The Effects of CLIL on Content Knowledge in Monolingual Contexts

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Hughes, Stephen P. (ORCID Hughes, Stephen P. (ORCID 0000-0001-6457-8512); Madrid, Daniel
  • Language:
    English
  • Source:
    Language Learning Journal. 2020 48(1):48-59.
  • Publication Date:
    2020
  • Document Type:
    Journal Articles
    Reports - Research
  • Additional Information
    • Availability:
      Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
    • Peer Reviewed:
      Y
    • Source:
      12
    • Education Level:
      Elementary Secondary Education
    • Subject Terms:
      Monolingualism; Course Content; Interdisciplinary Approach; Teaching Methods; Second Language Learning; Language of Instruction; Academic Achievement; Comparative Analysis; Science Achievement; Elementary Secondary Education; Foreign Countries; Public Schools; Private Schools; Charter Schools; English (Second Language); Second Language Instruction; Institutional Characteristics; Bilingual Education
    • Subject Terms:
      Spain
    • Accession Number:
      10.1080/09571736.2019.1671483
    • ISSN:
      0957-1736
    • Abstract:
      The adoption of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in Spain has affected educational spending and introduced modifications in learning and assessment procedures for students. While positive effects are noticeable in terms of language learning, evidence concerning the impact on non-linguistic subject areas has been less forthcoming. This study, which forms part of the wider MON-CLIL investigation into CLIL instruction in monolingual areas of Spain, aims to contribute to the developing body of knowledge by comparing academic performance in science in primary education and natural science in compulsory secondary education. In addition to comparing school results for a sample of 93 public, charter (semi-private) and private primary students and 139 public and charter secondary students (total = 232), this study also involved a stepwise discriminant analysis with other potential intervening variables in order to determine the extent to which differences might be due to instruction type or to other factors. Significant differences were detected between certain school types in favour of non-CLIL groups in primary education, while differences also existed between public secondary groups in favour of CLIL. These findings seem to indicate that CLIL instruction had no detrimental effects on the science learning of the secondary learners participating in the study.
    • Abstract:
      As Provided
    • Publication Date:
      2020
    • Accession Number:
      EJ1240770