Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T06:17:04.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

1 - CLIL in Multilingual and English-Background Contexts

Expanding the Potential of Content and Language Integrated Pedagogies for Mainstream Learning

from Part I - The Educational Context for CLIL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2020

By
Kim Bower ,
Russell Cross  and
Do Coyle
Edited by
Kim Bower ,
Do Coyle ,
Russell Cross  and
Gary N. Chambers
Kim Bower
Affiliation:
Sheffield Hallam University
Do Coyle
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Russell Cross
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Gary N. Chambers
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Get access

Summary

Chapter 1 outlines the peculiarities of language learning in predominantly Anglophone contexts, highlighting the challenges that Anglophone countries face in the teaching of modern languages compared to non-Anglophone countries. Tracing the development of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in the United Kingdom and Australia, the chapter explains why CLIL in such contexts is most often taught by language specialists, in contrast to content-area specialists, as is often the case in Europe where CLIL has been established for much longer. The chapter considers how CLIL offers a pedagogic model for mainstream modern language teachers in Anglophone-dominant contexts and how the same professional knowledge base might also have the potential to support the teaching of English as an additional language (EAL). The origins of how CLIL globally has become synonymous with learning English are also traced. A research agenda around the themes of sustainability, pedagogy, and social justice for CLIL in Anglophone-dominant contexts is proposed.

Keywords

origins of CLILCLIL pedagogyCLIL touchstonesEALsocial justicesustainability
Type
Chapter
Information
Curriculum Integrated Language Teaching
CLIL in Practice
 , pp. 3 - 21
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adamson, B. (2004). ‘Fashions in Language Teaching Methodology’, in Davies, A. and Elder, C. (eds.), The Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 604–622.Google Scholar
Alexander, R. (2008). Essays on Pedagogy. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Arshad, R. (2018). ‘Decolonisation and Critical Race Theory – What’s the Relevance?’ EAL Journal, 8(Summer), 50–51.Google Scholar
Baker, C., and Wright, W. E. (2017). Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Banegas, D. L. (2011). ‘A Review of “CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning” by D. Coyle, P. Hood, and D. Marsh, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2010’. Language and Education, 25(2), 182–185.Google Scholar
Bell, D. (2004). ‘A New Paradigm for Modern Foreign Languages?’ Language World (Newsletter). London, UK: Association of Language Learning.Google Scholar
Bower, K. (2006). An Analysis of Pupils’ and Teachers’ Views on the Use of ‘Immersion’ Techniques in the Teaching of Modern Foreign Languages at One Secondary School. Unpublished thesis. Hull, UK: University of Hull.Google Scholar
Bower, K. (2019). ‘“Speaking French Alive”: Learner Perspectives on Their Motivation in Content and Language Integrated Learning in England’. Innovation in Language Learning & Teaching, 13(1), 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bower, K., and Cross, R. (2019). ‘CLIL: Origins, Development and Distinctiveness’. Cross-curricular Language Learning: Putting CLIL into Practice. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Hallam Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Bruton, A. (2011). ‘Is CLIL So Beneficial, or Just Selective? Re-evaluating Some of the Research’. System, 39(4), 523–532.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., and Gorter, D. (2014). ‘Critical Analysis of CLIL: Taking Stock and Looking Forward’. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262.Google Scholar
Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research. (2003). Language Trends. London, UK: CILT.Google Scholar
Clyne, M. (2005). Australia’s Language Potential. Sydney, Australia: UNSW Press.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (1996). ‘Language medium teaching in Britain,’ in Teaching Content in a Foreign Language: Practice and Perspectives in European Bilingual Education. European Commission.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (1999). ‘Supporting students in content and language integrated learning contexts: Planning for effective classrooms,’ in Learning through a Foreign Language: Models, Methods and Outcomes. Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research, pp. 46–62.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2000). ‘Meeting the Challenge: Developing the 3Cs Curriculum’, in Green, S. (ed.), New Perspectives on Teaching and Learning Modern Languages. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, pp. 158–182.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2004a). ‘Redefining Classroom Boundaries: Learning to Teach Using New Technologies’. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 32(July), 1–24.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2004b). ‘Teaching through a Foreign Language’. ALL Language World Conference. Oxford, UK: ALL.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2006). ‘Developing CLIL: Towards a Theory of Practice’, in Figueras, N. (ed.), CLIL in Catalonia: From Theory to Practice. Barcelona, Spain: APAC, pp. 5–29.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2007a). ‘Content and Language Integrated Learning: Towards a Connected Research Agenda for CLIL Pedagogies’. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543–562.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2007b). ‘United Kingdom, England’, in Maljers, A., Marsh, D., and Wolff, D. (eds.), Windows on CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning in the European Spotlight. The Hague: European Platform for Dutch Education, pp. 172–178.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2008). ‘CLIL: A Pedagogical Approach from the European Perspective’, in Van Deusen-Scholl, N. and Hornberger, N. H. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education. New York, NY: Springer, pp. 97–111.Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2018). ‘The Place of CLIL in (Bilingual) Education’. Theory into Practice, 57(3), 1–10.Google Scholar
Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Meyer, O., and Schuck, K. (2018). ‘Knowledge Ecology for Conceptual Growth: Teachers as Active Agents in Developing a Pluriliteracies Approach to Teaching for Learning’. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 349–365.Google Scholar
Coyle, D., Holmes, B., and King, L. (2009). Towards an Integrated Curriculum: CLIL National Statements and Guidelines. London, UK: The Languages Company.Google Scholar
Coyle, D., Hood, P., and Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, R. (2014). Best Evidence Synthesis: Current Approaches to Languages Education (Gesture, Inquiry Learning, and CLIL). Melbourne, Australia: Catholic Education Commission of Victoria.Google Scholar
Cross, R. (2015). ‘Defining Content and Language Integrated Learning for Languages Education in Australia’. Babel, 49(2), 4–15.Google Scholar
Cross, R. (2016). ‘Language and Content “Integration”: The Affordances of Additional Languages as a Tool within a Single Curriculum Space’. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 48(3), 388–408.Google Scholar
Cross, R., and Gearon, M. (2013). Research and Evaluation of the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Approach to Teaching and Learning Languages in Victorian Schools. Melbourne, Australia: Victorian Department of Education and Early Childhood.Google Scholar
Cruickshank, K. (2019). ‘Negotiating Content and Language for Quality Learning: What This Means in Secondary EAL and Science Programs’. Cross-curricular Language Learning: Putting CLIL into Practice. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Hallam Institute of Education.Google Scholar
Dale, L., Oostdam, R., and Verspoor, M. (2017). ‘Searching for Identity and Focus: Towards an Analytical Framework for Language Teachers in Bilingual Education’. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 366–383.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2018). ‘Postscriptum: Research Pathways in CLIL/Immersion Instructional Practices and Teacher Development’. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 384–387.Google Scholar
De Swaan, A. (2001). ‘English in the social sciences’, in Ammon, U. (ed.), The Dominance of English as a Language of Science: Effects on Other Languages and Language Communities. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 71–83.Google Scholar
Department for Education and Skills. (2002). Languages for All: Languages for Life – A Strategy for England. London, UK: HMSO.Google Scholar
Department of Education and Science. (1990). Modern Foreign Languages for Ages 11 to 16: Proposals of the Secretary of State for Education and Science and the Secretary of State for Wales. National Curriculum Council. London, UK: HMSO.Google Scholar
Eurydice. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.Google Scholar
Eurydice. (2017). Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.Google Scholar
Hajek, J., and Slaughter, Y. (2015). Challenging the Monolingual Mindset. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Hall, G., and Cook, G. (2012). ‘Own-Language Use in Language Teaching and Learning’. Language Teaching, 45(3), 271–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, E. (1996). ‘Language Teaching in Perspective’, in Hawkins, E. (ed.), 30 Years of Language Teaching. London, UK: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research, pp. 15–32.Google Scholar
Holliday, A. (1994). Appropriate Methodology and Social Context. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ito, Y. (2018). ‘CLIL in Practice in Japanese Elementary Classrooms: An Analysis of the Effectiveness of a CLIL Lesson in Japanese Traditional Crafts’. English Language Teaching, 11(9), 59–67.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, A. (2011). ‘English as an Asian Lingua Franca and the Multilingual Model of ELT’. Language Teaching, 44(2), 212–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leathes, S. (1918). Modern Studies: Being the Report to the Committee on the Position of Modern Languages in the Educational System of Great Britain. London, UK: HMSO.Google Scholar
Lo Bianco, J., and Cross, R. (2010). Melbourne Collaborative Research Grant: Sustainable Models of Content and Language Integrated Learning in Asian Languages. Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne and Xavier College, Kew.Google Scholar
Macaro, E., Curle, S., Pun, J., An, J., and Dearden, J. (2018). ‘A Systematic Review of English Medium Instruction in Higher Education’. Language Teaching, 51(1), 36–76.Google Scholar
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE – the European Dimension: Action, Trends and Foresight Potential. Brussels, Belgium: European Union Public Services Contract.Google Scholar
May, S. (2013a). ‘Introducing the “Multilingual Turn”’, in May, S. (ed.), The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and Bilingual Education. London, UK: Routledge, pp. 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, S. (2013b). The Multilingual Turn: Implications for SLA, TESOL, and Bilingual Education. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Meyer, O., and Coyle, D. (2017). ‘Pluriliteracies Teaching for Learning: Conceptualizing Progression for Deeper Learning in Literacies Development’. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 199–222.Google Scholar
Nikula, T., Dafouz, E., Moore, P., and Smit, U. (2016). Conceptualising Integration in CLIL and Multilingual Education. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Nuffield Foundation. (2000). Languages: The Next Generation – The Final Report and Recommendations of the Nuffield Languages Inquiry. London, UK: Author.Google Scholar
Riddlebarger, J. (2013). ‘Doing CLIL in Abu Dhabi’. Asian EFL Journal, 15(4), 413–421.Google Scholar
Rojo, L. M. (2013). ‘(De)Capitalising Students through Linguistic Practices: A Comparative Analysis of New Educational Programmes in a Global Era’, in Duchene, A., Moyer, M., and Roberts, C. (eds.), Language, Migration and Social Inequalities: A Critical Sociolinguistic Perspective on Institutions and Work. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters, pp. 118–146.Google Scholar
Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Siqueira, D. S. P., Landau, J., and Paraná, R. A. (2018). ‘Innovations and Challenges in CLIL Implementation in South America’. Theory into Practice, 57(3), 196–203.Google Scholar
Smala, S. (2012). ‘CLIL programmes in Australia: Multilingual schooling contexts’. The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 1(1), 115–128.Google Scholar
Smala, S., Paz, J. B., and Lingard, B. (2013). ‘Languages, Cultural Capital and School Choice: Distinction and Second-Language Immersion Programmes’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(3), 373–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, M. (2013). ‘CLIL in Australia: The importance of context’. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(4), 395–410.Google Scholar
Yang, W. (2015). ‘Content and Language Integrated Learning Next in Asia: Evidence of Learners’ Achievement in CLIL Education from a Taiwan Tertiary Degree Programme’. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(4), 361–382.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×