THE IMPLEMENTATION CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL) IN SPEAKING CLASSES AT UIN SAYYID ALI RAHMATULLAH TULUNGAGUNG

  • Anindita Badianti UIN Sayyid Ali Rahmatullah Tulungagung
  • Baiq Sumarni Universitas Pendidikan Mandalika
  • Enggar Larasati UIN Sayyid Ali Rahmatullah Tulungagung
Keywords: CLIL, speaking class, higher education, language integration

Abstract

Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is increasingly regarded as an effective approach in fostering both language and content knowledge simultaneously. While numerous studies emphasize its application in various educational contexts, there remains a significant gap concerning its implementation in higher education, particularly in speaking classes. This qualitative study investigates the implementation of CLIL in 5 speaking classes at UIN Sayyid Ali Rahmatullah Tulungagung, with particular attention to pedagogical practices, challenges, and learners’ perceptions. Data were collected through classroom observations, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis. The results indicate that although CLIL enriches communicative competence, various challenges such as limited material, teacher preparedness, and student readiness persist. The findings offer insights into improving speaking instruction and enhancing the integration of content and language in tertiary education.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J. (2015). Putting CLIL into Practice. Oxford University Press.

Bonnet, A. (2012). Towards an Evidence Base for CLIL How To Integrate Qualitative and Quantitative as well as Process, Product and Participant Perspectives in CLIL Research. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(4), 66–78.

Bower, K., Cross, R., & Coyle, D. (2020). CLIL in Multilingual and English-Background Contexts: Expanding the Potential of Content and Language Integrated Pedagogies for Mainstream Learning. Curriculum Integrated Language Teaching: CLIL in Practice, June 2020, 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108687867.003

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brown, H., & Bradford, A. (2017). EMI, CLIL, & CBI: Differing Approaches and Goals. Transformation in Language Education, August, 328–334.

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse inDiscourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. 20.

Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2014). CLIL and motivation : the effect of individual and contextual variables. September, 37–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889508

Graaff, R. De, Koopman, G. J., & Westhoff, G. (2007). Identifying Effective L2 Pedagogy in Content and Language Integrated Learning. 10(3), 12–19.

Harmer, J. (2003). 済無No Title No Title No Title. J. Harmer, 5(3), 248–253.

Kustati, M. (2014). An Analysis of Code-Mixing and Code-Switching in EFL Teaching of Cross Cultural Communication Context. 21(3), 174–182.

Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign Language Competence in Content and Language Integrated Courses. December. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874913500801010030

Lasagabaster, D., & Zarobe, Y. R. De. (2010). CLIL in Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training (Issue December). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The Roles of Language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.

Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE – The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential. 1–204.

Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., & Wolff, D. (2010). European Framework for CLIL Teacher Education. European Centre for Modern Languages.

Massler, U. (2011). Assessment in CLIL learning. In Guidelines for CLIL Implementation in Primary and Pre-primary Education. http://www.proclil.org

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. Revista de Educación, 33, 11–29. https://doi.org/10.58265/pulso.5002

Pantaleon, A. M. (2021). A corpus-based analysis of “for example” and “for instance.” March.

Parupali, R. S. (2019). The Importance of Speaking Skills in English Classrooms. Alford Council of International English & Literature Journal (ACIELJ), 2(March). www.acielj.com

Richards, J. C. (2008). Teaching Listening and Speaking: From theory to Practice (RELC Portfolio Series). In Cambridge University Press (Issue January 2018).

Vásquez, V., & Rubio, F. (2010). Teachers’ concerns and uncertainties about the introduction of CLIL programmes. Revista Internacional de Didáctica de Las Lenguas Extranjeras, 14, 45–58. http://rabida.uhu.es/dspace/handle/10272/6790

Published
2025-11-05
How to Cite
Badianti, A., Sumarni, B., & Larasati, E. (2025). THE IMPLEMENTATION CONTENT AND LANGUAGE INTEGRATED LEARNING (CLIL) IN SPEAKING CLASSES AT UIN SAYYID ALI RAHMATULLAH TULUNGAGUNG. Jurnal Bahasa Lingua Scientia, 17(2), 231-265. https://doi.org/10.21274/ls.2025.17.2.231-265