Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-15T14:59:40.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Trends and Issues in Content-Based instruction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2010

Marguerite Ann Snow
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the last two decades, content-based instruction (CBI) has grown by leaps and bounds; it appears across educational levels and under various guises. In foreign language education, immersion education and “content-enriched” Foreign Language in the Elementary School (FLES) are popular examples. Sheltered classes and thematic curricula are two variations commonly found in ESL settings. The degree of language and content integration which underlies these various program types is perhaps best captured by means of a continuum.

Type
Integrated Perspectives on Learning and Assessment
Information
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , Volume 18 , March 1998 , pp. 243 - 267
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Adamson, H. D. 1993. Academic competence: Theory and classroom practice — Preparing ESL students for content courses. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Aebersold, J. and Field, M.. 1997. From reader to reading teacher: Issues and strategies for second language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arnold, A. 1997. Students as teachers in a community-based EAP course. Paper presented at the annual TESOL Conference. Orlando, FL, March 1997.Google Scholar
Bachman, L. F. and Palmer, A. S.. 1996. Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baker, S. 1993. The Monterey model: Integrating international policy studies with language education. In Krueger, M. and Ryan, F.. (eds.) Language and content: Discipline- and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. 120–129.Google Scholar
Beeman, W. O., Hayami, Y. and Rabson, S.. 1993. An experimental course in Japanese culture and language. In Krueger, M. and Ryan, F.. (eds.) Language and content: Discipline- and content-based approaches to language study. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. 158–165.Google Scholar
Benesch, S. 1996. Needs analysis and curriculum development in EAP: An example of a critical approach. TESOL Quarterly. 30.723–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernier, A. 1997. The challenge of language and history terminology from the student optic. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 95–103.Google Scholar
Bernier, A. and Snow, M. A.. 1997. Expanding academic vocabulary. In Brinton, D. M and Master, P.. (eds.) New ways in content-based instruction. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. 5–6.Google Scholar
Blakely, R. 1997. The English language Fellows Program: Using peer tutors to integrate language and content. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 274–289.Google Scholar
Braine, G. 1995. Writing in the natural sciences and engineering. In Belcher, D. and Braine, G.. (eds.) Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 113–134.Google Scholar
Bridgeman, B. and Carlson, S.. 1983. Survey of academic writing tasks required of graduate and undergraduate foreign students. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. [TOEFL Research Report No. 15.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A and Wesche, M. B.. 1989. Content-based second language instruction. New York: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Brown, J. D. 1995. The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Burger, S., Wesche, M. and Migneron, M.. 1997. Late, late immersion: Discipline-based second language teaching at the University of Ottawa. In Johnson, R. K and Swain, M.. (eds.) Immersion education: International perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 65–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burkart, G. S. and Sheppard, K.. 1994. Content-ESL across the USA: A training packet. Volume 3. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Coelho, E. 1982. Language across the curriculum. TESL Talk. 13.3.56–70.Google Scholar
Commission on Teacher Credentialing. 1992. Standards of program quality and effectiveness for professional teacher preparation programs for multiple and single subject teaching credentials with a (bilingual) crosscultural, language and academic development (CLAD/BCLAD) emphasis. Sacramento, CA: California State Department of Education.Google Scholar
Crandall, J. and Tucker, G. R.. 1990. Content-based instruction in second and foreign language. In Padilla, A., Fairchild, H. H and Valadez, C. M. (eds.) Foreign language education: Issues and strategies. Newbury Park: Sage. 187–200.Google Scholar
Echevarria, J. 1996. Quality sheltered instruction for limited-English-proficient students. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New York, NY, April 1996.Google Scholar
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M. and Short, D.. In press. A collaborative approach: The sheltered instruction observation protocol. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Freeman, D. and Freeman, Y.. 1997. Whole language teaching and content-based instruction: Are they compatible? In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 351–354.Google Scholar
Gibbons, P. 1993. Learning to learn in a second language. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Goldstein, L., Campbell, C. and Cummings, M. C.. 1994. Smiling through the turbulence: The flight attendant syndrome and other issues of writing instructor status in the adjunct model. In A. M Katz and T. Lucas. (eds.) The CATESOL Journal. 7.1.19–29.Google Scholar
Grabe, W. and Stoller, F.. 1997. Content-based instruction: Research foundations. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 158–174.Google Scholar
Graves, K. (ed.) 1996. Teachers as course developers. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafernik, J. J., Messerschmidt, D. and Vandrick, S.. 1996. What are IEP's really doing about content? Journal of Intensive English Studies. 10.31–47.Google Scholar
Hajer, M. 1996. heren in een tweede taal. Interactie in vakonderwijs aan een meertalige mavo-klas. [Learning through a second language: Interaction in content area instruction in a multilingual class.] Groningen: Wolters Noordhoff. [K. U Brabbant. Ph.D. diss.]Google Scholar
Hajer, M. 1997. Pupil participation and content area learning in multilingual classes. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Applied Linguistics. Orlando, FL, March 1997.Google Scholar
Harklau, L. 1994. ESL versus mainstream classes: Contrasting L2 learning environments. TESOL Quarterly. 28.241–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hess, N. and Morton, E.. 1996. An academic bridge course in the IEP. Journal of Intensive English Studies. 10.49–63.Google Scholar
Hess, N. and Ghawi, M.. 1997. English for academic purposes: Teacher development in a demanding area. English for Specific Purposes. 16.15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holten, C. 1997. Literature: A quintessential content. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 377–387.Google Scholar
Horowitz, D. 1986. What professors actually require: Academic tasks for ESL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly. 20.445–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iancu, M. 1997. Adapting the adjunct model: A case study. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 149–157.Google Scholar
Illinois State Board of Education. 1998. Assessment initiatives for bilingual/ESL students. Springfield, IL: Division of Standards and Assessment.Google Scholar
Kamhi-Stein, L. D. 1997. Enhancing student performance through discipline-based summarization-strategy instruction. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 248–262.Google Scholar
Kamhi-Stein, L. D., Koch, N. and Snow, M. A.. 1997. Making the most of office hours. In Brinton, D. M and Master, P.. (eds.) New ways in content-based instruction. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. 240–242.Google Scholar
Kamhi-Stein, L. D. and Snow, M. A.. 1997. Interpreting tables and figures. In Brinton, D. M and Master, P.. (eds.) New ways in content-based instruction. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. 134–137.Google Scholar
Kamhi-Stein, L. D., et al. 1997. A scaffolding approach to library research. In Brinton, D. M and Master, P.. (eds.) New ways in content-based instruction. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. 195–198.Google Scholar
Kasper, L. F. 1994. Improved reading performance for ESL students through academic course pairing. Journal of Reading. 37.376–384.Google Scholar
Kasper, L. F. 1995. Discipline-oriented ESL reading instruction. Teaching English in the Two-Year College. 22.45–53.Google Scholar
Kasper, L. F. 1995/1996. Using discipline-based texts to boost college reading instruction. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy. 39.298–306.Google Scholar
Kasper, L. F. 1997. The impact of content-based instructional programs on the academic progress of ESL students. English for Specific Purposes. 16.309–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffman, D., et al. 1994. Content-ESL across the USA: A practical guide. Volume 2. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Kaufman, D. 1997. Collaborative approaches in preparing teachers for content-based and language-enhanced settings. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 175–186.Google Scholar
Kaufman, D. and Brooks, J. Grennon, 1996. Interdisciplinary collaboration in teacher education: A constructivist approach. TESOL Quarterly. 30.231–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinsella, K. 1997a. Moving from comprehensible input to “learning to learn” in content-based instruction. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D.M. (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 46–68.Google Scholar
Kinsella, K. 1997b. Promoting content literacy across the university disciplines. Exchanges. 8.1.3–5. [California State University, Institute for Teaching and Learning.]Google Scholar
Koch, N., et al. 1997. The multistep writing assignment. In Brinton, D. M and Master, P. (eds.) New ways in content-based instruction. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. 243–257.Google Scholar
Kornblum, H. with Garschick, E.. 1992. Directory of professional preparation programs in TESOL in the United States. Alexandria, VA: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.Google Scholar
Krahnke, K. 1987. Approaches to syllabus design for foreign language teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Krilowicz, B. and Kamhi-Stein, L. D. 1997. A quarter-long exercise that introduces general education students to neurophysiology and scientific writing. Advances in Physiology Education. 17.1.19–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, B. 1979. A survey of writing needs of foreign and American college freshmen. ELT Journal. 33.159–174.Google Scholar
Kuehn, P. 1997. Defining academic language needs in grades K-6. Paper presented at the annual CATESOL Conference. Fresno, CA, April 1997.Google Scholar
Leki, I. and Carson, J.. 1997. “Completely different worlds”: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly. 31.39–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, E. and Met, M.. 1988. What it means to be an immersion teacher. Rockville, MD: Office of Instruction and Program Development, Montgomery County Public Schools.Google Scholar
McCurry, J. 1991. Comparing the sciences and social sciences: An assessment of the English language needs of second language undergraduates. Los Angeles: California State University. M.A. thesis.Google Scholar
Met, M. In press. Curriculum decision-making in content-based teaching. In F. Genesee and J. Cenoz. (eds.) Beyond bilingualism: Multilingualism and multilingual education. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Mohan, B. 1986. Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Moss, R. 1992. What are the benefits of cooperative learning in content-based instruction? In M. A Snow and D. M Brinton (eds.) The CATESOL Journal. 5.1.113–118.Google Scholar
Murphey, T. 1997. Content-based instruction in an EFL setting: Issues and strategies. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 117–131.Google Scholar
Peterson, P. W. 1997. Knowledge, skills, and attitudes in preparing teachers for content-based and language-enhanced settings. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D.M. (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 158–174.Google Scholar
Rambo, E. 1997. Using the case method for ESL instruction. Paper presented at the annual TESOL Conference. Orlando, FL, March 1997.Google Scholar
Richard-Amato, A, P.. 1996. Making it happen: Interaction in the second language classroom. 2nd ed. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Sheppard, K. 1994. Content-ESL across the USA: A technical report. Volume 1. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Sheppard, K. 1997. Integrating content-ESL: A report from the front. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 22–34.Google Scholar
Short, D. 1994. Expanding middle school horizons: Integrating language, culture, and social studies. TESOL Quarterly. 28.581–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, K. 1997. Reading and ‘riting and...social studies: Research on integrated language and content in secondary classrooms. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 213–232.Google Scholar
Sheppard, K., et al. 1994. Protest and the American revolution. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics, and National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.Google Scholar
Sheppard, K., et al. 1996. Conflicts in world cultures. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics, and National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.Google Scholar
Shulman, J. H. and Mesa-Bains, A. (eds.) 1993. Diversity in the classroom: A casebookfor teachers and teacher educators. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sigmon, R. L. 1996. Journey to service-learning: Experiences from independent liberal arts colleges and universities. Washington, DC: Council of Independent Colleges.Google Scholar
Snow, M. A. 1991. Content-based instruction: A method widi many faces. In Alatis, J.. (ed.) Linguistics and language pedagogy: The state of the art. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. 461–470. [Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1991.]Google Scholar
Snow, M. A. 1995. Teaching for academic literacy: Pre- and post-training conversations with content faculty. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Applied Linguistics. Long Beach, CA, March 1995.Google Scholar
Snow, M. A. 1997. Teaching academic literacy skills: Discipline faculty take responsibility. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 290–304.Google Scholar
Snow, M. A., Cortes, V., and Pron, A.. 1998. Content-based instruction in Argentina: EFL and educational reform. FORUM. 36.1.10–13.Google Scholar
Solomon, J. and Rhodes, N.. 1996. Assessing academic language. TESOL Journal. 5.4.5–8.Google Scholar
Stoller, F. and Grabe, W.. 1997. A six-Ts approach to content-based instruction. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 78–94.Google Scholar
Teemant, A. 1996. Science teachers on language learning: Insights from cross-disciplinary work. Paper presented at the annual TESOL Conference. Chicago, IL, March 1996. Xerox.Google Scholar
Tobin, K. 1996. Limited English proficiency and the teaching and learning of science. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Applied Linguistics. Chicago, IL, March 1996.Google Scholar
Trites, L. 1997. Language modifications and accommodations: Variations in comprehensible input received by second language students. Flagstaff, AZ: Northern Arizona University. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
Turner, J. 1997. Creating content-based tests: Guidelines for teachers. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 187–200.Google Scholar
Weigle, S. and Jensen, L.. 1997. Issues in assessment for content-based instruction. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 201–212.Google Scholar
Wesche, M. B. and Ready, D.. 1985. Foreigner talk in the university classroom. In Gass, S. and Madden, C.. (eds.) Input in second language acquisition. New York: Newbury House. 89–114.Google Scholar
Zuengler, J. and Brinton, D. M.. 1997. Linguistic form, pragmatic function: Relevant research from content-based instruction. In Snow, M. A and Brinton, D. M (eds.) The content-based classroom: Perspectives on integrating language and content. New York: Longman. 263–273.Google Scholar