Content and Foreign Language Integrated Learning

By Yolanda Ruiz de Zarobe, J. Sierra, Francisco Gallardo del Puerto. 2011

87 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Content and Foreign Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) teachers and researchers are in luck with this new volume published by Peter Lang. They will all find good reasons to justify it is worth working on CLIL projects. The articles inside create an oasis in the middle of the desert, a mirror to look themselves into and see others with the same difficulties but also satisfactory results, and a wide range of ideas for further research and study on the field.

Subfields: Education, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/12e4ef9455a9146b1598bc0383442ed0d4ddcee9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

1. Do Coyle
2. Marta Aguilar

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. Do Coyle
2. Marta Aguilar
3. D. Lasagabaster

Citations in the corpus

• Engineering lecturers’ views on CLIL and EMI (2017, background): “Other reasons point to the reported beneficial impacts of more intensive exposure to the foreign language through content teaching in front of formal instruction (Ruiz de Zarobe et al. 2011) and, in the case of European higher education (EHE), to the internationalisation drive.”
• Listening to learners: an investigation into ‘successful learning’ across CLIL contexts (2013, background): “An emerging picture substantiated by empirical evidence suggests that CLIL raises as many issues as it solves (Ruiz de Zarobe, Sierra, and Puerto 2011).”