Inclusive CLIL: Pre-vocational pupils’ target language oral proficiency, fluency, and Willingness to Communicate
Abstract
Bilingual education using a Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach seems in many contexts to select or attract the more able and more academically-inclined pupils, or only be available to pupils in higher academic secondary streams. Positive effects of CLIL for target language proficiency development may therefore be due in part to this cognitive or academic selection effect. Can the target language skills of pupils with lower scholastic attainment – a group which, in several educational contexts, has less access to CLIL programs – also benefit from the CLIL approach?
This two-year longitudinal quasi-experimental research, part of a larger study, focused on the development of oral proficiency skills of three cohorts of 603 pre-vocational pupils in 25 classes in the Netherlands in both CLIL and non-CLIL programs. Despite the lack of explicit school-based selection procedures for pre-vocational pupils’ participation in CLIL, there were significant differences in favor of the CLIL groups in the initial levels of English oral proficiency, fluency, and Willingness to Communicate. Furthermore, the CLIL pupils showed significantly more growth than the non-CLIL control group in English oral proficiency, but not for fluency or Willingness to Communicate. This positive result for the CLIL group did not appear to be moderated by pupil background variables. Despite the small effect sizes found, these results indicate that the CLIL approach can have a positive effect on the foreign language proficiency of pupils in less academic educational streams.
Keywords:
Publication history
Table of contents
The Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach to bilingual education, in which some school subjects are taught through a second or foreign language and attention is paid to both subject content and the target language, was envisioned as “a pragmatic European solution to a European need” (Marsh, 2002, p. 11), with the goals of increasing foreign language competence so as to enable more mobility and cultural understanding across the European Union (Marsh, 2013). Supported by several Council of Europe initiatives, the CLIL approach spread rapidly throughout Europe, particularly in secondary education (Nikula, 2017). Several decades later, various forms of CLIL provision are now part of educational systems in nearly all European countries, with a wide range of target languages but most commonly with English as the target language (Baïdak, Balcon, & Motiejunaite, 2017; Dalton-Puffer, 2011). European CLIL programs share certain core characteristics: the target language is a foreign language rather than a second language; CLIL teachers are themselves generally non-native speakers of the target language; CLIL lessons are school subject lessons, with additional foreign (target) language lessons; and CLIL lessons generally comprise less than 50% of the school curriculum (Dalton-Puffer, 2011). However, particularly in some European contexts, there is concern about a perception that CLIL only “‘works’ in ‘elite’ contexts, i.e. in private, urban schools with socio-economically and socio-culturally privileged children” (Pérez Cañado, 2020, p. 7) and about whether “rather than increasing the equality of opportunity, CLIL in certain contexts is subtly selecting students out” (Bruton, 2013, p. 593). In this light, increasingly more attention is being paid to inclusion and diversity in CLIL, such as in the six-country ADiBE research project (ADiBE Project, n.d.) which aims to make CLIL accessible to all learners, regardless of background or ability.
References
ADiBE Project (Attention to Diversity in Bilingual
Education
n.d.). Retrieved on 22 Febuary 2023 from https://adibeproject.com
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. 
Albers, M. J.
(2017) Introduction
to Quantitative Data Analysis in the Behavioral and Social Sciences. John Wiley &
Sons.
Allison, P. D.
(1990) Change
scores as dependent variables in regression analysis. Sociological
Methodology,
20
, 93–114.
Alonso, E., Grisaleña, J., & Campo, A.
(2008) Plurilingual
education in secondary schools: Analysis of results. International CLIL Research
Journal 1(1): 36–49.
Baïdak, N., Balcon, M. P., & Motiejunaite, A.
(2017) Key
data on teaching languages at school in Europe. 2017 edition. Eurydice report. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive
Agency, European Commission. Retrieved on 22 February from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/73ac5ebd-473e-11e7-aea8-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF
Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D.
(2000) The
role of gender and immersion in communication and second language orientations. Language
learning,
50
(2), 311–341.
Bergh, L. van
den, Denessen, E., Hornstra, L., Voeten, M., & W.
Holland, R. W.
(2010) The
implicit prejudiced attitudes of teachers. American Educational Research
Journal,
47
(2), 497–527.
Bot, K.
de, & Maljers, A.
(2009) De
enige echte vernieuwing: Tweetalig onderwijs. In R.
de Graaff & D. Tuin (Eds.), De
toekomst van het talenonderwijs: Nodig? Anders?
Beter? (pp. 131–146). IVLOS,
Universiteit Utrecht.
Boyson, B. A., Rhodes, N. C., & Thompson, L. E.
(2009) Administrator’s
manual for CAL Foreign Language Assessments, Grades K-8. Center for Applied
Linguistics.
Breukelen, G. J. P.
van
(2013) ANCOVA versus CHANGE from
baseline in nonrandomized studies: The difference. Multivariate Behavioral
Research,
48
, 895–922.
Broca, Á.
(2016) CLIL
and non-CLIL: Differences from the outset. Elt
Journal,
70
(3), 320–331.
Bruton, A.
(2011a) Are
the differences between CLIL and non-CLIL groups in Andalusia due to CLIL? A reply to Lorenzo, Casal, and Moore
(2010). Applied
Linguistics,
32
(2), 236–241.
(2011b) Is
CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the
research. System,
39
(4), 523–532.
(2013) CLIL:
Some of the reasons why … and why
not. System,
41
(3), 587–597.
Cambridge English key for schools: Teacher’s
handbook
(2012) University of Cambridge ESOL
Examinations.
CBS (Centraal Bureau voor de
Statistiek)
(2016) VO; leerlingen, onderwijssoort, leerjaar,
herkomstgroepering, generatie [data file]. Retrieved on 22 February from https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/80043NED/table
CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching,
Assessment)
2001 Language Policy Unit,
Strasbourg. Retrieved on 22
February from https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D.
(2014) Critical
analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied
linguistics,
35
(3), 243–262.
Clément, R., Baker, S. C., & MacIntyre, P. D.
(2003) Willingness
to communicate in a second language: The effects of context, norms, and vitality. Journal of
Language and Social
Psychology,
22
(2), 190–209.
Collier, V. P.
(1989) How
long? A synthesis of research on academic achievement in a second language. TESOL
quarterly,
23
(3), 509–531.
Coyle, D., Bower, K., Foley, Y., & Hancock, J.
(2021) Teachers
as designers of learning in diverse, bilingual classrooms in England: An ADiBE case
study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism, 1–19.
Cummins, J.
(1984) Bilingualism
and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. Multilingual
Matters.
Dallinger, S., Jonkmann, K., & Hollm, J.
(2018) Selectivity
of content and language integrated learning programmes in German secondary
schools. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism,
21
(1), 93–104.
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.
Dalton-Puffer, C.
(2011) Content-and-language
integrated learning: From practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics,
31
, 182–204.
(2017) CLIL
in Practice: What does the research tell us? Available from https://www.goethe.de/en/spr/unt/kum/clg/20984546.html
Dalton-Puffer, C., Hüttner, J., Jexenflicker, S., Schindlegger, V., & Smit, U.
(2008) CLIL
an Österreichischen HTLs. Project Report. University of
Vienna/BMUKK
Denessen, E. J. P. G.
(2017) Dealing
responsibly with differences: Socio-cultural backgrounds and differentiation in
education. Inaugural Lecture, Leiden University.
Denman, J., van
Schooten, E., & de
Graaff, R.
(2018) Attitudinal
factors and the intention to learn English in pre-vocational secondary bilingual and mainstream
education. Dutch Journal of Applied
Linguistics,
7
(2), 203–226.
Escobar
Urmeneta, C.
(2004) Content
and language integrated learning: Do they learn content? Do they learn
language? In J. D. Anderson, J. M. Oro, & J. Varela (Eds.), Linguistic
perspectives from the classroom: Language teaching in a multicultural
Europe (pp. 27–38). Universidade
de Santiago de Compostela.
(2019) An
introduction to content and language integrated learning (CLIL) for teachers and teacher
educators. CLIL. Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural
Education,
2
(1), 7–19.
Feddermann, M., Möller, J. Y., & Baumert, J.
(2021) Effects
of CLIL on second language learning: Disentangling selection, preparation, and
CLIL-effects. Learning and
Instruction,
74
, 101459.
Garcia
López, M., & Bruton, A.
(2013) Potential
drawbacks and actual benefits of CLIL initiatives in public secondary
schools. In C. Abello-Contesse, P. M. Chandler, M. D. López-Jiménez, & R. Chacón-Beltrán (Eds.), Bilingual
and multilingual education in the 21st century: Building on
experience (pp. 256–274). Multilingual
Matters.
Genesee, F.
(1987) Learning
through two languages: Studies of immersion and bilingual education. Newbury
House.
(2004) What
do we know about bilingual education for majority-language
students? In T. K. Bhatia & W. C. Richie (Eds.), The
handbook of
bilingualism (pp. 547–576). Blackwell.
Genesee, F., & Fortune, T. W.
(2014) Bilingual
education and at-risk students. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language
Education,
2
(2), 196–209.
Gierlinger, E. W.
(2007) Modular
CLIL in lower secondary education: Some insights from a research project in
Austria. In C. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical
perspectives on CLIL classroom
discourse (pp. 79–118). Peter
Lang.
Goris, J., Denessen, E., & Verhoeven, L.
(2013) Effects
of the content and language integrated learning approach to EFL teaching: A comparative
study. Written Language &
Literacy,
16
(2), 186–207.
(2017) The
contribution of CLIL to learners’ international orientation and EFL confidence. The Language
Learning
Journal,
47
(2), 246–256.
(2020) Determinants
of EFL learning success in content and language integrated learning. The Language Learning
Journal,
50
(1), 103–118.
Housen, A., Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I.
(2012) Complexity,
accuracy and fluency: Definitions, measurement and research. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions
of L2 performance and proficiency. Complexity, accuracy and fluency in
SLA (pp. 1–20). John
Benjamins.
Hox, J. J.
(2010) Multilevel
analysis. Techniques and applications. Quantitative methodology series (2nd
ed.). Routledge.
Juan, M.
2010 Oral
fluency development in secondary education CLIL learners. Vienna English Working Papers
(Views),
19
(3), 42–48.
Kang, S.
(2005) Dynamic
emergence of situational willingness to communicate in a second
language. System,
33
, 227–292.
Kraay, A. P.
de
(2016) Differentiation to improve
the articulation between levels in the teaching of English in primary and secondary education in the
Netherlands (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University
of Groningen.
Küppers, A., & Trautmann, M.
(2013) It
is not CLIL that is a success – CLIL students are! Some critical remarks on the current CLIL
boom. In S. Breidbach & B. Viebrock (Eds.), Content
and language integrated learning (CLIL) in Europe: Research perspectives on policy and
practice (pp. 285–296). Peter
Lang.
Lahuerta, A.
(2020) Analysis
of accuracy in the writing of EFL students enrolled on CLIL and non-CLIL programmes: The impact of grade and
gender. The Language Learning
Journal
48
(2), 121–132.
Lasagabaster, D.
(2008) Foreign
language competence in content and language integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics
Journal,
1
(1), 30–41.
Lialikhova, D.
(2018) 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,
6
(1), 27–56.
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,
31
(3), 418–442.
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.
MacDonald, J. R., Clément, R., & MacIntyre, P. D.
(2003) Willingness
to communicate in a L2 in a bilingual context: A qualitative investigation of Anglophone and Francophone
students (Unpublished manuscript). Cape Breton
University. Available on 22
February 2023 from 10.1.1.585.2454&rep=rep1&type=pdf
MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Conrod, S.
(2001) Willingness
to communicate, social support, and language-learning orientations of immersion
students. Studies on Second Language
Acquisition,
23
, 369–388.
MacIntyre, P. D., Baker, S. C., Clément, R., & Donovan, L. A.
(2002) Sex
and age effects on willingness to communicate, anxiety, perceived competence, and L2 motivation among junior high school
French immersion students. Language
Learning,
52
(3), 537–564.
MacIntyre, P. D., Clément, R., Dörnyei, Z., & Noels, K. A.
(1998) Conceptualizing
willingness to communicate in a L2: A situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation. The
Modern Language
Journal,
82
(4), 545–562.
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.
Marsh, D.
(2002) CLIL/EMILE-The
European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight
potential. UniCOM.
(2013) Content
and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): A development trajectory. Universidad de
Córdoba.
Mearns, T., de
Graaff, R., & Coyle, D.
(2020) Motivation
for or from bilingual education? A comparative study of learner views in the
Netherlands. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism,
23
(6), 724–737.
Menezes, E., & Juan-Garau, M.
(2015) English
learners’ willingness to communicate and achievement in CLIL and formal instruction
contexts. In M. Juan-Garau & J. Salazar-Noguera (Eds.), Content-based
language learning in multilingual educational
environments (pp. 221–236). Springer.
Merino, J. A., & Lasagabaster, D.
(2018) The
effect of content and language integrated learning programmes’ intensity on English proficiency: A longitudinal
study. International Journal of Applied
Linguistics,
28
(1), 18–30.
Merisuo-Storm, T.
(2007) Pupils’
attitudes towards foreign-language learning and the development of literacy skills in bilingual
education. Teaching and Teacher
Education,
23
(2), 226–235.
Mewald, C.
(2007) A
comparison of oral language performance of learners in CLIL and mainstream classes at lower secondary level in Lower
Austria. In C. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical
perspectives on CLIL classroom
discourse (pp. 139–178). Peter
Lang.
Mitchell, R., Myles, F., & Marsden, E.
(2019) Second
language learning theories (4th
ed.). Routledge.
Morinaj, J., Hadjar, A., & Hascher, T.
(2020) School
alienation and academic achievement in Switzerland and Luxembourg: A longitudinal
perspective. Social Psychology of
Education,
23
, 279–314.
Naber, R., & Lowie, W.
(2012) Hoe
vroeger, hoe beter? Een onderzoek naar de effectiviteit van vroeg
vreemdetalenonderwijs. Levende Talen
Tijdschrift,
13
(4), 13–21.
Nederlands Jeugdinstituut
. Cijfers over jeugd met een
migratieachtergrond 7 June 2021 Retrieved
on 22 February 2023 from https://www.nji.nl/cijfers/jeugd-met-een-migratieachtergrond
Nieto Moreno de
Diezmas, E.
(2016) The
impact of CLIL on the acquisition of L2 competences and skills in primary
education. International Journal of English
Studies,
16
(2), 81–101.
Nikula, T.
(2017) CLIL:
A European approach to bilingual education. In N.
Van Deusen-Scholl & S. May (Eds.), Second
and foreign language education. Encyclopedia of language and education (3rd
ed.). Springer.
Paran, A.
(2013) Content
and language integrated learning: Panacea or policy borrowing myth? Applied Linguistics
Review,
4
(2), 317–342.
Pérez
Cañado, M. L.
(2018) CLIL
and educational level: A longitudinal study on the impact of CLIL on language outcomes. Porta
Linguarum,
29
, 51–70.
(2020) CLIL
and elitism: Myth or reality? The Language Learning
Journal,
48
(1), 4–17.
Pérez
Vidal, C.
(2009) The
integration of content and language in the classroom: A European approach to education (the second time
around). In E. Dafouz & M. Guerrini (Eds.), CLIL
across educational
levels (pp. 3–16). Richmond.
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.
Rallo
Fabra, L., & Jacob, K.
(2015) Does
CLIL enhance oral skills? Fluency and pronunciation errors by Spanish-Catalan learners of
English. In M. Juan-Garau & J.
Salazar Noguera (Eds.), Content-based
language learning in multilingual educational
environments (pp. 163–177. Springer.
Ruiz de
Zarobe, Y.
(2008) CLIL
and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the Basque Country. International CLIL
Research
Journal,
1
(1), 60–73.
Rumlich, D.
(2017) CLIL
theory and empirical reality – Two sides of the same coin? Journal of Immersion and
Content-Based Language
Education,
5
(1), 110–134.
San
Isidro, X.
(2010) An
insight into Galician CLIL: Provision and results. In Y. Ruiz
de Zarobe & D. Lasagabaster (Eds.), CLIL
in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher
training (pp. 55–78). Cambridge
Scholars.
Schwab, G.
(2013) Bili
für alle? Ergebnisse und Perspektiven eines Forschungsprojektes zur Einführung bilingualer Module in einer
Hauptschule. In S. Breidbach & B. Viebrock (Eds.), Content
and language integrated learning (CLIL) in Europe: Research perspectives on policy and
practice (pp. 297–314). Peter
Lang.
Schwab, G., Keßler, J. U., & Hollm, J.
(2014) CLIL
goes Hauptschule. Chancen und Herausforderungen bilingualen Unterrichts an einer Hauptschule. Zentrale Ergebnisse einer
Longitudinalstudie. Zeitschrift für
Fremdsprachenforschung,
25
(1), 3–37.
Simons, M., Vanhees, C., Smits, T., & Van
De
Putte, K.
(2019) Remedying
Foreign Language Anxiety through CLIL? A mixed-methods study with pupils, teachers and
parents. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas
Aplicadas,
14
, 153–172.
Smala, S.
(2023) Situated
emergence of CLIL. E.
Codó, E. (Ed.), Global
CLIL: Critical, ethnographic and language policy
perspectives (pp. 52–73). Routledge.
Smiskova, H., Verspoor, M. H., & Lowie, W.
(2012) Conventionalized
ways of saying things (CWOSTs) and L2 development. Dutch Journal of Applied
Linguistics,
1
(1), 125–142.
Somers, T.
(2017) Content
and language integrated learning and the inclusion of immigrant minority language students: A research
review. International Review of
Education,
63
(4), 495–520.
Standaard Tweetalig vmbo
n.d.). Nuffic: De
Nederlandse organisatie voor internationalisering in onderwijs. Retrieved
on 22 February 2020 from https://www.nuffic.nl/onderwerpen/tweetalig-onderwijs/standaard-voor-t-vmbo
Verspoor, de
Bot, & van
Rein
(2011) English as a foreign language.
The role of out-of-school language input. In A.
De Houwer & A. Wilton (Eds.) English
in Europe today: Sociocultural and educational
perspectives (pp. 147–166) John
Benjamins.
Verspoor, M., Xu, X., & de
Bot, C. J. L.
(2013) Verslag
OTTO-2 aan Europees platform. Toegepaste Taalwetenschap, Universiteit
Groningen.
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), 4–27.
Verspoor, M., Schmid, M. S., & Xu, X.
(2012) A
dynamic usage based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language
Writing,
21
(3), 239–263.
Westhoff, G.
(2005) Talenquest:
beloften en valkuilen. Levende Talen
Magazine,
92
(4), 12–14.
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H.
(1998) Second
language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy and complexity. University of
Hawaii at Manoa.