Repositorio Institucional de Documentos

Trabajo Fin de Grado Inquiry methodology for teaching Science in L1 and CLIL Primary text books Autor Juan Pablo Martínez García Director Enrique Lafuente Millán Facultad de Educación Año 2014 2 INDEX 0. Abstract .................................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3 2. Theoretical framework ........................................................................................... 5 2.1 Inquiry methodology ....................................................................................... 5 2.2 CLIL methodology. Compatibility with inquiry methodology .................... 8 3. Materials for the analysis ..................................................................................... 12 4. Methods for the analysis ....................................................................................... 13 4.1 Method for the CLIL analysis ...................................................................... 13 4.2 Method for the inquiry analysis ................................................................... 14 5. Results of the analysis ........................................................................................... 16 5.1 Results of the CLIL analysis ......................................................................... 16 5.2 Results of the inquiry analysis ...................................................................... 19 5.2.1 Number of inquiry simple tasks ..................................................................... 19 5.2.2 Frequency of each kind of simple inquiry tasks ............................................. 20 5.2.3 Number of inquiry processes per task ............................................................ 21 5.2.4 Number of authentic inquiry tasks with essential processes .......................... 23 5.2.5 Cognitive, social and epistemic dimension .................................................... 24 5.2.5 Contrastive analysis of two units ................................................................... 26 6. Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 27 7. Discussions of the study ........................................................................................ 28 8. References .............................................................................................................. 31 9. Appendix ................................................................................................................ 32 3 0. Abstract This research focuses its attention on the inquiry methodology for teaching Science in Primary Education text books. This methodology has had a huge reception between scholars and it has been included in curricula such as the Currículo Aragonés. So, first of all, the inquiry methodology is explained, as well as the compatibility between the inquiry methodology and CLIL principles that is discussed to reach the conclusion that the inquiry methodology has a positive influence in promoting CLIL principles. This study sought to analyze L1 and L2 text books, designed for teaching Science, for evaluating the extent to which the inquiry methodology is carried out in Primary Education. The method used for the books’ analysis and evaluation was a quantitative method with some qualitative comments in order to identify the inquiry processes, classify the simple inquiry tasks and evaluate the extent to which the inquiry methodology is implemented in L1 and L2 books for teaching Science. It was showed that the second language or the mother tongue may affect, positively and negatively, Science education with regards to inquiry principles. These principles establish that inquiry tasks must promote cognitive processes, a cooperative environment, production of knowledge and learners’ autonomy. Also, there are other factors that have an influence in the depth to which the inquiry methodology is implemented in Science text books such as the publishing house, author, publication year and other principles and objectives. Key words: Primary Education, inquiry methodology, Science text books, CLIL approach, teaching Science, analysis and evaluation. 1. Introduction In the last few years, there has been an agreement among most of scholars that inquiry is the best methodology for teaching Science. This method has been adopted by Educational Curricula in Primary Education as the Currículo Aragonés. Simultaneously, there has been a huge increase in the number of Bilingual Primary Schools, in Aragon, most of which are teaching Science through a second language. Generally, bilingual schools use the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach “for 4 learning and teaching of both content and language” (Coyle, Hood and Marsh, 2010 :1). So, we find here that the CLIL approach should be deal with the inquiry methodology. But, Integrating language and content can have positive or negative effects. I think that teaching Science through a foreign language can affect the methodology that is used, originally, in the subject which is given through the mother tongue for some reasons. The use of a second language can be a barrier for teaching content because the language learning takes time that could be dedicated to content. Also, the lack of communicative skills in a foreign language may affect students and teachers negatively because the inquiry methodology requires a complex interaction through a scientific discourse. Consequently, L2 text books may focus on simple tasks which don’t promote the inquiry methodology as deeply as L1 books. When a teacher looks for a book they focus their attention on the relation quality-prize, and quality for CLIL books of Science means to follow CLIL and inquiry principles, so our study may help teachers to choose Science books that follow both CLIL and inquiry principles. Books have a relevant role in Education because they guide teachers to carry out the lessons, so they are going to be our study object. The main purpose of this research is to analyze and evaluate the extent to which L1 and L2 books designed for teaching Science promote an inquiry methodology. 1. To which extent are the principles of CLIL compatible with the principles of inquiry? 2. Is inquiry good for CLIL classrooms in which language and content are integrated? 3. What inquiry and CLIL principles can be used to analyze and evaluate Primary text books? 4. Do L2 books of Science follow the CLIL principles? 5. Do L1 books follow inquiry principles more closely than L2 books? 6. If so, which possible factors may explain why inquiry is developed to a different extent depending on the language in which Science is taught? 5 Our study consisted of a comparison of L1 and L2 Primary text books of Natural Science in order to see in which books inquiry methodology is followed more closely. Our study is divided into some parts which seek to answer the research questions. Firstly, it is going to be showed that CLIL principles are compatible with inquiry principles by reasoning logically, as well as that the inquiry methodology may be adequate for the CLIL principles. Then, the suitability between CLIL and inquiry principles for analyzing and evaluating Science books is going to be discussed. Then, we will make sure that L2 books chosen our study follow the CLIL principles. After that, the books will be compared according to the inquiry principles for which we have chosen L2 and L1 text books of the 5th course of Primary Education created by the Santillana and Edelvives publishing houses, in order to compare them just changing the language variable to do a reliable research. Finally, possible factors, that may affect the depth with which the inquiry methodology is implemented on L1 and L2 text books, will be suggested. 2. Theoretical framework 2.1 Inquiry methodology First of all, if we need to extract the inquiry principles that are going to be analyze, we must know what inquiry means in an education context and its evolution to get over misconceptions. Some Science practitioners tend to believe that all the experiments and hands-on activities are based on an inquiry methodology but the scientific method, known as the hypothetico-deductive method and the inquiry methodology differ in some aspects. Scientific Inquiry, as it is known nowadays, differs from the conception that academics had in the early 20th centuries when scientific inquiry referred to the hypothetico-deductive method. The former view of scientific inquiry was that new knowledge was discovered through experiments which justified it but no attention was paid to the way in which knowledge was discovered (Grandy and Duschl, 2007). This perspective is known as the “received view” and it is similar to the traditional scientific method (Grandy and Duschl, 2007 :150). It is important to know the differences between the scientific 6 method and scientific inquiry because we may find experiments suggested in the books that follow the scientific method but we couldn’t consider it as authentic inquiry tasks. There are some differences between the scientific method and scientific inquiry. The scientific method is simpler than scientific inquiry because it involves fewer processes which are just cognitive. However scientific inquiry includes social and epistemic processes. Differences are explained in depth in next paragraphs. The scientific method is less complex than scientific inquiry. The scientific method involves 5 steps that are sequenced in order: to make observations, to formulate hypothesis, to make predictions, to carry out observations to prove the hypothesis and reject or accept the hypothesis, while the scientific inquiry methodology includes those processes and many more like: posing questions, representing, discussing and recording data and learning theories. The scientific method includes cognitive processes and just the process of generalizing implies an epistemic construction. However, scientific inquiry goes further and involves epistemic and social tasks in most of their processes (Grandy and Duschl, 2007 :144) as you can see in table 1. The social processes are forgotten in the Scientific Method and they have an important role in developing science because nowadays it is needed a group of scholars to do research as progresses/models/theories must be agreed among the scientific community to be valid. Just a few processes incorporate explicitly the social dimension and those are discussing and explaining which need to take into account the audience, because they are social processes and therefore the language must be adapted to listeners or readers for reaching an agreement or persuading the audience. Many processes may have the social element if it is worked in teams and they involve more than one person. Scientific inquiry involves as well epistemic processes because their aim is to build up knowledge. Processes like discussing and writing about data or theories produce knowledge and are not included in the scientific method, also known as the hypothetico-deductive method. 7 Once we have set the two main differences between the scientific method and scientific inquiry, we can start establishing the inquiry principles that we need to study for determining if they are compatible with CLIL principles or not. The first principle is that all learning activities should focus on using cognitive processes. According to Chin and Malhotra (2002) and Grandy and Duschl (2007) a number of different processes promote the inquiry methodology as you can see in table 1, in which the cognitive, social and epistemic dimensions are related to the processes. An inquiry task has not got to include all those cognitive processes for learners to carry out them. We may find in books some simple tasks which involve a few processes, so they promote specific research skills that can be useful for authentic inquiry. For students it is difficult to do projects which involve many processes. Consequently, we must simplify the way scientists discover knowledge in order to implement it in Primary Education. The second principle is that the inquiry methodology should be carried out in a cooperative environment. It is essential that inquiry tasks are put into practice by groups of students for not to forget the social aspect of scientific inquiry. Knowledge can be produced, discussed and accepted in a group for being valid, so we can see the social dimension of inquiry processes. The third principle is that inquiry makes students to be active and autonomous. Inquiry tasks must give responsibilities to the students and the teacher must act as a facilitator. Inquiry activities make students to be active and autonomous, for instance, because they have to take decisions about the variables that have to be taken into account in the investigation and they must explain and reach their own conclusions. The fourth principle is that inquiry produces knowledge through evidences obtained from researches. The aim of an inquiry task must be to answer a question linked to a natural phenomenon for what is needed to learn, discuss, write and report which are epistemic processes. 8 Cognitive Epistemic Social Grandy and Duschl (2007) Designing experiments X Making observations X Collecting and representing data X X Relating data to hypothesis/model and theories X X Formulating hypothesis X Learning and refining theories X X Giving arguments for/against models and theories X X X Making predictions X Recording data X Discussing data X X X Writing about data/theories/models X X Chin and Malhotra (2002) Posing questions X Selecting variables X Planning procedures X Controlling variables X Planning measures X Explaining results X X Generalizations X X Table 1. Key processes involved on Authentic Inquiry and dimensions that include. (Processes adapted from Chin and Malhotra, 2002; Grandy and Duschl , 2007) 2.2 CLIL methodology. Compatibility with inquiry methodology The CLIL approach focus on both content and language, consequently CLIL is not learning content through language (Immersion) nor learning a language through content (Content Based Learning and Teaching). As Marsh et al. (1999) contended the concept of CLIL is based on principles different to those which refer to teaching a subject matter in a second language in an identical manner as in the mother tongue. Now, our study continues with a discussion about if CLIL is compatible with Inquiry and if Inquiry is favorable for implementing a CLIL methodology. For discussing the compatibility we needed to analyze CLIL principles one by one. These principles are as follows: previous knowledge must be activated, communication understanding must be guided, learning focuses on languages as mean for learning and communicating, different ways of assessment must be provided as well as social and cultural awareness and cognitive skills must be developed progressively as linguistic abilities. 9 The first principle is that students’ previous knowledge must be activated for each new topic (Coyle, Hood and Marsh, 2010). It is important to know the children misconceptions about natural phenomena as it can be the origin of an inquiry task. When a research question is asked in a classroom the previous knowledge is activated for which it is needed and positive to share evidences that are part of that previous knowledge. The second principle is that learners’ understanding must be guided. Inquiry activities must be guided because children are not authentic scientists and consequently they are not autonomous at all. Teachers must know where is the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) which is the line that separates what a learner is able to do on their own and what they are able to do with the help of someone who is more competent (Vigotsky, 1978). In this case, children must be guided to understand the nature of science and put into practice the inquiry methodology and the skills that it entails. For that it is useful to provide multimodal input because it facilitates understanding and scaffolds learners with input which is comprehensible so as learners can have a background to build up their own knowledge autonomously. Scientific inquiry can provide multimodal input because students are asked to read, to observe, to listen, to touch and to experiment. Hands-on activities are a good way for guiding understanding because students can be guided trough some steps. The inquiry methodology goes through the Bloom’s new taxonomy (Raths and Wittrock, 2001) whose skills are remembering, understanding, applying, analysing, evaluating and creating. In inquiry tasks, children create their own knowledge, discuss, explain and write but, before that, it is necessary to read, observe and try to understand for reaching some conclusions. There are basic skills like reading and there are others that are more complex, for instance, discussing. Moreover, guiding understanding means to do activities from those that involve lower-order thinking skills to those that include higher order thinking skills. Working in groups is another aid for guiding understanding because children can learn and work easily with the help of their mates but students little by little must learn to be autonomous and sometimes work individually. Moreover, the inquiry methodology is based on cooperative learning because knowledge is build up thanks to 16 Simple experiments (SE) differ a bit from simple illustrations. In simple experiments, students control variables and are free to explore and reach conclusions themselves. For instance, in one of our Science books learners are suggested to do an experiment with lentils. Students would control the variable of the amount of water to see what happens to the lentils depending of that variable. Also, learners are asked to predict and reach conclusions. Our research includes another category for simple inquiry tasks called simple searches (SS) as learners are asked to gather information from webs, books, journals, people… for answering a question but there is neither a specific procedure nor variables to control because the question cannot be answered empirically. For instance, in a book it is asked students to search information about the carnivorous plants and answer the question why can carnivorous plants live in dry environments? This question cannot be answered empirically but students can find the information by gathering from different sources as it was said before. 5. Results of the analysis 5.1 Results of the CLIL analysis In the check list 1, we analyzed the CLIL characteristics of the L2 books 1 (Appendix 4) and 5 (Appendix 5) for testing if they followed the CLIL principles. We used some CLIL features for each principle suggested by Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010) that we considered relevant for analysing books. After analyzing the books 1 and 5 we could test that they are CLIL books. They follow all the CLIL principles and most of the criteria chosen for analyzing CLIL books. Both books activate learners’ previous knowledge. When a unit starts, the first page is dedicated to find out the prior knowledge of students with questions and pictures or diagrams that facilitate understanding. For example, book 1 suggests questions such as: What natural features can you see in the landscape around your town? ¿Which things are man-made? (p.32). Furthermore, these questions are next to a picture of a landscape that facilitates understanding. More over the book 1 propose hands-on 17 activities, personal experiences (p.5) or a brainstorming (p.12) for activating the previous knowledge. Book 1 Book 5 ACTIVATING LEARNERS PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE It proposes a discussion on the new topic when the lesson starts X It suggests questions for finding out the previous knowledge X X It uses visuals like photographs like photographs or diagrams X X It suggests a brainstorming about vocabulary related to the unit X It provides hands-on activities to introduce new topics X GUIDING UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONTENT It uses multimodal input - Texts with visuals X X - Written stories X X - Spoken stories X X It scaffolds understanding and activities - Content learning X X - Language learning X X - It provides: - Graphic organisers - Expert groups - Target practice - Venn diagram X X X - It provides activities for pair and group work X X COGNITION IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE LINGUISTIC ABILITIES’ DEVELOPMENT - It uses questions from lower-order thinking to higher order thinking skills X - Remembering X X - Understanding X X - Applying X X - Analysing X X - Evaluating X - Creating X X FOCUSING ON LANGUAGE AS A MEAN FOR LEARNING AND COMMUNICATING It provides activities for language learning and use - Language of learning (concepts and skills related to the topic) X X - Language for learning (language for operating in the target language) X X - Language trough learning (learning through a foreign language) X X It provides practice of the 4 linguistic skills - It encourages writing X X - It encourages speaking X X It encourage reading X X - It encourage listening X X It provides different kind of texts, genres. - Reports X X - Instructs X X - Explains X X - Persuades X - Discusses X X - Describes X X - Predicts X X It helps to understand vocabulary - It provides activities for learning specific vocabulary X X - It provides a glossary X - With the translation X X - With English definitions and examples ASSESSING - It provides rubrics for assessing - Self-assessment X X - Peer assessment X - Teacher assessment X X - CULTURAL AND SOCIAL AWARNESS - It provides information about different cultures X X - It promote discussion for giving opinions X X - It engage students to acquire values as citizens X X Check list 1. CLIL principles analysis in L2 books of Science. 18 Also, both books accomplish the principle of guiding understanding. Books 1 and 5 use multimodal input. For instance, in the book 1 each page has listenings recordings, readings, photographs and pictures. The book 5 provides written texts accompanied by images (p.34) and listenings (p.37) as well. Also, the book 1 promotes pair and group work. For example, in page 24 it is proposed a role-play. Moreover, the book 5 demands progressive thinking skills clearly trough questions. For instance, in page 18 the first question is what is the main cause of acid rain? and the next question is what do you think will happen if we don’t reduce the emissions of harmful gases? The first question can be answered by reading the text but the second one requires predicting and applying the content by reasoning. The book 1 scaffolds learners as well; for example, the book proposes a true/false activity at first (p.523), then a filled-gap activity (p.24) and the final question is open for a more complex answer (p.24). Another principle that books follow is that language is considered as a mean for learning and communicating. Both books develop the three dimensions of language claimed by Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010). Language of learning is promoted with activities for acquiring specific vocabulary and the four linguistic skills needed for learning Science. Language for learning is provided in different types of texts. For instance, in the book 1 students are required to know how to describe the reproduction of plants, how to explain events scientifically as the decantation, as well as how to predict what will happen if we mix oil and water. The book 5 asks learners for predictions (p.44), descriptions (p.36), discussions (p.45) and reports (p.44), so students develop their abilities to create different genres of texts. Moreover, both books provide a bilingual glossary with specific vocabulary related to units. With regards to assessing, book 5 promotes self-assessment through the scientific method because children have to test their hypothesis (p.44), peer assessment when it asks students to compare the leaves they have done and teacher assessment as a current book (p.41). However, the book 5 doesn’t promote peer assessment but it encourage learners to self-asses at the end of each unit. Finally, we founded that books provide social and cultural awareness about living things, nutrition, atmosphere, population and more topics. Furthermore, the book 1 promotes values for being a good citizen like saving water and eating healthy and the book 5 makes students reflect about environmental problems and its implications for the 19 society. In conclusion, these books strongly follow CLIL principles and are useful for our research. 5.2 Results of the inquiry analysis For evaluating to which extent books follow the inquiry principles and comparing L2 books with L1 books we had got to pay attention to different factors that could help us: the number of simple inquiry tasks per page, the number of the different kind of simple inquiry tasks, the number of inquiry processes per task which are meaningful in inquiry tasks, the number of the inquiry tasks which have the more important inquiry processes and the cognitive, social and epistemic dimensions. It is complicated to establish that some activities follow an inquiry methodology more than others but we agree that the more processes a task involves the closer to an inquiry methodology the task is. We founded that the 100% of simple experiments of our books have 6 or more inquiry processes, the 78, 3% of simple illustrations have between 4 and 6 inquiry processes, the 91% of simple observations have 4 or less inquiry processes and the 84% of simple searches have 3 or less inquiry processes. As a result, we consider that the more inquiry processes the simple tasks have the closer to the inquiry methodology the simple tasks are. 5.2.1 Number of inquiry simple tasks If we fix our attention to the number of inquiry simple tasks, the book 1 (L2) includes 18 simple inquiry tasks in 26 pages, the book 2 (L1) 13 tasks in 96 pages, the book 3 (L1) 21 tasks in 137 pages and the book 4 (L1) 36 in 104 pages. With these data we would say that the books 4 (L1) and 3 (L1) are closer to the inquiry methodology than the book 1 (L2) because they provide more simple inquiry tasks than the L2 book. However, as you can see in table 4, book 1 (L2) has more tasks per page (0.69) than L1 books that have 0.14, 0.15 and 0.31 tasks per page. So, there is a huge difference in the relation between tasks and pages, consequently, the book 1 (L2) would follow the inquiry methodology more closely than the L1 books. Moreover, a short book as the book 1 (L2) allows the teacher to be more free for adding more inquiry 20 tasks or carry out the proposed inquiry tasks with the time needed for students to conduct the inquiry processes. Number of pages Number of simple inquiry tasks Simple inquiry tasks per page Book 1 (L2) 26 18 0.69 Book 2 (L1) 96 13 0.14 Book 3 (L1) 137 21 0.15 Book 4 (L1) 104 36 0.31 Table 4. Simple inquiry tasks per page 5.2.2 Frequency of each kind of simple inquiry tasks As we claimed, simple experiments are inquiry tasks which follow the inquiry methodology more closely than the rest of tasks. The book 1 (L2) has 4 simple experiments, while the book 2 (L1) has 1 and the book 4 (L2) has 2. If we see the simple illustrations that books have there is a 10-10 tie among the book 1 (L2) and 4 (L1), otherwise the others are far away from these results. Simple observations and simple searches are implemented deeper on L1 books but this fact doesn’t mean so much because a few inquiry processes are involved in those tasks. In the book 4 (L1) simple searches are strongly promoted but most of activities consist in searching information for answering a question or writing a report at a theoretical level. For instance, in the page 94 students are told to search information about the bread elaboration procedure for making a mural and they are asked for the stage in which the fermentation occurs as well. In short, the L2 book provides more simple tasks that are closer to authentic inquiry. 21 Chart 1. Quantity of simple inquiry tasks. 5.2.3 Number of inquiry processes per task For a more accurate analysis we are going to focus on the number of inquiry processes which are involved in the simple inquiry tasks. We must highlight that book 1 (L2) includes 8 activities with more than 5 inquiry processes. However, the L1 books have 1 activity with more than 5 processes. So, the quality of the L2 book tasks is better as inquiry tasks are more complete and the net connections created by processes are more complex. However, the simple task which is closer to the authentic inquiry is a task suggested by the book 4 in the page 78 (appendix 3 in page 32) which involve 11 inquiry processes from the 14 we analyzed. This task is a well-organized inquiry project in which students have to build up a terrarium equipped with soil, living things as plants, snails and worms and finally, water. After making the terrarium the book propose to organize the inquiry task in groups so that each group can investigate a different aspect of the ecosystem like the environment, the living things, the relation between them and the natural changes. Thus, children control variables that they can observe. The book also suggests the student to collect useful information from books, journals and webs for writing a report with highlighted data. Furthermore, the report of each group must be showed to the rest of the teams for discussing about what can be added or corrected. Then, the book proposes learners to make a short final report for displaying it to the class by explaining the conclusions to which they reached. It is 22 relevant to notice that the task which involves more processes in the L2 book has 7 processes, while there is a task which has 11 processes in a L1 book. This fact can be due to the language as the complexity of the inquiry task and the cooperative learning require mastering a language. Also, the use of the mother tongue facilitates the control of more variables, the access to more information taken from books, journals and webs and the discussions. In conclusion, we see the potential of the native language with this task that involves 11 inquiry processes although tasks with more than 5 processes predominate in the L2 book. There was a relevant data to highlight for showing a general view of the quality of the inquiry simple tasks. As you can see in chart 2 and table 5, we analyzed the average processes per task. Book 1 (L2) is the book with the highest average with 4.58 processes per task. While the second book in this ranking is the book 4 (L1) with 3.64 processes per tasks. There is a difference of almost 1 process per task between the book 1 and 4 and a difference of more than 1 process per task between the book 1 and books 3 and 4. So, we agree that the book 1 (L2) follows more closely an inquiry methodology because their tasks involve more inquiry processes on average. Number of processes Number of tasks Book 1 (L2) 87 19 Book 2 (L1) 38 14 Book 3 (L1) 71 21 Book 4 (L1) 135 37 Table 5. Number of inquiry processes Chart 2. Processes per task. Average and simple inquiry tasks 4,58 2,71 3,38 3,64 0 1 2 3 4 5 Book 1 (L2) Book 2 (L1) Book 3 (L1) Book 4 (L1) Processes per task. Average 23 5.2.4 Number of authentic inquiry tasks with essential processes If we try to determine the quality of inquiry tasks we cannot focus only on the number of processes carried out in a task. It is also important to know what processes are fundamental for a task to be considered an inquiry task. There are three steps that all the inquiry tasks in Primary Education should follow: posing questions, looking for evidences and regularities and explaining results and conclusions. In Authentic inquiry scientists pose questions by themselves but it can be accepted that in inquiry tasks carried out by children the teacher ask the research question. Thus, text books cannot contribute Authentic Inquiry with regards to the questions because if they propose a question children don’t do it anymore. But, they can propose questions that can be investigated empirically. Children have to do inquiry tasks by knowing what question they have to answer because the most fundamental goal for scientists and the reason why scientific knowledge develops is to answer questions we cannot yet. Another process that is essential is to look for evidences and regularities because is the way for building up knowledge. In Science, if there are not evidences we cannot trust on a scientific research. The same happens with Justice because there have to be evidences for sending a person to prison. The last process that we consider fundamental for inquiry tasks is to explain results and conclusions as scientific knowledge is built up by a scientific community and there has to be an agreement. We counted the number of simple inquiry tasks which involve these three processes (see chart 3) and we founded out that the book 1 (L2) is the book with more inquiry tasks which have the processes of posing questions, looking for evidences and regularities and explaining results and conclusions. There is a huge difference between L1 books and the L2 book. Even, the second book in number of tasks with these three processes has half of inquiry tasks that L2 book has. In Education it may be possible that an inquiry task doesn’t start from a question because it wouldn’t affect the inquiry methodology. There can be well-conducted inquiry tasks which consist in looking for regularities and explaining the conclusions without an explicit question, for instance, there is a task in the page 44 of the book 4 (L1) which consist in identifying the characteristics that make some animals different from others. So, we counted the number of tasks with the two processes (see chart 3) of looking for evidences and regularities and explaining conclusions and the results were 24 similar to the results obtained from counting the inquiry tasks by adding the process of posing questions. Chart 3. Number of tasks which have the processes of posing questions, looking for evidences and explaining results and conclusions. Number of tasks which have the processes of looking for evidences and explaining results and conclusions. 5.2.5 Cognitive, social and epistemic dimension As we said in the theoretical framework, an inquiry task cannot just be based on cognitive processes as the scientific method is. An inquiry task must include the social and epistemic dimension as well because scientific knowledge is discovered in groups. Therefore, we analyzed the three dimensions that inquiry tasks must cover. In the page 6 of our study we made a table with the inquiry processes and the dimensions that they include. We used that table for obtaining the number of processes that involve each dimension per task. We did it by summarizing the processes that include each dimension and then, we divided them into the number of tasks for obtaining the average (see chart 4). A result we notice is that the book 1 (L2) develop more cognitive processes but that is the consequence of having more inquiry processes as all they are cognitive. However, books 3 and 4 (L2) have more processes per task which cover the epistemic 25 and social dimension. It seems like there is not a huge difference between the L2 book and the L1 book. For instance, the biggest difference between book is in the social dimension as there is a difference of 0.46 social processes per task between the book 1 (L2) and 3 (L1). Nevertheless, we must take into account that the difference in the number of processes per tasks between these books is of 1.2 processes. So, we founded out that the epistemic and social dimension are developed deeper in books 3 and 4 (L1) than in the L2 book. But, we have to take into account that the book 2 (L1) was published by the same publishing house in a closer year to the L2 book’s and it develops all the dimensions in a lesser extent. Otherwise, the book 3 was published by the Edelvives publishing house and the book 4 was published by the Santillana publishing house, but 8 years later. Cooperative learning is not promoted in book 1 (L2) but it is in books 3 (L1) and 4 (L1) in which it is asked students explicitly to make groups, above all in the book 4 (L1) in which 11 from 37 simple inquiry tasks are asked to be done in groups. These results show us that, in L1 books, interaction between children and the teacher is promoted in a greater extent by suggesting tasks that make students to discuss, explain and report. But is not the case of the book 2 because it is the book which has the inquiry tasks that are less closely to the inquiry methodology. Chart 4. Number of processes per task in each dimension. 32 9. Appendix APPENDIX 1 Check list for analysing and evaluating books according to CLIL principles. YES NO ACTIVATING LEARNERS PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE It proposes a discussion on the new topic when the lesson starts It suggests questions for finding out the previous knowledge It uses visuals like photographs like photographs or diagrams It suggests a brainstorming about vocabulary related to the unit It provides hands-on activities to introduce new topics GUIDING UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONTENT It uses multimodal input - Texts with visuals - Written stories - Spoken stories It scaffolds understanding and activities - Content learning - Language learning - It provides: - Graphic organisers - Expert groups - Target practice - Venn diagram - It provides activities for pair and group work COGNITION IS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR THE LINGUISTIC ABILITIES’ DEVELOPMENT - It uses questions from lower-order thinking to higher order thinking skills - Remembering - Understanding - Applying - Analysing - Evaluating - Creating FOCUSING ON LANGUAGE AS A MEAN FOR LEARNING AND COMMUNICATING It provides activities for language learning and use - Language of learning (concepts and skills related to the topic) - Language for learning (language for operating in the target language) - Language trough learning (learning through a foreign language) It provides practice of the 4 linguistic skills - It encourages writing - It encourages speaking It encourage reading - It encourage listening It provides different kind of texts, genres. - Recounts 33 - Reports - Instructs - Explains - Persuades - Discusses - Describes - Predicts - hypothesises It helps to understand vocabulary - It provides activities for learning specific vocabulary - It provides a glossary - With the translation - With English definitions and examples ASSESSING - It provides rubrics for assessing - Self-assessment - Peer assessment - Teacher assessment CULTURAL AND SOCIAL AWARNESS - It provides information about different cultures - It promote discussion for giving opinions - It engage students to acquire values as citizens 34 APPENDIX 2 Check list for analysing and evaluating books according to the inquiry principles. All learning activities should focus on using cognitive, epistemic and social processes. - It poses questions that can be investigated empirically. - It suggests experiments - It promotes observations - It suggests students to collect and representing data - It encourages learners to formulate hypothesis and make predictions - It promotes looking for evidences - It suggests or asks for variables to be taken into account - It promotes learning data/theories/models - It asks for arguments to the students - It asks for explaining results to learners - It suggests to record data and measure - It suggests to discuss about data - It promotes writing about data - It asks for generalizations Inquiry is carried out in a cooperative environment (social aspect) - It promotes pair and groups share Inquiry involves information-processing skills (cognitive aspect) - It requires skills for an information treatment. Learners discover and construct new knowledge through Inquiry (epistemic aspect) - It provides opportunities for students to create their own knowledge Inquiry make the students to be active and autonomous - It gives opportunities for working individually 35 APPENDIX 3 Inquiry task provided by an L1 book. Edelvives publishing house. 5th Year of Primary Education. 2009. 36 APPENDIX 4 L2 book. Santillana publishing house. 5th Year of Primary Education. 2006 37 38 39 40 41 APPENDIX 5 L1 book. Edelvives publishing house. 5th Year of Primary Education. 2014 48 APPENDIX 7 Quantitative analysis. Book 2 (L1) Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7 Activities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Pages of the book 14 15 17 28 29 43 45 56 57 69 71 85 87 97 Posing questions that can be investigated empirically 1 1 Doing experiments or hands-on activities 1 1 2 Observating and measuring 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 Collecting and recording data 1 1 1 1 4 Representing data 1 1 1 1 1 5 Formulating hypothesis and making predictions 0 Looking for evidences and regularities 1 1 2 Controlling variables 1 1 2 Learning data/theory/model 1 1 1 3 Explaining results and conclusions 1 1 1 1 1 5 Discussing about data 1 1 1 3 Writing about data 1 1 Generalizing 0 Reporting 1 1 1 0 Total 2 3 3 2 2 5 2 3 2 1 3 1 2 7 Simple experiment 1 1 Simple illustration 0 Simple observation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 Simple searches 1 1 1 3 Total 13 49 APPENDIX 8 Quantitative analysis. Book 3 (L1) Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7 Unit 9 Unit 10 Unit 11 Unit 12 Unit 13 Unit 14 Unit 15 Activities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Pages of the book 36 41 47 48 53 56 57 64 80 88 89 93 102 110 118 119 119 123 126 127 140 Posing questions that can be investigated empirically 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Doing experiments or hands-on activities 1 1 1 1 4 Observating and measuring 1 1 1 1 1 5 Collecting and recording data 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 Representing data 1 1 2 Formulating hypothesis and making predictions 1 1 2 Looking for evidences and regularities 1 1 1 1 4 Controlling variables Learning data/theory/model 1 1 1 1 4 Explaining results and conclusions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 Discussing about data 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Writing about data 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 Generalizing Reporting 1 1 1 1 1 5 Total 4 2 2 5 3 6 3 3 2 2 5 3 5 5 2 3 3 2 3 3 5 Simple experiment Simple illustration 1 1 1 3 Simple observation 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Simple searches 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 Total 21 Cooperative learning 1 1 1 50 APPENDIX 9 Quantitative analysis. Book 4 (L1) Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Activities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Pages of the book 13 22 23 26 26 26 29 38 40 44 47 49 53 54 55 58 61 65 70 74 79 Posing questions that can be investigated empirically 1 1 1 Doing experiments or hands-on activities 1 1 1 Observating and measuring 1 1 1 1 1 1 Collecting and recording data 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Representing data 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Formulating hypothesis and making predictions Looking for evidences and regularities 1 1 1 1 1 1 Controlling variables 1 Learning data/theory/model 1 1 1 1 1 Explaining results and conclusions 1 1 1 1 1 1 Discussing about data 1 Writing about data 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Generalizing Reporting 1 1 1 1 Total 2 5 4 3 5 2 2 3 2 4 3 2 4 4 4 5 5 2 3 2 11 Simple experiment 1 Simple illustration 1 1 1 Simple observation 1 1 1 1 1 1 Simple searches 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Cooperative learning 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 51 Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 81 83 90 91 94 94 97 100 103 105 108 108 108 110 115 122 1 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 26 1 1 1 1 1 13 1 1 1 1 10 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 9 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 23 1 1 1 1 6 2 2 3 4 4 5 3 3 3 8 5 5 3 2 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 47 1 1 1 1 52 APPENDIX 10 Quantitative analysis. Book 5 (L2) Unit 3 Plants Activities 1 2 Pages of the book 41 44 Posing questions that can be investigated empirically 1 1 Doing experiments or hands-on activities 1 1 2 Observating and measuring 1 1 Collecting and recording data 1 1 Representing data 1 1 Formulating hypothesis and making predictions 1 1 Looking for evidences and regularities 1 1 Controlling variables 1 1 Learning data/theory/model Explaining results and conclusions 1 1 Discussing about data 1 1 Writing about data Generalizing Reporting 1 1 Total 2 10 Simple experiment 1 1 Simple illustration Simple observation 1 1 Simple searches 53 APPENDIX 11 Quantitative analysis. Book 6 (L1) Unit 3 Plants Activities 1 2 3 Pages of the book 59 60 65 Posing questions that can be investigated empirically 1 1 Doing experiments or hands-on activities Observating and measuring 1 1 Collecting and recording data 1 1 1 3 Representing data 1 1 Formulating hypothesis and making predictions 1 Looking for evidences and regularities 1 Controlling variables Learning data/theory/model 1 1 Explaining results and conclusions 1 1 Discussing about data Writing about data 1 1 Generalizing Reporting Total 4 3 4 Simple experiment Simple illustration 1 1 Simple observation 1 1 2 Simple searches 0