FAQs by vocational educators/ content teachers

1. What does CLIL mean?
2. Who is it for?
3. What do the students think about CLIL?
4. Who are the CLIL teachers?
5. What are the professional CLIL teacher competencies?(i.e. how well do I have to master the target language?)
6. How much learning in another language would you expect?
7. Will the teacher use the students’ first language if things become too difficult for them to understand the content in CLIL language?
8. Do the students learn professional terminology also in their first language?
9. Does it contain some specific methods?
10. Will students learn the main content as well as if they study in the first language?
11. Does it mean more work and possibly more stress , if a student joins the CLIL class?
12. Is CLIL lesson usually made cognitively less demanding when it comes to content?
13. What are the benefits to my institution?
14. How can I get started?
    

CLIL is not a new concept as it has been introduced in many ways since the dawn of civilisation. But the types of CLIL described are new to many ‘mainstream education’ environments in which, traditionally speaking, it has not been considered necessary to teach students much in the way of languages and communication. In terms of communication, there are many educational curricula which hardly pay any attention to learning about the mechanics of interpersonal communication. The changing world may make the needs new, but the concept remains old. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001,p. 14)

CLIL is about using languages to learn in order to use languages, so in a way it is more about language learning, not language teaching. It is about installing a ‘hunger to learn’ in the student. It gives opportunity for him/her to think about and develop how s/he communicates in general, even in the first language. Learning to use language, be it the first language or an additional language, works best when it is constantly given reference and attention across the curriculum. It requires time and continuous attention. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001,p. 15)

CLIL is for anybody interested in developing their language skills, especially pragmatic skills. Many of our students don’t realise they need languages, because they carry negative language learning memories from earlier education. They often reject and dislike those things which they believe they are not very good at.

CLIL can be of benefit to those young people with a ‘gift’ for languages, as much as for those who have not been able to acquire sufficient skill in any additional language in order to ‘feel good’ about themselves as language users. CLIL is about using different languages, including the majority language, in a manner which is directly linked to working in an increasingly international world. Introduction of the method in some European countries has found very good results in relation to how young people respond to this type of curriculum. It often requires a change of attitude on the part of educators and learners alike, and it is this change which young people can respond to very favourably. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001,p.13-14)

The most extensive available research shows no evidence that there are specific ‘at risk’ learner types that would be disadvantaged by CLIL. On the contrary there is evidence that so-called low ability learners can achieve specific advantages (Genesee F, 2003..in CLIL/EMILE 2002,p. 175)

However, as CLIL/EMILE report suggests, it is necessary to show evidence that mixed ability learners can benefit from this approach which stems from European educational environments. The most effective way to achieve this would be for substantial case study to be carried out. (CLIL/EMILE 2002, p.175.)

CLIL methods can install in the classroom a greater sense of relevance which builds student motivation and leads to better overall outcomes. If done well, CLIL has been found to be very positively received by students. Motivation is frequently high in such situations and this is often why outcomes can be rather positive. When the student sees that s/he is not only gaining professional knowledge and tools, but also the tools of communication, and recognises how these combine to form the basis for professional skill, then outcomes will be positive. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001,p. 29)

CLIL teachers include subject and language teachers, instructors and other providers of the curriculum. The core idea is to provide the learning of certain types of subject matter, be it in the classroom or other training facilities, in an additional language. It could involve a module, course, or, in exceptional circumstances, a whole curriculum. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg. , 2001,p. 14)

Many teachers enjoy the demands of CLIL teaching with its dual aims of a linguistic and subject focus. In other words there is frequently a ‘feel good’ factor reported by CLIL teaching staff. This is complemented by new opportunities which arise, such as greater networking abilities, both within countries and trans-nationally. Networking often leads to improved access to materials or resources, which upgrades subject learning, which in turn, gives teachers a greater source of satisfaction. Benefits will probably not come without a great deal of work, but they are often found to be within reach. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001, p.16)

It has been found that some of the most suitable CLIL teachers are those who speak the majority language as their first language, and the CLIL language as a second language. This is particularly important when dealing with students with low language proficiency and who need lots of support.

Some content teachers wonder how good you have to be in the target language to be able to teach through it. The answer is ‘good enough’, and this then leads us to the next question which is ‘ how good is good enough for me to be able to manage and do it in a worthwhile way?’ When it comes to language teachers, the question to be considered is how well one has to master the content area to be able to do CLIL.

This depends on what you decide to try and achieve, and what resources you have on-site. A small amount of exposure to CLIL can give clear benefits in terms of developing self-confidence, raising motivation and strengthening communication competence. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg , 2001,p. 14)

Exposure can be scaled as follows:
High (100-60%)
Medium ( 60-15%)
Low (15-5%)
Successful outcomes have been found with as little as 10% of a whole curriculum. More does not necessarily lead to better outcomes. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001,p. 14

Most CLIL classes involve use of two languages: the majority language and the CLIL language. This is one reason why this CLIL approach is called integrated because it includes translanguaging i.e. switching from one language to another when it is in the best interests of learning. Often the main issues are given in the first language and then learning activities carried out in the additional language. (Marsh)

In CLIL, the development of the first language carries the utmost importance. Integrating content and language learning should not mean that the focus on learning ‘another’ language results in the student’s first language being neglected. (Marsh)

In professional CLIL education we also have to ensure that the students learn professional terminology in their mother tongue

CLIL as an approach is more than just switching the medium of teaching from one language to another. It has been argued that CLIL often involves development of methodologies which are very specific to the dual-focused objectives of this approach. This means that CLIL teachers tend to report that they use different methods in CLIL than when teaching through the majority language. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001, p. 19-20)

The fore-mentioned finding was one of the outcomes found in the work of CLIL Compendium (2000-2001). The argument put forward by teachers in various countries was that CLIL/EMILE leads to ‘diversification of methods and forms of classroom practice’(Marsh, Maljers & Hartiala, 2001). Shifting towards learner-centered methods is common in some cases, and towards modularity of theme-based learning typical of others. (CLIL/EMILE 2002,p. 176)

In CLIL-AXIS the focus is, among other things, on this very important and widely-asked question. Examples of materials and methods can be found in the section on 'Teaching Models' (click here).

Yes, although the learning process may slow down, particularly at the beginning. There is even the possibility that the learning could be more successful when an additional language is used. This may be due to the student having to work harder at decoding in the additional language, the teacher stressing the main learning points, or other reasons such as high learner motivation resulting from the sense of ‘fun’ which some children experience. (Marsh)

It is possible that the CLIL class may be perceived as ‘more demanding’ by some students, due to the simple fact that listening, reading, speaking in an additional language is tiring until we get used to it. Therefore it is possible that the workload will feel heavier for the student, but it is up to the school to ensure that this is kept to an acceptable level. It is to be remembered that some work can be fun, and some boring.

If the student enjoys the CLIL experience then the extra workload will not be seen as a problem. Each school has a responsibility to ensure that its students’ exposure to negative stress is kept to an absolute minimum, and this is as true for CLIL classes as any other. (Marsh)

Not at all. What we need to realize is that the ability to use different languages, even to a modest extent, can have a positive impact on the students’ thinking processes. Being able to see the same phenomenon from different angles, as though looking through different language ‘spectacles’, can have a very interesting impact on our ability to think and understand. In other words, being able to frame their thoughts in more than one language can give advantages to a student in terms of thinking and studying. (Marsh)

CLIL doesn't only promote linguistic competence. Because of the different ‘thinking horizons’ which result from working in another language CLIL can also have an impact on conceptualisation, literally how we think. Being able to think about something in different languages can enrich our understanding of concepts, and help broaden our conceptual mapping resources. This allows better association of different concepts and helps the learner go towards a more sophisticated level of learning in general. (Marsh)

In CLIL, we provide a situation in which the attention of the student is on some form of learning activity which is not the language itself. So what we are doing is providing the opportunity to learn to ‘think’ in the language, not just learn about the language itself as the major learning focus. (Marsh)

CLIL, in one or another of its forms, may offer a way to stimulate the cognitive challenges of language learning in the professional educational environment, be it a classroom, laboratory, workshop or studio. By using the additional language as a tool, and giving the student the opportunity to ‘learn by doing’, we now believe that CLIL can provide exciting outcomes. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg. , 2001,p. 17) If a student learns different languages then this will develop the thinking processes within the brain itself. This is why the ability to ‘think’ in different languages is often seen as an advantage. (Marsh)

The extent to which CLIL improves thinking skills and develops autonomous learning depends on methods utilised. It is viewed as an approach which offers a range of methods to suit various goals. Some research argues that it can enhance the following:

• Learner concentration
• Problem-solving
• Risk-taking confidence and strategy
• Confidence
• Motivation
• Teacher/learner expectations
• Collaborative learning

CLIL can be the catalyst for development and strengthen the institution by showing that the curriculum has dual aims to equip the students for linguistic demands of their future live. CLIL has a positive impact on the institution’s profile and reputation. When you have planned the type of model which could be piloted in the institution, a degree of ‘looking into the future’ is required. This is best carried out by different representatives of the institution, and particularly the management. CLIL can unlock a number of doors which hinder an institution’s potential for growth. But precisely how that could happen depends on the local circumstances. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001, p. 28.)

CLIL can also give greater access to trans-national initiatives such as those which support mobility and student/teacher exchange. Exchange programmes for students and staff are frequently linked in CLIL. The networking which can take place enables institutions to identify even more precisely international contacts which are best suited for exchange programmes. So it is possible for networking through CLIL to be an advantage in setting up international links. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg , 2001,p. 29)

By networking with teachers in other institutions, particularly across borders, it is possible to share experience of materials, particularly those which may be available in your target language. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg. 2001,p. 29)

As Takala (2002, p.42) points out, CLIL needs to be tailor-made to fit the national/local circumstances. A systematic approach is needed to make sure that it has the requisite institutional and professional infrastructure. Cooperation between policy-makers, educational authorities, the academic community and the teaching profession is crucial for success. Learner involvement is a key element in the actual teaching-learning interaction in schools and classes.

Any teacher can be a ‘lonely rider’ and start CLIL just with his/her own teaching, without any other staff being involved, but the potential of working with other professionals in an integrated way is considerable. Team-work between selected professionals, including language teachers, is by far the best way to start. Many teachers already work together with teams of colleagues to maximise the overall efficiency of a curriculum. CLIL involves integrating content and language as a form of dual-focused learning and thus invites questions about broader integration with other subject and language teachers. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001, p. 26)

Teaching personnel and administrators interested in starting CLIL in their institution may find the VocTalk program useful. The manual provides practical steps and a route by which to introduce the approach within an institution. (Marsh, Marsland & Stenberg, 2001.)