The typical background of a CLIL teacher and discussion on CLIL as approach or methodology

July 2010

The following is a summary of opinions of FACTWorld members on the issues above and if the information is available the country where the colleagues are living:

-          The ideal situation is when a subject teacher is fluent in the foreign language (has an understanding of language acquisition and training in supporting language in their subject). Czech Republic

-          To answer your question: for me there is no difference whether you are subject or language based. Germany

-          Described as a 'problem area' at university trying to introduce/install a CLIL approach as opposed to the separate language and subject expert setting in existence.  It is extremely difficult as both 'parties' see this as extra work and there is a strong tendency to see CLIL as only getting bilingual subject experts to provide more content in the other language. University (location uknown)

-          I am all for the idea of CLIL At University. It would be more efficient if they could learn it in the way that they are exposed to the kind of English they will need in their future work area, such as machinery engineering or bio-chemistry, etc. China

-          From personal experience in Spain and abroad it is usually language teachers who seek subject specialists as allies. Spain

-          We have now a legal support that indicates clearly CLIL teachers have to focus on CONTENTS, so the most reasonably choice is Subject Teachers with a certificated Upper-Intermediate level of English (or French or German). Spain

-          Many CLIL teachers come from both backgrounds as we usually teach two subjects (in my case Biology and English). All the CLIL colleagues from my school have English as one of their teaching subjects and e.g. History, Chemistry or Geography as their second subject. Often we teach the same group in English as a foreign language and in our CLIL subject as well. Germany

-          The legal requirement is that CLIL teachers are content specialists with at least CFC exam. There are very few cases when these are language specialists doing the subject degree and few when the same person holds both degrees. Poland

-          CLIL as an acronym suggests that there is indeed a 'dual focus', but that focus has existed since time immemorial… it means very little. I've always preferred 'LEST'' - language enhanced subject teaching… Sometimes I wonder if CLIL is applicable to language teachers at all. Spain

-          "CLIL is a dual-focused educational approach in which an additional language is used for the learning and teaching of both content and language. That is, in the teaching and learning process, there is a focus not only on content, and not only on language". I think this is the perfect definition. Spain

-          CLIL … is an 'umbrella term covering a dozen or more educational approaches' …you immediately open the door to all-comers, but … have no prescriptive framework with which you can guide them in the practice of whatever 'CLIL' is… but this is surely nonsense. Spain

-          I also believe that primary school is an ideal field for starting to use a foreign language to learn other subjects. (But) the big problem in my opinion is that teachers don't look at CLIL as at an effective opportunity for learning ...some of them look at it as …something out of reach, a clever trick for clever and ambitious teachers...this is my perception as a teacher trainer. Italy

-          CLIL teachers are always subject teachers. … they have to pass a test and get a certification in the target language. CLIL is taught in what we call the "European sections" in high school (for the 15 to 18 years old). It concerns mainly English. CLIL teaching requires specific teaching strategies as the subject teachers must constantly be language aware... France

-          I think that if we present CLIL as a method, it would seem that there is just one "unique" way of doing CLIL, and that, in my humble opinion, may spoil its main focus: To develop good teaching/learning practices catering for different learning styles or needs. In any case, the labelling is important as far as we discuss its implications for the practice. Spain

-          One of the toughest issues when "defining" CLIL is the question of "using content to teach language" versus "using langauge to teach content." Korea

-          With CLIL, several people have put the cart before the horse. The trouble now, after only a few years, is that the cart is miles down the road, but the horse is still standing there. … What teachers need to know is what the best *methodological *practice is - given their contexts. Spain

-          The publishers … are scared to death that they are going to miss the boat. But of course, the big players do not yet see a clear market for 'Strong CLIL'. And so we are witnessing the usual messy compromise, with books appearing like mushrooms with CLIL labels, with publishers still unaware themselves of what the phenomenon is. Spain

-          There are more ENGLISH LANGUAGE teachers ready to teach other subjects in English, than teachers from other departments willing to teach their subject in English. Spain

-          CLIL teachers are subject teachers. They are required to have studied English at University or to have passed the Cambridge Proficiency Exam (for English as the CLIL language). Switzerland

Word version here