, p. 10), in our case onthe lexical one.

I have compiled my own trilingual (Czech-English-German) thematic learning dictionaries (compare in: Vasicek, 2008a).Why with German? Because German is a neighbouring language for the Czechs and a language of international relevance (Krumm, 2005, p.38). “German after English” is a certain multilingual solution for a total language teaching curriculum (Hufeisen, 2004, p. 9) or at least for its introductory variant. Anexpected extension for the farther future – and for future pupils with quite surely very different foreign-language assumptions and needs – could involve further foreign languages in an assigned way. (For example French as one of main languages of EU, Italian as the main international language for musicians, Spanish, Russian, Hebrew, etc., etc.)

The best pupils in CLIL have communicated usinghundreds offoreign-language (English orGerman) lexical units especially including music terminology. My own action research detected that theintegration of the subject of piano playing with communication inaforeign language (English or German) was more suitable for the pupils than not (compare in: Vasicek, 2007, 2008b, 2008c).An important task for the future can be seen in using Bloom’s taxonomy (BT) of educational objectives in CLIL.

2.Foreign-Language Word Family

As a Possible Theoretical Approach toBT in CLIL Concept

New ways of using of BThave been recommended (Byckovsky, Kotasek, 2004, p. 18).Ithink that only two words (a pair of verb + noun)usually used for one educational objective (compare in: Byckovsky,Kotasek, 2004, p. 16) only represent a minor part of thefactual (anda foreign-language)reality.Theseonly two words represent the reality in a limited way.And this is (or could be) a foreign-language problem of the BTin CLIL.

“We cannot ... say what we cannot think” (Wittgenstein, 1922, p. 86, underlined by Z.V.), weneed thinking/saying everything clearly (compare in: ibid., p.40, underlined by Z.V.).Werequire – already in the mother language – knowledge complexity (compare in: Prucha, 2009, p.174, underlined by Z.V.), we request a cognitive approach (compare in: Marsh, 2006, 7/35, underlined by Z.V.).The problem in each single case is solvable with a (relatively) complete and tabular organised foreign-language word family (of parts ofspeech). Inotherwords:Each word family has to contain all the necessary word conversions (compare in Plag, 2003, p. 9 etc.). Let us think and/or say all we need in complexes! And then we can assume with optimism: “Language understanding is a precondition for learning withcomprehension”(Janik, 2005, p. 28).

There are inspiringdesigns of foreign-languageword families in the world. See for examplethe “Academic Word List” (AWL, Coxhead, 2000) or “BNC spoken freq 01” (Nation, 2009). But they are not always complete enough yet (for the purpose of our tasks). It would be necessary for CLIL 1)To select proper (“pre-academic” or partly academic?) vocabulary and2)Toreplenish themissingparts ofspeech.It would also be possible – if appropriate – touse different neologisms, archaisms and paraphrases. The pupil isplayful (Prucha, 2009, p.350) and opened to otherness (CEFR, 2001, p. 161). He/she can also learn his/her own mother language on this occasion better (ibid., p. 136).

The CLIL teacher should analyse and minimise foreign-language barriers (Petrova, Novotna, 2007, p. 1281) by means of “scaffoldings” (Marsh, 2006, p.7/35): to use repetitions, rephrases (Petrova, Novotna, 2007, p. 1287), i. e. syntactic re-categorizations (compare in: Plag, 2003, pp. 73-74).Or – said inyetother words – to also just use different members offoreign-language wordfamilies (of parts of speech).

3.Method ofUsing of BTin CLIL Concept

I suggest the followingfive-step solution:

  • Step 1:Only use (learn)the basic foreign-language vocabulary of the specific subject. For example use (learn) the foreign-language vocabulary of the CLIL dictionaries forthe subject of piano playing (compare in: Vasicek, 2008a). This first step is only preliminary – without BT yet or with its fractions only.
  • Step 2:Only use (learn) 1 foreign-language word family selected from BT’s level 1 (compare in: Byckovsky, Kotasek, 2004; Tarlinton, 2003). Isuggest usingtheverb “todescribe” (selected from: Tarlinton, 2003).
  • Step 3:Only use (learn) 1 foreign-language word family selected from each of BT’s levels 1-6. Isuggest the following verbs: 1. “to describe”, 2. “to explain”, 3.“toapply”, 4.“to compare”, 5.“to criticise”, 6. “to invent” (selected from: Tarlinton, 2003).
  • Step 4:Use (learn) some other 3 or 4 foreign-language word families (but not yet synonyms) fromeachofBT’s levels 1-6.
  • Step 5:Use (learn) all the synonyms from each of BT’s levels 1-6.

The first word family should serve as a certain design, pattern (compare in Pinker, 2008, pp.39 and 308)or analogy (compare in: Plag, 2003, p. 48), i. e. in a “syncritic”way (Comenius, 1681, newly 1886, p.22).

An intended “word-family”, synonymic, trilingual (English-German-Czech) and in sum thereby “triangular”(even functionally triple = “triangularly triangular” = exponential) CLILdictionaryshould be prepared inadvance – forthe purpose ofcomplex teaching, learning and evaluation (Vasicek, 2003, p. 8; Vasicek,2008c, p. 10; compare alsorequirements in: Douglas, 2002, p. 5).

4.Research Designfor the Method of Using of BT in CLIL Concept

The research question should we worded as follows: “Is there a mental barrier for the pupilusing the above mentioned foreign-language word families of BT in CLIL?”It is a well known fact that theteaching methods should be adapted to the pupils´ mental lexicons (Plag, 2003, pp. 56-57) or learning styles (Multilingualism ..., 2008, p. 5). We do not know yet whether the pupil want to really be taught in this specific (“word-family”) way. We also do not know yet whether this specific way of teaching will be “economical” (i. e. time-saving, accelerating) enough for them.

The research sample should contain a small group of motivated female pupils aged around 15years and having previous learning experience in English as well as CLIL with English.The research paradigm would be qualitative.The research methods should involve observation, and a questionnaire. The research time should represent preliminarily 1 year, butnotnecessarily the school year 2010-2011. Atleast step 3 of the above mentioned method should be managed.

The contemporary Czech school curriculum represents a real challenge for educational research (Prucha, 2009, p.182), inclusive of primary arts schools(compare ibid., p. 637). Thecooperation between teachers andresearchers is recommendable (ibid., p. 295)tostrengthen the expert role of the teacher (Vasutova, 2007) and his/her know-how production (Teaching ..., 1995, p. 8).

This contribution couldalso beunderstood as a cooperation proposalforanexternalresearcher both inthe above mentioned CLIL (or BT-in-CLIL) research andtheCLIL “triangular”dictionary.

This contribution was presented in a variant version under the title“English and Bloom's Taxonomy inCLIL-Concept: A Possible Theoretical Approach” on August 31st, 2010, inposter session oftheinternational conference “EDUCATIONAL CHANGE IN THE GLOBAL CONTEXT” (CharlesUniversity in Prague/Prague, Faculty of Education, M. D. Rettigove 4).

Literature and sources

Literature

Byckovsky, P., Kotasek, J. (2004) Nastin revize Bloomovy taxonomie [An Outline ofBloom’s Taxonomy Revision]. In: Valisova, A. (ed.) Historie a perspektivy didaktickeho mysleni. 1st ed. Praha: Univerzita Karlova v Praze, Nakladatelstvi Karolinum. ISBN 80-246-0914-2. Pp. 203-221. Quoted from: Seminarky.cz. Pp. 1-18.

Comenius (Komensky), J.A. (1681, new Czech ed. 1886) Brana veci otevrena {Janua rerum reserata} [The Gate of Things Opened]. Praha: Frantisek Bayer v kommissi narodniho knehkupectvi E. Petrika.

Douglas, D. (2002) Assessing Languages for Specific Purposes. Reprinted. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0 521 58543 0.

Hufeisen, B. (2004) Foundations: A brief introduction to the linguistic foundations. In:Hufeisen, B., Neuner, G. (eds) The Plurilingualism Project: Tertiary Language Learning – German after English. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, pp. 7-11. ISBN 92-871-5145-8.

Janik, T. (2005) CLIL and the European Dimension in Education. In: Janik, T. (ed.) IntensiveProgramme TiFoLa: Teaching in Foreign Languages. Brno: Paido. ISBN 80-7315-109-X.

Krumm, H.-J. (2004) Language policies and plurilingualism. In: Hufeisen, B., Neuner, G. (eds) The Plurilingualism Project: Tertiary Language Learning – German after English. Strasbourg: Council of Europe, pp. 35-49. ISBN 92-871-5145-8.

Maalouf, A. et al. (2008) A Rewarding Challenge: How the Multiplicity of Languages CouldStrengthen Europe: Proposals from the Group of Intellectuals for Intercultural Dialogue set up at the initiative of the European Commission Brussels.

Marsh, D. (2006) English as medium of instruction in the new global linguistic order: Globalcharacteristics, local consequences. University of Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä (Finland).

Petrova, J., Novotna, J. (2007) The influence of learners´limited language proficiency oncommunication obstacles in bilingual teaching/learning of mathematics. CERME 5. Working group 8: Mathematics and language. Pp.1280-1289.

Pinker, S. (2008) Slova a pravidla [Words and rules]. 1st ed. Praha: Academia. ISBN 978-80-200-1641-6.

Plag, I. (2003) Word-Formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0 521 52563 2.

Prucha, J. (ed.) (2009) Pedagogicka encyklopedie [Educational Encyclopedia]. 1st ed. Praha: Portal. ISBN: 978-80-7367-546-2.

Tarlinton, D. (2003) Bloom's RevisedTaxonomy. (A presentation.)

Vasicek, Z. (2010) CLIL na ceskych ZUS a profesionalizace ucitelu: Prognoza [CLILatCzech Primary Arts Schools and Teacher Professionalization: A Forecast]. 11pp. + appendixes 1-4.

Vasicek, Z. (2008a) Hra na klavir s komunikaci v cizim jazyce (anglicky nebo nemecky) ciliCLIL: Zaklady [Piano Playing with Communication in a Foreign Language (Englishor German) or CLIL: Fundamentals]. I. dil. [1st Part.] (University handbook.) Brno: Janackova akademie muzickych umeni v Brne, 110 pp.

Vasicek, Z. (2008b) Ke konceptu hry na klavir jako CLIL na ZUS (2000-2007) [OntheConcept of Piano Playing as CLIL at Czech Primary Arts Schools (2000-2007)]. In: Pedagogika, roc. LVIII, c. 3, pp. 258-274.

Vasicek, Z. (2003) Predmet hra na klavir na ZUS integrovany skomunikaci vcizim jazyce (anglicky nebo nemecky): Autoevaluace zacatku druhe faze pokusneho vyucovani [TheSubject of “Piano Playing” at Primary Arts School Integrated with Communication in a Foreign Language (English or German): Autoevaluation of the Beginning oftheSecond Phase of Teaching Trial]. In: Nemec, J. (ed.) Socialni a kulturni souvislosti vychovy a vzdelavani: 11. konference CAPV: Sbornik anotaci prispevku [CD-ROM]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita.

Full text in:

Vasicek, Z. (2007) Predmet hra na klavir na ZUS integrovany s komunikaci v cizim jazyce (anglicky nebo nemecky) cili CLIL [The Subject of Piano Playing at Primary Arts School Integrated with Communication in a Foreign Language (English or German) or CLIL]. Doctoral dissertation. Ostrava: University of Ostrava. PC-version, 285 pp.

Vasicek, Z. (2008c) Piano Playing as CLIL at the Primary Arts School in Tisnov (CzechRepublic) 2000-2007. 15 pp.

Vasutova, J. (2007) Kvalifikace ucitelu pro permanentni zmenu [Teacher qualification forapermanent change]. In: Ucitelske listy, 23.1.2007. Quoted from: Manak, J., Janik, T. (eds): Problemy kurikula zakladni skoly: Sbornik [Problems of primary school curriculum: Proceedings]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2006, pp. 79-90.

Wittgenstein, L. (1922) Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus {Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung} [Logical-philosophical Treatise]. 1st ed. London: Kegan Paul. SIDE-BY-SIDE-BY-SIDE EDITION, version 0.22 (May 3, 2010), containing the original German, alongside both the Ogden/Ramsey, and Pears/McGuinness English translations.

Sources

Cambridge. Dictionaries onlice.

(CEFR) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (2001) Council of Europe – Language Policy Division: Strasbourg.

Content and Language Integrated Learning vCR [Content and Language Integrated Learningin the Czech Republic]. (2009)

Dictionary.com.

Multilingualism: an asset for Europe and a shared commitment. (2008)

Teaching and Learning: Towards the Learning Society. White Paper on Education andTraining. (1995)

The Academic Word List.

The Free Dictionary.

Webster´s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. (1993) Reprint. Cologne (Germany): Koenemann. ISBN 3-8290-5292-8.

Wiktionary: BNC spoken freq 01.

[The first of 14 1000-word-family lists from the count of the British National Corpus (BNC) compiled by Paul Nation.] Last modified on 8 December 2009.

Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Contact

MgA. et MgA., PhDr. Zdenek Vasicek, Ph. D. et Ph. D.

Workplace address:

PrimaryArtsSchool, Dvorackova 316, 666 01 Tisnov I, CZ

Phone: +420 549 410655 (director)

E-mail:

WWW:

Private address:

Vrchlickeho 449, 666 01 Tisnov I, CZ

Mobile phone: +420 739 908783

E-mail:

WWW: