Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Vol. 5:1 (2017) ► pp.4–29

Integrating content and foreign language learning

What do CLIL students believe?

| University of the Basque Country UPV/EHU
Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) programmes have recently gained momentum in many European countries in the belief that students will significantly improve their foreign language proficiency while content learning is not negatively affected. Based on a longitudinal qualitative approach, this article focuses on students’ reflections on their experience with CLIL. Previous studies have shown that students are able to reflect on organizational conditions and their learning process, while their reflections allow researchers to identify some of the key elements in students’ beliefs. Through focus groups carried out over a three-year period, this study gathers secondary education students’ reflections on their motivational stance, the CLIL experience, and the use of their linguistic repertoire in the CLIL classroom. By tapping into students’ language beliefs, reflections, and motivation, a clearer picture of CLIL settings will be available by bringing to light both the strengths and weaknesses of these programmes.
Keywords: content and language integrated learning (CLIL), motivation, students' beliefs, English-medium instruction, L1 use


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 20 April 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.1.01las
References (51)
Alcón, E., & Michavila, F. (Eds.). (2012). La universidad multilingüe. Madrid: Tecnos.Google Scholar
Baralt, M. (2012). Coding qualitative data. In A. Mackey & S. M. Gass (Eds.), Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide (pp. 222–244). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J. (2009). Towards multilingual education: Basque educational research from an international perspective. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2013). Listening to learners: An investigation into ‘successful learning’ across CLIL contexts. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 161, 244–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2011). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Csizér, K., & Lukács, G. (2010). The comparative analysis of motivation, attitudes and selves: The case of English and German in Hungary. System, 381, 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dafouz, E., & Hibler, A. (2013). ‘Zip your lips’ or ‘Keep quiet’: Main teachers’ and language assistants’ classroom discourse in CLIL settings. The Modern Language Journal, 971, 655–669. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dalton-Puffer C. (2007). Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): Current research from Europe. In W. Delanoy & L. Volkmann (Eds.), Future perspectives for English language teaching (pp. 139–157). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 311, 182–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C., Hüttner, J., Schindelegger, V., & Smit, U. (2009). Technology-geeks speak out: What students think about vocational CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal, 11, 18–25.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2013). Thinking allowed. Content and language integrated learning: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 461, 545–449. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (Eds.). (2013). English-medium instruction at universities: Global challenges. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
. (2014). Language friction and multilingual policies at higher education: The stakeholders’ view. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 351, 345–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doiz, A., & Lasagabaster, D. (2017). Teachers’ beliefs about translanguaging practices. In C. M. Mazak & K. S. Carroll (Eds.), Translanguaging in higher education: Beyond monolingual ideologies (pp. 157–176). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010). Researching motivation: From integrativeness to the ideal L2 self. In S. Hunston & D. Oakey (Eds.), Introducing applied linguistics: Concepts and skills (pp. 74–83). London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. D., & Henry, A. (2015). Motivational dynamics in language learning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
European Commission. (2004). Promoting language learning and linguistic diversity: An action plan 2004–06. Luxembourg: European Commission.Google Scholar
Fortanet, I., & Räisänen, C. (Eds.). (2008). ESP in European higher education. Integrating language and content. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friedman, D. A. (2012). How to collect and analyze qualitative data. In A. Mackey & S. M. Gass (Eds.), Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide (pp. 180–200). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibson, B., & Hartman, J. (2014). Rediscovering grounded theory. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Halbach, A., & Lázaro, A. (2015). La acreditación del nivel de lengua inglesa en las universidades españolas: Actualización 2015. [Accreditation of English language level in Spanish universities: 2015 Update.] Madrid: British Council.Google Scholar
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, 161, 267–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kachru, B. (1986). The alchemy of English: The spread, functions and models of non-native Englishes. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
. (Ed.). (1992). The other tongue: English across cultures (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Lamb, M. (2007). The impact of school on EFL learning motivation: An Indonesian case study. TESOL Quarterly, 411, 757–780. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2012). A self-system perspective on young adolescents’ motivation to learn English in urban and rural settings. Language Learning, 621, 997–1023. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lamb, M., & Buyidanto. (2013). Cultural challenges, identity and motivation in state school EFL. In E. Ushioda (Ed.), International perspectives on motivation: Language learning and professional challenges (pp. 18–34). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasagabaster, D. (2016). The relationship between motivation, gender, L1 and possible selves in English-medium instruction. International Journal of Multilingualism, 131, 315–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2017). “I always speak English in my classes”: Reflections on the use of the L1/L2 in English-medium instruction. In A. Llinares & T. Morton (Eds.), Applied linguistics perspectives on CLIL (pp. 259–275). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasagabaster, D., & Doiz, A. (2015). A longitudinal study on the impact of CLIL on affective factors. Applied Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2016a). CLIL students’ perceptions of their language learning process: Delving into self perceived improvement and instructional preferences. Language Awareness, 251, 110–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (Eds.). (2016b). CLIL experiences in secondary and tertiary education: In search of good practices. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lasagabaster, D., & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (Eds.). (2010). CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishers.Google Scholar
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 641, 376–395. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. (2010). The effects of content and language integrated learning in European education: Key findings from the Andalusian bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 311, 418–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Masgoret, A.-M., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 531, 167–210. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Massler, U. (2012). Primary CLIL and its stakeholders: What children, parents and teachers think of the potential merits and pitfalls of CLIL modules in primary teaching. International CLIL Research Journal, 11, 36–46.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C. (2014). Exploring young learners’ foreign language learning awareness. Language Awareness, 231, 24–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paulsrud, B. Y. (2016). English-medium instruction in Sweden: Perspectives and practices in two upper secondary schools. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 41, 108–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 151, 315–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pladevall-Ballester, E. (2015). Exploring primary school CLIL perceptions in Catalonia: Students’ and parents’ opinions and expectations. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 181, 45–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rumlich, D. (2016). Evaluating bilingual education in Germany: CLIL students’ general English proficiency, EFL self-concept and interest. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sierra, J. M. (2011). CLIL and project work: Contributions from the classroom. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, J. M. Sierra & F. Gallardo (Eds.), Content and foreign language integrated learning: Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts (pp. 211–239). Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, T., Magid, M., & Papi, M. (2009). The L2 motivational self system among Japanese, Chinese and Iranian learners of English: A comparative study. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 66–97). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wächter, B., & Maiworm, F. (2014). English-taught programmes in European higher education: The state of play in 2014. Bonn: Lemmens.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, R., & Walsh, M. L. (Eds.). (2015). Integrating content and language in higher education: From theory to practice. Selected papers from the 2013 ICLHE Conference. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Fazzi, Fabiana
2020. Stakeholders’ Perceptions over the Integration of CLIL and Museum Education and Methodological Implications . EL.LE :3 DOI logo
Göpferich, Susanne, Ina Alexandra Machura & Janine T. Murphy
2019. Supporting English Medium Instruction at German Institutions of Higher Education. In English in the German-Speaking World, ► pp. 114 ff. DOI logo
San Isidro, Xabier & David Lasagabaster
2019. The impact of CLIL on pluriliteracy development and content learning in a rural multilingual setting: A longitudinal study. Language Teaching Research 23:5 ► pp. 584 ff. DOI logo
Oattes, Huub, Ron Oostdam, Rick De Graaff, Ruben Fukkink & Arie Wilschut
2018. Content and Language Integrated Learning in Dutch bilingual education. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 7:2 ► pp. 156 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.