English in Brazil: Insights from the Analysis of Language Policies, Internationalization Programs and the CLIL Approach

Abstract: The paper proposes a reflection on the role of English in the globalized world and its teaching/learning in Brazil. With that aim, the study reviews language policies and internationalization programs in Brazil regarding the role of foreign languages in general and of English in particular. The theoretical framework includes a review of an English language teaching (ELT) approach used mainly in Europe, as a result of globalization and internationalization, the Content and Language Integrated Approach (CLIL). In order to support this reflection, a case study was carried out to examine pre-service English teachers’ beliefs on the use of CLIL in Brazil. The results of study show that pre-service English teachers understand the importance of the CLIL approach though they are aware of the various obstacles to its implementation in that context. The study suggests a review of language policies in Brazil so as to ensure a convergence between them and internationalization policies and approaches, at all levels of education. Regarding the ELT approach analyzed, the study concludes that despite the difficulties associated with the implementation of CLIL in Brazil, it represents a relevant alternative in that context.

Keywords: English language teaching (ELT), Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), Language policies, Internationalization, Brazil

Source:

FINARDI, Kyria; LEÃO, Roberta; PINHEIRO, Livia Melina. English in Brazil: Insights from the Analysis of Language Policies, Internationalization Programs and the CLILApproach. In: Education and Linguistics Research, 2016, Vol. 2, No. 1. Available at:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kyria_Finardi/publication/297653683_English_in_Brazil_Insights_from_the_Analysis_of_Language_Policies_Internationaliz ation_Programs_and_the_CLIL_Approach/links/5814871508aeffbed6bdf5ba/English-in-Brazil-Insights-from-the-Analysis-of-Language-Policiesth Internationalization-Programs-and-the-CLIL-Approach.pdf . Accessed on September 29th , 2020.

English in Brazil: Insights from the Analysis of Language Policies, Internationalization Programs and the CLIL Approach

Abstract: The paper proposes a reflection on the role of English in the globalized world and its teaching/learning in Brazil. With that aim, the study reviews language policies and internationalization programs in Brazil regarding the role of foreign languages in general and of English in particular. The theoretical framework includes a review of an English language teaching (ELT) approach used mainly in Europe, as a result of globalization and internationalization, the Content and Language Integrated Approach (CLIL). In order to support this reflection, a case study was carried out to examine pre-service English teachers’ beliefs on the use of CLIL in Brazil. The results of study show that pre-service English teachers understand the importance of the CLIL approach though they are aware of the various obstacles to its implementation in that context. The study suggests a review of language policies in Brazil so as to ensure a convergence between them and internationalization policies and approaches, at all levels of education. Regarding the ELT approach analyzed, the study concludes that despite the difficulties associated with the implementation of CLIL in Brazil, it represents a relevant alternative in that context.

Keywords: English language teaching (ELT), Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), Language policies, Internationalization, Brazil

Source:

FINARDI, Kyria; LEÃO, Roberta; PINHEIRO, Livia Melina. English in Brazil: Insights from the Analysis of Language Policies, Internationalization Programs and the CLILApproach. In: Education and Linguistics Research, 2016, Vol. 2, No. 1. Available at:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kyria_Finardi/publication/297653683_English_in_Brazil_Insights_from_the_Analysis_of_Language_Policies_Internationaliz ation_Programs_and_the_CLIL_Approach/links/5814871508aeffbed6bdf5ba/English-in-Brazil-Insights-from-the-Analysis-of-Language-Policiesth Internationalization-Programs-and-the-CLIL-Approach.pdf . Accessed on September 29th , 2020.

Text II

Pollution

Text I

While viruses do not respect borders, their spread and their chances of survival have long depended greatly on the laws, policies and acts of states. However, not all states are up to the job, writes Adam Roberts. 

A.J.P. Taylor often observed that great events can have very small causes. The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic is fresh evidence for this proposition. The cause is in all likelihood tiny and accidental: a genetic mutation in a virus, which then spreads into the human population. Like earlier epidemics throughout history, it could have happened with no human intentionality. Its consequences are already momentous and will be even more so before it is over.

The novel coronavirus can easily be seen as a profoundly anti-democratic force. In its first eight months, from early January to mid-August, it produced over 20 million cases of the COVID-19 disease. That disease has killed over 800,000 people and counting; put millions out of work; drastically curtailed travel; precipitated states of emergency; and caused citizens to be placed under detailed and intrusive administrative control, demonstrations to be banned, and elections to be rescheduled or postponed. Bitter disagreements have arisen about when and how to ease restrictions on movement. COVID-19 has generated a revival of conspiracy theories and unjustified recriminations, and prompted absurd denials of medical reality by certain political leaders. Among states, the pandemic has actually heightened some long-existing disputes, most notably those on trade and other matters between China and the United States. The capacity of the United Nations system to address epidemics has been called into question, not least in harsh American criticisms of the World Health Organization (WHO).

It is too simple to cast the pandemic crisis merely as a narrative of rampant authoritarianism versus embattled democracy. The long history of pandemics, earthquakes and other disasters reminds us of the enduring complexity of disaster management, and of the many controversies surrounding it, including the causes of and responses to plagues. States respond in different ways, raising questions regarding the relative effectiveness of democratic versus authoritarian states. International health organisations, especially the WHO, have important roles in dealing with epidemics, whether regional or global. Yet their formal powers are limited and their effectiveness depends on state cooperation. Epidemics, and action to control them, do sometimes play a part in increased authoritarianism, but they can also give rise to more positive initiatives of various kinds.

Adapted from: https://www.iiss.org/. Accessed on March 20, 2021.

Text I

While viruses do not respect borders, their spread and their chances of survival have long depended greatly on the laws, policies and acts of states. However, not all states are up to the job, writes Adam Roberts. 

A.J.P. Taylor often observed that great events can have very small causes. The 2020 COVID-19 pandemic is fresh evidence for this proposition. The cause is in all likelihood tiny and accidental: a genetic mutation in a virus, which then spreads into the human population. Like earlier epidemics throughout history, it could have happened with no human intentionality. Its consequences are already momentous and will be even more so before it is over.

The novel coronavirus can easily be seen as a profoundly anti-democratic force. In its first eight months, from early January to mid-August, it produced over 20 million cases of the COVID-19 disease. That disease has killed over 800,000 people and counting; put millions out of work; drastically curtailed travel; precipitated states of emergency; and caused citizens to be placed under detailed and intrusive administrative control, demonstrations to be banned, and elections to be rescheduled or postponed. Bitter disagreements have arisen about when and how to ease restrictions on movement. COVID-19 has generated a revival of conspiracy theories and unjustified recriminations, and prompted absurd denials of medical reality by certain political leaders. Among states, the pandemic has actually heightened some long-existing disputes, most notably those on trade and other matters between China and the United States. The capacity of the United Nations system to address epidemics has been called into question, not least in harsh American criticisms of the World Health Organization (WHO).

It is too simple to cast the pandemic crisis merely as a narrative of rampant authoritarianism versus embattled democracy. The long history of pandemics, earthquakes and other disasters reminds us of the enduring complexity of disaster management, and of the many controversies surrounding it, including the causes of and responses to plagues. States respond in different ways, raising questions regarding the relative effectiveness of democratic versus authoritarian states. International health organisations, especially the WHO, have important roles in dealing with epidemics, whether regional or global. Yet their formal powers are limited and their effectiveness depends on state cooperation. Epidemics, and action to control them, do sometimes play a part in increased authoritarianism, but they can also give rise to more positive initiatives of various kinds.

Adapted from: https://www.iiss.org/. Accessed on March 20, 2021.