CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 169Second Language Learning and TeachingMultilingual Education and PolicyEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 60 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Content and Language Integrated Learning: A research agenda

Dalton-Puffer, Christiane, Smit, Ute·2013·Language Teaching
DOI 10.1017/s0261444813000256
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

While Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has received a considerable amount of research interest lately, its increasing popularity as an approach to teaching content subjects in a foreign language requires concerted investigation that reflects and recognises its fundamentally contextualised nature. In this contribution, we sketch various tasks that require localised, often action research, covering a range of areas highly relevant to CLIL realities, but so far underrepresented in the literature. These are, firstly, policy issues, comprising policy statements as well as stakeholders’ perceptions of CLIL and its success; secondly, classroom discourse as the prime site for the investigation of CLIL practices and their implications for the learning process; and, thirdly, classroom pedagogy, with the focus on potential differences between CLIL and non-CLIL settings.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0261444813000256

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Show all 60 references

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Lose, 2007, Bilingualer Unterricht macht Schule: Beiträge aus der Praxisforschung, 97
  2. Hynninen, 2012, Integrating content and language in higher education: Gaining insights into English-medium instruction at European universities, 25, 13
  3. Dalton-Puffer, 2007, Diverse contexts – converging goals: CLIL in Europe, 201
  4. Dafouz, 2007, Diverse contexts – converging goals: CLIL in Europe, 91
  5. Vollmer, 2006, Subject-specific competence and language use of CLIL learners: The case of geography in grade 10 of secondary schools in Germany
  6. Ruiz de Zarobe, 2008, CLIL and foreign language learning: A longitudinal study in the Basque Country, International CLIL Research Journal, 1, 60
  7. Pérez Vidal, 2011, Contributions to multilingualism in European contexts, 103
  8. Dalton-Puffer, 2008, Content and language integrated learning an Österreichs Höheren Technischen Lehranstalten. Forschungsbericht
  9. Wolff, 2007, Diverse contexts – converging goals. CLIL in Europe, 15
  10. Spolsky, 2004, Language policy

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 169

Related

Metadata

Authors
Dalton-Puffer, C., & Smit, U.
Affiliations
University of Vienna (AT)
ORCID
Smit, Ute
Venue
Language Teaching
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2013-09-24
Volume
46
Issue
4
Pages
545-559
ISSN
  • 0261-4448 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-3049
DOI
10.1017/s0261444813000256
OpenAlex
W2170142417
Cited by
169
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 4
FWCI
157.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
Language Teaching (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Second Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
CLIL, research agenda, language policy, stakeholder perspectives, classroom discourse, classroom pedagogy, action research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review