1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Empowering language learners
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Traditional language teaching has often focused on language in isolation from real-world contexts. However, recognizing the inherent link between language and content, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) emerged some time ago as a global standard (Goris et al., 2019). Over time, CLIL has evolved and diversified to address new challenges. With current concerns about generative artificial intelligence (AI), global politics, and the role of education, enhancing CLIL with innovative methods that cater to local and global needs is vital. Maker Education, which combines hands-on projects with STEAM content (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics), is a practical approach to merge action, knowledge, and skill development. Maker Education’s benefits in first language contexts are well-documented, but its application in language learning is still in its nascency. This paper investigates the benefits and drawbacks of integrating Maker Education into CLIL curricula. The results suggest that Maker Education provides linguistic and developmental advantages, complementing CLIL approaches.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.23037.leg
2025-08-29
2026-02-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jicb.23037.leg
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ackermann, E.
    (2001) Piaget’s Constructivism, Papert’s Constructionism: What’s the difference?Constructivism: Uses and Perspectives in Education, , –. learning.media.mit.edu/content/publications/EA.Piaget%20_%20Papert.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Alley, W.
    (2018) Making English speakers: Makerspaces as constructivist language environments. MEXTESOL Journal, (), –. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12552/4904
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Anthony, L.
    (2022) AntWordProfiler (Version 2.0.0) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available fromwww.antlab.sci.waseda.ac.jp/
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Baranova, T., Kobicheva, A., Olkhovik, N., & Tokareva, E.
    (2020) The Design of integrated learning model for CLIL-learners. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, (), –. 10.1088/1757‑899X/940/1/012128
     https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/940/1/012128 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bevan, B.
    (2017) The promise and the promises of Making in science education. Studies in Science Education, (), –. 10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380
     https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2016.1275380 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bevan, B., Gutwill, J. P., Petrich, M., & Wilkinson, K.
    (2015) Learning through STEM-rich tinkering: Findings from a jointly negotiated research project taken up in practice. Science Education, (), –. 10.1002/sce.21151
     https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21151 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bevan, B., Ryoo, J. J., Vanderwerff, A., Wilkinson, K., & Petrich, M.
    (2018) Making deeper learners: A tinkering learning dimensions framework. Connected Science Learning, , –. https://playfulmit.github.io/beyond-rubrics/modules/setting%20context/resources/Learning%20Dimensions%20Explained-July2017.pdf. 10.1080/24758779.2018.12420507
     https://doi.org/10.1080/24758779.2018.12420507 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bevan, B., & Wilkinson, K.
    (2014) Tinkering is serious play. Educational Leadership, December 2014/January 2015, –. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1047577
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Blikstein, P.
    (2018) Maker movement in education: History and prospects. Handbook of technology education, –. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑44687‑5_33
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44687-5_33 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bonner, E., Garvey, K., Miner, M., Godin, S., & Reinders, H.
    (2022) Measuring real-time learner engagement in the Japanese EFL classroom. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, (). 10.1080/17501229.2021.2025379
     https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2021.2025379 [Google Scholar]
  11. Brown, H., & Bradford, A.
    (2017) EMI, CLIL, & CBI: Differing approaches and goals. Transformation in Language Education, August, –. 10.13140/RG.2.2.19525.04325
     https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19525.04325 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen, S., Zhao, J., de Ruiter, L., Zhou, J., & Huang, J.
    (2022) A burden or a boost: The impact of early childhood English learning experience on lower elementary English and Chinese achievement. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (), –. 10.1080/13670050.2020.1749230
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2020.1749230 [Google Scholar]
  13. Chou, P. N.
    (2018) Skill development and knowledge acquisition cultivated by Maker Education: Evidence from Arduino-based educational robotics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, (), –. 10.29333/ejmste/93483
     https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/93483 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cohen, J., Jones, W. M., Smith, S. & Calandra, B.
    (2017) Makification: Towards a framework for leveraging the maker movement in formal education. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, (), –. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/174191/
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Coyle, D.
    (2007) Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (), –. 10.2167/beb459.0
     https://doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0 [Google Scholar]
  16. Crossley, S. A., Allen, L. K., Kyle, K., & McNamara, D. S.
    (2014) Analyzing discourse processing using a simple natural language processing tool (SiNLP). Discourse Processes, (), –, 10.1080/0163853X.2014.910723
     https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2014.910723 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dalton-Puffer, C., Hüttner, J., & Llinares, A.
    (2022) CLIL in the 21st Century: Retrospective and prospective challenges and opportunities. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, (), –. 10.1075/jicb.21021.dal
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.21021.dal [Google Scholar]
  18. Dang, T. N. Y., Webb, S., & Coxhead, A.
    (2022) Evaluating lists of high-frequency words: Teachers’ and learners’ perspectives. Language Teaching Research, (), –. 10.1177/1362168820911189
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820911189 [Google Scholar]
  19. Dewey, J.
    (1986) Experience and education. Educational Forum, (), –. 10.1080/00131728609335764
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00131728609335764 [Google Scholar]
  20. Dubreil, S., & Lord, G.
    (2021) Make it so: Leveraging maker culture in call. CALICO Journal, (), –. 10.1558/cj.42531
     https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.42531 [Google Scholar]
  21. Dunn, R., Adamson, C., & Thorpe, T.
    (2018) Using LEGO® Serious Play® to foster communication in intercultural English problem-solving discussions. Journal of International Studies, (), –. https://kindai.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/19147/files/AA12777724-20171100-0041.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Goris, J., Denessen, E., & Verhoeven, L.
    (2019) The contribution of CLIL to learners’ international orientation and EFL confidence. The Language Learning Journal, (), –. 10.1080/09571736.2016.1275034
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2016.1275034 [Google Scholar]
  23. Harel, I., & Papert, S.
    (1991) Situating Constructionism. Constructionism, –. https://web.media.mit.edu/~calla/web_comunidad/Reading-En/situating_constructionism.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Hidalgo, D. R., & Ortega-Sánchez, D.
    (2023) CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) methodological approach in the bilingual classroom: A systematic review. International Journal of Instruction, (), –. 10.29333/iji.2023.16349a
     https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16349a [Google Scholar]
  25. Hochanadel, A., & Finamore, D.
    (2015) Fixed and growth mindset in education and how grit helps students persist in the face of adversity. Journal of International Education Research (JIER), (), –. 10.19030/jier.v11i1.9099
     https://doi.org/10.19030/jier.v11i1.9099 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kim, Y. J., Murai, Y., & Chang, S.
    (2020) Embedded assessment tools for maker classrooms: A design-based research approach. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL, , –. https://repository.isls.org/handle/1/6345
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Köylü, Z., & Tracy-Ventura, N.
    (2022) Learning English in today’s global world: A comparative study of at home, anglophone, and lingua franca study abroad. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, (), –. 10.1017/S0272263121000917
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263121000917 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lazarides, R., Gaspard, H., & Dicke, A. L.
    (2019) Dynamics of classroom motivation: Teacher enthusiasm and the development of math interest and teacher support. Learning and Instruction, (), –. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.012 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lege, R., Frazier, E., & Bonner, E.
    (2024) From makerspaces to language spaces: An investigation into Maker Education in EFL. JALT CALL Proceedings 2023, –. 10.37546/JALTSIG.CALL.PCP2023‑07
     https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTSIG.CALL.PCP2023-07 [Google Scholar]
  30. Lundberg, M., & Rasmussen, J.
    (2018) Foundational principles and practices to consider in assessing Maker Education. I-Manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, (), –. 10.26634/jet.14.4.13975
     https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.14.4.13975 [Google Scholar]
  31. MakerEd
    MakerEd (2015) Makerspace playbook: Youth edition. –. https://makered.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Youth-Makerspace-Playbook_FINAL.pdf
  32. Maker Education Initiative
    Maker Education Initiative (2019) Beyond rubrics. https://makered.org/beyondrubrics/overview/#design-principles
  33. Maltese, A. V., Simpson, A., & Anderson, A.
    (2018) Failing to learn: The impact of failures during making activities. Thinking Skills and Creativity, (), –. 10.1016/j.tsc.2018.01.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  34. Martin, L.
    (2015) The promise of the maker movement for education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, (), –. 10.7771/2157‑9288.1099
     https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1099 [Google Scholar]
  35. Martinez, S. L., & Stager, G.
    (2019) Invent to Learn. Constructing Modern Knowledge Press. https://inventtolearn.com/
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Mestre-Segarra, M. Á., & Ruiz-Garrido, M. F.
    (2022) Examining students’ reflections on a collaborative online international learning project in an ICLHE context. System, , –. 10.1016/j.system.2021.102714
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102714 [Google Scholar]
  37. Mikhak, B., Lyon, C., Gorton, T., Gershenfeld, N., McEnnis, C., & Taylor, J.
    (2002) Fab Lab: An alternate model of ICT for development. https://cba.mit.edu/events/03.05.fablab/fablab-dyd02.pdf
  38. Murai, Y., Kim, Y. J., Martin, E., Kirschmann, P., Rosenheck, L., & Reich, J.
    (2019) Embedding assessment in school-based making. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, –. 10.1145/3311890.3311922
     https://doi.org/10.1145/3311890.3311922 [Google Scholar]
  39. Murphy, P. H.
    (2018) School libraries addressing the needs of ELL students. Knowledge Quest, (), –. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1171688.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Piaget, J.
    (1952) The origins of intelligence in children. International Universities Press, Inc. 10.1037/11494‑000
     https://doi.org/10.1037/11494-000 [Google Scholar]
  41. Pilana, D.
    (2019) Creativity in modern education. World Journal of Education, (), . 10.5430/wje.v9n2p136
     https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v9n2p136 [Google Scholar]
  42. Provenzo, E. F.
    (2009) Friedrich Froebel’s gifts: Connecting the spiritual and aesthetic to the real world of play and learning. American Journal of Play, (), –. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1179517.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Quintana-Ordorika, A., Garay-Ruiz, U., & Portillo-Berasaluce, J.
    (2024) A Systematic Review of the Literature on Maker Education and Teacher Training. Education Sciences, (), –. 10.3390/educsci14121310
     https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14121310 [Google Scholar]
  44. Resnick, M., & Rosenbaum, E.
    (2013) Designing for tinkerability. InM. Honey and D. E. Kanter (Eds.) Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of science innovators (pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9780203108352
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203108352 [Google Scholar]
  45. Roos, J., & Victor, B.
    (2018) How it all began: The origins of LEGO® Serious Play®. International Journal of Management and Applied Research, –. 10.18646/2056.54.18‑025
     https://doi.org/10.18646/2056.54.18-025 [Google Scholar]
  46. Rosenheck, L., Lin, G. C., Nigam, R., Nori, P., & Kim, Y. J.
    (2021) Not all evidence is created equal: Assessment artifacts in maker education. Information and Learning Science, (), –. 10.1108/ILS‑08‑2020‑0205
     https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-08-2020-0205 [Google Scholar]
  47. Sánchez-García, R., & Pavón-Vázquez, V.
    (2021) Students’ perceptions on the use of project-based learning in CLIL: Learning outputs and psycho-affective considerations. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, (), –. 10.5294/laclil.2021.14.1.3
     https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2021.14.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  48. Schulz, B.
    (2008) The importance of soft skills: Education beyond academic knowledge. Journal of Language and Communication, June, –. https://ir.nust.na/jspui/bitstream/10628/39/1/The.Importance.of.Soft.Skills-Education.beyond.academic.knowledge.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Seymour, G.
    (2018) The inclusive makerspace: Working with English language learners and special education students. InSchool Library Makerspaces in Action (pp.–). Libraries Unlimited. 10.5040/9798216011262.ch‑007
     https://doi.org/10.5040/9798216011262.ch-007 [Google Scholar]
  50. Shin, M. H.
    (2021) Development of English teaching model applying artificial intelligence through Maker Education. Journal of the Korea Convergence Society, (), –. 10.15207/JKCS.2021.12.3.061
     https://doi.org/10.15207/JKCS.2021.12.3.061 [Google Scholar]
  51. Steidtmann, L., Kleickmann, T., & Steffensky, M.
    (2023) Declining interest in science in lower secondary school classes: Quasi-experimental and longitudinal evidence on the role of teaching and teaching quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (), –. 10.1002/tea.21794
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21794 [Google Scholar]
  52. Strauss, V.
    (2019, December3). How PISA created an illusion of education quality and marketed it to the world. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2019/12/03/expert-how-pisa-created-an-illusion-education-quality-marketed-it-world/
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Sweller, J.
    (1994) Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, (), –. 10.1016/0959‑4752(94)90003‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5 [Google Scholar]
  54. Valente, J. A., & Blikstein, P.
    (2019) Maker education: Where is the knowledge construction?Constructivist Foundations, (), –. https://tltlab.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019.Valente-Blikstein.Constructivist-Foundations.Maker-Education.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  55. VERBI Software
    VERBI Software (2021) MAXQDA 2022 [computer software]. Berlin, Germany: VERBI Software. Available frommaxqda.com
  56. Weng, X., Chiu, T. K. F., & Tsang, C. C.
    (2022) Promoting student creativity and entrepreneurship through real-world problem-based Maker Education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, (), . 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101046
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101046 [Google Scholar]
  57. Yufrizal, H.
    (2021) The impact of project based-CLIL on students’ English proficiency. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), (), –. 10.11591/edulearn.v15i1.15692
     https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v15i1.15692 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.23037.leg
Loading
Empowering language learners
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.23037.leg
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.23037.leg
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.23037.leg
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: curriculum development ; Maker Education ; pedagogy ; constructionism ; CLIL ; content and language integrated learning

Most Cited

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