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 CLIL students’ perceptions of learning along the 4Cs in inclusive primary education
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

This mixed-methods study explored how Swiss primary school students assigned to three different English attainment levels perceived their learning in CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) along the influential 4Cs framework. The approximately 100 students self-assessed their learning regarding the four relevant aspects of the framework (C-Communication, C-Content, C-Cultures, and C-Cognition) with a specifically designed questionnaire. Additional focus group interviews were conducted with selected students. The findings suggest that the perceptions of C-Communication, C-Content, and C-Cultures were generally positive and did not significantly differ across attainment levels, indicating that all students, regardless of their level of English, perceived learning benefits in these three dimensions. The low-attaining students, however, rated the cognitive activation related to C-Cognition significantly differently. The study underscores the need for differentiated scaffolding to enhance CLIL’s inclusivity and effectiveness.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra
2026-05-21
2026-06-07

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra/jicb.25013.fra.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C.
    (2001) A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing. A revision of Bloom’s Taxnomoy of educational objectives. Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Barrios, E., & Milla Lara, M. D.
    (2020) CLIL methodology, materials and resources, and assessment in a monolingual context: An analysis of stakeholders’ perceptions in Andalusia. The Language Learning Journal, (), –. 10.1080/09571736.2018.1544269
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2018.1544269 [Google Scholar]
  3. Beaudin, C.
    (2022) A classroom-based evaluation on the implementation of CLIL for primary school education in Taiwan. English Teaching & Learning, (), –. 10.1007/s42321‑021‑00093‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-021-00093-3 [Google Scholar]
  4. Borgers, N., De Leeuw, E., & Hox, J.
    (2000) Children as respondents in survey research: Cognitive development and response quality 1. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique, (), –. 10.1177/075910630006600106
     https://doi.org/10.1177/075910630006600106 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brennan, R. L., & Prediger, D. J.
    (1981) Coefficient kappa: Some uses, misues, and alternatives. Educational and Psychological Measurement, (), –. 10.1177/001316448104100307
     https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448104100307 [Google Scholar]
  6. Broca, Á.
    (2016) CLIL and non-CLIL: Differences from the outset. ELT Journal, (), –. 10.1093/elt/ccw011
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw011 [Google Scholar]
  7. Byram, M., Nichols, A., & Stevens, D.
    (2001) Introduction. InM. Byram, A. Nichols, & D. Stevens (Eds.), Developing Intercultural Competence in Practice (pp.–). Multilingual Matters. 10.21832/9781853595356‑002
     https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853595356-002 [Google Scholar]
  8. CAST
    CAST (2024) Universal Design for Learning Guidelines (Version 3.0.). https://udlguidelines.cast.org/
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark, L. A., & Watson, D.
    (1995) Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, (), –. 10.1037/1040‑3590.7.3.309
     https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen, J.
    (1992) A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, (), –. 10.1037/0033‑2909.112.1.155
     https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 [Google Scholar]
  11. Council of Europe
    Council of Europe (2001) Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Council of Europe Publishing Strasbourg.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Coyle, D.
    (1999) Supporting students in content and language integrated learning contexts: Planning for effective classrooms. InJ. Masih (Ed.), Learning through a foreign language: Models, methods and outcomes (pp.–). CILT.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. (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]
  14. (2013) Listening to learners: An investigation into ‘successful learning’ across CLIL contexts. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (), –. 10.1080/13670050.2013.777384
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777384 [Google Scholar]
  15. Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D.
    (2010) CLIL. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009024549
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009024549 [Google Scholar]
  16. 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]
  17. Dalton-Puffer, C.
    (2013) A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1515/eujal‑2013‑0011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011 [Google Scholar]
  18. 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]
  19. D-EDK
    D-EDK (2014) Lehrplan 21. Geschäftsstelle Luzern.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. De Smet, A., Mettewie, L., Hiligsmann, P., Galand, B., & Van Mensel, L.
    (2023) Does CLIL shape language attitudes and motivation? Interactions with target languages and instruction levels. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (), –. 10.1080/13670050.2019.1671308
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1671308 [Google Scholar]
  21. Döring, N.
    (2023) Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation in den Sozial- und Humanwissenschaften (6., vollständig überarbeitete, aktualisierte und erweiterte Auflage). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑662‑64762‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-64762-2 [Google Scholar]
  22. Dörnyei, Z., & Taguchi, T.
    (2010) Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203864739
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203864739 [Google Scholar]
  23. Elmiger, D., Sigentahler, A., & Tunger, V.
    (2022) Inventar des zweisprachigen Unterrichts in der Schweiz. Institut für Mehrsprachigkeit.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Fazzi, F., & Menegale, M.
    (2023) Doing CLIL with primary learners. InD. L. Banegas & S. Zappa-Hollman, The Routledge handbook of content and language integrated learning (1st ed., pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003173151‑19
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173151-19 [Google Scholar]
  25. Felix, M., Frank, S., & Müller, T.
    (2025) Universal design for learning — Leitlinien für den Fremdsprachenunterricht. https://zenodo.org/records/7907491
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Fernández-Costales, A.
    (2023) Cognitive development in CLIL. InD. L. Banegas & S. Zappa-Hollman, The Routledge handbook of content and language integrated learning (1st ed., pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003173151‑12
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173151-12 [Google Scholar]
  27. Field, A.
    (2024) Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (6th ed.). Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Frank Schmid, S.
    (2023a) The communicative CLIL classroom: Insights into heterogenous learners’ spoken communication in English about art in Swiss primary schools. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, (), –. 10.1075/jicb.21015.fra
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.21015.fra [Google Scholar]
  29. Frank Schmid, S.
    (2023b) In CLIL low-attaining beginners do better than we think. Babylonia, (), –. 10.55393/babylonia.v3i.298
     https://doi.org/10.55393/babylonia.v3i.298 [Google Scholar]
  30. Frank Schmid, S.
    (2024) Lesson study in Content and Language Integrated Learning: Making young case pupils’ learning visible through English alongside translanguaging and trans-semiotising. International Journal for Lesson & Learning Studies, (), –. 10.1108/IJLLS‑06‑2024‑0109
     https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLLS-06-2024-0109 [Google Scholar]
  31. Herrmann, C., & Gerlach, E.
    (2020) Unterrichtsqualität im Fach Sport — Ein Überblicksbeitrag zum Forschungsstand in Theorie und Empirie. Unterrichtswissenschaft, (), –. 10.1007/s42010‑020‑00080‑w
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s42010-020-00080-w [Google Scholar]
  32. Jäppinen, A.-K.
    (2005) 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, (), –. 10.1080/09500780508668671
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780508668671 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kolb, A., & Schocker, M.
    (2021) Teaching English in the Primary School. Klett / Kallmeyer.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Kuckartz, U.
    (2018) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung (.). Beltz-Juvena.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. LCH
    LCH (2023) Vielfalt braucht Vielfalt: Gelingensbedingungen für eine inklusionsorientierte Schule (Positionspapier). Dachverband Lehrerinnen und Lehrer Schweiz.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lenhard, W., & Lenhard, A.
    (2017) Computation of effect sizes [Dataset]. Unpublished. 10.13140/RG.2.2.17823.92329
     https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.17823.92329 [Google Scholar]
  37. Lialikhova, D.
    (2019) ‘We can do it together!’ — But can they? How Norwegian ninth graders co-constructed content and language knowledge through peer interaction in CLIL. Linguistics and Education, , . 10.1016/j.linged.2019.100764
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2019.100764 [Google Scholar]
  38. Liu, J. E., & Lin, A. M. Y.
    (2021) (Re)conceptualizing ‘language’ in CLIL: Multimodality, translanguaging and trans-semiotizing in CLIL. AILA Review, (), –. 10.1075/aila.21002.liu
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.21002.liu [Google Scholar]
  39. Llinares, A., & Nikula, T.
    (2024) CLIL students’ production of cognitive discourse functions: Comparing Finnish and Spanish contexts. Language and Education, (), –. 10.1080/09500782.2023.2211049
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2023.2211049 [Google Scholar]
  40. Madrid, D., & Pérez Cañado, M. L.
    (2018) Innovations and challenges in attending to diversity through CLIL. Theory into Practice, (), –. 10.1080/00405841.2018.1492237
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1492237 [Google Scholar]
  41. Mahan, K. R., & Norheim, H.
    (2021) ‘Something new and different’: Student perceptions of content and language integrated learning. ELT Journal, (), –. 10.1093/elt/ccaa057
     https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccaa057 [Google Scholar]
  42. Morton, T.
    (2023) CLIL: Future directions. InD. L. Banegas & S. Zappa-Hollman, The Routledge handbook of content and language integrated learning (1st ed., pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003173151‑42
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173151-42 [Google Scholar]
  43. Nikula, T., Skinnari, K., & Mård-Miettinen, K.
    (2023) Diversity in CLIL as experienced by Finnish CLIL teachers and students: Matters of equality and equity. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (), –. 10.1080/13670050.2022.2028125
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2022.2028125 [Google Scholar]
  44. Oxbrow, G.
    (2018) Students’ perspectives on CLIL programme development: A quantitative analysis. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de Las Lenguas Extranjeras. 10.30827/Digibug.54026
     https://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.54026 [Google Scholar]
  45. Pallant, J.
    (2020) SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003117452
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003117452 [Google Scholar]
  46. Pérez Cañado, M. L.
    (2021) CLIL and ELF: Friends or foes?InM. L. Pérez Cañado (Ed.), Content and language integrated learning in monolingual settings (Vol., pp.–). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑68329‑0_3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68329-0_3 [Google Scholar]
  47. Porto, M.
    (2023) Intercultural citizenship as CLIL in foreign language education. InD. L. Banegas & S. Zappa-Hollman, The Routledge handbook of content and language integrated learning (1st ed., pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003173151‑13
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173151-13 [Google Scholar]
  48. Rakoczy, K., Wagner, E., & Frick, U.
    (2021) Wie in Mathe so auch in Kunst? Zur Konzeption von Unterrichtsqualität im Kunstunterricht. Unterrichtswissenschaft, (), –. 10.1007/s42010‑021‑00104‑z
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s42010-021-00104-z [Google Scholar]
  49. Riemer, C.
    (2016) Befragung. InD. Caspari, F. Klippel, M. K. Legutke, & K. Schramm (Eds.), Forschungsmethoden in der Fremdsprachendidaktik: Ein Handbuch. (pp.–). Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Rose Mahan, K.
    (2023) Instructional scaffolding in CLIL. InD. L. Banegas & S. Zappa-Hollman, The Routledge handbook of content and language integrated learning (1st ed., pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003173151‑24
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173151-24 [Google Scholar]
  51. Ruiz De Zarobe, Y.
    (2023) CLIL and educational policy. InD. L. Banegas & S. Zappa-Hollman, The Routledge handbook of content and language integrated learning (1st ed., pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003173151‑10
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173151-10 [Google Scholar]
  52. Rumlich, D.
    (2017) CLIL theory and empirical reality — Two sides of the same coin?: A quantitative-longitudinal evaluation of general EFL proficiency and affective-motivational dispositions in CLIL students at German secondary schools. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, (), –. 10.1075/jicb.5.1.05rum
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.1.05rum [Google Scholar]
  53. San Isidro, X., & Pérez Cañado, M. L.
    (2023) The learner’s perspective on CLIL. InD. L. Banegas & S. Zappa-Hollman, The Routledge handbook of content and language integrated learning (1st ed., pp.–). Routledge. 10.4324/9781003173151‑23
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003173151-23 [Google Scholar]
  54. Schwab, G., & Schramm, K.
    (2016) Beobachtung. InD. Caspari, F. Klippel, M. K. Legutke, & K. Schramm (Eds.), Forschungsmethoden in der Fremdsprachendidaktik: Ein Handbuch. (pp.–). Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Siepmann, P., Rumlich, D., Matz, F., & Römhild, R.
    (2023) Attention to diversity in German CLIL classrooms: Multi-perspective research on students’ and teachers’ perceptions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (), –. 10.1080/13670050.2021.1981821
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2021.1981821 [Google Scholar]
  56. Tedick, D. J., & Lyster, R.
    (2020) Scaffolding language development in immersion and dual language classrooms. Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Villabona, N., & Cenoz, J.
    (2022) The integration of content and language in CLIL: A challenge for content-driven and language-driven teachers. Language, Culture and Curriculum, (), –. 10.1080/07908318.2021.1910703
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07908318.2021.1910703 [Google Scholar]
  58. Vogel, S., & García, O.
    (2017) Translanguaging. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.181
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.181 [Google Scholar]
  59. Vogl, S.
    (2015) Interviews mit Kindern führen. Beltz.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Vygotsky, L. S.
    (1978) Mind in society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Wallace, T. L., Kelcey, B., & Ruzek, E.
    (2016) What can student perception surveys tell us about teaching? Empirically testing the underlying structure of the Tripod Student Perception Survey. American Educational Research Journal, (), –. 10.3102/0002831216671864
     https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216671864 [Google Scholar]
  62. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G.
    (1976) The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, (), –. 10.1111/j.1469‑7610.1976.tb00381.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x [Google Scholar]
  63. Zydatiss, W.
    (2010) Scaffolding im Bilingualen Unterricht. Der Fremdsprachliche Unterricht Englisch, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra
Loading
CLIL students’ perceptions of learning along the 4Cs in inclusive primary education
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra
/content/journals/10.1075/jicb.25013.fra
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: CLIL ; mixed-methods ; diversity ; inclusion-oriented primary schools ; 4Cs framework ; perception study

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