CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning

By V. Busse. 2011

881 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Environmental Chemistry

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6f6a1e4e6169b20c1c12b23bc979b4ad71e97f3d

How researchers see this paper

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

In Environmental Chemistry

1. V. Vázquez
2. Kevin Schuck
3. A. Heras
4. Ana Llinares
5. O. Meyer
6. T. Ting
7. Paul Thompson
8. Darío Luis Banegas

Citations in the corpus

• Integration in CLIL: a proposal to inform research and successful pedagogy (2015, background): “As argued by Cenoz, Genesee, and Gorter (2014), definitions of CLIL as an educational approach in which a second language is used as a medium of instruction for learning both academic content and language (Coyle et al., 2010) can equally apply to any type of bilingual/multilingual education programm”
• CLIL students' perceptions of their language learning process: delving into self-perceived improvement and instructional preferences (2016, background): “Since CLIL is a dual-focused approach in which both content and language are learnt (Coyle et al., 2010), teachers ought to capitalise on both.”
• How much L1 is too much? Teachers' language use in response to students’ abilities and classroom interaction in Content and Language Integrated Learning (2015, methodology): “As Coyle, Hood, and Marsh (2010) put it, there may be a gap between students’ L2 and cognitive levels.”
• EXAMINING TEACHER ROLES AND COMPETENCES IN CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL) (2013, methodology): “As there is no template for planning CLIL lessons, because each subject and context is highly unique, the above-mentioned 4 Cs framework (Coyle et al., 2010: 41) is a good starting point for raising teacher awareness as to what should be considered when teaching CLIL classes.”
• Is English-medium instruction effective in improving Chinese undergraduate students' English competence? (2014, background): “Alternatively, some students might have a strong desire to learn English in the first place, which might in turn lead them to see EMI as necessary to achieve their English learning goals (see Coyle et al. 2010; Dalton-Puffer, Hüttner, Schindelegger, & Smit 2009).”
• Content and language integrated learning next in Asia: evidence of learners’ achievement in CLIL education from a Taiwan tertiary degree programme (2015, background): “…and language integrated learning (CLIL) is an umbrella term referring to a dualfocused educational approach in which content courses are taught through the medium of a foreign language (FL; Coyle, Hood, and Marsh 2010; Dalton-Puffer, Nikula, and Smit 2010a, 2010b; Lasagabaster and Sierra 2010).”
• The impact of CLIL on affective factors and vocabulary learning (2015, methodology): “According to Coyle et al. (2010), CLIL is a post-method pedagogy model, which has been influenced by different theories that have traditionally had an enormous impact on education.”
• A pluriliteracies approach to content and language integrated learning – mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction and meaning-making (2015, methodology): “Bridging the 4Cs framework and the pluriliteracies model The 4Cs framework developed in the 1990s serves as a pedagogic tool for teachers to foreground key ‘components’ for planning CLIL (Coyle et al., 2010).”
• Taiwanese Students’ Experiences and Attitudes towards English-Medium Courses in Tertiary Education (2014, background): “…needed to obtain basic concepts and skills related to the subject matter), ‘language for learning’ (language needed to operate in the target language environment), and ‘language through learning’ (language required to develop new meanings for a deeper level of learning) (Coyle et al., 2010: 37).”
• CLIL Teacher Development: Challenges and Experiences (2012, background): “The lessons and their activities were sequenced according to linguistic and cognitive demands so that they could be seen as instantiations of the CLIL Matrix (Coyle, Hood, and Marsh, 2010, p. 43), Mohan’s knowledge framework for activities (Mohan, 1986, pp. 25-46) and Bloom’s revised taxonomy (Ander”
• The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes (2016, background): “Like the wider critical pedagogy movement, the ‘dream’ of critical EAP is that critical practices in the classroom can lead to ‘reforms in academic institutions’ and improved ‘conditions in the workplace and community’ (Benesch, 2001, p. xviii).”