Source Title:
Journal of Language and Cultural Education
|
Volume/Issue:
Volume 8: Issue 1

Meta-analysis of studies on the acquisition of receptive skills and vocabulary in CLIL

Ivana Cimermanová 1
  • 1 University of Presov, , Slovakia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/jolace-2020-0003
|
Published online:
11 Nov 2020
PDF

Abstract

Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is a major area of interest within the field of formal education. There are numerous studies presenting data and results of CLIL implementation. The positive impacts have been reported in building positive attitudes to language learning, to content subject learning, increasing efficacy of language learning. Questions have been raised about the factors that (may) affect research results and their interpretation. Many small studies bring statistically non-significant data as they use small convenience samples. Meta-analyses enable the researchers to synthesise data from research with the same characteristics. The present article analyses the studies that focus on CLIL implementation at primary and secondary schools with special focus on receptive skills and vocabulary gains. Out of 385 selected studies were 9 included and applying randomised-effect model evaluated. The analysis found no statistically significant differences between the CLIL and EFL groups in listening and reading performance. Concerning vocabulary the statistically significant difference in favour of CLIL (p<0,0001) with overall estimate effect 0,84 and confidence interval ranging from 0,56 to 1,11 was observed.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Agudo, J. D. (2019). Which instructional programme (EFL or CLIL) results in better oral communicative competence? Updated empirical evidence from a monolingual context. Linguistics and Education, 51, 69-78. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2019.04.008

  • Agustín-Llach, M. P., & Canga Alonso, A. (2014). Vocabulary growth in young CLIL and traditional EFL learners: Evidence from research and implications for education. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 26(2), 211-227. doi:10.1111/ijal.12090

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction meta-analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Bruton, A. (2011). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the research. System, 39(4), 523-532. doi:10.1016/j.system.2011.08.002

  • Canga Alonso, A. (2013). The receptive vocabulary of Spanish 6th-grade primary-school students in CLIL instruction: A preliminary study. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 6(2), 22-41. doi:10.5294/laclil.2013.6.2.2

  • Castellano-Risco, I., Alejo-González, R., & Piquer-Píriz, A. M. (2020). The development of receptive vocabulary in CLIL vs EFL: Is the learning context the main variable? System, 91, 102263. doi:10.1016/j.system.2020.102263

  • Castro-García, D. (2017). Receptive vocabulary measures for EFL Costa Rican high school students. International Journal of English Studies, 17(2), 81-99. doi:10.6018/ijes/2017/2/265681

  • Cenoz, J. (2015). Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: The same or different? Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 8-24. doi:10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922

  • Chostelidou, D., & Griva, E. (2014). Measuring the Effect of Implementing CLIL in Higher Education: An Experimental Research Project. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2169-2174. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.538

  • Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

  • Dallinger, S., Jonkmann, K., Hollm, J., & Fiege, C. (2016). The effect of content and language integrated learning on students’ English and history competences – Killing two birds with one stone? Learning and Instruction, 41, 23-31. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.09.003

  • European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice. (2017). Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe – 2017 Edition. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. doi:10.2797/839825

  • Fontecha, A. F., & Canga Alonso, A. (2014). A preliminary study on motivation and gender in CLIC and non-CLIL types of instruction. International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), 21-36. doi:10.6018/ijes/14/1/156681

  • Gené-Gil, M., Juan-Garau, M., & Salazar-Noguera, J. (2015). Development of EFL writing over three years in secondary education: CLIL and non-CLIL settings. The Language Learning Journal, 43(3), 286-303. doi:10.1080/09571736.2015.1053278

  • Glen, S. (2016). Hedges’ g: Definition, Formula. From StatisticsHowTo.com: Elementary Statistics for the rest of us! Retrieved August 08, 2020, from https://www.statisticshowto.com/hedges-g/

  • Goris, J., Denessen, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2019). Effects of content and language integrated learning in Europe A systematic review of longitudinal experimental studies. European Educational Research Journal, 18(6), 675-698. doi:10.1177/1474904119872426

  • Gorjian, B., & Hamidavi, N. (2017). Using Clil Method in Teaching Vocabulary to Intermediate Efl Learners. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 7(3), 13-23.

  • Hak, T., Rhee, H. V., & Suurmond, R. (2016, updated 2018). How to Interpret Results of Meta-Analysis. SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3241367, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3241367

  • Hamidavi, N., Amiz, M., & Gorjian, B. (2016). The Effect of CLIL Method on Teaching Reading Comprehension to Junior High School Students. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 6(9), 64-73. doi:10.26655/mjltm.2016.12.1

  • Hamidavi, N., Amiz, M., & Gorjian, B. (2016). The Effect of Clil Method on Teaching Reading Comprehension to Junior High School Students. Bulletin De La Société Royale Des Sciences De Liège, 85, 1642-165.

  • Harrer, M., Cuijpers, P., Furukawa, T., & Ebert, D. (2019). Doing Meta-Analysis in R: A Hands-on Guide. Retrieved August 08, 2020, from https://bookdown.org/MathiasHarrer/Doing_Meta_Analysis_in_R/, doi:10.5281/zenodo.2551803

  • Isidro, X. S., & Lasagabaster, D. (2018a). Code-switching in a CLIL multilingual setting: A longitudinal qualitative study. International Journal of Multilingualism, 16(3), 336-356. doi:10.1080/14790718.2018.1477781

  • Isidro, X. S., & Lasagabaster, D. (2018b). The impact of CLIL on pluriliteracy development and content learning in a rural multilingual setting: A longitudinal study. Language Teaching Research, 23(5), 584-602. doi:10.1177/1362168817754103

  • Kovalik, S., & Olsen, K. (1993). ITI: The model: Integrated thematic instruction. United States: S. Kovalik & Associates.

  • Lasagabaster, D., & Doiz, A. (2015). A Longitudinal Study on the Impact of CLIL on Affective Factors. Applied Linguistics. doi:10.1093/applin/amv059

  • Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2009). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than similarities. ELT Journal, 64(4), 367-375. doi:10.1093/elt/ccp082

  • Lo, Y. Y., & Jeong, H. (2018). Impact of genre-based pedagogy on students’ academic literacy development in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Linguistics and Education, 47, 36-46. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2018.08.001

  • Madrid, D., & Barrios, E. (2018). A Comparison of Students’ Educational Achievement across Programmes and School Types with and without CLIL Provision. Porta Linguarum: Revista Internacional De Didáctica De Las Lenguas Extranjeras, (29), 29-50.

  • Mattheoudakis, M., Alexiou, T., & Laskaridou, C. (2014). To CLIL or Not to CLIL? The Case of the 3rd Experimental Primary School in Evosmos. Major Trends in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics Volume 3. doi:10.2478/9788376560915.p13

  • Mensel, L. V., Hiligsmann, P., Mettewie, L., & Galand, B. (2020). CLIL, an elitist language learning approach? A background analysis of English and Dutch CLIL pupils in French-speaking Belgium. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 33(1), 1-14. doi:10.1080/07908318.2019.1571078

  • Merino, J. A., & Lasagabaster, D. (2017). The effect of content and language integrated learning programmes’ intensity on English proficiency: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 18-30. doi:10.1111/ijal.12177

  • Moghadam, N. Z., & Fatemipour, H. (2014). The Effect of CLIL on Vocabulary Development by Iranian Secondary School EFL Learners. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 2004-2009. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.635

  • Morton, T., & Llinares, A. (2016). Students’ use of evaluative language in L2 English to talk and write about history in a bilingual education programme. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(4), 496-508. doi:10.1080/13670050.2016.1192101

  • Myskow, G., & Ono, M. (2018). A matter of facts: L2 writers’ use of evidence and evaluation in biographical essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 55-70. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.08.002

  • Nieto Moreno de Diezmas, E. (2016). The impact of CLIL on the acquisition of L2 competences and skills in primary education. International Journal of English Studies, 16(2), 81-101. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2016/2/239611

  • Nieto-Moreno de Diezmas, E. (2018a). The Acquisition of L2 Listening Comprehension Skills In Primary And Secondary Education Settings: A Comparison Between Clil And Non-Clil Student Performance. RLA. Revista De Lingüística Teórica Y Aplicada, 56(2), 13-34. doi:10.4067/s0718-48832018000200013

  • Nieto-Moreno-de-Diezmas, E. (2018). Acquisition of reading comprehension in L1 in bilingual programmes of Primary Education. A comparative study. Ocnos, 17 (1), 43-54. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18239/ocnos_2018.17.1.1471

  • Nikula, T. (2016). CLIL: A European Approach to Bilingual Education. Second and Foreign Language Education, 1-14. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02323-6_10-1

  • Ortega, L. (2015). Researching CLIL and TBLT interfaces. System, 54, 103-109. doi:10.1016/j.system.2015.09.002

  • Otwinowska, A., & Foryś, M. (2015). They learn the CLIL way, but do they like it? Affectivity and cognition in upper-primary CLIL classes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(5), 457-480. doi:10.1080/13670050.2015.1051944

  • Pastrana, A., Llinares, A., & Pascual, I. (2017). Students’ language use for co-construction of knowledge in CLIL group-work activities: A comparison with L1 settings. Zeitschrift Für Erziehungswissenschaft, 21(1), 49-70. doi:10.1007/s11618-017-0802-y

  • Pérez-Cañado, M. & Basse, R. (2015). Analysing Errors of CLIL and non-CLIL Primary School Students in their Written and Oral Productions: A Comparative Study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 173, 11-17. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.023

  • Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2017). The effects of CLIL on L1 and content learning: Updated empirical evidence from monolingual contexts. Learning and Instruction, 57, 18-33. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.002

  • Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2018). CLIL and Educational Level: A Longitudinal Study on the Impact of CLIL on Language Outcomes. Porta Linguarum, 29(January), 51–70.

  • Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2018a). CLIL and pedagogical innovation: Fact or fiction? International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(3), 369-390. doi: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. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2015.05.004

  • Pladevall-Ballester, E., & Vallbona, A. (2016). CLIL in minimal input contexts: A longitudinal study of primary school learners’ receptive skills. System, 58, 37-48. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2016.02.009

  • Pokrivčáková, S. (2015). CLIL in Slovakia: Projects, research, and teacher training (2005-2015). CLIL in Foreign Language Education: E-textbook for Foreign Language Teachers, 17-29. doi:10.17846/clil.2015.17-29

  • Prieto-Arranz J.I., Rallo Fabra L., Calafat-Ripoll C., Catrain-González M. (2015) Testing Progress on Receptive Skills in CLIL and Non-CLIL Contexts. In: Juan-Garau M., Salazar-Noguera J. (eds) Content-based Language Learning in Multilingual Educational Environments. Educational Linguistics, vol 23. 123-137, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11496-5_8

  • Roquet, H., Llopis, J., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2015). Does gender have an impact on the potential benefits learners may achieve in two contexts compared: Formal instruction and formal instruction + content and language integrated learning? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 19(4), 370-386. doi:10.1080/13670050.2014.992389

  • Salamanca, C., & Montoya, S. I. (2018). Using CLIL Approach to Improve English Language in a Colombian Higher Educational Institution. English Language Teaching, 11(11), 19. doi:10.5539/elt.v11n11p19

  • Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D. & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behavior of two new versions of the Vocabulary Level Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55–88.

  • Schroll, J. B., Moustgaard, R., & Gøtzsche, P. C. (2011). Dealing with substantial heterogeneity in Cochrane reviews. Cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11(1), 22. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-22

  • Sepešiová, M. (2019). New Perspectives in Pre-Service Teacher Training in CLIL via VLE. In C. Can, P. Patsala, & Z. Tatsioka (Eds.), Contemporary Means and Methods in ELT and Applied Lingustics (pp. 515-533). Tallin, Estonia: LIF - Language in Focus.

  • Straková, Z. (2020). CLIL and Global Education: A Meaningful Match. SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 5, 546-557. doi:10.17770/sie2020vol5.4819

  • Surmont, J., Struys, E., Noort, M. V., & Craen, P. V. (2016). The effects of CLIL on mathematical content learning: A longitudinal study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 319-337. doi:10.14746/ssllt.2016.6.2.7

  • Sylvén, L. K. (2013). CLIL in Sweden – why does it not work? A metaperspective on CLIL across contexts in Europe. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 301-320. doi:10.1080/13670050.2013.777387

  • Taillefer, G. (2013). CLIL in higher education: The (perfect?) crossroads of ESP and didactic reflection. ASp, (63), 31-53. doi:10.4000/asp.3290

  • Terrazas Gallego, M. & Agustín Llach, M. P. (2009). Exploring the increase of receptive vocabulary knowledge in the foreign language: A longitudinal study. International Journal of English Studies, 9(1), 113–133, Available at https://revistas.um.es/ijes/article/view/90681/87481

  • Tzoannopoulou, M. (2015). Rethinking ESP: Integrating Content and Language in the University Classroom. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 173, 149-153. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.045

  • Yang, Wen-hsien. (2016). ESP vs. CLIL: A coin of two sides or a continuum of two extremes?. ESP Today. 4(1). 43-68.

  • Zarobe, Y. R. (2008). CLIL and Foreign Language Learning: A Longitudinal Study in the Basque Country. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 60-73.

  • Zarobe, Y. R. (2017). Improving reading strategy knowledge in young children: What self-report questionnaires can reveal. Elia, (17), 15-45. doi:10.12795/elia.2017.i17.02

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Journal of Language and Cultural Education

Online ISSN:
1339-4584
First Published:
06 Mar 2015
Language:
English
Publisher:
Sciendo

Search