Does CLIL Enable Us to Teach Languages Better?

 The study and acquisition of English allow individuals to understand it as a functional system of communication, enabling them to meet personal goals, needs, or desires. In this context, second language teaching and learning are deeply connected to the sociocultural conditions in which communication takes place, enriching students’ cognitive frameworks and expanding their ability to communicate across various contexts. Through the exploration of different linguistic codes, learners enhance their capacity to engage with and understand new knowledge, effectively broadening their perspectives.

For language learning to be effective, it is essential that students are taught how to use the target language in real-life situations, aligning with the sociocultural norms associated with those situations. Learners actively shape their understanding of the language by making hypotheses about its functioning and testing these assumptions in various communicative contexts. This process allows them to refine their language use, deciding how and when to express themselves based on real-world interactions. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) provides a powerful framework for fostering this kind of learning by integrating language learning with subject content.

As an educator, using English as the medium of instruction for subjects such as computer science, science, or social studies provides students with opportunities to engage with the language in meaningful ways. Through activities that encourage peer interaction, students can discover resources and strategies to test and validate their hypotheses about the language, thereby fostering cognitive development. These interactions, centered on the negotiation of meaning, allow learners to refine their communicative abilities, taking responsibility for both the message and the method of communication.

Graddol (2006) emphasizes that CLIL differs from traditional English-medium instruction in that it does not require learners to have advanced proficiency in English before they begin studying the subject. Instead, CLIL supports language development by integrating language learning with subject content, offering the necessary language support alongside the academic material (Graddol, 2006, p. 86). In this approach, students are motivated to use the language for practical, real-world purposes, which not only helps them develop linguistic proficiency but also enables them to express their emotions, ideas, and thoughts through the language.

By adopting CLIL, educators can align their teaching practices with the principles of communicative language teaching (CLT), which focus on the real use of language. According to Richards (2006), CLT emphasizes:

• Making real communication the focus of language learning.
• Providing learners with opportunities to experiment and apply what they know.
• Tolerating errors, as they signify progress in building communicative competence.
• Offering chances to develop both fluency and accuracy.
• Integrating speaking, reading, and listening skills, as they are interrelated in real-world communication.
• Encouraging students to discover grammar rules inductively (Richards, 2006, p. 13).

For example, my first-grade students are more motivated to engage with language learning because CLIL allows them to use language creatively, connecting it to their everyday experiences. This approach encourages them to reflect on concepts, facts, and situations that enhance their understanding of the language and its use in the world.

Advantages and Disadvantages of CLIL Compared to Traditional Teaching Settings

One significant advantage of the CLIL approach is that it helps educators adhere to the principles of communicative language teaching. According to Senthamarai and Chandran (2017), CLIL enhances language skills and subject knowledge by:

• Creating a supportive learning environment.
• Providing purposeful language use in the classroom.
• Focusing on meaning over form.
• Increasing the time spent on both language and content learning (Dalton-Puffer, 2007; Dalton-Puffer & Smit, 2007). Additionally, CLIL allows students to learn specialized vocabulary that supports their academic and professional growth (Senthamarai & Chandran, 2017, p. 20).

However, a major challenge with CLIL is the need for specialized teacher training. Many teachers implementing CLIL are language instructors rather than subject matter experts, which can create difficulties in effectively delivering content in a second language. Graddol (2006) argues that CLIL is particularly challenging unless subject teachers are bilingual, as they must have proficiency in both the subject and the language of instruction (Graddol, 2006, p. 86).

Furthermore, in regions like Colombia and other Latin American countries, there are substantial challenges related to policy and financial constraints that slow the adoption of CLIL. Public schools may face delays in implementation, and by the time the approach is integrated, it may lose its relevance or popularity (Senthamarai & Chandran, 2017, p. 21).

References

Graddol, D. (2006). English next: Why global English may mean the end of 'English as a foreign language'. British Council Publications.

Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge University Press.

Senthamarai, T., & Chandran, M. R. (2017). Content Integrated Language Learning: A Phenomenon in Indian Context. Quest Journals: Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Science, 5(9), 19-22. Retrieved from http://www.questjournals.org/jrhss/papers/vol5-issue9/D591922.pdf