The Efficacy of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in Promoting English Language Proficiency in Italian State Secondary Education: An Exploratory Study
Parole chiave:
CLIL implementation; EFL; language proficiency; pedagogical approach; SLAAbstract
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has become a central pedagogical approach in European education, particularly in contexts where improving foreign language competence is a priority. In Italy, CLIL has been formally integrated into upper secondary education to strengthen students’ English proficiency while simultaneously developing subject-specific knowledge. This article explores how CLIL could enhance English language learning in Italian high schools by examining its theoretical foundations, implementation within the Italian educational system, and its linguistic and motivational benefits for learners. This study was conducted in Italy and employed a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative data in order to investigate CLIL’s impact. The data gathering processes consist of CEFR-aligned English proficiency tests at B1/B2 levels, structured for 12 students and semi-structured interviews with 4 teachers. Drawing on existing research and educational theory, the paper discusses the impact of CLIL on vocabulary acquisition, communicative competence, and academic language development, as well as the challenges faced by Italian teachers and state institutions. The analysis suggests that, when effectively implemented, CLIL has the potential to represent a robust pedagogical approach, fostering language acquisition and promoting learner autonomy, though its success depends on adequate teacher training and institutional support.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Banegas, D., L. (2018). Putting CLIL into practice. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2018; 21: 2, 265– 268. doi: 10.1080/13670050.2016.1146425
Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why … and why not. System. 41(3): 587-597. doi:
1016/j.system.2013.07.001
Coonan, C. M. (2007). Insider views of the CLIL class through teacher self-observation. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 625–646.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Costa, F. (2013). ICLHE Italy: State of the Art. Multilingualism, CLIL and teaching innovation. Bozen University Press. pp. 107–121
Cinganotto, L. (2016). CLIL in Italy: a general overview. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning. 9(2): 374-400. doi: 10.5294/laclil.2016.9.2.6
Civinini, C. (2016).Digital EL Gazette. Behind the news at Italian schools. Available online:
https://www.cebs.at/fileadmin/user_upload/service/CLIL/clil_research_italian_model_230516_ab_01.pdf (accessed on 4th December 2025)
Cummins, J. (2008). BICS and CALP: Empirical and theoretical status of the distinction. In N. H. Hornberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Education (pp. 71–83). New York: Springer.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204.
Di Martino, E., & Di Sabato, B. (2012). CLIL implementation in Italian schools: Can long-serving teachers be retrained effectively? The Italian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 44(1), 65–83.
Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational Strategies in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
European Commission. (2014). Improving the effectiveness of language learning: CLIL and multilingual education. Brussels.
Genesee, F., Hamayan, E. (2016). CLIL in Context Practical Guidance for Educators. Cambridge University Press
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford University Press.
Hughes, S., P., Madrid, D. (2019). The effects of CLIL on content knowledge in monolingual contexts. The Language Learning Journal. 48(1): 48-59. doi: 10.1080/09571736.2019.1671483
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London: Longman.
Kumar, R. (2014). Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners. 4th edn. London: SAGE Publications : SAGE Publications.
Kumar, R. (2005). Research Methodology, Sage Publications.
Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign Language Competence in Content and Language Integrated Courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal 1(1):30-41. DOI:10.2174/1874913500801010030
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE: The European Dimension. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
Mehisto, P., Frigols, M.,J., Marsh, D. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning and Multilingual Education. Macmillan.
MIUR. (2010). Regolamento per l’introduzione dell’insegnamento CLIL nella scuola secondaria di secondo grado. Rome: Ministero dell’Istruzione.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Valdés-Sánchez, L., Espinet, M. (2020). Coteaching in a science-CLIL classroom: changes in discursive interaction as evidence of an English teacher’s science-CLIL professional identity development. International Journal of Science Education. 42(14):
-2452. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2019.1710873
Villabona, N., Cenoz, J. (2021). The integration of content and language in CLIL: a challenge for content-driven and language-driven teachers. Language Culture and Curriculum 35(1):1-15. DOI:10.1080/07908318.2021.1910703
Walker, A., White, G. (2014). Technology Enhanced Language Learning. Oxford University Press.
##submission.downloads##
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2026 Federico Valente
Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 4.0 Internazionale.
