CLIL Teacher Training for Reducing Rejection Towards Bilingual Education at University

Background Of The Study And Methodology Description

This study was structured into three different phases (Contero, 2017). The first of them focused on direct observation in the classroom and the analysis of CLIL sequences designed for university content courses (distinguishing them from FL courses). It is the second phase of our study that will be the focal point of the present paper. Our survey comprised two key open-ended questions addressed to a population of expert professors in content teaching who were immersed in a process of experimentation with CLIL methodology. This survey allowed us to collect and analyze judgments made by university teachers on their first contact with CLIL practices It is also crucial to mention that the third phase of our study will not be deeply presented in this chapter for length limitations. Particularly, this third phase of our work consisted of a survey formed by closed-ended questions addressed to content university teachers of different areas and intended to obtain the following information: 1) confirming CLIL-ProfiTs’ attitudes towards CLIL teaching at university; 2) identifying non-CLIL content professors’ beliefs towards CLIL university teaching; 3) comparing both positions; and 4) providing solutions to the obstacles encountered.

As noted above, the focus of this paper is to delve into phase two through which CLIL-ProfiTs had the opportunity to openly put forward their viewpoint regarding the teaching practices shown to them in the CLIL training schemes they had participated in.