Abstract
Student perspectives and experiences have been mainly overlooked in the current research literature regarding technological tool use, managed learning environment design and their application in bilingual educational settings in Australian high schools. The overall information found is pedagogy driven, focused on best practice and relating to efficient language acquisition. This qualitative study is attempting to fill this gap by contributing valuable insight into student perceptions negotiating a content and language integrated learning (CLIL) environment, the mastery of different speech genres, and learning in a new learning management system (LMS). Data were collected from 22 Year 9 students (aged 13 and 14 year) covering 18 biology lessons during 6 weeks, over two consecutive years. The students’ interactions were audio and video recorded to gain a deeper understanding on students’ opinions and experiences working in a CLIL LMS. Additionally a focus group interview was conducted to clarify student understanding on self-regulation and scientific open inquiry strategies, learning in a bilingual context, as well as using digital tools in a LMS. The discourse analysis based on theories of student voice, dialogism and heterology, CLIL communication, self-efficacy, self-theory, and self-regulation revealed firstly that Year 9 student self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulatory practices developed primarily through the exposure to a bilingual classroom setting. Secondly it is highly plausible that students benefit from the exposure to a bilingual setting, as it is affording students more possibilities to explore self-efficacy beliefs leading to the uptake of self-regulation strategies and therefore improved learning opportunities. Consequently, the results of this study might have interesting implications for the future customization of managed learning spaces for high school students not only applicable to a CLIL environment but also to a wider range of subject areas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2014). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring, developing, and assessing TPCK (Vol. 2015). New York: Springer.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2013). Information and communication technology (ICT) capabilities. Retrieved from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/GeneralCapabilities/information-and-communication-technology-capability
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres & other late essays (V. W. McGee, Trans.). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Bakhtin, M. M., Holquist, M., & Emerson, C. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Barzilai, S., & Zohar, A. (2006). How does information technology shape thinking? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(2), 130–145. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2006.08.001
Bell, B. T. (2016). Understanding adolescents. In L. Little, D. Fitton, B. T. Bell, & N. Toth (Eds.), Perspectives on HCI research with teenagers (pp. 10–24). Basel, Switzerland: Springer.
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30–33.
Bentley, K. (2010). The TKT course CLIL module. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Bielaczyc, K. (2006). Designing social infrastructure: Critical issues in creating learning environments with technology. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 301–329. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1503_1
Bonnet, A. (2012). In depth: Towards an evidence base for CLIL: How to integrate qualitative and quantitative as well as process, product and participant perspectives in CLIL research. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(4), 66–78.
Canagarajah, S. (2011). Codemeshing in academic writing: Identifying teachable strategies of translanguaging. The Modern Language Journal, 95(3), 401–417. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01207.x
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2000). On the structure of behavioral self-regulation. In M. Boerkaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 41–84). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Corte, A. A. (2012). Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(5), 621–624. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.666117
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Creese, A., & Blackledge, A. (2010). Translanguaging in the bilingual classroom: A pedagogy for learning and teaching? The Modern Language Journal, 94(1), 103–115. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00986.x
Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL activities. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Demetriou, A. (2000). Organisation and development of self-understanding and self-regulation: Toward a general theory. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 209–251). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Department of Education, Training and Employment. (2012). The learning place flyer.
Drake, S. M., Reid, J. L., & Kolohon, W. (2014). Interweaving curriculum and classroom assessment. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour & Information Technology, 21(1), 1–25.
Dweck, C. (2000). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. New York: Psychology Press.
Dweck, C. (2009). Who will the 21st-century learners be? Knowledge Quest, 38(2), 8.
Francis, B. (2012). Gender monoglossia, gender heteroglossia: The potential of Bakhtin’s work for re-conceptualising gender. Journal of Gender Studies, 21(1), 1–15. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2012.639174
Fuller, A. (2005–2006). Into the mystery of the adolescent mind. The Byron Child, 14–22.
Garcia, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Hampshire, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gee, J. P. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routledge.
Hall, J. K., Vitanova, G., & Marchenkova, L. (2005). Dialogue with Bakhtin on second and foreign language learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hao, Y. (2016). Middle school students’ flipped learning readiness in foreign language classrooms: Exploring its relationship with personal characteristics and individual circumstances. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 295–303. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.031
Kitsantas, A., Dabbagh, N., Huie, F. C., & Dass, S. (2013). Learning technologies and self-regulated learning: Implications for practice. In H. Bembenutty, T. J. Cleary, & A. Kitsantas (Eds.), Application of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines: A tribute to Barry J. Zimmerman (pp. 325–354). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Kudo, H., & Mori, K. (2015). A preliminary study of increasing self-efficacy in junior high school students: Induced success and a vicarious experience. Psychological Reports, 117(2), 631–642. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2466/11.07.PR0.117c22z4
Kuhl, J. (2000). Functional-design approach to motivation and self-regulation: The dynamics of personality systems interactions. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 111–169). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Lichtman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: A users guide. Riverside County, CA: Sage.
Lust, G., Vandewaetere, M., Elen, J., & Clarebout, G. (2014). Tool-use in a content management system: A matter of timing? Learning Environments Research, 17(3), 319–337. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-014-9161-2
Marenzi, I., & Zerr, S. (2012). Multiliteracies and active learning in CLIL: The development of LearnWeb2.0. Transactions on Learning Technologies, 5(4), 336–348. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1109/Tlt.2012.14
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mills, G. E. (2003). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Pellegrino, E., De Santo, M., & Vitale, G. (2013). Integrating learning technologies and autonomy: A CLIL course in linguistics. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 106, 1514–1522. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.171
Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers/Johnny Saldaña (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Schraw, G. J., & Robinson, D. H. (2008). Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Smith, C. (2015). Education perfect. Retrieved from http://worldseries.educationperfect.com
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 435–454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Todorov, T. (1984). Mikhail Bakhtin: The dialogical principle (W. Godzich, Trans. Vol. 13). Minneapolis, MN: The University of Minnesota Press.
Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
Xuelian, L. (2011). Designing online collaborative tasks for language learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(2), 191–193.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (Vol. 5). Los Angeles: Sage.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bembenutty, H., & Schunk, D. H. (2013). Applications of self-regulated learning across diverse disciplines: A tribute to Barry J. Zimmerman. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2011). Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank Dr. Simone Smala (The University of Queensland), Dr. Chris Campbell (Griffiths University, Brisbane), and Dr. Tony Wright (The University of Queensland) for their ongoing support.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Freihofner, U. (2018). Self-Efficacy Beliefs Influencing Year 9 Students’ Actions in a Bilingual Learning Management System. In: Hodges, C. (eds) Self-Efficacy in Instructional Technology Contexts. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99858-9_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99858-9_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99857-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99858-9
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)