A Review of European Research on Content and Language Integrated Learning

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Introduction. Subjects’ integration in formal teaching can play an important role in addressing the issue of authentic and meaningful learning as opposed to rote memorisation. Content and language integrated learning has been the subject of educational studies for three decades. The scope of research is broad, and from the primary focus on foreign language performance, it has been slowly extended to the impact of Content and language integrated learning on content and mother tongue. The purpose of the research is to summarize selected research articles on Content and language integrated learning application and to estimate its summary average effect on content development in a group of students aged 10‒16.
Materials and Methods. The article presents the systematic review of the studies published in the Web of Science database in the last decade (2010–2020) and surveys the selected empirical studies that focus on the impact of Content and language integrated learning implementation on the content subjects at primary and secondary schools. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Data from six studies were also statistically evaluated using Comprehensive meta analysis and RevMan software, and the synthesis is presented in the Results and Discussion parts.
Results. Based on the 16 discussed studies’ results, Content and language integrated learning intervention produces positive added value; however, the statistical meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences between the Content and language integrated learning and non-CLIL groups in their content knowledge and the results favouring non-CLIL groups. As the groups’ size differed in terms of absolute value, the pooled standard deviation was used to reflect the sample sizes and standard deviation were averaged with more weight given to the larger sample groups.
Discussion and Conclusion. The practical significance and prospects of the study lie in pointing out the benefits of Content and language integrated learning and stressing the importance of its inclusion in teacher training study programmes along with the development of pre-service teachers’ creativity, critical thinking and ability to create their materials.

About the authors

Ivana Cimermanova

University of Presov

Author for correspondence.
Email: ivana.cimermanova@unipo.sk
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8063-8949
Scopus Author ID: 57193775555

Associate Professor of the Institute of British and American Studies

Slovakia, 1, 17 novembra St., Presov 080 01

References

  1. Lynch G. Introducing Content and Language Integrated Learning in Study Abroad Programs. Journal of Kanazawa Seiryo University. 2015; 48(2):69-73. Available at: http://www.seiryo-u.ac.jp/u/education/gakkai/e_ronsyu_pdf/No125/09_lynch_Introducing_Content_125.pdf (accessed 25.11.2020). (In Eng.)
  2. Hanesová D. History of CLIL. In: Pokrivčáková S. (ed.) CLIL in Foreign Language Education: E-textbook for Foreign Language Teachers. Nitra: Constantine the Philosopher University; 2015. p. 7-16. (In Eng.) DOI:http://doi.org/10.17846/CLIL.2015.7-16
  3. Lasagabaster D., Sierra J.M. Immersion and CLIL in English: More Differences than Similarities. ELT Journal. 2010; 64(4):367-375. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp082
  4. Cenoz J. Content-Based Instruction and Content and Language Integrated Learning: The Same or Different?Language, Culture and Curriculum. 2015; 28(1):8-24. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922
  5. Ortega L. Researching CLIL and TBLT Interfaces. System. 2015; 54:103-109. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.09.002
  6. Yang W. ESP vs. CLIL: A Coin of Two Sides or a Continuum of Two Extremes? ESP Today. 2016;4(1):43-68. Available at: https://www.esptodayjournal.org/pdf/current_issue/3.6.2016/WENHSIEN-YANGfull% 20text.pdf (accessed 25.11.2020). (In Eng.)
  7. Taillefer G. CLIL in Higher Education: The (Perfect?) Crossroads of ESP and Didactic Reflection. Asp.2013; 63:31-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/asp.3290
  8. Tzoannopoulou M. Rethinking ESP: Integrating Content and Language in the University Classroom.Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2015; 173:149-153. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.045
  9. Borzova E., Shemanaeva M. A University Foreign Language Curriculum for Pre-Service Non-Language Subject Teacher Education. Education Sciences. 2019; 9(3):163. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9030163
  10. Urgal C.C. Law and Business Students’ Attitudes towards Learning English for Specific Purposes within CLIL and Non-CLIL Contexts. Languages. 2019; 4(2):45. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/languages4020045
  11. Nikula T. CLIL: A European Approach to Bilingual Education. In: Van Deusen-Scholl N., May S. (eds)Second and Foreign Language Education. Encyclopedia of Language and Education (3rd ed.). Springer, Cham;2016. p. 1-14. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02323-6_10-1
  12. Marsh D. Language Awareness and CLIL. In: Cenoz J., Hornberger N.H. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Language and Education. 2008. p. 233-246. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_152
  13. Cenoz J., Zarobe Y.R. Learning through a Second or Additional Language: Content-Based Instruction and CLIL in the Twenty-First Century. Language, Culture and Curriculum. 2015; 28(1):1-7. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000921
  14. Llinares A. Integration in CLIL: A Proposal to Inform Research and Successful Pedagogy. Language,Culture and Curriculum. 2015; 28(1):58-73. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000925
  15. Pérez Cañado M.L. Evaluating CLIL Programmes: Instrument Design and Validation. Pulso. Revista de Educación. 2015; 39:79-112. (In Eng.)
  16. Pastrana A., Llinares A., Pascual I. Students’ Language Use for Co-Construction of Knowledge in CLIL Group-Work Activities: A Comparison with L1 Settings. Zeitschrift Für Erziehungswissenschaft. 2018;21(1):49-70. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11618-017-0802-y
  17. Zarobe Y.R. Improving Reading Strategy Knowledge in Young Children: What Self-Report Questionnaires Can Reveal. Elia. 2017; 17:15-45. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.12795/elia.2017.i17.02
  18. Straková Z. CLIL and Global Education: A Meaningful Match. Society. Integration. Education. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference. 2020; 5:546-557. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.17770/sie2020vol5.4819
  19. Pfenninger S.E. The Dynamic Multicausality of Age of First Bilingual Language Exposure: Evidence from a Longitudinal CLIL Study with Dense Time Serial Measurement. Modern Language Journal. 2020;104(3):662-686. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12666
  20. Lasagabaster D., Doiz A. A Longitudinal Study on the Impact of CLIL on Affective Factors. Applied Linguistics. 2017; 38(5):688-712. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv059
  21. Otwinowska A., Foryś M. They Learn the CLIL Way, but Do They Like It? Affectivity and Cognition in Upper-Primary CLIL Classes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2017;20(5):457-480. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1051944
  22. Fontecha A.F., Canga Alonso A. A Preliminary Study on Motivation and Gender in CLIC and NoN-CLIL Types of Instruction. International Journal of English Studies. 2014; 14(1):21-36. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/14/1/156681
  23. Canga Alonso A. The Receptive Vocabulary of Spanish 6th-Grade Primary-School Students in CLIL Instruction: A Preliminary Study. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning. 2013;6(2):22-41. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2013.6.2.2
  24. Mensel L.V., Hiligsmann P., Mettewie L., Galand B. CLIL, an Elitist Language Learning Approach?A Background Analysis of English and Dutch CLIL Pupils in French-Speaking Belgium. Language, Culture and Curriculum. 2020; 33(1):1-14. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2019.1571078
  25. Perry L., Mcconney A. School Socio-Economic Composition and Student Outcomes in Australia: Implications for Educational Policy. Australian Journal of Education. 2010; 54(1):72-85. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000494411005400106
  26. Sirin S.R. Socioeconomic Status and Academic Achievement: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research. Review of Educational Research. 2005; 75(3):417-453. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417
  27. Pérez Cañado M.L. The Effects of CLIL on L1 and Content Learning: Updated Empirical Evidence from Monolingual Contexts. Learning and Instruction. 2017; 57:18-33. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.002
  28. Castellano-Risco I., Alejo-González R., Piquer-Píriz A.M. The Development of Receptive Vocabulary in CLIL vs EFL: Is the Learning Context the Main Variable? System. 2020; 91:102263. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102263
  29. Chostelidou D., Griva E. Measuring the Effect of Implementing CLIL in Higher Education: An Experimental Research Project. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2014; 116:2169-2174. (In Eng.) DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.538
  30. Martínez Agudo J. de D. To What Extent Do Affective Variables Correlate with Content Learning Achievement in CLIL Programmes? Language and Education. 2021; 35(3):226-240. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2020.1833910
  31. Somers T., Llinares A. Students’ Motivation for Content and Language Integrated Learning and the Role of Programme Intensity. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2018. (In Eng.) DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1517722
  32. Navarro-Pablo M., Gándara Y.L. The Effects of CLIL on L1 Competence Development in Monolingual Contexts. The Language Learning Journal. 2020; 48(1):18-35. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1656764
  33. Nieto-Moreno-de-Diezmas E. Acquisition of Reading Comprehension in L1 in Bilingual Programmes of Primary Education. A Comparative Study. Ocnos. 2018; 17(1):43-54. (In Eng.) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18239/ocnos_2018.17.1.1471
  34. Kaushanskaya M., Yoo J., Marian V. The Effect of Second-Language Experience on Native-Language Processing. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 2011; 8(1):54-77. (In Eng.)
  35. Bruton A. Is CLIL so Beneficial, or Just Selective? Re-Evaluating Some of the Research. System. 2011;39(4):523-532. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.08.002
  36. Boncés J.R. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): Considerations in the Colombian Context.Gist Educationand Learning Research Journal. 2012; (6):177-189. Available at: https://latinjournal.org/index.php/gist/article/view/432 (accessed 25.11.2020). (In Eng.)
  37. Cenoz J., Genesee F., Gorter D. Critical Analysis of CLIL: Taking Stock and Looking Forward. Applied Linguistics. 2014; 35(3):243-262. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011
  38. Graham K.M., Choi Y., Davoodi A., Razmeh S., Dixon L.Q. Language and Content Outcomes of CLIL and EMI: A Systematic Review. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning. 2018;11(1):19-37. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2018.11.1.2
  39. Doiz A., Lasagabaster D., Sierra J.M. CLIL and Motivation: The Effect of Individual and Contextual Variables. The Language Learning Journal. 2014; 42(2):209-224. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889508
  40. Ouazizi K. The Effects of CLIL Education on the Subject Matter (Mathematics) and the Target Language (English). Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning. 2016; 9(1):110-137. (In Eng.)DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2016.9.1.5
  41. Lasagabaster D., Sierra J.M. Language Attitudes in CLIL and Traditional EFL Classes. International Journal of CLIL Research. 2009; 1(2):4-17. Available at: http://www.laslab.org/wp-content/uploads/language_attitudes_in_clil_and_traditional_efl_classes.pdf (accessed 25.11.2020). (In Eng.)
  42. Psaltou-Joycey A., Mattheoudakis M., Thomaï A. Language Learning Strategies in CLIL and Non-CLIL Classes: Which Strategies Do Young Learners Claim They Use? In: Conference: Cross-Curricular Approaches to Language Education. Thessaloniki, Greece; 2012. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3240.2088
  43. Pozo E. del CLIL in Secondary Classrooms: History Contents on the Move. In: Tsuchiya K., Pérez Murillo M.D. (eds.). Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2019. p. 125-151. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6_6
  44. Jäppinen A. Thinking and Content Learning of Mathematics and Science as Cognitional Development in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): Teaching Through a Foreign Language in Finland. Language and Education. 2005; 19(2):147-168. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780508668671
  45. Surmont J., Struys E., Noort M.V., Craen P.V. The Effects of CLIL on Mathematical Content Learning:A Longitudinal Study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching. 2016; 6(2):319-337. (In Eng.) DOI:https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2016.6.2.7
  46. Fleckenstein J., Gebauer S.K., Möller J. Promoting Mathematics Achievement in One-Way Immersion:Performance Development Over Four Years of Elementary School. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2019;56:228-235. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.01.010
  47. Binterová H., Šulista M. GeoGebra Software Use within a Content and Language Integrated Learning Environment. European Journal of Contemporary Education. 2013; 4(2):100-116. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2013.4.100
  48. Serra C. Assessing CLIL at Primary School: A Longitudinal Study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2007; 10(5):582-602. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.2167/beb461.0
  49. Piesche N., Jonkmann K., Fiege C., Keßler J. CLIL for All? A Randomised Controlled Field Experiment with Sixth-Grade Students on the Effects of Content and Language Integrated Science Learning. Learning and Instruction. 2016; 44:108-116. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.04.001
  50. Fernández-Sanjurjo J., Fernández-Costales A., Blanco J. M. Analysing Students’ Content-Learning in Science in Clil vs. Non-Clil Programmes: Empirical Evidence from Spain. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2019; 22(6):661-674. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1294142
  51. Mattheoudakis M., Alexiou T., Laskaridou C. To CLIL or Not to CLIL? The Case of the 3rd Experimental Primary School in Evosmos. In: Major Trends in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics. Vol. 3. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter; 2015. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/9788376560915.p13
  52. Meyerhöffer N., Dreesmann D.C. The Exclusive Language of Science? Comparing Knowledge Gains and Motivation in English-bilingual Biology Lessons between Non-selected and Preselected Classes. International Journal of Science Education. 2019; 41(1):1-20. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1529446
  53. Xanthou M. The Impact of CLIL on L2 Vocabulary Development and Content Knowledge. English Teaching:Practice and Critique. 2011; 10(4):116-126. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ962609.pdf (accessed 25.11.2020). (In Eng.)
  54. Isidro X.S., Lasagabaster D. The Impact of CLIL on Pluriliteracy Development and Content Learning in a Rural Multilingual Setting: A Longitudinal Study. Language Teaching Research. 2019; 23(5):584-602. (In Eng.)DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817754103
  55. Lialikhova D. Triggers and Constraints of Lower Secondary Students’ Willingness to Communicate Orally in English in a CLIL Setting in the Norwegian Context. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education. 2018; 6(1):27-56. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.16013.lia
  56. Sylvén L.K. CLIL in Sweden – Why Does It not Work? A Metaperspective on CLIL across Contexts in Europe. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2013; 16(3):301-320. (In Eng.) DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777387
  57. Dallinger S., Jonkmann K., Hollm J., Fiege C. The Effect of Content and Language Integrated Learning on Students’ English and History Competences – Killing Two Birds with One Stone? Learning and Instruction.2016; 41:23-31. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.003
  58. Bellés-Calvera L. Teaching Music in English: A Content-Based Instruction Model in Secondary Education.Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning. 2018; 11(1):109-139. (In Eng.) DOI:https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2018.11.1.6
  59. Salvador-García C., Capella-Peris C., Chiva-Bartoll O., Ruiz-Montero P.J. A Mixed Methods Study to Examine the Influence of CLIL on Physical Education Lessons: Analysis of Social Interactions and Physical Activity Levels. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00578
  60. Pérez Cañado M.L. From the CLIL Craze to the CLIL Conundrum: Addressing the Current CLIL Controversy.Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature. 2016; 9(1):9-31. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.667
  61. Banegas D.L. A Review of “CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning”. Language and Education.2011; 25(2):182-185. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2010.539045
  62. Hak T., Rhee H.V., Suurmond R. How to Interpret Results of Meta-Analysis. SSRN Electronic Journal.2018. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3241367
  63. Sepešiová M. New Perspectives in Pre-service Teacher Training in CLIL via VLE. In: Language in Focus:Contemporary Means and Methods in ELT and Applied Linguistics. LIF – Language in Focus. Tallinn; 2018.p. 515-533. (In Eng.)
  64. Papaja K. The Role of a Teacher in a CLIL Classroom. Glottodidactica. An International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 2013; 40(1):147-154. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/gl.2013.40.1.11
  65. Banegas D.L. CLIL Teacher Development: Challenges and Experiences. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning. 2012; 5(1):46-56. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2012.5.1.4
  66. Van Kampen E., Admiraal W., Berry A. Content and Language Integrated Learning in the Netherlands:Teachers’ Self-Reported Pedagogical Practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism.2018; 21(2):222-236. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1154004
  67. McDougald J.S. Teachers’ Attitudes, Perceptions and Experiences in CLIL: A Look at Content and Language. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal. 2015; 17(1):25-41. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2015.1.a02
  68. Cross R. Creative in Finding Creativity in the Curriculum: The CLIL Second Language Classroom. The Australian Educational Researcher. 2012; 39(4):431-445. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-012-0074-8
  69. Hanesová D. Development of Critical and Creative Thinking Skills in CLIL. Journal of Language and Cultural Education. 2014; 2(2):33-51. (In Eng.)
  70. Kosturková M. The Level of Critical Thinking in Students of Education. Lifelong Learning. 2014;4(1):45-61. (In Eng.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.11118/lifele2014040145

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2026 Cimermanova I.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

We use cookies and Yandex.Metrica to improve the Site and for good user experience. By continuing to use this Site, you confirm that you have been informed about this and agree to our personal data processing rules.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).