words they were expected to learn, such as climate, weather, the ozone layer, global warming and showed some command of basic structures such as affir- mative sentences, gerunds, and linking words. As I see it, it is fundamental to create opportunities where students are exposed to the target language and can use their mother tongue to facilitate the learning of an additional lan- guage. When students use different languages to articulate their thinking, they start becoming aware of how important language is in their learning process. These projects were co-constructed with students, taking into account their interests and school curricula. Students felt engaged from the beginning of their projects and through the time became used to setting goals and fol- lowing procedures as scientists do.
As mentioned previously, translanguaging might become salient in the classroom, as long as there is clear planning and all languages are deemed important while building and communicating meaning. I strongly believe that CLIL practices might benefit when researchers and practitioners do not underestimate learners’ capacity to learn while using their whole linguistic repertoire. In this project, students combined not only Spanish and English but also social and academic registers to construct knowledge and language their thinking. Despite the external label given of L2 low achievers, these learners have demonstrated that their L1 played a key role to foster the devel- opment and improvement of their L2 not only in terms of language produc- tion but also in terms of register and choice.
non-technical meanings, such as power, theory, volume, eccentricity, and so on. Overall, the language of science is shaped by special linguistic patterns that are key for argumentation and communication about scientific ideas defined by the discipline.
In Colombia, CLIL researchers and practitioners (Anderson, 2011) tend to use the concepts of BICS and CALP (Cummins, 1979, 1980/2001), to dif- ferentiate language instruction in the classroom and in other social contexts such as home or the playground. Other academics remind us of the need to include the development of BICS and CALP in bilingual political endeavours (Bonilla Carvajal & Tejada-Sánchez, 2016). It is true to say that BICS and CALP have played a key role in our understanding of language proficiency and that these concepts have been evolving from their origins to encompass cognitive and contextual factors. Nevertheless, it seems that in some bilingual settings, we have overgeneralised these concepts, and CLIL teachers whose job is to foster academic language proficiency in the disciplines tend to artifi- cially separate what students may internally perceive as a unitary language repertoire. Based on translanguaging principles, I would say that BICS and CALP belong to the same unitary linguistic repertoire that learners build through experience and therefore are dependent not only on contexts but also on speakers’ choices. I also believe that translanguaging pedagogies may read- dress the way we validate all types of language that might occur and interact in the classroom.
Culturally diverse contexts may limit academic and social success on account of privileged or deprived learning environments. In these contexts, allowing students to use their entire linguistic repertoire to make intelligent choices for communicating their thinking should be an overriding priority for both content and language educators. If learners are used to social cognitively undemanding language (the one they might encounter outside school bound- aries), they would have to translate this language into a more complex code in order to succeed through schooling and to gain access to scientific communi- ties. In this rather bleak scenario, one may claim that the language learners may potentially use to articulate their thinking is virtually the same regardless of the social or academic tag we have externally placed on their linguistic rep- ertoire. Through translanguaging pedagogies, we may have the opportunity to surpass unnatural boundaries and take advantage of students’ funds of knowl- edge to enrich the learning of both content and language.
In the Colombian context, educators may wish to think beyond BICS and CALP and help students learn content and language in a more holistic fash- ion. In the project described above we observed how L2 low achievers were able to display academic register and grammar to communicate their
thinking. Translanguaging, then, seems to be a useful tool to give value not only to so-called languages such as Spanish, English, Palenque/Creole, Romani and about 100 indigenous linguistic codes officially recognised by Colombian constitution, but also to social and academic variations of lan- guage that may be exploited to do science and communicate its products to both lay and specialised audiences.
Current educational policies on bilingual practices in Colombia have inclined towards narrowed perceptions of what bilingualism is and have framed it mostly through English and Spanish. Learners are expected to understand the correct use of words and grammatical forms, to achieve a B1 level of English at the end of secondary education. In line with these policies, teachers may need to bear in mind that they are co-learners who use their students’ existing resources and leverage them to make meaning. Grounded in translanguaging principles, educators are invited to design learning environ- ments where students are able to perform in L1 and L2 with some flexibility to shift between languages and registers at times in a strategic fashion.
Translanguaging may support not only students’ learning but also tutors’
learning through dynamic linguistic and cultural interactions. These exchanges have the potential to broaden teacher’s understanding of phenomena and to be more empathetic towards students’ views of the world. In Colombia, teach- ers who use English as Medium of Instruction (EMI) tend to eradicate the presence of L1 in their classrooms. As I see it, EMI teachers should consider the fact that learners come to their classrooms with funds of knowledge that should not be ignored and that it might be inconsistent to expect that learners will appropriate the new language without making reference to what they have already learnt in L1.
In bilingual programmes, tutors may wish to avoid the complete isolation of both languages (Lewis, Jones, & Baker, 2012) because, as García and Lin (2016) emphasise, learners are bilingual individuals not two monolinguals hidden behind one identity; therefore, it is advisable to build language bridges to support students’ learning. Tutors may adapt their languaging or language use to suit what learners bring to the class. It is recommendable to plan metic- ulously, not only in terms of language- and content-expected learning out- comes but also in terms of input adaptations that facilitate translanguaging in the classroom.
One of the issues I have faced in my experience was that those students who did not perform well in English (for instance, reading and reporting scientific texts) had the same issues in Spanish. This finding resonates with those found in Anderson (2011) on the development of CALP in Latin American CLIL settings. He found that the participants in his study reported significant
difficulties in the development of L2 CALP associated to underdeveloped L1 CALP. In the project described above, students who did well in science were those who had developed stronger literacy skills in L1 and L2, which empow- ered them to build their entire linguistic repertoires. This was evident when students presented their research findings to visitors who came from different contexts and cultures. The students who had developed literacy skills in L1 and L2 exhibited greater confidence to display all their linguistic tools to com- municate with their audience effectively.
Bilingual practices should not be framed as a dichotomy where two lan- guages are learnt independently. Conversely, there is a bilingual continuum that changes according to the skill that has been developed. What we may call a more formal use of English or of Spanish, refers simply to the codes that are recognised in an academic learning community. The proposed learning pro- gression accepted for decades might be incomplete or speculative if learners are not considered holistically, without artificial snapshots of students’ com- petencies at a certain time. Students learn science by actively engaging in sci- entific practices. For that reason, their whole linguistic repertoire is key to articulate their thinking and understanding of the natural world.