Petra Vallin, Faculty of Education, Charles University in Prague,

Teacher trainer of ITC International, Prague, Erasmus + KA101 course provider

contact: info@itc-international.eu

www.itc-international.eu

Research found out that if introduced in a systemic way, CLIL methodology brings a number of positive changes in education. Language skills is the area that is most frequently subject to examination: results have shown that CLIL-classes students have significantly wider range of specialized vocabulary, apply grammar rules more efficiently and are more self-confident and spontaneous in using the foreign language (Várkuti, 2010). Furthermore, they tend less to “borrow” words from their mother tongue both in writing and when speaking (Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010). At the same time their knowledge in the specific subject is not getting worse.

Nevertheless, CLIL’s benefits go beyond language skills. Students seem to develop motivation and interest in learning other foreign languages, considering it more necessary, important and useful compared to their peers taught foreign language in traditional classes. Interpreting the results of this survey, Lasagabaster and Sierra (2009) claim that CLIL offers more reasonable opportunities to use foreign languages, which is reflected in creating positive attitudes to languages in general.

Some Finnish studies on foreign language auto-evaluation and motivation for learning foreign languages have come up with interesting results, pointing out that CLIL students feel rather unsuccessful compared to control groups; however, this motivates them to more intense language learning (Seikkula-Leino, 2007). In addition, success of CLIL is also shown in Van de Craen (2006): his students in CLIL classes featured higher resistance to stress; and in Vollmer (2006), who found CLIL students more persistent both in foreign language learning and in other subjects, which has been attributed to extraordinary load put on students during the first year of CLIL implementation. If you would like to find out how to implement CLIL in an efficient way into your teaching see ww.itc-international.eu/.

References

Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2010). First languages and age in CLIL and non-CLIL contexts. International CLIL Research Journal, 3(1), 61 - 66.

Seikulla-Leino, J. (2007). CLIL Learning: Achievement Levels and Affective Factors. Language and education, 21(4), 328 – 341.

Van de Craen, P. (2007). An interdisciplinary research approach to CLIL learning in primary schools in Brussels. In Dalton-Puffer, C. & Smit, U. (Eds.). Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (s. 253 - 274). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Várkuti, A. (2010). Linguistics Benefits of the CLIL Approach. International CLIL Research Journal, 3(1), 68 – 79.

Vollmer, H. J. a kol. (2006) Subject-specific competence and language use of CLIL learners: The case of geography in grade 10 of secondary schools in Germany. In Dalton-Puffer, C.(2011). CLIL: From Practice to Principles. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31(1), 182 – 204.