Language Skills and Curricular Learning: Research Contributions
Code: 43222 ECTS Credits: 6| Degree | Type | Year |
|---|---|---|
| Research in Education | OP | 1 |
Contact
- Name:
- Xavier Fontich Vicens
- Email:
- xavier.fontich@uab.cat
Teachers
- Roser Canals Cabau
Teaching groups languages
You can view this information at the end of this document.
Prerequisites
Bachelor's degree.
Objectives and Contextualisation
a) Become familiar with differnt research lines, epistemological traditions and examples of language (fisr, second or foreign) across the curriculum approaches.
b) Carry out a studyof limited scope on oral or written language across the curriculum.
c) Obtain and provide feedback on research decissions made by course takers.
Learning Outcomes
- CA71 (Competence) Plan research in accordance with practice-related problems, considering the theoretical advances in the field of knowledge.
- CA72 (Competence) Associate the theoretical and empirical aspects of a study in order to establish the conclusions and recommendations.
- CA73 (Competence) Act with social and ethical responsibility when assessing research results.
- KA72 (Knowledge) Analyse methodological approaches and designs in research on linguistic composition.
- KA73 (Knowledge) Identify lines of curricular research.
- KA74 (Knowledge) Identify problems and offer solutions for the needs arising from the teaching and learning of language.
- SA25 (Skill) Design and carry out field work in school contexts using suitable data collection instruments.
- SA58 (Skill) Conduct a comprehensive review of the scientific literature focused on language learning in the curriculum.
- SA59 (Skill) Select the design and methodology that is most consistent with the research goals.
Content
- Language competence and subject-matter learning. Developing academic discourse-skills in first, second and foreign languages across the curriculum.
- Language skills and scientific competence in Social Sciences and Experimental Sciences.
- Talking to learn content and language in the classroom: Teacher-learner and learner-learner interaction.
- In-building support in content lessons taught through an additional language.
Activities and Methodology
| Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type: Directed | |||
| Master classes | 20 | 0.8 | |
| Tutorials | 16 | 0.64 | |
| Type: Supervised | |||
| Analysis and collective discussion of articles and documentary sources. | 18 | 0.72 | |
| Classroom practices: problem solving / case analysis / research / innovations | 14 | 0.56 | |
| Oral presentation | 4 | 0.16 | |
| Type: Autonomous | |||
| Analysis of research and innovation projects | 32 | 1.28 | |
| Reading of articles and documentary collections | 46 | 1.84 |
Annotation: Within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.
Assessment
Continous Assessment Activities
| Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Activities during the development of the subject | 30% | 0 | 0 | CA71, CA72, CA73, SA25, SA58, SA59 |
| Attendance and participation | 20% | 0 | 0 | CA72, KA72, KA74, SA58, SA59 |
| Report / individual work | 50% | 0 | 0 | CA71, CA73, KA73, SA25, SA59 |
The assessment of the module will be based on the activities specified. If a student opts for the single assessment modality, the evaluation will take place on the same day as the final monitoring session and oral presentation of the module. In addition to completing the monitoring and oral presentation of their work, the student must submit, via Moodle, a portfolio containing all the evidence established as assessment activities. The deadline to submit the assignments for each of the four blocks is one week after the end of the block. The deadline to submit the final project is one week after the fourth block ends.
The final grade will be the weighted average of the scheduled activities. In order for this criterion to apply, the student must obtain at least 40% in each of the proposed assessment activities. Students are only eligible for reassessment if they have submitted at least 66% of the assessment tasks. Only the individual paper/project is eligible for reassessment. The reassessment will consist of a new submission of the paper and an oral exam, which will be scheduled during the second week of January 2026. Students who do not submit any assessment activities or whose submissions amount to less than 20% will be marked as NOT assessable. This module allows for a Synthesis Test for students enrolling for the second time.
Class attendance is mandatory. To receive a positive final assessment, the student must have attended at least 80% of the classes. The review of assessments will be carried out individually. A maximum period of 20 working days from the academic calendar is set for returning, giving feedback on, or grading assessment activities.
Academic integrity - Copying or plagiarism occurs when a text or part of a text from another person is presented as one’s own without proper citation. Plagiarism or copying in any form ofassessment is a serious offense. In this module, committing such an offense will be penalized with a 0/fail as the final grade for the subject. If the instructor identifies such misconduct, the student will automatically lose the right to reassess the activity. The incident will also be reported to the master’s program coordinator.
Furthermore, any attempt to copy during in-class activities will also be penalized. If a student is caught trying to cheat or using an unauthorized device during an assessment, they will receive a 0/fail, which will also lead to the loss of the right to reassessment of that activity.
Use of technology and IA - In this module, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools is allowed only for stylistic correction of texts and never for generating content. Any student who uses such technologies must include a report on AI usage as an annex to the learning activity, which must include the following three parts:
a) the original version of the text,
b) which AI tool(s) were used and the exact prompts or instructions given for correction or stylistic improvement (screenshots may be attached),
c) a critical reflection on how the AI was used and how the original text improved as a result.
Failing to declare the use of technology or AI will be considered an act of academic dishonesty and penalized accordingly with a grade of 3 out of 10.
Bibliography
Angermuller, J, Maingueneau, D., & Wodak, R. (Ed.) (2014). The Discourse studies reader. Main currents in theory and analysis. John Benjamins.
Bazerman, C., Little, J., Bethel, L., Chavkin, T, Fouquette, D., & Garufis, J. (2005). Reference guide to writing across the curriculum. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press and WAC Clearinghouse.
Benejam, P. (2014). Com ensenyar? Una resposta basada en les capacitats psicolingüístiques. En Benejam, P. (Ed.) Quina educación volem? (pp. 89-103). Associació de mestres Rosa Sensat.
Boghrati, R., Berger, J., & Packard, G. (2022). Style, content, and the success of ideas. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.03174
Boillos, M. M., & Idoiaga, N. (2025). Student perspectives on the use of AI-based language tools in academic writing. Journal of Writing Research, 17(1), 155-170. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2025.17.01.06
Camps, A. & Fontich, X. (ed.) (2020). Research and teaching at the intersection Navigating the territory of grammar and writing in the context of metalinguistic activity. Peter Lang, https://doi.org/10.3726/b17237
Canals, R. (2007). La argumentación en el aprendizaje del conocimiento social. Enseñanza de las Ciencias Sociales, 6, 49-60.
Canals, R. (2015). El pensamiento crítico en el aula. Aula de secundaria, 12, 24-29.
Canals, R. (2015). El desarrollo del pensamiento social en la formación inicial del profesorado para dar respuesta a problemas invisibles desde el currículo. Paper presented at the XXVI Simposio Internacional de Didàctica de las Ciencias Sociales.Universidad de Extremadura.
Canet Pladevall, R. & Evnitskaya, N. (2011). Rethink, rewrite, remake or learning to teach science through English. In C. Escobar Urmeneta, N. Evnitskaya, E. Moore, & A. Patiño (Eds.), AICLE -- CLIL -- EMILE. Educació plurilingüe: Experiencias, research & polítiques (pp. 167-177). Servei de Publicacions de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
Casas, M., Bosch, D., & González-Monfort, N. (2005). Las competencias comunicativas en la formación democrática de los jóvenes: describir, explicar, justificar, interpretar y argumentar. Enseñanza de las Ciencias Sociales, 4, 39-52.
Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL Activities: A Resource for Subject and Language Teachers with CD-ROM. MacMillan.
Davies P. (2004). Contributing to citizenship education by improving the quality of students' arguments. Teaching Business and Economics, 8(1), 26-30.
Dolz, J., & Pasquier, A. (1996). Argumentar para convencer. Departamento de Educación y cultura Gobierno de Navarra.
Echevarría, J., Vogt, M.E., & Short, D.J. (2008). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP® model, 4th Edition. Pearson Education.
Escobar Urmeneta, C. (2013). Learning to become a CLIL teacher: Teaching, reflection and professional development. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,16(3), pp: 334-353.
Fajardo Dack, T., Argudo, J. & Abad, M. (2020). Language and Teaching Methodology Features of CLIL in University Classrooms: A Research Synthesis. Colomb. Appl. Linguistic. J., 22(1), pp. 40-54. https://revistas.udistrital.edu.co/index.php/calj/article/view/13878/16253
Fontich, X. (2021). Consideraciones sobre la enseñanza y el aprendizaje de la gramática de la primera lengua en la escuela. RILCE: Revista de Filología Hispánica, 37(2), 567-589, https://doi.org/10.15581/008.37.2.567-89
Fortanet, I. (Ed.) (2013). CLIL in higher education: towards a multilingual language policy. Multilingual Matters.
Gajo, L. (2007). Linguistic knowledge and subject knowledge: How Does Bilingualism Contribute to Subject Development? The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 563-581.
Hall, J.K., Hellermann, J., & Pekarek Doehler, S. (Eds.) (2011). L2 Interactional Competence and Development. Multilingual Matters.
Harmanto, B., Anwar, K., Arifani, Y., Basri, H., & Nuriddin, M. (2023). The relationship between attitudes, motivations and gender in learners of English for academic purposes. International Journal of Instruction, 16(3), 971-990.https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16352a
Hess, D. (2008). Controversial issues and democratic discourse. In L.S. Levstik, & C.A. Tyson (Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 124-136 ). Routledge.
Hu, D., Chen, J., Li, Y., & Wang, M. (2025). Technology-enhanced content and language integrated learning: A systematic review of empirical studies. Educational Research Review, 47, Article 100677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2025.100677
Hu, H., Mohd Said, N. E., & Hashim, H. (2023). Sustaining Content and Language Integrated Learning in China: A Systematic Review. Sustainability, 15(5), 3894. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15053894
Jorba, J., Gómez, I., & Prat, A. (Eds.) (1998). Parlar i escriure per aprendre. ICE de la Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
Kaiypova, F., Lee, H., Yi Lo, Y., Ho Lee, J. (2025). Effects of Content and Language Integrated Learning on secondary-level students’ content learning: A meta-analysis. System, 129, 103580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103580
Kanitaki, E. (2025). Unveiling mirror-writing: Exploring the phenomenon in typically developing children within the Greek school context. Journal of Writing Research, 17(1), 61-86. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2025.17.01.03
Lasagabaster, D., & Doiz, A. (Eds.) (2016). CLIL experiences in secondary and tertiary education: In search of good practices. Peter Lang.
Lattimer, H. (2010). Reading for learning: Using discipline-based texts to build content knowledge. NCTE
Lemke, J. (1997). Aprender a hablar ciencia. Temas de educación. Paidós.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned (4th edition). Oxford University Press.
Lightbown, Patsy M. (2014). Focus on content based language teaching. Oxford University Press.
Lin, C. W., & Zhu, W. (2025). Divergent LLM adoption and heterogeneous convergence paths in research writing. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.13629
Lin, Z. (2023). Techniques for supercharging academic writing with generative AI. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2310.17143
Ling Huang, Jinlei Deng (2025). “This dissertation intricately explores…”: ChatGPT's shell noun use in rephrasing dissertation abstracts, System, 129, 103578 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103578
Llinares, A. and Morton, T. (2016, forthcoming). Applied Linguistics Perspectives on CLIL. John Benjamins.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The role of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.
Macaro, E (2013). Language Learning: research, policy and practice. Routledge.
Macaya, A., & Santisteban, A. (2001). Orígenes y cualidades de la argumentación: Una investigación desde la formación inicial. In F.J. Perales (Ed.), Las Didácticas de las Áreas Curriculares en el siglo XXI (pp. 1727-1741). Grupo Editorial Universitario.
Márquez, C., Izquierdo, M., & Espinet, M. (2006) Multimodal science teachers' discourse in modelling the water cycle. Science Education, 90(2), 202-226.
Mattozzi, I. (2004). Enseñar a escribir sobre la historia. Enseñanza de las Ciencias Sociales, 3,41-46.
Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. Versión en español: La construcción guiada del conocimiento. Paidós, (1997).
Mercer, N., & K. Littleton (2007). Dialogue and the development of children's thinking. Routledge.
Mohan, B.A. (1986). Language and content. Addison Wesley.
Moore, E., Nussbaum, L., & Borràs, E. (2012) Plurilingual teaching and learning practices in 'internationalised' university lectures. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16, 471-493.
Mortimer, E.F., & Scott, P.H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open University Press.
Moschkovich, J. (Ed.) (2010). Language and mathematics education: Multiple perspectives and directions for research. Information Age Publishing.
Muñoz, C. (2012) Intensive exposure experiences in second language learning Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Oliver, R., & Philp, J. (2014). Focus on Oral Interaction. Oxford University Press.
Oliveras, B.; Márquez, C.; Sanmartí, N. (2013). The use of newspaper articles as a tool to develop critical thinking in sceince classes. International Journal of Science Education, 35 (6), 885-905.
Ortega-Sánchez, D. (2023). CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) Methodological Approach in the Bilingual Classroom: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Instruction, 16(3), 915–934. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16349a
Pallotti, G. & Wagner, J. (Eds.). (2011). L2 Learning as Social Practice: Conversation-Analytic perspectives. National Foreign Language Resource Center. University of Havai'i at Manoa.
Palmquist, M. (2025). Writing to learn and think critically in STEM: Engaging students in disciplinary knowledge and practices. In Sites of Writing: Essays in Honor of Anne Ruggles Gere. The WAC Clearinghouse/University Press of Colorado. https://wac.colostate.edu/docs/books/gere/chapter8.pdf
Plá, S. (2005). Aprender a pensar históricamente. La escritura de la historia en el bachillerato. Plaza y Valdés.
Planas, N. (2012). Heteroglossia and "orchestration" in multilingual mathematics classrooms. A H. Forgasz & F. Rivera (Eds.), /Advances in mathematics education. Toward equity: gender, culture, and diversity /(pp. 333-343). Springer.
Planas, N., & Civil, M. (2013). Language-as-resource and language-as-political: Tensions in the bilingual mathematics classroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 25(1), 3-26.
Roca, M.; Márquez, C.; Sanmartí, N. (2013). Las preguntas de los alumnos:Una propuesta de análisis. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 31, 1, 95-114
Scott, P., & Ametller, J. (2007). Teaching science in a meaningful way: striking a balance between opening up and closing down classroom talk. School Science Review, 88(324), 77-83.
Seedhouse, P., Walsh, S., & Jenks, C. (Eds.) (2010). Conceptualising 'Learning' in Applied Linguistics. Palgrave Macmillan.
Snow, M., Met, M., & Genesee, F. (1992). A Conceptual framework for the integration of language and content instruction. In P.A. Richard-Amato, & M.A. Snow (Eds.), The Multicultural Classroom: Readings for content-area teachers (pp. 27-38). Addison-Wesley.
Szende, T. (2016). The Foreign Language Appropriation Conundrum: Micro Realities & Macro Dynamics. Peter Lang.
V.V.A.A. (2001). La construcción del conocimiento social y el lenguaje: el discurso social en el aula. Revista Iber, 28, 57-68.
Vogt, M.E., & Echevarría, J. (2011). Response to intervention (RTI) and English learners: Making it happen. Pearson Education.
Walsh, S. (2006). Investigating Classroom Discourse. London, UK: Routledge.
Wilkinson, R., & Walsh, M. L. (2015). Integrating content and language inhigher education: From theory to practice. Peter Lang
Woore, R, Macaro, E, Graham, S (2015). Improving foreign language teaching: Towards a research-based curriculum and pedagogy. Routledge.
Zhou, Y. (2024). A scoping review of content-and-language integrated learning. Frontiers in Science and Engineering, 4(7), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.54691/k5b50003
Software
The software to be used will basically be word processors and presentation programs as well as document repositories.
Groups and Languages
Please note that this information is provisional until 30 November 2025. You can check it through this link. To consult the language you will need to enter the CODE of the subject.