3rd International Conference on Education, Culture and Identity

ICECI 2017

BILINGUAL EDUCATION IN
SERBIAN AND RUSSIAN;
ALEKSINAC MODEL

Dragana Vasilijević Belgrade, Serbia

Topics to be covered

Bilingual Education in Europe: Forms and Benefits

Bilingual Education in Serbia

Bilingual Teaching in Serbian and Russian: Aleksinac Model

Conclusions and perspectives

 Language combinations in Europe

We understand CLIL as a dual- 1 state language + 1 foreign language

focused approach in which an
additional language is used for
learning and teaching of both 1 state language + 1 other state language
language and content
(Maljers, Marsh & Wolff, 2007, p.
8) typically to students 1 state language + 1 regional/minority
participating in some form of language with official status
mainstream education at
the primary, secondary, or tertiary 1 state language + 1 regional/minority
level (Dalton-Puffer, 2011, p. 183). language without official status

1 regional/minority language without

official status + 1 foreign language

European Commission, 2017, pp. 161-163

 Objectives
(EURYDICE, 2006, pp. 22-23)

Socio- Socio-
economic cultural
objectives objectives

Educational Linguistic
objectives objectives
 Introduction of
bilingual education
01 Sep
2004

5 vehicular
languages;
80 sections
Adapted CLIL
model with 30-
45% classes in
foreign
language
 Law on Primary Education (Article 5)
Law on Secondary Education (Article 19)

Forms of Teaching
by language of instruction
 Rulebook on more specific conditions for the
implementation of bilingual teaching, “Official
Gazette of RS”, no. 105/2015, 50/2016. Schools

Pupils

Teachers
Conditions for Pupils

Language test

Average score in
previous classes 6th 7th High
grade grade School
Final exams

A1.1 CEFR A1.2 CEFR A2 CEFR

Conditions for teachers
Subject
Subject
Teacher’s consent teacher with
teacher who
studied in
B2 CEFR
target
certificate
Proof of their language

language knowledge

Subject
teacher with
Foreign B1 certificate
lecturer
+ language
teacher
Conditions for Schools
Inconsistences of the Rulebook
The Rulebook does not oblige teachers of any kind of
improvement except for linguistic;

The Rulebook does not oblige schools on cooperation

and experience exchange;

The Rulebook does not state the obligation of

external evaluation of bilingual instruction except for the
Report written by schools themselves;
 Guidelines
Problems
for Improvement
Adequate
valuation
of teachers
Bilingual education is Revision and
not recognized in reform of the
official documents! program for
bilingual
classes
No achievement Better
standards for cooperation
bilingual education! among all
the parties

No benefits for Creating

teachers! achievement
standards
Vučo & Begović, 2017, p. 232 Vučo, 2014, pp. 142-144
Russian language in Serbia
Russian is being
less and less
present in
primary and
secondary
education

The interest for

learning Russian
is constantly
increasing
 Aleksinac Supported
Gymnasium From
year
by NIS
Company
2014/15

Russian is taught as a
second foreign language
(only 2 classes per week)

73 pupils,
science
classes

9 subjects
(30-45% in
Russian)
 take entrance exams in Russian (A2)
(gymnasium offers free four months of
preparatory lessons for absolute beginners)

are expected to master standard

Students curicula + B2 level of Russian in four
years

get free textbooks and/or transportation

2 best students get scholarships to study at
Lobachevsky State University in Nizhni Novgorod
Teachers
Subject teachers (B1)
together with the Overburdening
language teacher

Lack of teaching
No native speakers
materials

No opportunities for
No benefits for
professional
teachers
advancement
 Positive aspects Negative aspects

Lack of teaching materials

Cooperation with institutions
Overburdening of teachers

No foreign lecturers
Financial support by NIS
company Insufficient pre-required
knowledge
No chances to use Russian
language
High motivation
No trainings for teachers
Recommendations and perspectives
Legal changes (optional Russian lessons for primary school
students or a preparatory year)
Employing lecturers from Russia or teachers with high level
of knowledge of Russian
Professional development in the area of methodology,
experince exchange, external evaluations

1. Questionnaire for teachers and students

2. Russian language test for students
 References
1. Baetens Beardsmore, H. (2002). The significance of CLIL/EMILE. In D. Marsh (Ed.), CLIL/EMILE The European
Dimension – Action, Trends and Foresight Potential (pp. 20–27). Bygate: University of Jyväskylä.
2. Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-Language Integrated Learning: From Practice to Principles. Annual Review
of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204.
3. Đurić, L. (2006). Ogledi i inovativni projekti u nastavi francuskog jezika. Inovacije u nastavi - časopis za savremenu
nastavu, 19(3): 28-40.
4. Manic, D. (2014a). CLIL Assessment. Linguistics, Culture and Identity in Foreign Language Education.
International Burch University, Sarajevo. 35-6 pp. 417- 423
5. Manić, D. (2014b). Početna obuka i stručno usavršavanje CLIL nastavnika. Savremene paradigme u nauci i
naučnoj fantastici. Nauka i savremeni univerzitet 3, 398-408.
6. Manić, D. (2016). Evaluation and assessment of task-based activities in CLIL. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Faculty of Philology, Belgrade.
7. Vučo, J. (2006a). U potrazi za sopstvenim modelom dvojezične nastave. Inovacije u nastavi,19, 41-54.
8. Vučo, J. (2006b). Prva iskustva u razvoju dvojezične nastave u Srbiji. In M. Knežević & A. Nikčević-Batričević (Eds.)
Reading Accros Borders: papers in literary and language studies.
9. Vučo, J. (2007). Dvojezično obrazovanje - savremene tendencije, Zbornik sa naučnog skupa Jezik, književnost,
politika, pp. 403–410.
10. Vučo, J. & Zavišin, K. (2011). Bilingual education: the road to multilingualism. Linguistic and Cultural Diversity
within Learning Communities: Cross-cultural and Transnational Perspectives, International Burch University
Sarajevo, pp.713-723.
 References
11. Vučo, J, Filipović, J & Marković, Lj. (2013). Efikasnost CLIL-a u akademskoj nastavi jezika, književnosti i
kulture (studija slučaja). Srpski jezik XVIII, Beograd, Društvo za srpski jezik, pp. 357-378.
12. Vučo, J. (2014). Dvojezična nastava stranih jezika u Srbiji, Filipović J. Filipović & O. Durbaba (eds.). Jezici
u obrazovanju i jezičke obrazovne politike (pp. 107-152). Beograd: Filološki fakultet Univerziteta u
Beogradu/Čigoja.
13. Vučo, J. & Manić, D. (2015). ICT in Task-Based Language Learning – Analyzing a Lesson Plan in PETALL
Project. ICT for Language Learning. Florence, Italy. Libreriauniversitaria, pp. 148-151.
14. Vučo, J. & Manić, D. (2015). Unapređivanje nastave stranog jezika struke u srednjim stručnim školama –
CLIL i TBLT iskustva u projektu PETALL Примењена лингвистика, 16 (2015), pp. 79-88.
15. Vučo, J. & Manić, D. (2016a). O interkulturnim vrednostima projektnih zadataka – primer PETALL
projekta. Jezici i kulture u vremenu i prostoru. Novi Sad. Filozofski fakultet.
http://petallproject.eu/petall/images/interkulturnim_novi_sad.pdf
16. Vučo, J. & Manić, D. (2016b). Informacione tehnologije u nastavi jezika zasnovanoj na projektnim
zadacima. Digitalna humanistika. Beograd: Filološki fakultet.
17. Vučo, J. & Begović, A. (2017). Bilingual Education in Serbia: Models and Perspectives In J. Filipović, J.
Vučo (Eds.), Manjinski jezici u obrazovanju i učenje jezika: izazovi i nove perspektive, Filološka istraživanja
danas. (pp. 225-238). Beograd: Filološki fakultet, Beograd
18. Zavišin, K., & Đorović, D. (2011). Nastava italijanskog jezika u funkciji CLIL-a. In Jezik struke: izazovi i
perspektive (pp. 732-740). Beograd: Filozofski fakultet.
 References
19. Zavišin, K. (2012). Bilingvalna nastava iz perspektive jezičke politike i planiranja: smernice za projekat
bilingvalne nastave na italijanskom i srpskom jeziku u srednjim školama. Inovacije u nastavi, XXV (13), 64–74.
20. Zavišin, K. (2013a). Theoretical foundations and critical analysis of CLIL-based instruction in Italian and
Serbian in a high school in Serbia. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Faculty of Philology, Belgrade.
21. Zavišin, K. (2013b). CLIL nastava od teorije do prakse. In J. Vučo & О. Durbaba, (Eds), Jezik i obrazovanje
Filološka istraživanja danas. (pp. 439-451). Filološki fakultet, Beograd.
22. Eurydice (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Brussels: European
Commission.
23. European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2017). Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe – 2017
Edition. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
24. Tzoannopoulou, M. (2016). From ESP to CLIL: Designing Materials for the University Classroom. In K. Papaja
& C. Can (Eds.), Language in Focus: Exploring the challenges and opportunities in Linguistics and English
Language Teaching (ELT) (pp. 423-442). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
25. Pushkin Institute. (2017, August 23). Русский язык: повседневное общение (уровни А1 - С2) . Retrieved from
http://www.pushkin.institute/Certificates/CCT/russkiy-yazyk-povsednevnoe-obshchenie-urovni-a1-c2.php
26. European Comission. (2006). Special Eurobarometer 243: Europeans and their languages. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_243_en.pdf
27. Beko, L. (2013). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in Earth Science. (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Faculty of Philology, Belgrade.
 References
28. Lujić, R. (2016). Dvojezično i višejezično obrazovanje u Republici Hrvatskoj u svjetlu hrvatske jezične politike i
planiranja. Metodički Ogledi, 23(2), 99–120.
29. Rašić, M. (2017, January). U srpskim školama dominira učenje engleskog, ali još jedan jezik mu se opasni
približava. Blic. Retrieved from http://www.blic.rs/vesti/drustvo/u-srpskim-skolama-dominira-ucenje-engleskog-
ali-jos-jedan-jezik-mu-se-opasno/rk02he9
30. Hanesová, D. (2015). History of CLIL. In S. Pokrivčáková et al. (Ed.), CLIL in Foreign Language Education: e-textbook
for foreign language teachers (pp. 7–16). Nitra: Constantine the Philosopher University.
31. Maljers, A., Marsh, D. & Wolff, D. (eds.). 2007. Windows on CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning in the
European Spotlight. Graz, Austria: European Centre for Modern Languages.
32. Commission of the European Communities (2003). Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity: An
Action Plan 2004-2006. Brussells. Retreived from:
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2003:0449:FIN:en:PDF
33. Pasuljević, L. (2015) Dvojezična nastava na francuskom jeziku u Srbiji: istraživanje receptivnih veština učenika.
Primenjena lingvistika (16), pp. 131-142.
34. Glušac, T. (2012).CLIL and One-to-One Classes. Content and Language. In R. Popović & V. Savić (eds.) Integrated
Learning (CLIL) in Teaching English to Young Larners : conference proceedings no. 11 (pp. 63-74). Jagodina : Faculty
of Education.
35. Glušac, M. & Mazurkiević, J. (2013). The CLIL Initiative in Vojvodina. R. Popović & V. Savić (eds.) Integrated
Learning (CLIL) in Teaching English to Young Larners : conference proceedings no. 11 (pp. 93-102). Jagodina :
Faculty of Education.
Documents
1. Elaborate for determining the fulfillment of the prescribed conditions in terms of space,
equipment, teaching tools and teaching staff for conducting bilingual classes, 2016. Archive of
Aleksinac Gymnasium.
2. Report on the work of the bilingual class in the school year of 2015/2016 in this gymnasium in
Aleksinac, 2016. Archive of Aleksinac Gymnasium.
3. Law on Primary Education ("Official Gazette of RS", no. 55/2013)
4. The Law on Secondary Education ("Official Gazette of RS", no. 55/2013)
5. Rulebook on more specific conditions for the implementation of bilingual teaching, “Official
Gazette of RS”, no. 105/2015, 50/2016.
 linkedin.com/in/
Dragana Vasilijević vasilijevic@gmx.at vasilijevic/

Thank you for your attention!

Thank you for your attention!
Topics to be covered

Bilingual Education in Europe: Forms and Benefits

Bilingual Education in Serbia

Bilingual Teaching in Serbian and Russian: Aleksinac Model

Conclusion