Language as a by-product of learning about real-world content

 People learn a second language more successfully when they use the language as a means of acquiring information  The curriculum-organizing principle is subject matter, not language.  Students are tested on content, not language Students will not be tempted to review their grammar and memorize long lists of vocabulary words, but rather will listen closely to lectures, participate in discussions, do topic-related readings, and acquire a great deal of language in the process (Krashen 1991).  The focus is always on meaning, not form.  Content-based instruction better reflects learner’s needs for learning a second language

Teacher’s role in CBI  In CBI, native speakers of the L2 are generally excluded from the classroom, which ensures that instructors will speak at a language level comprehensible to the non-native speaker.  Instructors make speech adjustments, and also make use of facial expressions, gestures, and body language to help make input more comprehensible. They rely extensively on graphic organizers.  They sometimes provide students with readings in their native language for background knowledge. Such a sheltered environment is conducive to a lowering of the affectivefilter (Krashen 1985a, 1985b).

Theme-based Courses (TB)  TB courses do have explicit language aims which are usually more important than the content learning objectives.   It is a language teacher, and not a subject specialist, that is responsible for teaching content.  Students are taught subject matter, but they are tested on language and get course credit for that only.  In the continuum of CBI (Brinton, Snow and Wesche,1989), TB courses would constitute the weakest representation of CBI models.  Usually found in EFL contexts

Adjunct/Linked Courses (AL)  A specially designed language course + a regular academic course  The content instructor---academic concepts  The language teacher--- the students’ academic needs Language skills using the academic content (revising notes, writing assignments, preparing for tests)  Native speakers in the content class

Sheltered subject-matter instruction (SSM) Overall purpose is content learning rather than language learning (one of the “strong” paradigms within the general framework of CBI) Learners who have been segregated or ‘sheltered’ from native speakers” Commonly taught by a content instructor, not a language teacher The content instructor has to be sensitized to the students’ language needs and abilities, and has to be familiarized with the traits of the language acquisition process.

Second language medium courses (SLM)  The strongest version within the framework.  Without specific instructional emphasis on language analysis and practice, and without making adjustments to adequate the discourse to the level of proficiency of students.  Students---above intermediate level, at least, with respect to listening and reading comprehension  Not always strictly considered as a model in CBI

Q: What are the advantages and disadvantages?

Objection 1 The focus on meaning in CBI prevents the development of accuracy in the target language. Objection 2 Language in CBI is “functionally restricted.”  Predominance of academic language over nonacademic language.  In content-based programs, adolescents do not have an opportunity to develop peer-peer vernacular and thus resort to vernacular in the first language when engaging in peer-peer social interaction(Tarone and Swain, 1995)

Suggestions Sheltering language and content in CBl courses is a must.  Use of readings in the students’ native language to provide background knowledge (see, e.g., Klee and Tedick 1997; Leaver 1997; Sternfeld 1992, 1993, 1997).  Input in its full formal and functional range through free voluntary reading (Krashen, 1994).