CLIL: Some of the reasons why … and why not

By Anthony Bruton. 2013

218 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4672262a324c799033965fac92eb7049c3c8364e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials

1. aLberto Fernández-CostaLes
2. Javier Fernández-Sanjurjo
3. José Miguel Arias Blanco

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. aLberto Fernández-CostaLes
2. Javier Fernández-Sanjurjo
3. José Miguel Arias Blanco

Citations in the corpus

• Analysing students’ content-learning in science in CLIL vs. non-CLIL programmes: empirical evidence from Spain (2019, background): “…positive effects of CLIL are widely accepted, opposing views are also found on the possible drawbacks and the need for more solid research designs (Bruton 2011, 2013, 2015), suggesting that the initial enthusiasm for CLIL should not neglect challenges of this approach (Paran 2013; Pérez-Cañado…”