80
Ноябрь 2020 7-қисм
Тошкент
KEY DIMENSIONS IN TEACHING ENGLISH LANGUAGE
Asqarov Azamat Komuljonovich
Teacher of school number 27 of Urgench district
Phone: +998 (93) 286 10 60
azamat.komuljonovich1995@inbox.uz
Masharipova Roza Kurbanbayevna
Teacher of school number 27 of Urgench district
Phone: +998 (97) 458 35 47
roza_masharipova67@inbox.uz
Annotation: This article provides information on the key dimensions of English language
teaching.
Key words: The European CLIL, the Culture Dimension, the Environment Dimension, the
Language Dimension, the Learning Dimension, Communicative
The European CLIL Compendium has presented the various reasons for implementing CLIL
under five key dimensions involving culture, environment, language, content and learning. The
schools can decide freely which dimensions will be given more emphasis than others and which
learning and development outcomes their CLIL programmes focus on. The dimensions of CLIL
are:
The Culture Dimension: building intercultural
knowledge and undestanding, developing
intercultural communication skills, learning
about specific countries, regions and/or minority
groups, introducing the wider cultural context.
The Environment Dimension: prepare for internationalization, access international certification,
enhance school profile.
The Language Dimension: improve overall target language competence,
develop oral
communication skills, deepen awareness of both mother tongue and the target language, develop
plurilingual interests and attitudes, introduce a target language, allow learners more contact with
the target language. The Content Dimension: provide opportunities to study content through
different perspectives, access subject-specific
target language terminology, prepare for future
studies or working life.
The Learning Dimension: complement individual learning strategies, diversify methods and
forms of classroom practice, increase learner motivation and confidence
in both the language
and the subject being taught.
Immersion and CLIL: The Main Differences. Immersion education and CLIL have similar
goals and methods, but they differ in three main respects. First, a pre - requisite for successful
immersion is a society that enables the learners to become functional bilinguals and in which the
first language of the learners has a strong position. basically, this applies to societies with two
official or main languages. This is not a pre-requisite for CLIL. Second, in immersion education
the learners learn to read and write in the immersion language, whereas in CLIL they learn to
read and write in their first language. Third, in immersion classes approximately 50% of the
teaching and learning discourse should take place in the immersion
language while in CLIL
the minimum requisite is only 25%. Moreover, immersion has well established methodological
principles and goals whereas CLIL is an umbrella term for various educational models and goals,
including immersion itself.
These differences considered, the term that best describes the educational model followed by
the informants of this study is CLIL: the foreign language content varies between 30—50% per
day and the pupils learn basic literacy skills in Uzbek.
The pupils do not need to speak or write English before commencing the programme, but
their language aptitude is tested before they are admitted to the programme to ensure that they
are able to undertake the programme. pupils are, thus, selected on the basis of their score in the
language aptitude test. Involving both an underlying language learning capacity and the capacity
to handle decontextualized language, language aptitude has been
found to be one of the best
predictors of L2 learning. Studying in both Finnish and English typically means much extra
work and challenges for the pupil as well as requires ample support from parents. practically, all