CLIL Courses Planning & Design: Reflecting on Key Ideas

When we think about teaching through CLIL — that is, teaching subjects like science or history using a second language — it’s important to reflect deeply on how we plan and assess learning. Let’s consider some common ideas about CLIL and discuss whether they are true or not, using both theory and practical classroom experience.

1.     Should most of my questions be simple to check understanding? It might seem logical to use mostly simple, factual questions to see if students understand. However, limiting yourself to low-order questions restricts their thinking development. In fact, some subjects naturally require more complex thinking skills. For example, in a science lesson, you might ask students not only to recall facts but also to explain a process or predict outcomes. According to Bloom’s taxonomy, encouraging higher-order thinking skills helps students deepen understanding and language use (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

2.     Do all subjects require the same cognitive demand? No, some subjects do require more complex thinking. Math and science often ask for problem-solving and analysis, while social studies might focus on interpretation and argumentation. So, your questions and activities should reflect these differences.

3.     Are high-frequency words important for both everyday language and academic language? Absolutely. CLIL emphasizes both BICS (Basic Interpersonal Communicative Skills) and CALP (Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency). High-frequency words appear in everyday speech and in academic texts. Reinforcing them helps students move smoothly between social and classroom language (Cummins, 2000).

4.     Is classroom language essential in CLIL? Yes! Classroom language—the words and phrases teachers and students use to manage activities, give instructions, and encourage participation—is crucial. Without a solid foundation in this language, students struggle to follow lessons and engage meaningfully (Coyle, Hood, & Marsh, 2010).

5.     Do only less able learners need scaffolding? This is a common misconception. Scaffolding—the support teachers give to help students reach new understanding—is vital for all learners, especially in CLIL settings where students face both content and language challenges. Even confident learners benefit from guidance as they tackle new or complex concepts (Gibbons, 2015).

6.     Is it okay to prioritize task completion over language accuracy? While completing tasks is important, ignoring language accuracy can harm long-term learning. CLIL aims for content and language development together. Encouraging language support during tasks builds students’ confidence and competence, helping them express ideas more clearly (Coyle et al., 2010).

Understanding Assessment and Evaluation in CLIL

Now, let’s clarify two concepts that often cause confusion: assessment and evaluation. Though they seem similar, they serve different purposes in education.

Assessment is a continuous process where teachers gather information about students’ knowledge, skills, attitudes, and beliefs. Its main goal is to improve learning. It is diagnostic, qualitative, and focuses on individual progress. For example, a teacher might observe how well a student explains a scientific concept or participates in a group discussion. This feedback helps students and teachers know what to work on next (Black & Wiliam, 1998).

In contrast, evaluation involves making a judgment about the quality of learning, often by assigning grades or scores. It’s summative and product-focused, typically done at the end of a term or unit to measure how well goals were met. For example, a final exam or project grade reflects evaluation. It compares students against standards or each other and is often more rigid and quantitative (Stiggins, 2005).

Assessment	Evaluation
Formative and ongoing	Summative and final
Diagnostic, guides learning	Judgmental, ranks performance
Focus on individual progress	Focus on group outcomes
Flexible and reflective	Fixed and comparative

Assessment in CLIL: What and How?

In CLIL classrooms, assessment is unique because it involves both content and language. Teachers must decide whether they are assessing students’ understanding of the subject, their language skills, or both. This decision guides how tasks and tests are designed.

• When assessing content, choose methods that require the least language possible to fairly measure understanding. For example, diagrams, multiple-choice questions, or practical tasks can show if a student knows the science concept without demanding complex language (Mehisto, Marsh, & Frigols-Martín, 2008).
• When assessing language, teachers can use CEFR descriptors to check skills like speaking, writing, or listening. This is especially useful for formative assessments to track language growth over time.
• Remember, sometimes students may understand content but cannot yet express it fully in the second language. Here, scaffolding and translanguaging strategies help bridge gaps (Garcia, 2009).

Assessment should also encourage collaboration through peer and self-assessment. When students reflect on their own work or give constructive feedback to classmates, they become more aware of their learning process and take more responsibility for it.

Assessment for Learning: Empowering Students

A vital part of CLIL is Assessment for Learning (AfL), which focuses on involving students actively in their progress. This means sharing clear learning goals, success criteria, and inviting learners to self-assess and evaluate peers.

Why is this important? Because it makes students:

• More motivated and independent learners.
• More responsible for their own progress.
• More confident to try, even when making mistakes.
• More positive about learning in general.

For teachers, AfL leads to smoother lessons and better insights into students’ needs. It helps identify what to teach next and how to tailor support individually or for the group. Clear “Can Do” statements—simple descriptions of what students should be able to do—make goals transparent and assessment fair (Black & Wiliam, 1998).

Practical Strategies for Effective CLIL Assessment

To make assessment meaningful and fair, teachers can:

• Observe students closely during activities to see how they use language and content knowledge.
• Use effective questioning that encourages deeper thinking and language use.
• Differentiate tasks to match students’ language and content levels.
• Provide accommodations and supports, like vocabulary lists or sentence starters.
• Include collaborative tasks that show teamwork, communication, and problem-solving.

In conclusion, teaching and assessing through CLIL is a rich, challenging process that balances language and content learning. By thoughtfully planning questions, scaffolding support, and involving students in their own assessment, teachers create an environment where learners thrive both academically and linguistically. Remember, learning is not something done to students but something they actively do themselves. This mindset inspires growth, curiosity, and confidence in every classroom.

References

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102

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

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Multilingual Matters.

Garcia, O. (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Wiley-Blackwell.

Gibbons, P. (2015). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning: Teaching English language learners in the mainstream classroom. Heinemann.

Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols-Martín, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Macmillan.

Stiggins, R. J. (2005). From formative assessment to assessment FOR learning: A path to success in standards-based schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(4), 324–328.