Perceived Constraints of Contextual Factors on CLIL Teachers’ Effectiveness: Effect of a Training Course
Keywords:CLIL contextual factors, CLIL teachers, CLIL teachers’ beliefs, CLIL teacher training, effective CLIL implementation
Even though the implementation of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and its results have been researched extensively, fewer works have focused on the effect of contextual factors (CF) on teachers’ beliefs and on which ones are perceived as constraints. Furthermore, no research has explored how training might change those beliefs and help to adjust or modify some of the negative effects that CF exert on teaching practices. This qualitative study explores six in-service CLIL secondary teachers’ beliefs about CF and the effect a training course had on them. Results confirmed CF are perceived as constraints to the successful implementation of CLIL, and training appears to have a positive effect in shaping negative teachers’ beliefs and attitudes into more favourable ones. This, in turn, may help teachers to cope with the unfavourable teaching situations that CF may provoke on a daily basis. Since CF still seem to hinder CLIL success, considering teachers’ beliefs about them in CLIL teacher training programmes may contribute largely to teachers’ effectiveness.
Almarza, G. G. (1996). Student foreign language teachers’ knowledge growth. In D. Freeman & J. C. Richards (Eds.), Teacher learning in language teaching (pp. 50–78). Cambridge University Press.
Ashton, P. (1985). Motivation and the teacher’s sense of efficacy. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education, 2 (pp. 141–174). Academic Press.
Azparren-Legarre, M. P. (2020). Educating teachers for Content and Language Integrated Learning: An action research study of secondary school teachers’ practices and cognitions during a CLIL teaching programme. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. University of Navarra.
Azparren-Legarre, M. P. (2022). The impact of CLIL teacher education on the beliefs of in-service secondary CLIL teachers. Porta Linguarum, Monograph IV, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi.21587
Ball, P. (2018). Innovations and challenges in CLIL materials design. Theory into Practice, 57(3), 222–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1484036
Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J. (2016). Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford Handbooks for Language Teachers. Oxford University Press.
Banegas, D.L. (2012). CLIL teacher development: Challenges and experiences. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 5(1), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2012.5.1.4
Banegas, D. L. (2016). Teachers develop CLIL materials in Argentina: A workshop experience. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 9(1), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2016.9.1.2
Banegas, D. L. (2020). Teacher professional development in language-driven CLIL: A case study. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 12(2), 242–264. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2019.12.2.3
Banegas, D. L., Corrales, K., & Poole, P. (2020). Can engaging L2 teachers as material designers contribute to their professional development? Findings from Colombia. System, 91, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102265
Barrios, E., & Milla-Lara, M. D. (2020). CLIL methodology, materials and resources, and assessment in a monolingual context: An analysis of stakeholders’ perceptions in Andalusia. The Language Learning Journal, 48(1), 60–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2018.1544269
Basturken, H. (2012). Review of research into the correspondence between language teachers’ stated beliefs and practices. System, 40, 282–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.05.001
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36(2), 81–109. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444803001903
Borg, S. (2011). The impact of in-service teacher education on language teachers’ beliefs. System, 39(3), 370–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.07.009
Borg, S. (2017). Teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices. In P. Garrett & J. M. Cots (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language awareness
(pp. 75–91). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315676494-5
Breen, M. P., Hird, B., Milton, M., Oliver, R., & Thwaite, A. (2001). Making sense of language teaching: Teachers’ principles and classroom practices. Applied Linguistics, 22(4), 470–501. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.4.470
Breeze, R., & Azparren-Legarre, M. P. (2021). Understanding change in practice. Identity and emotions in teacher training for content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Language Studies, 15(3), 25–44.
Breeze, R., & García-Laborda, J. (2016). Issues in teacher education for bilingual schools. Estudios sobre Educación, 31, 9–12. https://doi.org/10.15581/004.31.9-12
Brutt-Griffler, J., & Samimy, K.K. (1999). Revisiting the colonial in the postcolonial: Critical praxis for non-native English-speaking teachers in a TESOL program. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 413–431. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587672
Buehl, M. M., & Beck, J. S. (2014). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and teachers’ practices. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 66–84). Routledge.
Bueno-Alastuey, M. C., & Villarreal, I. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions and training contributions towards ICT use. Estudios sobre educación, 41, 107-129. https://doi.org/10.15581/004.41.002
Cabezas-Cabello, J. M. (2010). A SWOT analysis of the Andalusian Plurilingualism Promotion Plan (APPP). In M. L. Pérez (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd GRETA Convention (pp. 83–91). Joxman.
Castellano-Risco, I., Alejo-Gonzáles, R., & Piquer-Píriz, A. M. (2020). The development of receptive vocabulary in CLIL vs. EFL: Is the learning context the main variable? System, 91, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102263
Cenoz, J. (2013). Discussion: Towards an educational perspective in CLIL language policy and pedagogical practice. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 389–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777392
Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL. Pluriliteracies teaching for deeper
learning. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108914505
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009024549
Custodio-Espinar, M. (2019). Influencing factors on in-service teachers’ competence in planning CLIL. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 12(2), 207–241. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2019.12.2.2
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2013). A construct of cognitive discourse functions for conceptualising content-language integration in CLIL and multilingual education. European Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2013-0011
Dupuy, B. (2011). CLIL: Achieving its goals through a multiliteracies framework. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.3
Eurydice. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Eurydice Unit, Eurydice. https://www.indire.it/lucabas/lkmw_file/eurydice/CLIL_EN.pdf
European Parliament. (2009). Resolution on multilingualism: An asset for Europe and shared commitment. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2009-0162_EN.html
Ford, M. E. (1992). Motivating humans: Goals, emotions, and personal agency beliefs. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483325361
Gondoavá, D. (2015). Selecting, adapting and creating CLIL materials. In S. Pokrivcáková (Ed.), CLIL in Foreign Language Education (pp.151–163). Constantine the Philosopher University. https://doi.org/10.17846/CLIL.2015.153-163
Guerra, P. L., & Wubbena, Z. C. (2017). Teacher beliefs and classroom practices. Cognitive dissonance in high stakes test-influenced environments. Issues in Teacher Education, 26(1), 35–51.
Hammersley, M. (2013). What is qualitative research? Bloomsbury Academic.
Hillyard, S. (2011). First steps in CLIL: Training the teachers. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.1
Holt-Reynolds, D. (1992). Personal history-based beliefs as relevant prior knowledge in course work. American Educational Research Journal,
(2), 325–349. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312029002325
Hüttner, J., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U. (2013). The power of beliefs: Lay theories and their influence on the implementation of CLIL programmes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 267–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2013.777385
Keogh, C. (2022). Student and teacher perspectives on co-created CLIL-appropriate materials focused on critical thinking and active citizenship. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 15(1), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2022.15.1.2
Kim, H., & Graham, K. M. (2022). CLIL teachers’ needs and professional development: A systematic review. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 15(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2022.15.1.5
Kurihara, Y., & Samimy, K. K. (2007). The impact of a U. S. teacher training program on teaching beliefs and practices: A case study of secondary school level Japanese teachers of English. JALT Journal, 29(1), 99–122. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTJJ29.1-5
Lamie, M. J. (2001). Understanding change: The impact of in-service training of teachers of English in Japan. Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Lancaster, N. K. (2016). Stakeholder perspectives on CLIL in a monolingual context. English Language Teaching, 9(2), 148–177. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n2p148
Lancaster, N. K. (2018). Innovations and challenges in CLIL program evaluation. Theory into Practice, 57(3), 250–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1484034
Lasagabaster, D., & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2010). Ways forward in CLIL: Provision issues and future planning. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. Ruiz de Zarobe (Eds.). CLIL in Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training (pp. 278–295). Scholars Publishing.
Lazarevic, N. (2022). CLIL teachers’ reflections and attitudes: Surviving at the deep end. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(2), 571–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1703897
Lumpe, A., Haney, J., & Czerniak, C. (2000). Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(3), 275–292. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200003)37:3<275::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-2
Lyster, R. (2007). Learning and teaching languages through content. A counterbalanced approach. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.18
Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols-Martín, M. J. (2012). European framework for CLIL teacher education. The European centre for modern languages. https://www.english-efl.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/CLIL-EN.pdf
Martí-Arnándiz, O., Moliner, L., & Alegre, F. (2022). When CLIL is for all: Improving learner motivation through peer-tutoring in Mathematics. System, 106, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102773
McDougald, J. (2015). Teachers’ attitudes, perceptions and experiences in CLIL: A look at content and language. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 17(1), 25–41. https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2015.1.a02
Mehisto, P. (2012). Criteria for producing CLIL learning material. Encuentro, 21, 15–33. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb466.0
Mehisto, P., & Asser, H. (2007). Stakeholder perspectives: CLIL programme management in Estonia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 683–701.
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and language integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Macmillan Education.
Meyer, O. (2010). Towards quality CLIL: Successful planning and teaching strategies. Pulso, 33, 11–29. https://doi.org/10.58265/pulso.5002
Moodie, I. (2016). The anti-apprenticeship of observation: How negative prior language learning experience influences English language teachers’ beliefs and practices. System, 60, 29–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.05.011
Morton, T. ( 2013). Critically evaluating materials for CLIL: Practitioners’ practices and perspectives. In J. Gray (Ed.), Critical perspectives on language teaching materials (pp. 111–136). Macmillan Publishers Limited. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137384263_6
Morton, T. (2020). Cognitive discourse functions: A bridge between content, literacy and language for teaching and assessment in CLIL. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 3(1), 7–17. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/clil.33
Moscovici, S., & Vignaux, G. (1994). The concept of Themata. In S. Moscovici & G. Duveen (Eds.), (2000), Social representations: Explorations in social psychology (pp. 156–183). Polity Press.
Nishino, T. (2012). Modelling teacher beliefs and practices in context:
A multi-methods approach. The Modern Language Journal, 96(3),
Pavón-Vázquez, V., Ávila-López, J., Gallego-Segador, A., & Espejo-Mohedano, R. (2015). Strategic and organizational considerations in planning content and language integrated learning: A study on the coordination between content and language teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(4), 409–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2014.909774
Pavón-Vázquez, V., & Ellison, M. (2018). Examining teacher roles and competences in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Linguarum Arena: Revista de Estudos em Didática de Línguas da Universidade do Porto, 4, 65–78.
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2016a). Are teachers ready for CLIL? Evidence from a European study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 202–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2016b). Teacher training needs for bilingual education: In-service teacher perceptions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19(3), 266–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2014.980778
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2017). The evolution of bilingual education in monolingual settings: An Andalusian case study. In M. Jedynack & P. Romanowski (Eds.), The many faces of bilingualism-living with two languages (pp. 207–241). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92396-3_12
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2018). CLIL and pedagogical innovation: Fact or fiction? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 369–390. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12208
Pérez-Vidal, C., & Roquet, H. (2015). The linguistic impact of a CLIL Science programme: An analysis measuring relative gains. System, 54, 80–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.05.004
Phipps, S., & Borg, S. (2009). Exploring tensions between teachers’ grammar teaching beliefs and practices. System, 37(3), 380–390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.03.002
Pineda, I., Tsou, W., Chen, F. (2022). Glocalization in CLIL: Analyzing the training needs of in-service CLIL teachers in Taiwan and Spain. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2050380
Pistorio, M. I. (2009). Teacher training and competences for effective CLIL teaching in Argentina. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 2(2), 37–43. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2009.2.2.14
Seidlhofer, B. (1999). Double standards: Teacher education in the expanding circle. World Englishes, 18, 223–245. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-971X.00136
Szczesniak, A., & Muñoz-Luna, R. (2022). Percepciones de los profesores sobre el aprendizaje integrado de contenidos y lenguas en los centros de primaria de Andalucía. Porta Linguarum, 37, 237–257. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi37.18414
Villarreal, I., & Bueno-Alastuey, M. C. (2022). The Forging Links project: Knowledge transference using pre-service teachers’ CLIL units with ICT integration. Porta Linguarum, Monograph IV, 63–79. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi.22415
Woods, D. (1996). Teacher cognition in language teaching: Beliefs, decision-making and classroom practice. Cambridge University Press.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2023 María Paz Azparren-Legarre, María Camino Bueno-Alastuey
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
This journal and its papers are published with the Creative Commons License Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). You are free to share copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format if you: give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made; don’t use our material for commercial purposes; don’t remix, transform, or build upon the material.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).