Tag: Germany

Introduction to CLIL – Content & Language Integrated Learning

I am currently co-teaching a class on cultural studies and how culture can be taught and used within an EFL classroom. Imagine my surprise on hearing that my students – future EFL teachers at German secondary schools – had never heard of CLIL. The last couple of IATEFL conferences have been brimming with presentations and discussions about content and language integrated learning, but it seems not everyone has heard about this trend. And even those who have heard about it are not really sure what it means, particularly what it could mean for their teaching.

And so I set my students a project – to devise key questions that arose when they first heard about CLIL, and to produce a resource for introducing it to other teachers. They have agreed to let me publish their work here, partly to reach an authentic audience, and partly to introduce other teachers to CLIL who may not yet have heard about it or understood how they could use it in their own teaching setting.  I have added only slight edits to what my student teachers produced to make it more accessible to a more international audience. We would love to hear what you think about this introductory information – please use the contact form below or add your comments!

The following introduction to CLIL was researched and written by Juliane H., Helena L., Constanze Q.-M., Timon B. and Thomas H., and edited by me and Carol E. 

CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning

Key Questions:

  1. How is CLIL defined by different people?
  2. What do I need to know to use CLIL?
  3. What are the Advantages and Disadvantages of CLIL?
  4. Is CLIL used in the German school system?

1) How is CLIL defined?

Hartmut Ebke:
CLIL refers to the teaching of a current subject other than foreign languages in more than one language.

British Council Teaching English:
CLIL has become the umbrella term describing both learning another (content) subject such as physics or geography through the medium of a foreign language and learning a foreign language by studying a content-based subject.

European Commission’s Eurydice Report:
The acronym CLIL is used as a generic term to describe all types of provision in which a second language (a foreign, regional or minority language and/or another official state language) is used to teach certain subjects in the curriculum other than the language lessons themselves.

The most important fact all three definitions share is that new content, i.e. information/factual knowledge that the learners did not previously know,  is taught in a foreign language. In some cases this is called “bilingual education” , where subjects such as math, biology or physics are taught in a foreign language such as French or English. As we can see from these different definitions, CLIL can therefore take various forms which fall along a continuum between teaching an entire school subject through the foreign language, and using input on information students didn’t know before to teach them some new language points.

In many EFL classrooms, factual information and understanding of the target culture is transmitted, which is new to the learners, and this input is used as the basis for language exercises. For example, a text about a certain aspect of life in the UK can be looked at either from a content or from a language perspective. The same input is therefore used to teach both content and language in an integrated manner. Many EFL or other MFL teachers do this in the lessons, without considering it anything special or thinking of it explicitly as CLIL. In many definitions, though, this is what CLIL is, in a less “intense form than providing pupils with an entirely bilingual education.

2) What do I need to know to use CLIL?

For EFL teachers wanting to include some CLIL in their teaching, the standard principles of good teaching and organising a good lesson apply. However, there are a couple of points to bear in mind when starting to use CLIL with your learners.

  • To make the first CLIL-lessons easy to follow, they should be clearly structured and pupils may need to be informed about the dual aims of each lessons.
  • To support pupils getting used to CLIL, the teacher may want to allow them to speak in their L1  to clarify points, ask questions, etc, to ensure that content is not lost due to being taught in a foreign language.
  • A group of pupils may be overwhelmed if they start learning through CLIL in subjects at the same time – this might lead to “cognitive overload“ and content and/or language points may not be retained.
  • The teacher can further support his/her pupils by providing authentic language input in the target language, by working with word lists and explaining key words in context with examples, by training learners in pre-reading/pre-listening strategies specific to the subject area, and by exploring cultural knowledge comparatively with their native culture.
  • In CLIL-lessons, pupils should encouraged to view themselves as learning in real-life situations because it helps them to acquire the foreign language “naturally”, as they have done their L1.
  • Pupils should not only have receptive but also productive skills in order to acquire a foreign language step by step. If pupils did not have any of these skills, the new teaching approach would probably not work out. (student-centred & task-based learning) .
  • Teachers should employ a wide variety of media so that learners “have access to many forms of non-lingual information“ (pictures, films, graphs etc.) in case they have not fully understood the explanations of content in the target language.
  • The teacher should also create tasks that “allow learners to express themselves in a non-verbal way“ (paintings, music etc.) if the focus is on testing understanding of the content.
  • The teacher may also want to include silent periods“ in the lessons which make it possible that pupils can “decide themselves when they want to participate verbally“ and give pupils time to digest the new information – the information load may be larger than in normal content or language classes (taught separately), so this is more important than normal.

3) What are the Advantages and Disadvantages of CLIL?


  • Especially teachers in Germany could profit from CLIL, because teacher training in Germany involves two subjects
  • Especially students with a keen interest in subjects, e.g. natural sciences, history or social sciences may simultaneously be more motivated to improve their language skills in order to understand the contents of the subjects they are interested in
  • Pupils can access subject-specific language terminology they might otherwise not learn
  • Students can develop intercultural communication skills and learn to use language to communicate authentic information and research in intercultural situations.
  • Due to the points above, it can lead to improved overall language competence
  • There is the possibility of gaining international certification
  • It may prepare pupils for their future studies and/ or working life more effectively than standard EFL teaching
  • Alongside language, they acquire cultural knowledge and understanding of a specific subject


  • One condition for teaching CLIL is that teachers need training in two subjects, one of them of course being the target language. Keep in mind that in many countries teachers receive training only in one subject
  • Students struggling with the target language could also have difficulties in understanding the contents  using in CLIL
  • Students might not acquire subject-specific terminology in their mother tongue
  • Currently, there is a shortage of teaching materials for CLIL. Teachers have to produce their own materials on various topics at various language levels; a task which can be very time-consuming

4) Is CLIL used in the German school system? 

CLIL is used in around 700 different schools of different school types in Germany but projects show that the concept of CLIL has never been a part of teacher- training programs. Typically, CLIL is practiced in Germany in the following contexts:

Schools: mainly grammar schools, but also Realschule. Comprehensive and vocational schools have also started making use of this type of education.

With the following languages: mostly English and French, but also Italian, Spanish, Dutch, Russian (these last four in very few schools)

Subjects which are taught completely in bilingual education: in most cases Geography, History, Politics, but also Social Science, Biology, Physical Education, Art, Music, Physics and Mathematics. 4
See here for an example: The CLIL approach in North Rhine-Westphalia

1 Primary schools

The CLIL approach is mostly not applied in German primary-education. For further information click on the link below

2 Secondary schools
In year five and six the learners sometimes have the chance to prepare for CLIL by taking two additional English classes, but usually CLIL starts in year five and lasts until year ten. It is generally applied in geography first and later in history and/or political science. Depending on the school, students can continue in the upper level courses by taking “Grundkurse” with the CLIL approach. If they continue taking a course with the CLIL approach until year 13, it will be part of the Abitur and their certificate will include a note explaining which course was taken bilingually (Abendroth-Timmer 2007; Müller-Hartmann & Schocker-v. Ditfurth 2009, p.153)
Click link for more information: 

Vocational schools
In the field of vocational schools the Content and Language Integrated Learning method can also be used. It is more a self- contained learning with modules provided in which the focus is clearly job- related and with reference to later applications and professions. (Abendroth-Timmer, 2007)
Click for Further information

4 Universities 
“Until recently there has neither been any pre-service nor any in-service training. Most CLIL teachers learn the CLIL-specific aspects of their profession in the field, i.e while they are teaching in CLIL classes. Now some German universities (including Wuppertal) offer an additional pre-service teacher training programme for students who want to qualify as CLIL teachers.” (Wolff)
Click for Further information


Are Detailed Objectives Really Necessary in Lesson Plans?

Lesson planning is usually a key component on English Language teacher training courses.  However, practising teachers rarely draw up such detailed plans as they are taught to on training courses. Thus questions arise as to whether it is really necessary to describe course, lesson and activity aims in such detail and what the benefits of this practice might be. 

The background literature is full of statements aboout how beneficial detailed lesson planning is, and mostly regard it as a vital part of teaching. Here are some of the most pertinent comments:

Bailey (1996, p.18): “Lessons are intended to help students accomplish the objectives of the course and program.”

Woodward (2001, p.2): characteristics of a ‘good’ lesson/course include that Ss and T are aware of what there is to learn and of why they are doing the chosen activities

Williams & Burden (1997, p. 82):“teachers first need to be clear why they select [an] activity and then help their learners to see the value for them.”

In order to provide some answer to the question which forms the title of this post, beyond theoretical perspectives found in the literature, I undertook a small-scale action research study and would like to present a summary of my findings, to provoke further consideration and discussion of this topic.

My study was based on teaching EFL to advanced learners on English Studies degree programmes at Trier University (Germany). I kept a developmental record including detailed tabular lesson plans for language lessons, my post-teaching reflections on these lessons and the success of the activities, plus student comments from post-lesson feedback.

From my collection of reflections in this record, the findings can be summarised as follows:

Why include aims in lesson planning?

  • it helps teachers organise their thoughts
  • it increases teachers’ self-confidence
  • it provides a yardstick to help evaluate materials
  • the teacher can evaluate tasks’ effectiveness/contribution to aims
  • the long-term value of skills and language taught is concretely considered
  • it helps to highlight the links between the lessons of a course
  • it thus prevents the course/lesson from being an end in itself

Why not?

  •  it is time consuming
  •  it may be a waste of time if need to change course goal
  •  it may lead to inflexibility


Generally, what I’m saying is that considering and contemplating the overarching aims of a course, lesson, or activity, and the relationship between these, IS NECESSARY, and is more important than the actual form the lesson planning takes or when it is done.

I don’t wish to advocate that we, as teachers, should always formulate the aims using staid old statements e.g. “by the end of the lesson, learners will be able to…”, as these are often quite unrealistic when you think about them. I mean, in just one lesson, they’ll be able to ‘do’ something or ‘know’ a language point? Maybe your lesson is just an introduction to the language point, or a bit of practice or repetition, but to truly ‘learn’ and ‘know’ something and be able to do it, we would all need more than 1 lesson!

So what I’m saying is, a ‘plan’ doesn’t have to be a long, typed up document for scrutiny by someone else. Indeed, ‘planning’ can be everything – scrappy post-its, discussions over coffee with a colleague, or typing up a scheme of work schedule. But I do believe that writing down can be very useful, in any form, especially at beginning of your teaching career.

Indeed, what my little action research study has really found, is that trainees’ books such as that by Harmer  are definitely pointing new teachers in the right direction when they say that “[t]he actual form a plan takes is less important than the thought that has gone into it; the overriding principle is that we should have an idea of what we hope our students will achieve in the class, and that this should guide our decisions about how to bring it about” (2001, p.311).

This post is a very brief summary of the following article, due for publication shortly:

Fielder, C., ‘Are detailed objectives really necessary in lesson planning?’ TTT Journal (expected Dec 2013)