Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 364

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities

Lasagabaster, D., Sierra, J. M.·2010·ELT Journal

Abstract

In ELT literature, the reader often finds the terms Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) and immersion used interchangeably, even though there are important differences between them. These two labels usually appear as generic terms covering any kind of teaching in which an L2 is used to teach content. In this article, we attempt to unravel this ambiguity from the Spanish context, describing from a psycholinguistic and methodological point of view the aspects they share and, above all, their main differences. Although CLIL can be implemented in different foreign languages, the fact is that English is the language overwhelmingly used as a means of instruction in most European countries (Eurydice. 2006. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Brussels: European Commission).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/elt/ccp082

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 364

Metadata

Authors
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M.
Venue
ELT Journal
Published
2009-10-29
Volume
64
Issue
4
Pages
367-375
ISSN
  • 0951-0893 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-4526
OpenAlex
W2101565320
Cited by
364
References
0
FWCI
194.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/elt/ccp082
The paper
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities. ELT Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp082

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.