GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS IN CLIL LESSONS AS A WAY TO ACTIVATE COGNITIVE PROCESSES

This article deals with the issues related to the formation and improvement of cognitive skills of students of schools in Kazakhstan in the framework of the updated content of education. The article presents the results of an applied research aimed at finding effective ways to use graphic organizers when working with texts in English as a foreign language lessons in secondary school. The features of teaching the disciplines of the natural science cycle in a foreign language are considered from the point of view of CLIL technology. The authors’ ideas on the use of graphic organizers as a productive tool for activating cognitive processes and improving students' cognitive skills are described. The variable forms of graphic organizers develop the skills of formulating high-order questions, teach you to express your opinion, structure information, and argue your point of view using the subject knowledge obtained from the text in a foreign language. In this way, students develop the skills that underlie the formation of critical thinking.

1. Strategiya «Kazakhstan - 2050» https://www.akorda.kz/ru/official_documents/strategies_and_programs (Data obrashheniya: 09.01.2021). (In Russian)

2. Urmeneta C. E.(2019) An Introduction to Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) for Teachers and Teacher Educators. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education. Vol. 2(1). P. 7–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.21

3. Renaul M.L., Martí S.M.. (2019) CLIL Approach: Evolution and Current Situation in Europe and in Spain. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR). Vol. 8(12). P. 1110–1119. DOI: 10.21275/ART20203503

4. Tarnaeva L.P., Baeva G.A. (2019) Predmetno-yazykovaya integracziya v sisteme lingvisticheskogo obrazovaniya: pro et contra // Yazyk i kultura. # 45. C. 280–298. DOI: 10.17223/19996195/45/20 (In Russian)

5. Zhetpisbaeva B.A., Kubeeva A.E., Mazachova N. (2016) Rasshirenie professionalnykh funkczij pedagogov pri integrirovannom obuchenii predmetu i yazyku. Vestnik Karagandinskogo universiteta. Seriya "Pedagogika". #4(84). S.8-15 (In Russian) 15.URL:https://rep.ksu.kz/bitstream/handle/data/1175/Zhetpisbayeva%2c%20A.E.Kubeyeva.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

6. Coyle, D. (2010) Content and language integrated learning / D. Coyle, P. Hood, D. Marsh, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 182 p.

7. Lorenzo F., Casal S., Moore P. (2010) The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), pp. 418–442. DOI: 10.1093/applin/amp041

8. Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014) Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–62. doi: 10.1093/applin/amt011

9. Dallinger, S., Jonkmann, K., Hollm, J., & Fiege, C. (2016) The effect of content and language integrated learning on students' English and history competences—killing two birds with one stone? Learning and Instruction, 41, 23–31. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.003

10. Baker, W., & Hüttner, J. (2016) English and more: A multisite study of roles and conceptualisations of language in English medium multilingual universities from Europe to Asia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 1–16. doi: 10.1080/01434632.2016.1207183

11. Pavón V., Ellison M. (2013) Examining Teacher Roles and Competences in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). LINGVARVMARENA. Vol. 4, p.65–78.

12. Pavón V., Ellison M. Examining teacher roles and competences in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Report. Public Services Contract EACEA/2007/3995/2. Brussels: European Commission.

13. Cammarata, L., & Tedick, D. J. (2012) Balancing content and language in instruction: The experience of immersion teachers. The Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 251–69. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01330.x

14. Boldyrev N.N. (2004) Konczeptualnoe prostranstvo kognitivnoj lingvistiki // Voprosy kognitivnoj lingvistiki. #1. S.18-36 (In Russian)

15. Tate, M.L. (2003) Worksheets don't grow dendrites: 20 strategies that engage the brain/ M.L. Tate.-London. 93 p.

16. Demyankov V.Z. (1994) Kognitivnaya lingvistika kak raznovidnost interpretiruyushhego podkhoda // Voprosy yazykoznaniya. # 4. S. 17–33. (In Russian)

17. Karpova I.V. (2005) Kommunikativno-kognitivnyj podkhod k obucheniyu referirovaniyu studentov na prodvinutom urovne v neyazykovom vuze: dis. kand. ped. nauk: 13.00.02 . M. – 150 s. (In Russian)

18. Morrow, K. (1981) Principles of Communicative Methodology / K. Morrow, K. Johnson. – New York and London – 124 p.

19. Ekshembeeva L.V. (2009) Kognitivnoe kartirovanie lingvisticheskogo znaniya: uchebnoe posobie. Almaty: Bastau. – 133 s. (In Russian)