Use of Languages Across the Curriculum

  • Marianne Turner


The chapter considers ways in which languages have been structured into everyday teaching and learning across the curriculum. Use of languages is considered in different contexts and includes programmes that target the learning of a language at school and English-medium settings where students are able to leverage a language they speak at home to assist in their learning. My aim in the chapter is to provide some background on how bilingual education and the education of (emergent) bi/multilinguals has been conceptualised in relation to language use, and also to discuss language-related pedagogies. Cross-curricular distribution of languages is discussed first in relation to instructional language separation, language flexibility and incorporation of students’ languages into English-medium classes. Everyday language-related pedagogies then focus on both learning through a target language and cross linguistic learning.


  1. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2018). Australian curriculum: English. Retrieved from
  2. Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (3rd ed.). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, C., & Wright, W. E. (2017). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism (6th ed.). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  4. Ballinger, S., Lyster, R., Sterzuk, A., & Genesee, F. (2017). Context-appropriate crosslinguistic pedagogy: Considering the role of language status in immersion education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 5(1), 30–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banegas, D. L. (2014). An investigation into CLIL-related sections of EFL coursebooks: Issues of CLIL inclusion in the publishing market. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 17(3), 345–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beatens Beardsmore, H. (2009). Bilingual education: Factors and variables. In O. García (Ed.), Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective (pp. 137–158). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Behan, L., Turnbull, M., & Spek, W. (1997). The proficiency gap in late immersion (extended French): Language use in collaborative tasks. Le journal de l’immersion, 20, 41–42.Google Scholar
  8. Blair, A., Haneda, M., & Nebus Bose, F. (2018). Reimagining English-medium instructional settings as sites of multilingual and multimodal meaning making. TESOL Quarterly, 52(3), 516–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Butzkamm, W. (2003). We only learn language once. The role of the mother tongue in FL classrooms: Death of dogma. Language Learning Journal, 28, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Canagarajah, S. (2011). Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics Review, 2, 128.Google Scholar
  11. Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christie, F. (2005). Language and education in the primary school. Sydney: UNSW Press.Google Scholar
  13. Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (2004). The astounding effectiveness of dual language education for all. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
  14. Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Cross, R. (2015). Defining content and language integrated learning for languages education in Australia. Babel, 49(2), 4–15.Google Scholar
  17. Cummins, J. (2005). A proposal for action: Strategies for recognizing heritage language competence as a learning resource within the mainstream classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 89(4), 585–592.Google Scholar
  18. Cummins, J. (2006). Identity texts: The imaginative construction of self through multiliteracies pedagogy. In O. Garcia, T. Skutnabb-Kangas, & M. E. Torres-Guzman (Eds.), Imagining multilingual schools: Language in education and glocalization (pp. 51–68). Toronto: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cummins, J. (2007). Rethinking monolingual instructional strategies in multilingual classrooms. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics (CJAL), 10(2), 221–240.Google Scholar
  20. Cummins, J., & Early, M. (2011). Identity texts: The collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools. Staffordshire: Trentham Books.Google Scholar
  21. Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1986). Bilingualism in education: Aspects of theory, research and practice. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  22. D’Warte, J. (2014). Exploring linguistic repertoires: Multiple language use and multimodal literacy activity in five classrooms. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 37(1), 21–30.Google Scholar
  23. D’Warte, J. (2015). Building knowledge about and with students: Linguistic ethnography in two secondary school classrooms. English in Australia, 50(1), 39–48.Google Scholar
  24. Dagenais, D., & Jacquet, M. (2008). Theories of representation in French and English scholarship on multilingualism. International Journal of Multilingualism, 5(1), 41–52. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dalton-Puffer, C. (2016). Cognitive discourse functions: Specifying an integrative interdisciplinary construct. In E. Dafouz & T. Nikula (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 29–54). Bristol: Channel View Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., Lorenzo, F., & Nikula, T. (2014). ‘You can stand under my umbrella’: Immersion, CLIL and bilingual education. A response to Cenoz, Genesee & Gorter (2013). Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 213–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2013). Content and language integrated learning: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 46(4), 545–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Day, E., & Shapson, S. (1991). Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in French immersion: An experimental study. Language Learning, 41, 25–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. de Graaff, R., Koopman, G. J., Anikina, Y., & Westhoff, G. (2007). An observation tool for effective L2 pedagogy in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 603–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. de Jong, E. J. (2011). Foundations for multilingualism in education: From principles to practice. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. de Jong, E. J. (2016). Two-way immersion for the next generation: Models, policies, and principles. International Multilingual Research Journal, 10(1), 6–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. de Jong, E. J., & Howard, E. (2009). Integration in two-way immersion education: Equalising linguistic benefits for all students. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 12, 81–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Derewianka, B. (2011). A new grammar companion for teachers (2nd ed.). Newtown: Primary English Teaching Association.Google Scholar
  34. Derewianka, B., & Jones, P. (2016). Teaching language in context (2nd ed.). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Durán, L., & Palmer, D. (2014). Pluralist discourses of bilingualism and translanguaging talk in classrooms. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 14(3), 367–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ellis, R. (2001). Investigating form-focused instruction. Language Learning, 51(Suppl. 1), 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. European Commission. (2002). CLIL/EMILE the European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential. Brussels: Brussels European Unit, Public Services Contract 2001-3406/001-001.Google Scholar
  39. Eurydice. (2006). Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice.Google Scholar
  40. Fitts, S. (2006). Reconstructing the status quo: Linguistic interaction in a dual-language school. Bilingual Research Journal, 30(2), 337–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Fortune, T. W., & Tedick, D. J. (2008). One-way, two-way and indigenous immersion: A call for cross-fertilization. In T. W. Fortune & D. J. Tedick (Eds.), Pathways to multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp. 3–21). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Fortune, T. W., & Tedick, D. J. (2015). Oral proficiency assessment of English-proficient K-8 Spanish immersion students. Modern Language Journal, 99(4), 637–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. French, M. (2016). Students’ multilingual resources and policy-in-action: An Australian case study. Language and Education, 30, 298–316. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. García, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  45. García, O., Ibarra Johnson, S., & Seltzer, K. (2017). The translanguaging classroom: Leveraging student bilingualism for learning. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon.Google Scholar
  46. García, O., & Li, W. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Genesee, F. (1981). A comparison of early and late second language learning. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 13, 115–127. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Genesee, F. (1983). Bilingual education of majority-language children: The immersion experiments in review. Applied Psycholinguistics, 4(1), 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Cambridge, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  50. Genesee, F. (2015). Canada: Factors that shaped the creation and development of immersion education. In P. Mehisto & F. Genesee (Eds.), Building bilingual education systems: Forces, mechanisms and counterweights (pp. 43–56). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Hall, G., & Cook, G. (2011). Own-language use in language teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 45(3), 271–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5(2), 93–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hamman, L. (2018). Translanguaging and positioning in two-way dual language classrooms: A case for criticality. Language and Education, 32(1), 21–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Hammond, J., & Gibbons, P. (2005). Putting scaffolding to work: The contribution of scaffolding in articulating ESL education. Prospect, 20(1), 6–30.Google Scholar
  55. Harley, B. (1989). Functional grammar in French immersion: A classroom experiment. Applied Linguistics, 10, 331–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Harley, B. (1998). The role of form-focused tasks in promoting child L2 acquisition. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition (pp. 156–174). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Hummel, K. (2010). Translation and short-term L2 vocabulary retention: Hindrance or help? Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2008). New learning: Elements of a science of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kim, S. H., & Elder, C. (2008). Target language use in foreign language classrooms: Practices and perceptions of two native speaker teachers in New Zealand. Language, Culture and Communication, 21(2), 167–185.Google Scholar
  60. Kovelman, I., Baker, S., & Petitto, L. (2008). Age of first bilingual language exposure as a new window into bilingual reading development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(2), 203–223. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lapkin, S., Hart, D., & Swain, M. (1991). Early and middle French immersion programs: French language outcomes. Canadian Modern Language Review, 48(1), 11–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lin, A. M. Y. (2015). Conceptualizing the potential role of L1 in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 74–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Lin, A. M. Y. (2016). Language across the curriculum and CLIL in English as an additional language contexts: Theory and practice. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Lindholm-Leary, K., & Genesee, F. (2014). Student outcomes in one-way, two-way, and indigenous language immersion education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 2(2), 165180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Lindholm-Leary, K. J. (2005). The rich promise of two-way immersion. Educational Leadership, 62(4), 56–59.Google Scholar
  66. Lindholm-Leary, K. J., & Howard, E. R. (2008). Language development and academic achievement in two-way immersion programs. In T. W. Fortune & D. J. Tedick (Eds.), Pathways to multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp. 177–200). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Littlewood, W., & Yu, B. H. (2011). First language and target language in the foreign language classroom. Language Teaching, 44, 64–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Liu, Y., Fisher, L., Forbes, K., & Evans, M. (2017). The knowledge base of teaching linguistically diverse contexts: 10 grounded principles of multilingual classroom pedagogy for EAL. Language and Intercultural Communication, 1–18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Lucas, T., & Katz, A. (1994). Reframing the debate: The roles of native languages in English-only programs for language minority students. TESOL Quarterly, 28, 537–561. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Luk, J., & Lin, A. M. Y. (2015). Voices without words: Doing critical literate talk in English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 49(1), 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Lyster, R. (2004). Research on form-focused instruction in immersion classrooms: Implications for theory and practice. Journal of French Language Studies, 14(3), 321–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content: A counterbalanced approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Lyster, R., Collins, L., & Ballinger, S. (2009). Linking languages through a bilingual read-aloud project. Language awareness, 18, 366–383. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Marian, V., Shook, A., & Shroeder, S. R. (2013). Bilingual two-way immersion programs benefit academic achievement. Bilingual Research Journal, 36(2), 167–186. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Marsh, D. (Ed.). (2002). CLIL/EMILE the European Dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential. University of Jyväskylä. Retrieved from
  77. Martin, J. R. (1985). Factual writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. Geelong, VIC: Deakin University Press. (Republished by Oxford University Press, 1989).Google Scholar
  78. Martin, J. R. (1991). Types of writing in infants and primary schools. In Working with genre: Papers from the 1989 LERN conference (pp. 33–44). Leichhardt: Common Ground.Google Scholar
  79. Martin, J. R. (1994). Macro-genres: The ecology of the page. Network, 21, 29–52.Google Scholar
  80. Martin, J. R. (2009). Genres and language learning: A social semiotic perspective. Linguistics and Education, 20, 10–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Martin, J. R., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). Modelling and mentoring: Teaching and learning from home to school. In A. Mahboob & L. Barratt (Eds.), Englishes in multilingual contexts (pp. 137–163). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  82. Martínez-Roldan, C. M. (2015). Translanguaging practices as mobilization of linguistic resources in a Spanish/English bilingual after-school program: An analysis of contradictions. International Multilingual Research Journal, 9(1), 43–58. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. London: Macmillan Education.Google Scholar
  84. Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Schuck, K., & Ting, T. (2015). A pluriliteracies approach to content and language integrated learning—Mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction and meaning-making. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 41–57. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzales, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Toward a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice: Qualitative Issues in Educational Research, 3(2), 132–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Moore, P., & Nikula, T. (2016). Translanguaging in CLIL classrooms. In T. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 211–234). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Navés, T. (2002). Successful CLIL programmes. In G. Langé & P. Bertaux (Eds.), The CLIL professional development course (pp. 93–102). Milan: Ministero della’ Instruzione della’ Universitá e della Ricerca.Google Scholar
  88. Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., & Smit, U. (Eds.). (2016). Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  89. Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., & Lorenzo, F. (2016). More than content and language: The complexity of integration in CLIL and bilingual education. In T. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp. 1–25). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. O’Malley, J., & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Ortega, L. (2009). Understanding second language acquisition. London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
  92. Pacheco, M. (2018). Spanish, Arabic, and ‘English-Only’: Making meaning across languages in two classroom communities. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 1–27. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Pacheco, M., & Smith, B. E. (2015). Across languages, modes, and identities: Bilingual adolescents’ multimodal codemeshing in the literacy classroom. Bilingual Research Journal, 38(3), 292–312. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Palmer, D. K., Ballinger, S., & Lizette, P. (2014). Classroom interaction in one-way, two-way, and indigenous immersion contexts. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 2(2), 225–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Polio, C. G., & Duff, P. A. (1994). Teachers’ language use in university foreign language classrooms: A qualitative analysis of English and target language alternation. The Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 313–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Potowski, K. (2004). Student Spanish use and investment in a dual immersion classroom: Implications for second language acquisition and heritage language maintenance. The Modern Language Journal, 88(1), 75–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Potowski, K. (2007). Language and identity in a dual immersion school. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Prasad, G. (2015). Beyond the mirror towards a plurilingual prism: Exploring the creation of plurilingual ‘identity texts’ in English and French classrooms in Toronto and Montpellier. Intercultural Education, 26(6), 497–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Prasad, G. (2018). How does it look and feel to be plurilingual? Analyzing children’s representations of plurilingualism through collage. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism.
  100. Reid, J. (1996). Recent developments in Australian late immersion education. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 17(6), 469–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Rose, D. (2012). Integrating SFL theory with literacy teaching. In Z. Yan, J. Webster, & F. Yan (Eds.), Developing systemic functional linguistics: Theory and application. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
  102. Rose, D. (2015). Building a pedagogical metalanguage II: Knowledge genres. In J. R. Martin (Ed.), Applicable linguistics and academic discourse (pp. 29–58). Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press.Google Scholar
  103. Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney school. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
  104. Rubinstein-Avila, E. (2002). Problematizing the “dual” in a dual immersion program: A portrait. Linguistics and Education, 13(1), 65–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Schecter, S., & Cummins, J. (Eds.). (2003). Multilingual education in practice: Using diversity as a resource. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  106. Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Schmidt, R. (1983). Interaction, acculturation and the acquisition of communication competence. In M. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  108. Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Seedhouse, P. (1999). Task-based interaction. ELT Journal, 53(3), 149–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Seedhouse, P. (2005). ‘Task’ as research construct. Language Learning, 55(3), 533–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Somerville, M., D’Warte, J., & Sawyer, W. (2016). Building on children’s linguistic repertoires to enrich learning: A project report for the NSW Department of Education. Retrieved from
  112. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
  113. Swan, M. (2005). Legislation by hypothesis: The case of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 376–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Tarone, E., & Swain, M. (1995). A sociolinguistic perspective on second language use in immersion classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 166–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Tedick, D. J., & Young, A. I. (2016). Fifth grade two-way immersion students’ responses to form-focused instruction. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 784–807.Google Scholar
  116. Tedick, D. J., & Young, A. I. (2017). Two-way immersion students’ home languages, proficiency levels, and responses to form-focused instruction. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 1–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Teo, P. (2008). Outside in/inside out: Bridging the gap in literacy education in Singapore classrooms. Language and Education, 22(6), 411–431. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. The New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60–92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Thomas, W. P., & Collier, V. P. (2002). A national study of school effectiveness for language minority students’ long-term academic achievement. Santa Cruz, CA: University of California at Santa Cruz, Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence.Google Scholar
  120. Turnbull, M., Lapkin, S., Hart, D., & Swain, M. (1998). Time on task and immersion graduates’ French proficiency. In S. Lapkin (Ed.), French second language education in Canada: Empirical studies (pp. 31–55). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  121. Valadez, C., MacSwan, J., & Martínez, C. (2002). Toward a new view of low achieving bilinguals: A study of linguistic competence in designated ‘semi-linguals. Bilingual Review, 25(3), 238–248.Google Scholar
  122. Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2012). Promoting teacher scaffolding in small-group work: A contingency perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 193–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Williams, C. (1996). Secondary education: Teaching in the bilingual situation. In C. Williams, G. Lewis, & C. Baker (Eds.), The language policy: Taking stock (pp. 39–78). Llangefni: CAI.Google Scholar
  124. Wood, D., Wood, H., & Middleton, D. (1978). An experimental evaluation of four face-to-face teaching strategies. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 1, 131–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marianne Turner
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations