1887
image of CLIL in the 21st Century
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article traces the historical phases in the conceptualisation of and research on Content-and-language-Integrated Learning in Europe since the 1990s. Following upon early programmatic statements, the first wave of CLIL research concentrated on language learning outcomes. In a second wave, the focus was on descriptions of practice and studies of participant perspectives. More recently, studies have focused on the unique character of CLIL as an educational approach in its own right, not simply as a context of foreign language teaching. The crucial content-language interface is being addressed in research focusing on language and literacy in content curricula and classroom practices. A new CLIL research focus is the development of pedagogical practice through theory-based interventions. In line with the UN sustainable development goal of Quality Education, we identify equity and team work as future challenges and argue that CLIL could be a catalyst for a more collaborative and multidisciplinary approach in education.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21021.dal
2022-06-24
2022-08-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Admiraal, W., Westhoff, G., & de Bot, K.
    (2006) Evaluation of bilingual secondary education in the Netherlands: Students’ language proficiency in English. Educational Research and Evaluation, 12(1), 75–93. 10.1080/13803610500392160
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610500392160 [Google Scholar]
  2. Badertscher, H., & Bieri, T.
    (2009) Wissenserwerb im Content and Language Integrated Learning: Empirische Befunde und Interpretationen. Haupt.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Baetens Beardsmore, H.
    (Ed.) (1993) European models of bilingual education. Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J.
    (2015) Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Barwell, R.
    (2016) A Bakhtinian perspective on language and content integration: Encountering the alien word in second language mathematics classrooms. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.101–120). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑008
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-008 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bauer-Marschallinger, S.
    (2016) Acquisition of historical competences in the CLIL history classroom. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. (2019) With united forces: How design-based research can link theory and practice in the transdisciplinary sphere of CLIL. CLIL: Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 2(2), 7–23. 10.5565/rev/clil.19
    https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.19 [Google Scholar]
  8. Berger, A.
    (2016) Learning mathematics bilingually: An integrated language and mathematics model of word problem solving processes in English as a foreign language. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.73–100). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑007
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-007 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bonnet, A., & Breidbach, S.
    (2017) CLIL teachers’ professionalization: Between explicit knowledge and professional identity. InA. Llinares & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp.269–285). Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.47.16bon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.16bon [Google Scholar]
  10. Breeze, R., & Dafouz, E.
    (2017) Constructing complex Cognitive Discourse Functions in higher education: An exploratory study of exam answers in Spanish- and English-medium instruction settings. System, 70, 81–91. 10.1016/j.system.2017.09.024
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.09.024 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bruton, A.
    (2011) Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the research. System, 39(4), 523–532. 10.1016/j.system.2011.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  12. (2013) CLIL: Some of the reasons why… and why not. System, 41(3), 587–597. 10.1016/j.system.2013.07.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.001 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D.
    (2014) Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. 10.1093/applin/amt011
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011 [Google Scholar]
  14. Carrió-Pastor, M.
    (2021) CLIL vs EMI: Different approaches or same dog with a different collar?InM. L. Carrió-Pastor & B. Bellés Fortuño (Eds.) Teaching language and content in multicultural and multilingual classrooms (pp.1–10). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑56615‑9_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56615-9_2 [Google Scholar]
  15. Codó, E.
    (2020) The dilemmas of experimental CLIL in Catalonia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 10.1080/01434632.2020.1725525
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1725525 [Google Scholar]
  16. Codó, E., & Patiño-Santos, A.
    (2018) CLIL, unequal working conditions and neoliberal subjectivities in a state secondary school. Language Policy, 17(4), 479–499. 10.1007/s10993‑017‑9451‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-017-9451-5 [Google Scholar]
  17. 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. 10.2167/beb459.0
    https://doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0 [Google Scholar]
  18. Coyle, D., & Meyer, O.
    (2021) Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies Teaching for Deeper Learning. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108914505
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108914505 [Google Scholar]
  19. Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D.
    (2010) CLIL – Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009024549
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009024549 [Google Scholar]
  20. 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. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  21. Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2007) Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) classrooms. Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.20
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.20 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2013) A construct of Cognitive Discourse Functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 216–253. 10.1515/eujal‑2013‑0011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2016) Cognitive Discourse Functions: Specifying an integrative interdisciplinary construct. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.29–54). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑005
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-005 [Google Scholar]
  24. Dalton-Puffer, C., & Bauer-Marschallinger, S.
    (2019) Cognitive Discourse Functions meet historical competences: Towards an integrated pedagogy in CLIL history education. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 7(1), 30–60. 10.1075/jicb.17017.dal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.17017.dal [Google Scholar]
  25. (forthcoming). L2 proficiency and development in CLIL (chapter 11). InD. Banegas & S. Zappa Eds. The Routledge Handbook of Content and Language Integrated Learning. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Dalton-Puffer, C., & Nikula, T.
    (2006) Pragmatics of content-based instruction: Teacher and student directives in Finnish and Austrian classrooms. Journal of Pragmatics, 27(2), 241–267.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 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. 10.1093/applin/amu010
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu010 [Google Scholar]
  28. deBoer, M., & Leontjev, D.
    (Eds.) (2020) Assessment and learning in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) classrooms: Approaches and conceptualisations. Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑54128‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54128-6 [Google Scholar]
  29. Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M.
    (2014) CLIL and motivation: The effect of individual and contextual variables. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 209–224. 10.1080/09571736.2014.889508
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889508 [Google Scholar]
  30. European Centre of Modern Languages (ECML)
  31. European Commission
    European Commission (1995) White paper on education and training. Teaching and learning: towards the learning society. Directorate General for Education Youth Sport and Culture. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/8722c9fb-71da-435f-94b6-33aab67eb081/language-en
    [Google Scholar]
  32. European Commission
    European Commission (2002) CLIL/EMILE – The European dimension. Technical Report. Brussels: European Commission.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. European Commission
    European Commission (2003) Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity: An action plan 2004–2006. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b3225824-b016-42fa-83f6-43d9fd2ac96d
    [Google Scholar]
  34. European Commission
    European Commission (2012) Special Eurobarometer 36: Europeans and their Languages. https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2224
  35. European Parliament
    European Parliament (2021) Factsheet: Language Policy. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTU_3.6.6.pdf
  36. Evnitskaya, N., & Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2020) Cognitive Discourse Functions in CLIL classrooms: Eliciting and analysing students’ oral categorizations in science and history. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1804824
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1804824 [Google Scholar]
  37. Evnitskaya, N., Jakonen, T.
    (2017) Multimodal conversation analysis and CLIL classroom practices. InA. Llinares & T. Morton (eds.). Applied Linguistics Perspectives on CLIL. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 201–220. 10.1075/lllt.47.12evn
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.12evn [Google Scholar]
  38. Fernández-Agüero, M., & Hidalgo-McCabe, E.
    (2020) CLIL students’ affectivity in the transition between education levels: The effect of streaming at the beginning of secondary education. Journal of Language, Identity & Education. 10.1080/15348458.2020.1795864
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2020.1795864 [Google Scholar]
  39. Fortune, T., Tedick, D., & Walker, C.
    (2008) Integrated language and content teaching: Insights from the language immersion classroom. InT. Fortune & D. Tedick (Eds.), Pathways to Multilingualism: Evolving perspectives on immersion education (pp.71–96). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781847690371‑007
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847690371-007 [Google Scholar]
  40. Gablasova, D.
    (2014) Issues in the assessment of bilingually educated students: Expressing subject knowledge through L1 and L2. Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 151–164. 10.1080/09571736.2014.891396
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.891396 [Google Scholar]
  41. Garzón-Díaz, E.
    (2021) From cultural awareness to scientific citizenship: Implementing Content and Language Integrated Learning projects to connect environmental science and English in a state school in Colombia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(2), 242–259. 10.1080/13670050.2018.1456512
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1456512 [Google Scholar]
  42. Genesee, F.
    (2004) What do we know about bilingual education for majority language students?InT. K. Bhatia & W. Ritchie (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism and multiculturalism (pp.547–576). Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Goris, J., Denessen, E., & Verhoeven, L.
    (2017) The contribution of CLIL to learners’ international orientation and EFL confidence. The Language Learning Journal, 47(2), 246–256. 10.1080/09571736.2016.1275034
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1275034 [Google Scholar]
  44. (2019) Effects of Content and Language Integrated Learning in Europe: A systematic review of longitudinal experimental studies. European Educational Research Journal, 18(6), 675–698. 10.1177/1474904119872426
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904119872426 [Google Scholar]
  45. Hüttner, J.
    (2017) ELF and Content and Language Integrated Learning. InJ. Jenkins, W. Baker, & M. Dewey (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English as a Lingua Franca (pp.481–493). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315717173‑39
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315717173-39 [Google Scholar]
  46. Hüttner, J., & Smit, U.
    (2018) Negotiating political positions: Subject-specific oral language use in CLIL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 287–302. 10.1080/13670050.2017.1386616
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1386616 [Google Scholar]
  47. Hüttner, J., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U.
    (2013) The power of beliefs: Lay theories and their influence on the implementation of CLIL programmes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 267–284. 10.1080/13670050.2013.777385
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777385 [Google Scholar]
  48. Ikeda, M., Izumi, S., Watanabe, Y., Pinner, R., & Davis, M.
    (2022) Soft CLIL and English language teaching: Understanding Japanese policy, practice, and implications. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Kääntä, L.
    (2014) From noticing to initiating correction: Students’ epistemic displays in instructional interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 86–105. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.010 [Google Scholar]
  50. Lasagabaster, D.
    (2011) English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 3–18. 10.1080/17501229.2010.519030
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2010.519030 [Google Scholar]
  51. Lasagabaster, D., & Doiz, A.
    (2017) A longitudinal study on the impact of CLIL on affective factors. Applied Linguistics, 38(5), 688–712. 10.1093/applin/amv059
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv059 [Google Scholar]
  52. Lin, A. & Lo, Y. Y.
    (2017) Trans/languaging and the triadic dialogue in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Language and Education31(1), 26–45. 10.1080/09500782.2016.1230125
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2016.1230125 [Google Scholar]
  53. Lin, A. M.
    (2019) Theories of trans/languaging and trans-semiotizing: Implications for content-based education classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(1), 5–16. 10.1080/13670050.2018.1515175
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1515175 [Google Scholar]
  54. Llinares, A.
    (2015) Integration in CLIL: A proposal to inform research and successful pedagogy. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 58–73. 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000925
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000925 [Google Scholar]
  55. Llinares, A., & Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2015) The role of different tasks in CLIL students’ use of evaluative language. System, 54, 69–79. 10.1016/j.system.2015.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  56. Llinares, A., & Evnitskaya, N.
    (2021) Classroom interaction in CLIL programs: Offering opportunities or fostering inequalities?TESOL Quarterly, 55(2), 366–397. 10.1002/tesq.607
    https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.607 [Google Scholar]
  57. Llinares, A., & McCabe, A.
    (Eds.) (2020) Systemic Functional Linguistics: A social-semiotic approach to Content and Language Integrated Learning in bilingual/multilingual education. Special Issue of International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2019.1635985
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1635985 [Google Scholar]
  58. Llinares, A., & Mendikoetxea, A.
    (2020) Enhancing international competence in EMI: Teacher reflective practices. InM. M. Sánchez-Pérez (Ed.), Teacher training for English-Medium Instruction on higher education (pp.87–105). IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑7998‑2318‑6.ch005
    https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-2318-6.ch005 [Google Scholar]
  59. Llinares, A., & Morton, T.
    (Eds.) (2017) Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL. Benjamins. 10.21832/9781783096145‑004
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-004 [Google Scholar]
  60. Llinares, A., & Nashaat-Sobhy, N.
    (2021) What is an ecosystem? Defining science in primary school CLIL contexts. Language Teaching for Young Learners, 3(2), 337–362. 10.1075/ltyl.20010.lli
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ltyl.20010.lli [Google Scholar]
  61. Llinares, A., & Pascual Peña, I.
    (2015) A genre approach to the effect of academic questions on CLIL students’ language production. Language and Education, 29(1), 15–30. 10.1080/09500782.2014.924964
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.924964 [Google Scholar]
  62. Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R.
    (2012) The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Lo, Y. Y.
    (2017) Development of the beliefs and language awareness of content subject teachers in CLIL. Does professional development help?International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–15. 10.1080/13670050.2017.1318821
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1318821 [Google Scholar]
  64. Lo, Y. Y., & Jeong, H.
    (2018) Impact of genre-based pedagogy on students’ academic literacy development in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Linguistics and Education, 47, 36–46. 10.1016/j.linged.2018.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2018.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  65. Lo, Y. Y., & Lin, A. M. Y.
    (Eds.) (2021) Teaching, learning and scaffolding in CLIL science classrooms. Benjamins. Originally published as special issue ofJournal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education7(2) 2019 10.1075/bct.115
    https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.115 [Google Scholar]
  66. Lorenzo, F.
    (2017) Historical literacy in bilingual settings: Cognitive academic language in CLIL history narratives. Linguistics and Education, 37, 32–41. 10.1016/j.linged.2016.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2016.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  67. Lorenzo, F., Granados, A., & Ávila, I.
    (2019) The development of cognitive academic language proficiency in multilingual education: Evidence of a longitudinal study on the language of history. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 41, 100767. 10.1016/j.jeap.2019.06.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  68. Lorenzo, F., Granados, A., & Rico, N.
    (2021) Equity in bilingual education: Socioeconomic status and Content and Language Integrated Learning in monolingual Southern Europe. Applied Linguistics, 42(3), 393–413. 10.1093/applin/amaa037
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amaa037 [Google Scholar]
  69. Madrid, D., & Barrios, E.
    (2018) A comparison of students’ educational achievement across programmes and school types with and without CLIL provision. Porta Linguarum, 29, 29–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Marsh, D.
    (2002) CLIL/EMILE: The European dimension: Action, trends and foresight potential. UniCOM.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J.
    (2007) CLIL as a catalyst for change in languages education. Babylonia, 7(3), 33–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Massler, U., Stotz, D., & Queisser, C.
    (2014) Assessment instruments for primary CLIL: The conceptualisation and evaluation of test tasks. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 137–150. 10.1080/09571736.2014.891371
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.891371 [Google Scholar]
  73. McCabe, A., & Whittaker, R.
    (2017) Genre and appraisal in CLIL history texts: Developing the voice of the historian. InA. Llinares & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp.105–124). Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.47.07mcc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.07mcc [Google Scholar]
  74. Mearns, T., de Graaff, R., & Coyle, D.
    (2017) Motivation for or from bilingual education? A comparative study of learner views in the Netherlands. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–14. 10.1080/13670050.2017.1405906
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1405906 [Google Scholar]
  75. 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. 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000924
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2014.1000924 [Google Scholar]
  76. Moore, P., & Nikula, T.
    (2016) Translanguaging in CLIL classrooms. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.211–234). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑013
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-013 [Google Scholar]
  77. Nashaat Sobhy, N.
    (2018a) Pragmatics in CLIL. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 31(2), 467–494. 10.1075/resla.16040.nas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.16040.nas [Google Scholar]
  78. Nashaat-Sobhy
    Nashaat-Sobhy (2018b) Operationalizing “defining” from a cognitive discourse perspective for learners’ use. InS. Anwaruddin (Ed.), Knowledge Mobilization in TESOL: Connecting research and practice (pp.94–112). Brill Sense. 10.1163/9789004392472_007
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004392472_007 [Google Scholar]
  79. Nashaat-Sobhy, N. & Llinares, A.
    (2020) CLIL students’ definitions of historical terms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1798868
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798868 [Google Scholar]
  80. Nieto Moreno de Diezmas, E.
    (2018) The acquisition of L2 listening comprehension skills in primary and secondary education setting: A comparison between CLIL and non-CLIL student performance. Revista de lingüística teórica y aplicada, 56(2), 13–34. 10.4067/S0718‑48832018000200013
    https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48832018000200013 [Google Scholar]
  81. Nikula, T.
    (2005) English as an object and tool of study in classrooms: Interactional effects and pragmatic implications. Linguistics and Education, 16(1), 27–58. 10.1016/j.linged.2005.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2005.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  82. Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., & Smit, U.
    (Eds.) (2016) Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education. Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145 [Google Scholar]
  83. Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., & Lorenzo, F.
    (2016) More than content and language: The complexity of integration in CLIL and bilingual education. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.1–25). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑004
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-004 [Google Scholar]
  84. Oattes, H., Oostdam, R., de Graaff, R., & Wilschut, A.
    (2018) The challenge of balancing content and language: Perceptions of Dutch bilingual education history teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 165–174. 10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.022
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.11.022 [Google Scholar]
  85. Ortega, L.
    (2013) SLA for the 21st century: Disciplinary progress, transdisciplinary relevance, and the bi/multilingual turn. Language Learning, 63, 1–24. 10.1111/j.1467‑9922.2012.00735.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00735.x [Google Scholar]
  86. Otwinowska, A., Foryś, M.
    (2017) 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, 20(5), 457–480. 10.1080/13670050.2015.1051944
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1051944 [Google Scholar]
  87. Pappa, S., Moate, J., Ruohotie-Lyhty, M., & Eteläpelto, A.
    (2017) Teachers’ pedagogical and relational identity negotiation in the Finnish CLIL context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 65, 61–70. 10.1016/j.tate.2017.03.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.03.008 [Google Scholar]
  88. Paran, A.
    (2013) Content and Language Integrated Learning: Panacea or policy borrowing myth?Applied Linguistics Review, 4(2), 317–342. 10.1515/applirev‑2013‑0014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2013-0014 [Google Scholar]
  89. Pascual, I., & Basse, R.
    (2017) Assessment for learning in CLIL classroom discourse: The case of metacognitive questions. InA. Llinares & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp.221–235). Benjamins. 10.1075/lllt.47.13pas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.47.13pas [Google Scholar]
  90. Pérez Cañado, M. L.
    (2016) From the CLIL craze to the CLIL conundrum: Addressing the current CLIL controversy. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Languages & Literature, 9(1), 9–31. 10.5565/rev/jtl3.667
    https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/jtl3.667 [Google Scholar]
  91. Piesche, N., Jonkmann, K., Fiege, C., & Keßler, J.-U.
    (2016) 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, 44, 108–116. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.04.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.04.001 [Google Scholar]
  92. Rascón Moreno, D. J., & Bretones Callejas, C. M.
    (2018) Socioeconomic status and its impact on language and content attainment in CLIL contexts. Porta Linguarum, 29, 115–135. 10.30827/Digibug.54025
    https://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.54025 [Google Scholar]
  93. Roiha, A., & Sommier, M.
    (2018) Viewing CLIL through the eyes of former pupils. Insights into foreign language and intercultural attitudes. Language and Intercultural Communication, 18(6), 631–647. 10.1080/14708477.2018.1465069
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2018.1465069 [Google Scholar]
  94. Rumlich, D.
    (2016) Evaluating bilingual education in Germany: CLIL students’ general English proficiency, EFL self-concept and interest. Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑653‑06460‑5
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-653-06460-5 [Google Scholar]
  95. (2020) Bilingual education in monolingual contexts: A comparative perspective. The Language Learning Journal, 48(1), 115–119. 10.1080/09571736.2019.1696879
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1696879 [Google Scholar]
  96. Skinnari, K., & Bovellan, E.
    (2016) CLIL teachers’ beliefs about integration and about their professional roles: Perspectives from a European context. InT. Nikula, E. Dafouz, P. Moore, & U. Smit (Eds.), Conceptualising integration in CLIL and multilingual education (pp.145–167). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781783096145‑010
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783096145-010 [Google Scholar]
  97. Somers, T., & Llinares, A.
    (2021) Students’ motivation for content and language integrated learning and the role of programme intensity. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(6), 839–854. 10.1080/13670050.2018.1517722
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1517722 [Google Scholar]
  98. Spolsky, B.
    (2004) Language Policy. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Tsuchiya, K., & Pérez Murillo, M. D.
    (Eds.) (2019) Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese contexts: Policy, practice and pedagogy. Springer Nature. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑27443‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6 [Google Scholar]
  100. van Kampen, E., Admiraal, W., Berry, A.
    (2018) Content and Language Integrated Learning in the Netherlands: Teachers’ self-reported pedagogical practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(2), 222–236. 10.1080/13670050.2016.1154004
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1154004 [Google Scholar]
  101. Verspoor, M., de Bot, K. & Xu, X.
    (2015) The effects of English bilingual education in the Netherlands. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 3(1), S.4–27. 10.1075/jicb.3.1.01ver
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.3.1.01ver [Google Scholar]
  102. Vollmer, H. J.
    (2006) Language across the curriculum. Preliminary study. Languages of schooling: towards a framework for Europe. Intergovernmental Conference. Strasbourg. https://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/Source/
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Whittaker, R., & McCabe, A.
    (2020) Expressing evaluation across disciplines in primary and secondary CLIL writing: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1798869
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1798869 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21021.dal
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.21021.dal
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error