The e ec s o CLIL on L1 compe ence de elopmen in monolingual
con ex s
Ve y li le esea ch has been conduc ed on he e ec s o CLIL on L1 compe ence
de elopmen . This a icle compa es CLIL and non-CLIL lea ne s' le els o
a ainmen in Spanish Language and Li e a u e in se en public schools in he
Sou h o Spain. Lea ne s' e bal in elligence and mo i a ion we e p e iously
ma ched in o de o homogenise he sample. This s udy ocuses on a o al o
se en public schools (n=271) in he p o ince o Se ille, a bo h p ima y and
seconda y le el. S uden s’ pe o mance in L1 (Spanish) was compa ed o check
di e ences be ween CLIL and non-CLIL s ands. The esul s sugges ha s uden s
in CLIL p og ammes do be e in hei end-o -yea Spanish Language and
Li e a u e assessmen , compa ed wi h s uden s in non-CLIL s ands. The e is also
some e idence o sugges ha in schools wi h ea ly CLIL p og ammes CLIL
s uden s do be e in he Spanish Language and Li e a u e assessmen han
s uden s in schools wi h la e CLIL p og ammes. Teache s and s uden s su eyed
gene ally belie e ha CLIL has a posi i e impac in his a ea, pa icula ly on
s uden s’ unde s anding o how language wo ks.
Keywo ds: CLIL; communica ion skills in he L1; language lea ning; Spanish
In oduc ion
CLIL (Con en and Language In eg a ed Lea ning) is de ined as ‘an educa ional app oach
in which a ious language-suppo i e me hodologies a e used which lead o a dual-
ocused o m o ins uc ion whe e a en ion is gi en bo h o he language and he
con en ’ (Coyle, Hood and Ma sh 2010: 3). I has i s o igins in he 1990s, when he e m
CLIL was coined o e e o a se ies o eaching me hodologies ha b ough oge he
p inciples om exis ing educa ional app oaches such as Con en -Based Ins uc ion (CBI),
language imme sion and bilingual educa ion. The e is now a subs an ial li e a u e
seeking o de ine CLIL and o unde s and commonali ies and di e ences wi h ea lie
app oaches (Dal on-Pu e 2011; Ruiz de Za obe, Sie a, and Galla do 2011; Fe nández-
Sanju jo, Fe nández-Cos ales and A ias 2017). Pé ez-Cañado (2012) has sugges ed ha
CLIL should be seen as he Eu opean coun e pa o he Ame ican-based CBI. I is
ce ainly ue ha CLIL has de eloped mos ly in Eu ope, and mos no ably in Spain,
whe e i has been seen as pa icula ly app op ia e o achie ing he Eu opean Union’s
mul ilingual policy (Eu opean Commission 2004). This is he con ex o he esea ch
epo ed in his pape .
In he yea s ollowing i s appea ance, CLIL a ac ed conside able c i ical
a en ion. Ea ly esea ch a emp ed o de ine he me hod and ou line i s main ea u es
(Coyle 2008; Coyle, Hood and Ma sh 2010; Dal on-Pu e 2011; Pé ez-Cañado 2012). In
his pe iod, CLIL was concep ualised in e y b oad e ms as an educa ional app oach
ha could encompass a a ie y o eaching me hods al eady in use in bilingual,
mul ilingual and imme sion p og ammes in Eu ope (Ruiz de Za obe, Sie a and Galla do
2011). Indeed, CLIL was said o be an ‘umb ella e m’ (Mehis o, Ma sh and F igols 2008:
12) co e ing a ious eaching me hodologies. This allowed di e en Eu opean coun ies
and ins i u ions o adap i o hei pa icula con ex s and educa ional amewo ks, and
o ailo i o hei own speci ic linguis ic needs.
Comen ado [E1]: This equi es cla i ica ion
Comen ado [H2R1]: Done.
As CLIL s a ed o be implemen ed and de eloped in se e al Eu opean coun ies
(Coyle, Hood and Ma sh 2010), esea ch in e es shi ed om de ini ion and
cha ac e isa ion o he e alua ion o i s implemen a ion. S udies began o ocus on
lea ning ou comes and o assess s uden s' o e all compe ence de elopmen in he
o eign language (FL), compa ing bo h CLIL and non-CLIL s ands (Admi aal, Wes hoo
and de Bo 2006; Dal on-Pu e 2011; Lasagabas e 2008). In hese s udies, esea ch
ypically showed posi i e esul s o CLIL p og ammes, wi h CLIL s uden s ou pe o ming
non-CLIL s uden s (Dal on-Pu e 2013; Lo enzo, Casal and Moo e 2009; Pé ez-Cañado
2012).
Since hen, di e en lines o esea ch ha e been de eloped. One o hem ocuses
on assessing no jus he impac on gene al FL p o iciency bu on speci ic aspec s o
lea ne s' FL compe ence such as speci ic communica i e language skills o ocabula y o
g amma (Lasagabas e 2008; Nie o 2016a, 2016b). Ruiz de Za obe and Jiménez (2009:
135) p o ide a comple e o e iew o esea ch on language skills de elopmen in CLIL
con ex s, concluding ha ‘unde he CLIL app oach, some ecep i e and p oduc i e skills
seem o bene i mo e han o he s: eading, speaking and some w i ing compe encies
such as luency, lexical a ie y and lexical and syn ac ic complexi y.’
While esea ch gene ally shows ha CLIL lea ne s end o achie e be e esul s
in FL lea ning han non-CLIL lea ne s, his is no always he case, no is i always clea
why CLIL s uden s ou pe o m non-CLIL s uden s. As Dal on-Pu e (2011: 186) sugges s:
‘ he ques ion o how much and in wha espec CLIL s uden s a e be e emains o
in e es , as does he ques ion o why.’ Thus ano he impo an line o esea ch conside s
di e en a iables ha may a ec he FL lea ning ou comes o s uden s in CLIL
p og ammes, such as con ex ual ac o s, indi idual lea ne cha ac e is ics and
mo i a ion (Lasagabas e 2011; Fe nández and Canga 2014; Doiz and Lasagabas e
2014; Syl én and Thomson 2015; Alejo and Pique 2016; A ibas 2016; O winowska and
Fo yś 2015; P enninge 2016). So a , indings in his a ea ha e no been conclusi e,
indica ing ha u he esea ch is needed o unde s and he in luence o ac o s such as
age, gende , se ing (e.g. u al s. u ban), socio-economic s a us and mo i a ion on he
de elopmen o CLIL lea ne s’ FL compe ence.
As Nikula e al. (2016: 1) no e: ‘CLIL esea ch o da e has been mainly
cha ac e ised by language lea ning pe spec i es on lea ne s’ gene al language skills [in
he FL]’ while li le is known abou he possible e ec s o CLIL on lea ne s' pe o mance
in o he a eas o he cu iculum. CLIL is a e all abou he in eg a ion o bo h con en
and language. The impac o CLIL on con en subjec lea ning is add essed in ano he
a icle in he p esen issue o The Language Lea ning Jou nal (see Mad id and Hughes);
he e, we in es iga e whe he CLIL impac s on he de elopmen o lea ne s’ knowledge
and skills in he a ea o he i s language (L1).
The ole o he i s and he o eign language in CLIL
The impac o CLIL on lea ne s' L1 de elopmen has been sys ema ically neglec ed in he
li e a u e (Lasagabas e and Sie a 2010; Dal on-Pu e 2012; Me ino and Lasagabas e
2015, Lasagabas e 2017). This is no doub due o he assump ion ha CLIL is a
me hodology ha is p ima ily aimed a imp o ing s uden s' compe ence in he FL,
a he han an educa ional app oach in which he in e ac ion be ween he languages
used s imula es he lea ning o o he cu icula con en oo. Lo enzo, Casal and Moo e
Comen ado [E3]: A e hey e e ing o L2?
Comen ado [H4R3]: Done.
Comen ado [E5]: I’m sugges ing dele ing his as i doesn’
eally ell us any hing bu jus epea s he same idea.
Comen ado [H6R5]: Done.
(2009: 435) ce ainly ound ha his was he dominan iew among L1 eache s su eyed
in Andalusia in 2007-2008 and hey concluded ha :
L1 eache s appea eluc an o pa icipa e in in eg a ion; some e en conside ed CLIL a
compe i o o L1 lea ning, in he belie —nou ished by a pedes ian iew o
bilingualism— ha di e en languages ep esen opposing o ces, g owing a each
o he ’s expense.
Howe e , well-es ablished heo ies o bilingualism main ain esea ches done in CLIL
show ha he lea ning o a second language has posi i e e ec s on lea ne s’
pe o mance in hei L1 due, o example, o he de elopmen o language awa eness
(Cenoz 2015; Dal on-Pu e 2007; Ruiz de Za obe and Cenoz 2015). Likewise, CLIL
heo is s ag ee ha CLIL is no only conce ned wi h de eloping lea ne ’s FL compe ence,
bu wi h he de elopmen o gene al communica i e compe ences (Eu opean Council
2001: 13-14), bo h in he FL and he L1 . As Coyle (2002: 28) explains, d awing on he
dis inc ions made by Cummins (1999), CLIL helps s uden s de elop basic in e pe sonal
communica ion skills (BICS) and cogni i e-academic language p o iciency (CALP) in bo h
he FL and he L1.
Bilingual p og ammes ha e a long and es ablished adi ion in Spain (Cenoz
2013; Cenoz 2015; Lasagabas e and Ruiz de Za obe 2010; Pé ez-Cañado 2012) so i is
pe haps su p ising ha , ela i e o o he g oups o in e na ional and Eu opean lea ne s,
Spanish lea ne s pe o m compa a i ely less well bo h in he i s and he o eign
language (PIRLS 2011; Eu opean Commission 2012; Eu ydice 2012; ECCL 2012). Could i
be ha eaching cu icula subjec s in a o eign language impac s nega i ely on L1 skills
and knowledge de elopmen ? I is o his eason ha esea ch was unde aken as pa
o a na ionwide esea ch p ojec o look a he impac o CLIL on L1 skills and knowledge.
The e has been li le esea ch on his issue since Ma sh (2002: 24) asked he ques ion
i een yea s ago: ‘Will he i s language de elop no mally despi e a signi ican amoun
o ins uc ion ime being conduc ed in ano he language?’
A numbe o a gumen s and conside a ions unde pin he iew ha L1 and FL
compe ences can de elop in pa allel, and indeed, should bene i each o he ; hese o m
he heo e ical ounda ion o CLIL. We e iew i e key poin s below:
Cogni i e de elopmen
Acco ding o he li e a u e (S occo e al. 2014; Olusola e al., 2010 and Le Pichon
Vo s man e al. 2009 ), lea ning mo e han one language should ha e cogni i e bene i s
o lea ne s. This idea is cen al o CLIL; Coyle (2002: 28) o example makes i one o he
ou key ea u es o CLIL in he ‘4C's model’ along wi h con en , cul u e and
communica ion:
CLIL should cogni i ely challenge lea ne s - wha e e hei abili y. [ . . . ] Resea ch
sugges s ha hese challenges encou age hinking o ake place in di e en languages
and a a deepe le el o in e -cul u al unde s anding in ol ing bo h sa oi ai e and
sa oi ê e.
Comen ado [E7]: Jus on speaking pe o mance???? Please
e iew his ph asing and cla i y wha exac ly is being e e ed
o.
Comen ado [H8R7]: Done.
Comen ado [E9]: Wha a e hese? Please can we ha e a
de ini ion o a he e y leas a e e ence. ????
Comen ado [H10R9]: Done.
Comen ado [E11]: The Cummins e e ence is Cummins, J.
1999. BICS and CALP: cla i ying he dis inc ion. ERIC
ED438551. h ps://e ic.ed.go /?id=ED438551
You will need o add his o you e e ences.
Comen ado [H12R11]: Done.
Comen ado [E13]: Please s a e a wha le el – a e we
alking seconda y lea ne s, p ima y, adul ????
Comen ado [MNP14]: PIRLS ( ou h g ade s uden s:
PIRLS 2016 consis s o h ee sepa a e assessmen s o eading
comp ehension: PIRLS, PIRLS Li e acy, and ePIRLS. PIRLS
is a comp ehensi e assessmen o ou h g ade s uden s’
eading li e acy achie emen . Conduc ed on a egula i e-
yea cycle.
Eu ydice: all educa ion le els.
Comen ado [MNP15]: No encuen o dónde hace
e e encia a que en e los pocos escu udios en algunos se
señala que CLIL no a ec a al desa ollo de la L1:
Admi al e al, 2006
Coyle, Hood and Ma sh, 2011
Dal on-Pu e , 2011
Pé ez- Cañado, 2012
E isencias de que mejo a:
Lo enzo, Casal and Moo e 2009
Fe nández-Sanju jo 2017
Comen ado [E16]: Re e ences please
Comen ado [MNP17R16]: done
Comen ado [MNP18]: Coyle 2008 ambién hace
e e encia al desa ollo cogni i o:
•De elop isk- aking and p oblem-sol ing skills in he
lea ne s;
•De elop s udy skills, concen a ion—lea ning how o
lea n h ough he o eign language is undamen al o CLIL;
In his iew, he cogni i e bene i s o CLIL should impac bo h on FL and L1 lea ning.
Thus, eaching con en subjec s in he FL should no impede, bu a he os e , he
de elopmen o lea ne s’ L1 skills and knowledge.
Skills ans e be ween languages
Na és (2009: 28) poin s o e idence sugges ing success ul lea ning o a second language
builds on e ec i e L1 de elopmen : ‘ he lack o con inuing i s -language de elopmen
has been ound, in some cases, o inhibi he le els o second language p o iciency and
cogni i e academic g ow h’. Na és e e s o K ashen's e iew o bilingual educa ion
(1997: 1) whe e he la e a gues ha :
…when schools p o ide child en quali y educa ion in hei p ima y language, hey gi e
hem wo hings: knowledge and li e acy. Li e acy de elopmen in he p ima y
language ans e s o he second language.
In he same ein, Cummins (2000: 25) con ends ha ‘ he i s language mus no be
abandoned be o e i is ully de eloped, whe he he second language is in oduced
simul aneously o successi ely, ea ly o la e, in ha p ocess’. In he con ex o CLIL,
Agus ín (2009: 112) also acknowledges he in luence o he L1 in he p ocess o lea ning
a second o o eign language. Thus, cu en hinking sugges s ha a he han
compe ing wi h FL lea ning, he de elopmen o compe ence in he L1 po en ially
s eng hens i .
The amoun , na u e and ype o inpu in he L1 and he FL / na u e o inpu
Rega ding inpu , mos a gumen s used in CLIL de i e om esea ch in he ield o second
language acquisi ion (Na és 2009) in pa icula K ashen's inpu hypo hesis (1985),
acco ding o which L2 acquisi ion can only ake place when lea ne s a e exposed o
su icien comp ehensible inpu . The e a e se e al s udies o CLIL in which he amoun
o FL inpu is one o he a iables conside ed (Lo enzo, Casal and Moo e 2009; Ojeda,
2009; Dal on-Pu e , 2011; Me ino and Lasagabes e , 2017 and Nie o, 2016) bu all o
hese ocus exclusi ely on he impac on FL, a he han L1, de elopmen . Ce ainly, one
o he ad an ages o CLIL lies p ecisely in he inc eased FL inpu ha s uden s ecei e
du ing ins uc ion compa ed o egula English as a o eign language (EFL) classes in non-
CLIL con ex s.
A he same ime, CLIL may also o e mo e oppo uni ies o lea ne s o
communica e in he FL; in o he wo ds, g ea e ‘ou pu ’ and ‘in e ac ion’, bo h o which
a e conside ed impo an in success ul second language acquisi ion acco ding,
espec i ely, o Swain (1985) and o Long (1996). Indeed, esea ch on CLIL sugges s ha
he success o he me hodology is di ec ly ela ed o he numbe o hou s ha s uden s
a e exposed o and, he e o e, able o use, wo k and in e ac in he FL (Lasagabas e
2010, 2015, 2017; Lo enzo, Casal and Moo e 2009). Howe e , a co olla y o his is ha
a balance mus be sough in he amoun o inpu ha CLIL lea ne s ecei e in each
language, so ha exposu e o one language is no a he expense o he o he . In
Andalusia, whe e he p esen s udy akes place, he Plan Es a égico de Desa ollo de
las Lenguas en Andalucía (2016) (S a egic Plan o he De elopmen o Languages in
Andalucia) s a es ha a minimum o 50% o cu iculum ime should be deli e ed in he
Comen ado [E19]: Please check his e ision. No mally,
‘language ans e ’ e e s o he ans e o linguis ic elemen s
om one language o ano he . I hink you’ e e e ing o
some hing a he di e en he e.
Comen ado [H20R19]: Done.
Comen ado [E21]: The e’s a dissonance be ween ‘ equi es’
he e and Na es’ a he mo e nuanced commen ‘in some
cases …’ Hence my ew i e.
Comen ado [H22R21]: OK.
Comen ado [E23]: This e e ence does no e e o
K ashen’s ‘ heo y o L2 acquisi ion’ bu a he o K ashen’s
e iew o e idence o suppo bilingual p og ammes: hence
my ew i e.
Comen ado [H24R23]: OK.
Con o ma o: Resal a
Comen ado [E25]: You need o gi e he e e ence. I hink
i ’s 1985 bu please check.
Comen ado [H26R25]: Done.
Comen ado [E27]: In L1? In L2????? A e you alking jus
abou CLIL s udies?
Comen ado [H28R27]: Done.
Comen ado [E29]: You alk abou ‘se e al’ bu e e ence
only one s udy. Please check his and p o ide u he
e e ences i necessa y.
Comen ado [MNP30R29]: done
Comen ado [E31]: Which? We eally do need he
e e ences.
Comen ado [MNP32R31]: done
Comen ado [E33]: The e e ences a e as ollows. Swain,
M. 1985. Communica i e compe ence: some oles o
comp ehensible inpu and comp ehensible ou pu in i s
de elopmen . In Inpu in Second Language Acquisi ion, ed.
S.M. Gass and C.G. Madden, 235-256. Long, M.1996. The
ole o he linguis ic en i onmen in second language
acquisi ion. In Handbook o Second Language Acquisi ion,
ed. W. Ri chie and T. Bha ia, 413-468.
Comen ado [H34R33]: Done.
Comen ado [MNP35R33]:
FL i a school is o be accep ed wi hin he Bilingual/CLIL Scheme. Beyond his, i is he
schools' esponsibili y o decide he exac numbe o hou s ha he FL will be used and
how hese will be dis ibu ed ac oss cu icula subjec s. Because no maximums a e se ,
exposu e o he L1 may be signi ican ly educed depending on he school and he
con ex , which could po en ially ha e an e ec on lea ne s’ L1 de elopmen . Thus,
moni o ing he FL-L1 balance is impo an .
O o aspec o impo an e en elación al inpu que se p opo ciona en el aula CLIL es á
elacionado con la na u aleza del inpu y el consiguien e ou pu que se ob iene
(O winowska and Fo ys, 2015). En es e sen ido, es impo an e ene en cuen a que el
obje i o p incipal del en oque CLIL es que se mejo e la compe encia del alumnado pa a
comunica se en la o eign language. Así Galla do e al. (2009) conside an que es
necesa io que el alumnado sea expues o a au hen ic inpu y que la lengua se use de con
communica i e pu puses. De ahí que como indica Dal on Pu e (2011) una de la eo ías
de e e encia sea el K ashen’s (1985) moni o model señalando la impo ancia que se
concede en el mismo a la necesidad de que exis a un comp ehensi e inpu . De la misma
o ma, Na és (2009:25) hace e e encia a la necesidad de que el con ex o de ap endizaje
de la segunda lengua enga una condiciones simila es al de la p ime a lengua en an o
en cuan o el oco de la enseñanza debe es a en el signi icado más que en la o ma y el
inpu que se p opo ciona debe ajus a se al ni el de compe encia del alumnado.
Siguiendo es a misma idea, Nie o (2016:82) señala la comunicación como obje i o
cen al en la me odología CLIL y la consecuen e necesidad de p opo ciona un ico y
a iado inpu que incluye “di e en language unc ions, di e en gen es, academic
language, class oom language…” como medio pa a consegui os e “s uden ´s
in ol emen and p oduc ion o comp ehensi e ou pu ”. Tene en cuen a las unciones
comunica i as de la lengua y combina lo con el ap endizaje an o de in e pe sonal
communica ion skills (BICS) and cogni i e-academic language p o iciency (CALP) implica
la con eniencia de analiza el inpu que el p o eso ado p opo ciona en el aula no solo
en cuan o a la dis ibución y p opo ción del mismo, sino ambién en cuan o a los
momen os en los que se u iliza en el aula y los obje i os pa a los que se emplea.
Va ious s udies ha e ocused on he ype o con en , discu si e unc ions and ac i i ies
o which he L1 and he FL a e used in con en subjec s in CLIL p og ammes. Fo
example, Ma sh (2002: 97) concluded ha ’ he hou s augh in he L1 will be de o ed o
knowledge-in ensi e eaching, whe eas he CLIL [. . . ] hou s will ocus on ac i i ies
pe mi ing he use o he L2/L3: consolida ing knowledge, and using i in a ious
communica i e ac i i ies.’ In a simila ein, Lo enzo, Casal and Moo e (2009: 230)
iden i ied di e en s ages in CLIL eaching o which each language is used. Thei indings
show ha FL use a ies depending on he discu si e unc ion employed.
Flexibili y
Flexibili y is a key conside a ion in CLIL implemen a ion, e lec ing he needs o s uden s
in hei pa icula lea ning con ex and enabling he de elopmen bo h o he L1 and he
FL. Bae ens (2002: 25) e e s o a a ie y o ways o o ganising CLIL:
CLIL allows o a g ea lexibili y in cu icula design and ime- able o ganiza ion,
anging om ea ly o al, ea ly pa ial, la e imme sion ype p og ammes, o modula
Comen ado [MNP36]: Language- ela ed a iables
embedded in he CLIL lea ning en i onmen , which pe ain
o he na u e o inpu , in e ac ion and ou pu in he
class oom,
An impo an ac o ha di e en ia es CLIL classes om
language classes is he ole o language used in he inpu ,
in e ac ions and ou pu ”
Comen ado [MNP37]: (a) by being exposed o
au hen ic inpu in he second language and (b) by
needing o use he second language o eal,
communica i e pu poses’
Comen ado [MNP38]: Una idea pa ecida na se si segui
an adiendo aque pe o e dejo la ci a
(Jiménez Ca alán and Ruiz de Za obe (2009: 81):
T adi ionally, wo ypes o language lea ning con ex s
ha e been dis inguished: na u al con ex s and
class oom con ex s. Na u al lea ning con ex s a e
cha ac e ized by he use o language o communica ion
as well as by exposu e o a g ea deal o a ied inpu
p o ided by na i e speake s.
As Ellis (1995: 17) poin s ou , his kind o esea ch aims
a he cla i ica ion o heo e ical issues bu abo e all
aims a he imp o emen o language eaching by
means o de eloping eache s’ awa eness o he na u e
o he inpu ha lea ne s a e exposed o.
Comen ado [MNP39]: Wha is a he cen e o
s akeholde s is he unde s anding ha CLIL class ooms
a e an en i onmen o na u alis ic language lea ning,
implying ha he bes kind o language lea ning p oceeds
painlessly, wi hou o mal ins uc ion. These implici
baseline assump ions a e in line wi h K ashen’s (1985)
moni o model, which con inues o be he mos p ominen
ecep ion-based heo y o language acquisi ion ou side
academic esea ch ci cles. As is well known, he basic idea
...
Comen ado [MNP40]: Na és (2009:25): We can b ie ly
e iew he a ionale o in eg a ing con en and
language. K ashen (1982), Ligh bown and Spada (2006),
Long (1990) and Swain (2000), among o he s, sugges
...
Comen ado [MNP41]: Thus, CLIL me hodology is based
on communica ion, p o iding a ich and a ied inpu
(di e en language unc ions, di e en gen es, academic
language, class oom language...) and os e ing s uden s’
...
Comen ado [MNP42]: Hay que conec a es e pá a o con
el an e io o undi lo
Comen ado [E43]: Wha is his?
Comen ado [H44R43]: Done.
Comen ado [E45]: The signi icance o his lis is no clea :
why is i ci ed? Wouldn’ i be mo e use ul o indica e which
unc ions L, C and Moo e 2009 ound we e ypically in he
FL o he L1?
Comen ado [MNP46R45]: Explicación del a ículo.
Resumimos o ci amos los esul ados ¿?
The esul s show ha con en eache s a e mo e likely o
employ he L2 in explici ly con en -cen ed eaching:
du ing ac i i ies, consolida ion and e i- sion and o a
...

subjec -de e mined slo s in Ge many (Mäsch, 1993) and he Uni ed Kingdom
(Coyle, 2002). The modula app oach allows o subjec s o be handled in di e en
combina ions o languages, he eby esponding o he desi e o sa egua d L1
capaci ies, imp o ing L2 capaci ies and in oducing L3 o a a ie y o languages,
acco ding o pe cei ed local con ingencies. Flexibili y also allows o a wide ange
o abili ies o bene i om pa ial educa ion h ough a di e en language.
As Ma sh (2002: 95) poin s ou , his so o lexibili y is al eady p esen in p og ammes
wi h di e en and a ied o ms o CLIL deli e y. In coun ies like Spain and F ance, s a e
and egional go e nmen s allow schools a ce ain deg ee o au onomy in deciding which
subjec s a e augh in he FL and how many hou s o language exposu e o bo h he L1
and he FL a e app op ia e, depending on con ex . Thus, lexibili y in CLIL p og amme
design con ibu es o achie ing he igh balance be ween L1 and FL in eaching con en
subjec s o enable knowledge and skills o de elop in bo h he FL and he L1.
A s udy on he impac o CLIL on L1 compe ence de elopmen was ca ied ou in Spain
by Me ino and Lasagabas e (2015). He concluded ha he e we e no s a is ically
signi ican di e ences be ween CLIL and non-CLIL s ands in s uden s’ de elopmen o
L1 skills and knowledge. Howe e , Lasagabas e 's esea ch ook place in a bilingual
con ex in Spain whe e he FL was in ac he lea ne s' L3. To da e, he e a e no ew
s udies (Pe ez-Cañado, 2018) on he e ec s o CLIL on lea ne s' L1 compe ence
de elopmen in monolingual con ex s. The p esen s udy add esses ha gap, ocusing
on CLIL schools in Andalusia whe e he languages o ins uc ion a e Spanish ( he
lea ne s’ only L1) and English ( he lea ne s’ FL).
Aim and esea ch ques ions
This a icle p esen s he esul s o assessmen s and a su ey ca ied ou in se en public
schools in he p o ince o Se ille in o de o compa e ou comes in L1 (Spanish) lea ning
be ween CLIL and non-CLIL s ands. The aim was o see i CLIL had any signi ican e ec
on s uden s' L1 esul s, and o pinpoin any possible easons o di e ences, based on
a iables ela ing o he pa icula i ies o he schools in ol ed, hei se ing (u ban s.
u al) o he balance o L1/FL inpu and ype o inpu (i.e. discu si e unc ions o which
L1/FL was used). The esea ch ques ions guiding he s udy we e as ollows:
RQ1. A e he e s a is ically signican di e ences in Spanish Language and
Li e a u e esul s be ween CLIL and non-CLIL s uden s? I so, o wha ex en a e
hese de e mined by he se ing ( u al/u ban) and/o he pa icula i ies o he
school and i s CLIL p og amme?
RQ2. A e he e a ia ions ega ding he p opo ion o L1 and FL and he ype o
inpu in each language ha CLIL s uden s ecei e in hei con en classes?
RQ2. A e he amoun , na u e and ype o inpu p o ided in CLIL class ooms
playing a ole on he lea ning o bo h languages?
RQ3. Wha a e eache s’ and s uden s’ pe cep ions on whe he pa icipa ion in
a CLIL p og amme has an impac on s uden s’ L1 skills and knowledge
de elopmen ?
The s udy and esea ch me hods
Comen ado [E47]: And isn’ his he case also in Spain?
You ph asing he e seems o sugges F ance is di e en om
Spain.
Comen ado [H48R47]: Done.
Comen ado [E49]: How we e hese es ed?
Comen ado [MNP50R49]:
Two es ounds we e conduc ed in a longi udinal s udy
spanning one yea and in which 285 seconda y educa ion
s uden s ook pa . In he case o Basque and Spanish,
eading comp ehension was assessed h ough
s anda dised es s. These es s we e based on hose
p e iously used by he ISEI-IVEI (Basque Ins i u e o
Resea ch and E alua ion in Educa ion) (ISEI-IVEI 2012a,
2012b). The es s consis ed o one o wo ex s ollowed
by comp ehension ques ions o se e al kinds wi h
di e en alues acco ding o hei complexi y, ha is,
mul iple choice, ue o alse, o hose which equi ed a
sho w i en answe . W i en p oduc ion in Basque and
Spanish was assessed by means o an essay abou a gi en
opic ha pa icipan s had o de elop. The ‘p o ile’
echnique (Jacobs e al. 1981) was applied o e alua e
he w i en es s, which consis s o i e scales e e ing o
he di e en aspec s unde conside a ion: Con en ,
O ganiza ion, Vocabula y, Language Use and Mechanics.
Wi hin each o hese scales he e a e ou bandings
(‘excellen o e y good’, ‘good o a e age’, ‘ ai o poo ’,
and ‘ e y poo ’) which gi e he pe son ma king a se ies o
key wo ds on which o base he speci ic e alua ion
c i e ia. The o e all w i en sco e is a i ed a by adding
he sco es o each o he scales, which a ies om a
minimum o 34 poin s o a maximum o 100. The
s uden s’ w i ings we e assessed by wo independen
e alua o s, he co ela ion coe icien s be ween bo h
being highe han .70 in all he i e scales bo h a T1 and
T2. Bo h e alua o s we e bilingual in Spanish and Basque,
had comple ed hei English S udies deg ee, and had
p e iously been ad ised and guided on he p ocedu e o
assess he w i ings.
Comen ado [E51]: Why should hese wo con ex s be
di e en ? You don’ explain speci ically, and hus we emain
wi hou a clea a ionale o you s udy. Please add a sen ence
o so eminding us why i should be so signi ican o examine
a monolingual con ex .
Comen ado [MNP52R51]: En un con ex o monolingue el
alumnado no ha enido la expe iencia de ap endizaje bilingüe
que se a a de pone en p ác ica con es a me odología y que
implica po ejemplo un desa ollo cogni i o de e en e. En
con ex os que ya son bilingües odos esos p ocesos ya han
ocu ido con la p ime a y segunda lengua.
Comen ado [MNP53]: Es o no es aba así pe o es que ya
no es e dad po uqe Ma isa ya ha publicado un a ículo sob e
es o, es que lle amos ya más de un año y así no se puede
ene la bibliog a ía ac ualizada!!!Lo ponemos ¿?
Con o ma o: Resal a
The p esen s udy belongs o a la ge p ojec on CLIL implemen a ion and esul s in
monolingual con ex s in Spain. Fo his speci ic s udy, bo h quan i a i e and quali a i e
da a ha e been ga he ed.
The sample o schools was selec ed in collabo a ion wi h he p o incial coo dina o o
bilingual p og ammes. I is composed o se en s a e schools in bo h u al (Schools 1, 3
and 6) and u ban (Schools 2, 4, 5 and 7) se ings. The e we e h ee p ima y schools (1,
2 and 3) and ou seconda y schools (4, 5, 6 and 7). Two seconda y schools (Schools 4
and 7) ook s uden s om ea ly CLIL p og ammes (i.e. s uden s had been ecei ing
bilingual ins uc ion since he beginning o p ima y educa ion) while he o he wo
(Schools 5 and 6) had s uden s in la e CLIL p og ammes (i.e. s a ing bilingual ins uc ion
a he beginning o seconda y educa ion). A p ima y le el, all CLIL s uden s had ecei ed
bilingual ins uc ion om he onse o p ima y educa ion.
In all he schools CLIL and non-CLIL s ands an alongside each o he . S uden s in
he non-CLIL s ands had egula EFL classes. The s udy in ol ed a o al o 271 s uden s:
134 CLIL and 137 non-CLIL, 151 p ima y school lea ne s (Yea 6, age 11) and 120
seconda y school s uden s (Yea 10, age 15). A g oup o 38 eache s, including FL
eache s, con en eache s and language assis an s, also ook pa in his s udy.
In o de o c ea e a homogenous sample o s uden s allowing o compa isons,
CLIL and non-CLIL g oups we e ma ched o e bal in elligence, mo i a ion and ou -o -
class exposu e o English using, espec i ely, he EFAI (E aluación Fac o ial de las
Ap i udes In elec uales) sub es o e bal ap i ude was used in p ima y and seconda y
e sions (San ama ía, A ibas, Pe eña and Seisdedos 2014); Pelechano’s (1994) MA
mo i a ion ques ionnai e; and a ques ionnai e based on he language dia y c ea ed by
Sundq is and Syl én (2014) o asce ain he ype o ac i i ies in which s uden s engaged
in English ou side school and he amoun o ime spen on hese ac i i ies.
In o de o answe RQ1, CLIL and non-CLIL s uden s’ end-o -yea esul s in
Spanish Language and Li e a u e we e collec ed. These comp ised a summa i e
assessmen ma ked on a scale o 0 o 10 (wi h 5 as he pass ma k) assessing p og ess
o e he school yea in he i e main cu icula a eas: o al communica ion (speaking and
lis ening); w i en communica ion ( eading); w i en communica ion (w i ing);
knowledge o he language as a sys em; and li e a y educa ion.
In o de o answe RQ2, we used esponses o ques ions su eying eache s’ and
s uden s’ pe cep ions conce ning he p opo ion o FL inpu in CLIL con en classes.
Rega ding he ype o inpu ha s uden s ecei ed in he L1 and he FL in con en classes,
semi-s uc u ed in e iews we e ca ied ou wi h bo h eache s and s uden s. In his
s udy, he ype o inpu ecei ed by he s uden s was analysed in ela ion o he
discu si e unc ions o which each language is used in class. The p o ocols included a
lis o hese discu si e unc ions, which was used o he ca ego isa ion in he analysis.
RQ3 used da a om ano he selec ion o i ems om he longe ques ionnai e
(Pé ez-Cañado 2015). The i ems (I ems 4 and 6 om Sec ion 1 o bo h he Teache
e sion and he S uden e sion) used a 4-poin Like scale and ocused on gauging
s uden s’ and hei eache s’ le el o ag eemen on whe he hei L1 knowledge and
skills and hei language awa eness had imp o ed due o pa icipa ing in bilingual
educa ion.
The s a is ical so wa e SPSS Ve sion 24.0 was used o he analysis and
p ocessing o quan i a i e da a. In he case o RQ1, bo h cen al endency (mean) and
dispe sion measu e (s anda d de ia ion) we e calcula ed. S uden -Fishe - es s o
Comen ado [MNP54]: Quizás es á más cla o si se pone
p ime o los de p ima ia y secunda ia y despue´s los que
co esponden a u ales y u banos y elimina oda la pa e de
ea ly y la e. Con eso no es necesa io hace la abla
Comen ado [E55]: Wha abou he p ima y schools? Did
hey all s a CLIL om he beginning?
Comen ado [H56R55]: Done.
Comen ado [E57]: I hink i would be eally help ul o ha e
a Table indica ing all he di e en cha ac e is ics o he
schools. This becomes an impo an issue la e .
Comen ado [E58]: Can you explain wha you mean? A e
you saying o a CLIL s uden wi h X yea s’ exposu e o
English and an in elligence sco e o X, you we e able o ind
a co esponding s uden wi h he same yea s o exposu e and
he same in elligence sco e????
Comen ado [MNP59R58]: En odos los a ículos apa ece
así. C eo que el p oceso de qué signi ica ma ching hay que
explicá selo a ella. Se selecciona on alumnos de odos los
ni eles pa a que odos los cen os u ieses una can idad
ap oximada de alumnado con odos los ni eles an o de
in eligencia, mo i ación….
Comen ado [E60]: We need much g ea e p ecision on
wha was in ol ed: wha kind o es s/assessmen s we e
in ol ed, how he ma king was unde aken (acco ding o
wha c i e ia). In pa icula , he eade has NO idea o wha
‘li e a y educa ion’ migh mean.
Comen ado [MNP61R60]: De es o no enemos ealmen e
in o mación. Solo se puede deci que la asigna u a es de
lengua y li e a u a y cogimos las cali icaciones de lengua que
as una e aluación con inua había hecho los p o eso es.
Comen ado [E62]: None o his is eally ele an .
Comen ado [H63R62]: OK.
Comen ado [E64]: How on ea h did his gi e you a clea
empi ical pic u e o ype o inpu !?
Comen ado [E65]: I’ e dele ed his as i gi es no p ecise
in o ma ion. Please explain speci ically how he in o ma ion
abou p opo ion and ype o L1/FL inpu was ob ained. I’m
a aid i ’s no clea om you w i e-up he e.
Comen ado [MNP66R65]: Pa a las en e is as se enía
una guia de p egun as que se les iban haciendo.
Las p egun as que se hicie on:
¿En qué po cen aje di ía que u iliza us ed el inglés en clase?
¿Pa a qué unciones discu si as u iliza el inglés en clase:
p opo cionando un lis ado:
In oduci el ema
T ansmi i con enidos
Realiza ac i idades
Acla a dudas y explica di icul ades
Fo mula p egun as
Co egi a eas
Consolida y epasa conocimien os
O ganiza la clase con dis in os ipos de ag upamien o
In e ac ua con el alumnado/p o eso ado
Suminis a eedback sob e las ac uaciones de clase
independen g oups and analysis o a iance (ANOVA) we e employed in o de o es
o s a is ically signi ican di e ences be ween CLIL and non-CLIL g oups wi hin and
ac oss schools. Le ene’s es was used o check he equali y o a iances in he CLIL-and
non-CLIL g oups. Rega ding RQ2, s uden s’ and eache s’ epo ed pe cen age o usage
o he L1 and he FL in class was compa ed. This quan i a i e analysis is complemen ed
wi h quali a i e da a ob ained in he in e iews, and analysed ollowing he ca ego ies
es ablished in he in e iew p o ocols.
Resul s
Table 1 shows he mean sco e and s anda d de ia ions o he L1 assessmen sco es o
he whole sample (bo h p ima y and seconda y s uden s), and he esul s o he
S uden -Fishe - es , checking he signi icance o any di e ences. As can be seen, a
s a is ically signi ican di e ence (p = .001) was ound be ween CLIL and non-CLIL g oups
in a ou o CLIL s ands, sugges ing ha s uden s in CLIL g oups ob ained signi ican ly
highe sco es in Spanish Language and Li e a u e.
Table 1. Compa ison o esul s in L1 Spanish Language and Li e a u e be ween CLIL and
non-CLIL g oups.
G oup
n
M
SD
p- alue
Non-CLIL
137
6.35
1.793
.001
CLIL
134
7.04
1.692
Fu he mo e, when p ima y and seconda y educa ion da a we e disagg ega ed, simila
esul s we e ound. The e we e signi ican di e ences be ween CLIL and non-CLIL
g oups, again in a ou o CLIL s ands, a p ima y (p = .002) and a seconda y le el (p =
.003). This sugges s, a he e y leas , ha CLIL educa ion did no impac nega i ely on
s uden s’ L1 a ainmen and indeed appea s o be associa ed wi h a posi i e e ec on
L1 a ainmen .
Fu he analyses we e hen pe o med in o de o explo e he in luence o o he
ac o s. Fi s , using a - es , signi ican di e ences in Spanish Language and Li e a u e
sco es be ween schools in u ban and schools in u al a eas we e checked; an ANOVA
es was pe o med o iden i y any di e ences be ween schools on L1 a ainmen esul s
o CLIL s. non-CLIL s ands. Table 2 shows ha no s a is ically signi ican di e ences
we e ound be ween u al and u ban schools (p = .069). This indica es ha he se ing
was no a ac o a ec ing he esul s ob ained when CLIL and non-CLIL g oups a e
con as ed.
Table 2. Compa ison o esul s in Spanish Language and Li e a u e be ween u al s.
u ban schools
G oup
n
M
SD
p- alue
Ru al
124
6.90
1.750
.069
U ban
147
6.51
1.780
Comen ado [E67]: I’m no su e I’d emphasise he
quan i a i e na u e – ge ing pa icipan s o assess % is a
ai ly loose – and he e o e inexac - way o calcula ing % o
use o L1/TL (as opposed o, o example, basing he
calcula ion on analysis o eco dings o e en class
obse a ion no es).
Comen ado [MNP68R67]: Lo que ella no en iende es que
además de las en e is as se ealiza on unos cues iona ios
complemen aios con una escala Like que es de dónde salen
los da os cuan i a i os. Es o es á dicho en el pá a o an e io .
Comen ado [E69]: We ha e no idea wha hese we e, so
i ’s a bi poin less o men ion hem. See abo e e. need o
g ea e cla i y and p ecision in epo ing esea ch ins umen s.
Comen ado [MNP70R69]: In o mación sob e los
p o ocolos pa a las en e is as. Ejemplos de las p egun as?
Re e encia los ins umen os con el a ículo de Ma isa:
E alua ing CLIL p og ammes: Ins umen Design and
Valida ion, 2016
Con o ma o: Resal a
Table 3 shows he e ec o he independen a iable 1 (CLIL/non-CLIL s and)
and he independen a iable 2 (school) on he dependen a iable (L1 esul s). Bo h
hese independen a iables we e ound o ha e a s a is ically signi ican e ec wi h
high e ec sizes: o CLIL s. non-CLIL (pa ial E a2 = .193) and o school (pa ial E a2 =
.169). The es ima ed ma ginal mean in he CLIL g oup was highe (3.524) han in he
non-CLIL g oup (2.825). Howe e , when bo h independen a iables we e conside ed
oge he , no s a is ically signi ican di e ences we e ound (p = .150) and he e ec size
was lowe (pa ial E a2 = .036). This sugges s ha ‘school’ was a c ucial a iable ac ing
on he esul s.
Table 3. In e -subjec analysis
O igin
Type III
Sum o squa es
Gl.
RMS
F.
Sig.
E a2
Co ec ed model
113.837a
13
8.757
6.233
.000
.240
In e cep
2222.622
1
2222.622
1582.095
.000
.860
CLIL/non-CLIL s and
26.944
1
26.944
19,179
.000
.069
School
86.223
6
14.370
10,229
.000
.193
CLIL/non-CLIL x School
13.426
6
2.238
1.593
.150
.036
Fu he analysis was ca ied ou conside ing he s ands (CLIL- non-CLIL) and he
schools. In his analysis, means we e con as ed and pos -hoc es s pe o med o bo h
p ima y and seconda y schools. Table 4 shows he desc ip i e s a is ics o s uden s in
p ima y educa ion, acco ding o he school a ended. En odos los casos las secciones
CLIL de cada cen o ob ienen mejo es esul ados que las secciones non-CLIL. The e a e
di e ences be ween he means o he schools: he highes mean co esponds o School
2 and he lowes one o School 3, bo h o CLIL and non-CLIL g oups.
Table 4. Desc ip i e s a is ics o indi idual p ima y schools
Sec ion
School
M
SD
Non CLIL
School 1
3.23
1.055
School 2
3.68
1.090
School 3
3.03
1.449
To al
3.30
1.231
CLIL
School 1
3.88
1.116
School 2
4.33
0.970
School 3
3.63
1.300
To al
3.93
1.153
Table 5 shows he esul s o he pos -hoc analysis wi h mul iple compa isons
be ween schools. The e a e s a is ically signi ican di e ences be ween School 2 and
School 3 (p = .016). In e es ingly, School 2 is he school ha has been implemen ing a
CLIL p og amme longe . implemen s an ea ly CLIL p og amme s a ing a 2005, whe eas
School 3 has a la e one. These da a sugges ha he leng hyea s o implemen a ion o
he CLIL p og amme may be an impo an ac o a ec ing s uden s' esul s bo h in CLIL
Con o ma o: New pa ag aph, No conse a con el
siguien e
Con o ma o: New pa ag aph
Con o ma o: New pa ag aph
Con o ma o: New pa ag aph
Con o ma o: New pa ag aph
Con o ma o: New pa ag aph
Con o ma o: Sang ía: P ime a línea: 0 cm
Con o ma o: Español (España)
Con o ma o: Tachado
Con o ma o: Fuen e: Sin Neg i a
Con o ma o: Fuen e: Sin Neg i a
Comen ado [MNP71]: Pa a P ima ia sí podemos deci que
el que iene mejo es esul ados lle a más iempo con el
p og ama, sé que es el que lle aba más iempo y con la
coo dinado a con más expe iencia. Empezó en el 2005 pe o
no consigo encon a los da os de cuándo empeza on los
demás. Quizás pone simplemen e que el p og amma es más
an iguo y ya.
Comen ado [E72]: Be ca e ul no o o e in e p e – i ’s
only based on one school ou o 7
Comen ado [H73R72]: Done.
Re e ences
Adesope, Olusola O; La in, T acy; Thompson, Te i; Unge leide , Cha les. 2010. “A
Sys ema ic Re iew and Me a-Analysis o he Cogni i e Co ela es o
Bilingualism.” Re iew o Educa ional Resea ch 80 (2): 207, doi:
h ps://doi.o g/10.3102/0034654310368803
Admi aal, W., G. Wes ho , and K. de Bo . 2006. “E alua ion o Bilingual Seconda y
Educa ion in he Ne he lands: S uden s’ Language P o iciency in English.”
Educa ional Resea ch and E alua ion 12 (1): 75–93.
Alejo, R., and A. Pique . 2016. “U ban s. u al CLIL: an analysis o inpu - ela ed a iables,
mo i a ion and language a ainmen .” Cul u e and Cu iculum 29 (3): 245-262.
Agus ín Llach, M.P. 2009. “The Role o Spanish L1 in he Vocabula y Use o CLIL and non-
CLIL EFL Lea ne s.” In Con en and Language In eg a ed Lea ning. E idence om
Resea ch in Eu ope, edi ed by Y. Ruiz de Za obe and R. Jiménez, 112-129. Canada:
Mul ilingual Ma e s.
A ibas, M. 2016. “Analysing a whole CLIL school: S uden s’ a i udes, mo i a ion, and
ecep i e ocabula y ou comes.” La in Ame ican Jou nal o Con en and
Language In eg a ed Lea ning 9 (2): 267-292. doi:10.5294/la-clil.2016.9.2.2
Bae ens, H. 2002. “The Signi icance o CLIL/EMILE.” In CLIL/EMILE. The Eu opean
dimension. Ac ions, ends, and o esigh po en ial, edi ed by D. Ma sh, 20-26.
Jy a skyla : Uni e si y o Jy a skyla .
Casal, S., and P. Moo e. 2009. “The Andalusian Bilingual Sec ions Scheme: E alua ion
and consul ancy.” In e na ional CLIL Resea ch Jou nal 1: 36-46.
Cenoz, J. 2013. “Discussion: owa ds an educa ional pe spec i e in CLIL language policy
and pedagogical p ac ice.” In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingual Educa ion and
Bilingualism 16(3):389-394. Doi: 10.1080/13670050.2013.777392
Cenoz, J. 2015. “Con en -based ins uc ion and con en and language in eg a ed
lea ning: he same o di e en ?” Language, Cul u e and Cu iculum 28(1):8-24.
Doi: 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000922
Coyle, D. 2002. “Rele ance o CLIL o he Eu opean Commission’s Language.” In
CLIL/EMILE. The Eu opean dimension. Ac ions, ends, and o esigh po en ial,
edi ed by D. Ma sh, 27-29. Jy a skyla : Uni e si y o Jy a skyla .
Coyle, D. 2008. “Con en and Language In eg a ed Lea ning: owa ds a connec ed
esea ch agen- da o CLIL pedagogies.” In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingual
Educa ion and Bilingualism 10(5): 543-562.
Coyle, Do, Pe e Hood, and Da id Ma sh. 2010. CLIL: Con en and Language In eg a ed
Lea ning. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Cummins, J. 1999. BICS and CALP: cla i ying he dis inc ion. ERIC ED438551. Accessed 12
Sep embe 2016. h ps://e ic.ed.go /?id=ED438551
Cummnis, J. 2000. Language, Powe and Pedagogy: Bilingual Child en Caugh in he
C oss-Fi e. Cle edon: Mul ilingual Ma e s.
Dal on-Pu e , C. 2007. Discou se in Con en and Language in eg a ed Lea ning (CLIL)
Class ooms. Language Tea ning & Language Teaching 20. Ams e dam: John
Benjamins Publiching Company.
Dal on-Pu e , C. 2011. “Con en -and-Language In eg a ed Lea ning: F om p ac ice o
p inciples?” Annual Re iew o Applied Linguis ics 31: 182–204.

Dal on-Pu e , C., and U. Smi . 2013a. “Con en and Language In eg a ed Lea ning: A
esea ch agenda.” Language Teaching 46: 545-559.
doi:10.1017/s0261444813000256
Dal on-Pu e , C., and U. Smi . 2013b. “The powe o belie s: Lay heo ies and hei
in luence on he implemen a ion o CLIL p og ammes.” In e na ional Jou nal o
Bilingual Educa ion and Bilingualism 16 (3): 267-284, doi:
10.1080/13670050.2013.777385
Doiz, A., D. Lasagabas e , and J. M. Sie a. 2014. “CLIL and mo i a ion: The e ec o
Indi idual and con ex ual a iables.” The Language Lea ning Jou nal 42: 209-24.
Eu opean Commision. 2004. P omo ing language lea ning and linguis ic di e si y: An
ac ion plan 2004-06. Luxembou g: Eu opean Commision.
Eu opean Council. 2001. Common Eu opean amewo k o e e ence o languages:
lea ning, eaching, assessmen . S asbou g: Council o Eu ope.
Eu opean Commision. 2012. “Eu opeans and hei Languages. Special Eu oba ome e
386.” Accessed 12 Sep embe 2016.
h p://ec.eu opa.eu/publi_opinion/a chi es/ebs/ebs_386_en.pd .
Eu ydice. 2012. “Key Da a on Teaching Languages a School in Eu ope.” Accessed 12
Sep embe 2016.
h p://eacea.eceu opa.eu/educa ion/eu ydice/documen s/key_da a_se ies/14
3EN_HI.pd .
Fe nández, A., and A. Canga. 2014. “A p elimina y s udy on mo i a ion and gende in
CLIL and non-CLIL ypes o ins uc ion.” In e na ional Jou nal o English S udies 4
(1): 21-36.
Fe nández-Sanju jo, J., A. Fe nández-Cos ales and J. A ias. 2017. “Analysing s uden s
lea ning in science in CLIL s. Non-CLIL p og ammes: Empi ical e idence om
Spain.” In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingual Educa ion and Bilingualism, doi:
10.1080/13670050.2017.1294142
G aa , R., and G. Wes ho . 2007. “An obse a ion ool o e ec i e L2 pedagogy in
Con en and Language In eg a ed Lea ning (CLIL).” The In e na ional Jou nal o
Bilingual Educa ion and Bilingualism 10 (5): 603-624.
Jun a de Andalucía. 2016. “Plan Es a égico de desa ollo de las Lenguas en Andalucía.”
Accessed 12 Sep embe 2016.
h p://www.jun adeandalucia.es/educacion/po als/abaco-
po le /con en /462 16e3-c047-479 -a753-1030b 16 822
K ashen, S. 1985. The Inpu Hypo hesis. London: Longman.
K ashen, S. 1997. Why bilingual educa ion. ERIC Diges . Cha les on, WV: ERIC/CRESS.
Lasagabas e , D. 2008. “Fo eign Language Compe ence in Con en and Language
In eg a ed Cou ses.” The Open Applied Linguis ics Jou nal 1: 30–41.
Lasagabas e , D., and J.M. Sie a. 2009. “Language a i udes in CLIL and adi ional EFL
classes.” In e na ional CLIL Resea ch Jou nal 1 (2): 4-17.
Lasagabas e , D., and J. M. Sie a. 2010. “Imme sion and CLIL in English: Mo e
Di e ences Than Simila i ies.” ELT Jou nal 64: 367–375.
Lasagabas e , D. and Y. Ruiz de Za obe, eds. 2010. CLIL in Spain: Implemen a ion, Resul s
and Teache T aining. Newcas le: Camb idge Schola s.
Lasagabas e , D. 2011. “English achie emen and s uden mo i a ion in CLIL and EFL
se ings.” Inno a ion in Language Lea ning and Teaching 5 (1): 3-18.
Lasagabas e , D., and A. Doiz. 2015. “A Longi udinal S udy on he Impac o CLIL A ec i e
Fac o s.” Applied Linguis ics 24: 1-26.
Lasagabas e , D. 2017. “Language lea ning Mo i a ion and Language A idu es in
Mul ilingual Spain F om an In e na ional Pe spec i e.” Mode n Language Jou nal
101:583-596.
Long, M.1996. The ole o he linguis ic en i onmen in second language acquisi ion. In
Handbook o Second Language Acquisi ion, ed. W. Ri chie and T. Bha ia, 413-468.
Lo enzo, F., S. Casal, and P. Moo e. 2009. “The E ec s o Con en and Language
In eg a ed Lea ning in Eu opean Educa ion: Key Findings om he Andalusian
Bilingual Sec ions E alua ion P ojec .” Applied Linguis ics 31 (3): 418–442.
Me ino, J.A., and D. Lasagabas e . 2015. “CLIL as a way o mul ilingualism, In e na ional
Jou nal o Bilingual Educa ion and Bilingualism.” In e na ional Jou nal o
Bilingual Educa ion and Bilingualism, doi: 10.1080/13670050.2015.1128386
Me ino, J.A., and D. Lasagabas e . 2017. “The e ec o con en and language in eg a ed
lea ning p og ammes´s in ensi y on English p o iciency: A longi udinal s udy.”
In e na ional Jou nal o Applied Linguisi ics 28 (1):1-13,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/ijal.12177
Milla, M.D. and A.V. Casas. 2018. “Teache Pe spec i es on CLIL Implemen a ion: A
Wi hin-G oup Compa ison o Key Va iables.” Po a Lingua um 29:159-180.
Ma sh, D., ed. 2002. CLIL/EMILE. The Eu opean Dimension. Ac ions, T ends, and
Fo esigh Po en ial. Jy a skyla : Uni e si y o Jy a skyla .
Mehis o, P., D. Ma sh, M. J. y F igols. 2008. Unco e ing CLIL: Con en and Language
In eg a ed Lea ning in Bilingual and Mul ilingual Educa ion. Ox o d: Macmillan
Educa ion.
Minis e io de Educación, Cul u a y Depo e. 2012. Es udio Eu opeo de Compe encia
Lingüís ica EECL. In o me Español. Vol. I. Mad id: Sec e a ía Gene al Técnica.
Minis e io de Educación, Cul u a y Depo e. 2011. Es udio In e nacional de P og eso en
Comp ensión Lec o a, Ma emá icas y Ciencias. PIRLS-TIMS. In o me Español. Vol. I.
Mad id: Ins i u o Nacional de E aluación Educa i a.
Na és, T. 2009. “E ec i e Con en and Language in eg a ed Lea ning (CLIL)
P og ammes.” In Con en and Language In eg a ed Lea ning. E idence om
Resea ch in Eu ope, edi ed by Y. Ruiz de Za obe and R. Jiménez, 22-40. Canada:
Mul ilingual Ma e s.
Nie o, E. 2016a. “The impac o CLIL on he Acquisi ion o he lea ning o lea n
Compe ence in Seconda y School Educa ion in he Bilingual P og ammes o
Cas illa-La Mancha.” Po a Lingua um 2: 21-34.
Nie o, E. 2016b. “The impac o CLIL on he Acquisi ion o L2 Compe ences Skills in
P ima y Educa ion.” In e na ional Jou nal o English S udies 16 (2): 81-101.
Nikula, T., C. Dal on-Pu e , A. Llina es., and F. Lo enzo. 2016. “Mo e han con en and
language: he complexi y o in eg a ion in CLIL and mul ilingual educa ion.” In
Concep ualising in eg a ion in CLIL and mul ilingual educa ion, edi ed by T.
Nikula, E. Da ouz, P. Moo e, and U. Smi , 1-28. B is ol: Mul ilingual Ma e s.
O winowska, A., and M. Fo yś. 2015. “They lea n he CLIL way, bu do hey like i ?
A ec i i y and cogni ion in uppe -p ima y CLIL classes.” In e na ional Jou nal o
Bilingual Educa ion and Bilingualism, doi:10.1080/13670050.2015.1051944.
P enninge , S. 2016. “All good hings come in h ees: ea ly English lea ning, CLIL and
mo i a ion in Swi ze land.” Cahie s de l ILSL 48: 119-147.
Pa ón. V. 2018. “Lea ning Ou comes in CLIL p og ammes: a Compa ison o Resul s
Be ween U ban and Ru al En i omen s.” Po a Lingua um 29:9-28.
Pelechano, V. (1994). “P ueba MA.” Análisis y Modi icación de la Conduc a, 20: 71-72.
Pé ez-Cañado, M. 2012. “CLIL esea ch in Eu ope: pas , p esen and u u e.”
In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingual Educa ion and Bilingualism 15(3): 315-341, doi:
10.1080/13670050.2011.630064
Pé ez-Cañado, M. 2014. “Teache aining needs o bilingual educa ion: in-se ice
eache pe cep ions.” In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingual Educa ion and
Bilingualism 19 (3): 1-30, doi: 10.1080/13670050.2014.980778
Pé ez-Cañado, M. 2016. “A e eache s eady o CLIL? E idence om a Eu opean s udy.”
Eu opean Jou nal o Teache Educa ion 39 (2): 79-112, doi:
10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104
Pé ez-Cañado, M. 2018. “The e ec s od CLIL on L1 and con en lea ning: Upda e emi ical
e idence om monolingual con ex s.” Lea ning and Ins uc ion 57: 18-33,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.lea nins uc.2017.12.002
Ruiz de Za obe, Y. and J. Cenoz, 2015. “Way o wa d in he wen y- i s cen u y in
con en -based ins uc ion: mo ing owa ds in eg a ion.” Language, Cul u e and
Cu iculum 28(1): 90-96, doi: 10.1080/07908318.2014.1000927
Ruiz de Za obe, Y. and R. Jimenez. 2009. Con en and Language In eg a ed Lea ning.
E idence om Resea ch in Eu ope. Canada: Mul ilingual Ma e s.
Ruiz de Za obe, Y., J. Sie a and F. Galla do 2011. Con en and Fo eign Language
In eg a ed Lea ning. Con ibu ions o Mul ilinguals in Eu opean Con ex s. Be n:
Pe e Lang.
San ama ia, P., A ibas, D., Pe eña, J. and Seisdedos, N. (2014). EFAI. E aluación
Fac o ial de las Ap i udes In elec uales. Mad id: TEA.
Seikkula-Leino, J. 2007. “CLIL Lea ning: Achie emen le els and a ec i e ac o s.”
Language and Educa ion 21(4): 328-341, doi: 10.2167/le635.0
S occo, A., Yamasaki, B., Na alenko, R. and P a , C. 2014. “Bilingual b ain aining: A
neu obiological amewo k o how bilingual expe ience imp o es execu i e
unc ion” In e na ional Jou nal o Bilingualism 18 (1):67-92, doi:
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1367006912456617
Sundq is , P. and Syl én, L.K. (2014). “Language- ela ed compu e use: Focus on young
L2 English lea ne s in Sweden.” ReCALL 26(1):3-20.
Swain, M. 1985. Communica i e compe ence: some oles o comp ehensible inpu and
comp ehensible ou pu in i s de elopmen . In Inpu in Second Language Acquisi ion, ed.
S.M. Gass and C.G. Madden, 235-256.
Syl én, L. and A. Thompson. 2015. “Language Lea ning mo i a ion and CLIL. Is he e a
connec ion?” Jou nal o Imme sion and Con en -Based Language Educa ion 3
(1): 28-50.
Emmanuelle Le Pichon Vo s man; Hen ie e De Swa , Vik o ija Ceginskas & Huub Van
Den Be gh. 2009. “Language lea ning expe ience in school con ex and
me acogni i e awa eness o mul ilingual child en.” In e na ional Jou nal o
Mul ilingualism 6(3): 258-280, doi: 10.1080/14790710902878692
Comen ado [MNP94]: Así pone pa a ci a lo en la e is a
pe o no engo muy cla o en odos cúal es el nomb e y el
apellido pa a adap a lo al o ma o de las e e encias!!!