Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
53
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.77.05.4
How to Cite:
Myronenko, T., Dobrovolska, L., Shevchenko, I., & Kordyuk, O. (2024). Challenges and sustainability of CLIL implementation in
Ukrainian educational establishments. Amazonia Investiga, 13(77), 53-65. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.77.05.4
Challenges and sustainability of CLIL implementation in Ukrainian
educational establishments
Виклики та сталість впровадження предметно-мовного інтегрованого навчання у
навчальних закладах України
Received: April 7, 2024 Accepted: May 25, 2024
Written by:
Tetyana Myronenko1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0965-0232
Lesia Dobrovolska2
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5304-4133
Iryna Shevchenko3
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6551-9266
Olena Kordyuk4
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2362-8557
Abstract
The article analyses the issue of techniques of
bilingual education by introducing CLIL
comparing to ESP, EAP, EMI approaches at
different levels of education – secondary and
tertiary. In the article the authors studied the
challenges, resilience and sustainability during the
process of introduces above mentioned
approaches. The CLIL approach facilitates foreign
language learning by integrating language and
content instruction. The authors’ investigation has
a theoretical bias and different scientists’ point of
view. By analyzing the implementation of CLIL
approach and authors’ experience in practical
application of other approaches the comparative
analysis is done that proves the priorities of using
CLIL at schools and higher educational
establishments.
The authors justified that CLIL is more than just
language switching; it means that teaching
subjects in a second language, like English, is the
best way to make learning more meaningful and
1
PhD in Pedagogy, Professor, Head of the Germanic Philology Department, Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University,
Ukraine. WoS Researcher ID: IVV-6497-2023
2
PhD in Pedagogy, Assistant Professor, Assistant Professor at the Germanic Philology Department, Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi
National University, Ukraine. WoS Researcher ID: IVV-6461-2023
3
PhD in Pedagogy, Senior Lecturer at the Germanic Philology Department, Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University,
Ukraine. WoS Researcher ID: AAB-7671-2020
4
Lecturer at the Germanic Philology Department, Mykolaiv V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University, Ukraine. WoS Researcher
ID: IWD-4584-2023
54
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
engaging. The benefits of CLIL in Ukrainian
education system emphasize learners’ fluency in
both languages - Ukrainian and English, high
academic achievements, achievements in
communication and development of sociocultural
competencies that as a result boost learners’
motivation and bridge the language gap.
Keywords: bilingual education methods, CLIL
approach, secondary education, tertiary education,
academic achievements.
Introduction
As Ukraine becomes more actively integrated into the economic, educational, and informational spheres of
Europe, the demand for highly skilled professionals is on the rise. The educational system is evolving and
experiencing significant transformations in various aspects. Consequently, there is a keen emphasis on the
role of foreign languages, with educational institutions creating encouraging environments for their
incorporation into the learning process to facilitate successful acquisition.
Hence, there arises a necessity to implement innovative approaches such as CLIL, EAP, EMI, and ESP.
The adoption of the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach in the educational
framework enables educators to integrate the study of English with other subjects specified in the
curriculum, enriched with contemporary authentic materials.
The CLIL approach is recognized as a contemporary method for teaching subject matter through language,
gaining increasing importance both in Europe and Ukraine. This significance is underscored by a
quantitative analysis of educational institutions implementing CLIL across various regions of Ukraine
(including Kharkiv, Mykolaiv, Poltava, Ternopil, Zaporizhzhia, etc) and Europe. Furthermore, the level of
research dedicated to CLIL implementation at the master’s and PhD levels serves as further validation of
its importance.
Functioning as a tool for integrating content and language instruction, the CLIL approach facilitates foreign
language comprehension for learners. Emphasizing the integration of subject matter with language
acquisition, CLIL positions the teacher as a facilitator while learners engage in comprehensive language
learning encompassing listening, reading, speaking, and writing. This cognitive process fosters the
development of integrated mental abilities and effective learning skills. Additionally, CLIL encourages the
cultivation of intercultural communication skills by exposing learners to different cultural perspectives,
aligning with the Ministry of Education and Science policy on multilingual education in Ukraine,
particularly regarding English language instruction. This approach is in line with the principles outlined in
the New Ukrainian School (NUS) and the Methodological Recommendations for Ensuring Quality
Learning, Teaching, and Use of English in Higher Education Institutions of Ukraine.
Literature Review
Teacher professional growth is a crucial aspect of educators’ careers, involving the enhancement of
individual abilities, personal performance, employment prospects, and career progression in implementing
modern approaches in education. Being the lingua franca, the English language became dominant in every
sphere - content and level of education – secondary, higher education.
English for Academic Purposes (EAP) is dedicated to guiding learners in the appropriate application of
language for scholarly endeavours and research. Being used within the framework of ESP (English for
Myronenko, T., Dobrovolska, L., Shevchenko, I., Kordyuk, O. / Volume 13 - Issue 77: 53-65 / May, 2024
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
55
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Specific Purposes), this field has evolved in tandem with the growing population of international learners
pursuing advanced studies in English (Hyland, 2014).
EAP encompasses a wide array of academic communicative practices, including pre-university,
undergraduate, and postgraduate instruction, ranging from materials design to lectures and classroom
activities. It also involves classroom interactions such as tutorials, feedback sessions, and seminar
discussions, as well as various research genres like journal articles, conference papers, and grant proposals.
Moreover, EAP addresses student writing across assignments, exams, and dissertations.
Unlike general English courses, which typically emphasize speaking and listening skills, EAP prioritizes
reading and writing. Additionally, EAP courses concentrate on teaching formal academic genres rather than
the conversational and social genres typically covered in general English courses. This educational
approach places the learner and their specific academic context at the forefront, emphasizing tailored
language instruction to support academic success (Dudley-Evans & St. John, 1998).
The term EAP emerged in 1974 within the realm of English Language Teaching (ELT) as a minor
component. Over the years, its significance has dramatically increased, largely propelled by the
globalization of higher education and the widespread adoption of English as the primary language for
academic discourse. EAP established its own professional organization in 1972, initially named SELMOUS
(Special English Language Materials for Overseas University Learners), which underwent a name change
in 1989 and is now recognized as BALEAP (The British Association of Lecturers in English for Academic
Purposes), dedicated to fostering the professional growth of EAP practitioners. Furthermore, EAP boasts
its own dedicated professional publication, the Journal of English for Academic Purposes (JEAP),
inaugurated in 2002.
Currently, there exists a multitude of terms denoting the practice of instructing core curriculum subjects in
English. This pedagogical approach is alternatively referred to as EMI (English as the Medium of
Instruction), CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning), or CBT (Content-Based Teaching).
However, some individuals perceive these labels as distinct and not interchangeable.
English Medium Instruction (EMI) refers to the use of the English language to teach academic subjects
(other than English itself) in countries where the first language of the majority of the population is not
English. CLIL and EMI approaches are similar in the sense that they are both forms of bilingual education
but CLIL means teaching content through any foreign language while EMI means teaching content to
learners who are proficient in English (at least C1 proficiency level). English as a Medium of Instruction
(EMI) is the use of the English language to teach another subject. It differs from Content and Language
Integrated Learning (CLIL) in that there are no explicit language learning aims, but the focus is solely on
teaching the subject content.
ESP, or English for Specific Purposes, is a method of language instruction wherein the selection of content
and instructional methods is determined by the learner’s purpose for acquiring the language. In essence,
ESP is not defined by any specific language outcome, but rather by its focus on tailored language teaching
guided by explicit and identifiable learning objectives (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987).
We consider that CLIL goes beyond mere language switching; it embodies the belief that teaching subjects
in a second language, such as English, is the most effective approach to learning with greater meaning and
motivation. This approach is grounded in an enhanced awareness of the second language, requiring teachers
to ensure their understanding the key structures and vocabulary relevant to the subject matter. Moreover,
CLIL emphasizes the development of cognitive skills and cultural awareness, which are believed to be
essential by most scientists.
The primary motivation behind implementing CLIL is typically to increase the amount of time dedicated
to second language acquisition within the school timetable. However, there may also be more specific
reasons for its implementation. Many scientists consider a high level of English proficiency to be a valuable
life skill, leading governments and education authorities to prioritize enabling learners to directly pursue
tertiary or vocational qualifications without the need for additional language courses.
56
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
The primary rationale for implementing CLIL often revolves around expanding the time allocated within
the curriculum for second language acquisition. However, there exist other more targeted motivations. The
most notable is the widespread recognition of high English language proficiency to be a crucial life skill.
Researchers, including renowned CLIL expert David Marsh, declared convincing arguments regarding the
advantages of the bilingual or multilingual brain. Evidence suggests that language learning itself contributes
to enhanced cognitive development, further underscoring the value of CLIL and similar language
immersion approaches.
The term “CLIL” was introduced by David Marsh, who in 1994 outlined an integrated approach to foreign
language learning. CLIL, which stands for Content and Language Integrated Learning, entails teaching
subjects or components of subjects in a foreign language with the aim of simultaneously acquiring both
content knowledge and proficiency in the foreign language (Marsh, 2012). The concept of “dual focus” in
CLIL implies that it operates on two levels. It adopts an interdisciplinary approach that integrates subject
matter with language instruction. Compared to STEM education, CLIL offers broader opportunities for the
integration of various school subjects.
In its turn I. Knysh et al., (2024) “STEM education is aimed at maintaining a constant interest and
encouraging learners to pursue a career and their own research in a certain field”.
Among the foreign researchers of CLIL we should single out such scholars as M. Allen, D.Coyle,
H. Collins, D. Graddol, D. Marsh, M. Heyer, P. Mehisto, D.Wolff and others.
D. Marsh et al., (2011) believe that “CLIL teaching refers to situations where disciplines are taught through
a foreign language with several focused goals, namely: learning the content of a foreign language and
simultaneously learning it itself”.
P.Ball & Lindsay (2012) defines “CLIL as a method of bilingual education where both the curriculum
content (e.g., science or geography) and the language are taught alongside. Unlike traditional secondary
education, CLIL does not presuppose that learners possess the necessary level of proficiency in a foreign
language to comprehend the curriculum content”.
M. Heyer (2000), adheres to the idea that “CLIL leads to a decrease in subject competence or imperfect
understanding of the subject by learners, as teachers simplify the content of the curriculum in advance”.
Fernandes states that CLIL represents a versatile approach to foreign language acquisition. Unlike
alternative teaching methodologies, CLIL proves effective as it influences learners’ interest in a particular
subject to drive motivation for learning a foreign language. Within the framework of CLIL approach, the
foreign language serves as the medium of instruction for acquiring subject content, thereby integrating
language learning with content acquisition. This reciprocal relationship between language and content
facilitates foreign language learning through authentic communicative contexts. Fernandes states that
“CLIL is a flexible method with which to learn a foreign language”.
According to D. Coyle, P. Hood, D. Marsh, (2010), the term “content” in foreign language instruction
relates to specific subject knowledge, such as science or art. Within the context of CLIL, the selection of
content varies based on particular objectives. Considerations must include the availability of qualified
instructors, learners’ proficiency levels, their language skills, and the learning environment. Content in
CLIL instruction may derive from conventional school subjects like physics, chemistry, mathematics,
geography, or music. It can also encompass national curriculum topics or projects such as ecosystems and
global warming, and may even extend to cross-curricular or interdisciplinary themes. Thus, CLIL provides
opportunities, both within and beyond the standard curriculum, to enhance knowledge and skills, with
careful attention given to learners’ cognitive engagement”.
Dr. Heike Roll (2019), Professor of the Institute of German as a Second Language at the University of
Duisburg-Essen, Germany, states that “the most unified definition of CLIL today is the following: a didactic
methodology that allows learners to develop foreign language linguistic and communicative competence in
the same learning context as the formation of general knowledge and skills." H. Roll assures that "the use
of CLIL methodology in the educational process has two goals, namely: studying a professional subject by
means of a foreign language and a foreign language through a professional subject”.
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
57
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Therefore, the essence of CLIL lies in its instructional approach, wherein a foreign language instructor
integrates interdisciplinary subjects into language classes or delivers various subjects in a foreign language.
Consequently, the foreign language serves as both a tool for communication and a vehicle for cognitive
development, blending learning in both native and foreign languages into a unified process. It’s worth
noting that CLIL is not a novel concept in Europe.
Ch. Dalton-Puffer (2007) suggests that learners employ to using a non-native language when facing
conceptual difficulties, though this approach does not always solve the language problem. What may
initially appear as a barrier for a learner can actually be a valuable chance to better understand subject-
specific concepts. It's essential to recognize that students in CLIL may encounter difficulties with exams in
various subjects, except in instances where subjects such as a foreign language and native language
literature are combined.
The purpose of the article is to analyse proposed approaches and then find the ways of CLIL approach
implementation as the most suitable for secondary and tertiary education in Ukraine.
Methodology
The study used research methods that encompassed a systematic and theoretical analysis of scientific
literature on the application of CLIL in both European and Ukrainian contexts. This methodology entailed
a comprehensive review of existing scientific works and publications pertaining to the implementation of
CLIL practices.
The issue of CLIL implementation in Ukraine has been studied by such Ukrainian scholars as
A. Artsyshevska, S. Bobyl, O. Khodakovska, N. Kuzminska and others.
N. Kuzminska et al. (2019) suggests that within the CLIL framework, language acquisition takes on a more
purposive nature, with language serving as a tool for accomplishing specific communicative objectives.
The main advantages of using CLIL in the classroom is the focus is on the content where learners have the
opportunity to learn a foreign language in practice. Learners gain deeper insights into the culture associated
with the target language, fostering the development of socio-cultural competence. Engaging with a
substantial amount of language material enables learners to fully immerse themselves in a natural language
environment. Exploring diverse topics facilitates the acquisition of specialized terms and language
structures, enriching learners’ vocabulary with subject-specific terminology and preparing them for further
application of acquired knowledge and skills. Simultaneously studying a foreign language and a non-
language subject serves as an additional way for accomplishing educational objectives, offering positive
outcomes for both language acquisition and subject learning.
Both foreign and Ukrainian scholars highlight four characteristics of the CLIL approach that share
similarities with other existing methods of foreign language learning.
The first characteristic is the naturalistic and implicit nature of CLIL. This aspect involves an emphasis on
communication opportunities, resulting in increased exposure to external input. A variety of information
fosters improved learning outcomes.
The second characteristic of CLIL is its cooperative learning style. Through cooperative learning, learners
collaborate in small groups to accomplish tasks, fostering an environment that reduces anxiety, enhances
motivation, and encourages active interaction among learners. Collaborative interaction within teams
enhances learners’ communication skills in foreign language learning.
The third characteristic of CLIL is authenticity, which enables learners to develop their ability to address
real-life communication challenges. Authentic-oriented learning involves selecting materials that reflect
real-world language usage.
The fourth characteristic of CLIL is its flexibility. The CLIL approach can be adapted to various curricula
to align with the content of subject studies.
58
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
The reason for the emergence of the CLIL approach in tertiary education is the new challenges faced by
graduates in their professional activities. This has led to the need to revise curricula and add professionally
oriented courses in order to master a foreign language (Artsyshevska et al., 2021).
The researchers emphasize that “CLIL’s flexibility is supported by a theoretical framework commonly
referred to as the 4C model. The 4C model is a holistic approach that integrates content, communication,
cognition and culture”.
Y.R. de Zarobe (2015) considers that successful CLIL operation encompasses five dimensions:
advancement in content knowledge, skills, and comprehension; engagement in communicative interactions;
development of effective communication skills; and cultivation of heightened intercultural awareness. In
this regard, CLIL offers distinct advantages supported by substantial evidence: enhanced language
proficiency, heightened motivation, and applicability to learners of varying abilities.
CLIL approach is highly sought-after in contemporary education, as it combines the instruction of subject-
specific content with foreign language learning. Modern secondary educational institutions may choose for
either “soft” CLIL, where specific topics are taught within a language course, or “hard” CLIL, where
subjects are exclusively taught in English. While hard CLIL focuses solely on teaching a particular subject
in English, soft CLIL utilizes English to deliver content with the aim of achieving language-based
objectives.
I. Tkalia, N. Cherkashyna, and Z. Ognivenko (2020) emphasize that “CLIL provides a combined coverage
of content and language, which allows improving learners’ communication skills in real-life situations. The
main advantage of CLIL-based teaching methods is the high degree of motivation gained by learners, as
language learning is inextricably linked to the development of their professional competencies”.
On the basis of theoretical analyses CLIL can be divided into “soft” and “hard” CLIL. These two models
describe different emphases within CLIL instruction. “Soft CLIL” has an emphasis on language learning
alongside content learning. In soft CLIL, language development is often seen as the primary goal, with
content learning serving as a context for language acquisition. This approach prioritizes language support
and scaffolding throughout the lesson to ensure that learners can access and engage with the content
effectively while also developing their language skills.
In this turn “hard CLIL” focuses more on content learning, with language learning serving as a secondary
goal. In hard CLIL, the primary objective is for learners to acquire knowledge and skills related to the
subject content, with language development occurring naturally as a result of engaging with the content.
While language support is still provided in hard CLIL, it may be less extensive compared to soft CLIL and
the emphasis is more on delivering content instruction.
Teachers often adapt their CLIL instruction based on factors such as the proficiency levels of their learners,
the specific content being taught, and the learning objectives of the lesson. Both soft and hard CLIL
approaches have their positive features and challenges and can be effective depending on the context and
goals of the curriculum.
L. Budko, G. Maksymovych & T. Shulga (2024) believe that among the various forms and models for
integrating a foreign language with subject disciplines, it is challenging to select one that perfectly suits a
specific higher education institution. This is especially true when considering the institution's unique
characteristics while avoiding significant organizational changes. Thus, based on the degree of immersion,
three CLIL models are known: soft (language-led), hard (subject-led), partial immersion”.
The researchers explain that “the initial model concentrates on the linguistic aspects within a specific
context, while the second model entails dedicating 50% of the curriculum for subject-based instruction in
a foreign language. The third model serves as an intermediate approach and is employed when certain
modules of the educational program are delivered in a foreign language”.
Researchers believe that employing CLIL approach fosters increased motivation in learning a foreign
language. This is attributed to language serving not only as a pool of knowledge but also as a medium of
communication between learners and teachers, as well as among peers. Engaging with various thematic
units enables learners to enhance their reading, writing, listening, and speaking abilities, while also
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
59
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
enriching their vocabulary with professional terminology. This serves as a strong basis for applying
acquired knowledge and skills in future professional career.
Modern researchers identify several didactic principles that characterize CLIL approach:
1. Content integration - CLIL seeks to integrate language learning with subject content, fostering
simultaneous development in both areas.
2. Language development - CLIL aims to enhance language proficiency while learners engage with
subject-specific content, enabling them to communicate effectively in various contexts.
3. Cognitive challenge - CLIL tasks are designed to provide cognitive challenges that stimulate critical
thinking, problem-solving, and deeper understanding of subject matter.
4. Learner-centered approach - CLIL promotes active learner involvement, encouraging learners to take
ownership of their learning process and engage actively in activities.
5. Authentic contexts - CLIL emphasizes learning within authentic contexts, where learners encounter
real-life situations and use language in meaningful ways relevant to their academic and professional
lives.
6. Scaffolded support - CLIL provides scaffolded support to learners, offering appropriate assistance and
guidance to help them comprehend complex subject matter and language structures.
7. Assessment - CLIL assessments are associated with both content and language objectives, ensuring
that learners’ language proficiency and subject knowledge are accurately evaluated.
These principles of CLIL approach guide educators in implementing effective teaching strategies that
promote integrated language and content learning.
Results and discussion
The use of CLIL approach in secondary and tertiary education allowed us to pay attention to the problems
associated with its implementation in the educational process. The main and most important problem today
is the need to develop specific professional competencies of teachers who could work with the CLIL.
The primary benefits of employing CLIL approach are:
• Enhanced motivation for foreign language acquisition;
• Directed progression in mastering a foreign language for specific communicative objectives;
• Emphasis on cultivating skills for professional communication in a foreign language;
• The interactive and collaborative nature of CLIL fosters learners’ self-assurance.
• Cultivation of cultural and intercultural understanding to deepen knowledge of the target language’s
culture;
• Immersion in a purposefully constructed language environment;
• Acquisition of specialized terms and language structures essential for particular subjects, leading to an
expansion of subject-specific vocabulary;
• Elevation of critical thinking abilities and the development of rapid comprehension skills when
engaging with new material;
• Flexibility in implementing the CLIL methodology across diverse educational formats and learning
contexts;
• Creation of opportunities for educators to integrate foreign language learning seamlessly with various
non-language subjects.
According to the methodologists CLIL (M.M. Adrián and M.J.G. Mangado, M.O. Douglas, E. Dafouz &
A. Hibler) faces some benefits and challenges. To positive side of CLIL introduction we can place
mastering foreign language proficiency. M.M. Adrian & M.J.G. Mangado (2015) state that immersing
learners in subject content taught in a foreign language through CLIL encourages natural and meaningful
language use. Instead of depending solely on memorization and artificial examples, CLIL requires learners
to actively apply language skills in real academic settings. This approach not only enhances communicative
language development but also fosters critical thinking and cognitive engagement as learners cope with
complex, advanced subject matter.
60
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Despite the widespread positive feedback and successful global implementation of CLIL several challenges
that require resilience remain:
− CLIL class schedules must encompass three critical stages simultaneously: the content of the
discipline, the foreign language, and its application in educational contexts;
− Recognizing the foreign language as both a means and as a purpose of the learning process;
− A shortage of “subject and content specialists” capable of conducting comprehensive integrated lessons
in a foreign language effectively;
− The need to adapt and create educational materials that correspond to the requirements of integrated
learning (European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, 2006).
E. Dafouz & A. Hibler (2013) emphasize that providing teachers with the essential skills and knowledge to
effectively implement CLIL is crucial for its success. High-quality CLIL instruction necessitates
specialized teaching strategies that integrate language and content learning.
M.O. Douglas (2017) states that the complexity of linguistic nuances and syntactic structures can deter
language acquisition for CLIL learners. Without sufficient scaffolding and support, the language demands
of the content can overwhelm learners, causing cognitive overload in both content and language learning.
Careful assessment and responsive support are essential to provide learners with the necessary language
assistance. Without this, CLIL could obstruct the language development.
According to P. Moore & F. Lorenzo (2015) CLIL is not a prescriptive method but rather an approach
grounded in an epistemological perspective that emphasizes the symbiosis of language and content. The
essence of CLIL lies in this integration. Designing a CLIL pathway involves reflecting on and developing
a theory or understanding of language. However, for many content teachers, the primary focus in CLIL
implementation remains the material itself.
Challenges in implementing CLIL implementation include insufficient awareness and comprehension of
the CLIL approach and its principles among educators at both school and university levels, alongside a
shortage of suitable materials aligning with its dual objectives. There is a need for more structured teacher
training programmes, as well as methodological webinars and seminars. Learners often show low English
proficiency levels, struggle with interpreting content texts, while teachers may lack practical experience
and confidence in areas such as lesson planning, time management, pronunciation skills, and accessing
adequate resources. Additionally, there is the challenge of engaging with parents effectively. Despite these
obstacles, CLIL presents new opportunities for learners, particularly at faculties where English isn’t a
primary focus.
For future school teaches of different subjects it opens new ways for communication with their colleagues
in other countries, that is global communication in educational community.
Figure 1. CLIL Implementation and Risks.
Figure 1 shows interconnection of three stages of CLIL implementation in secondary and tertiary education.
It is possible to distinguish the following challenges associated with the process of implementing CLIL
approach: lack of the required number of trained specialists; lack of appropriate training and professional
development of specialists who would be able to work according to the CLIL approach; lack of educational
material and difficulties in its selection and adaptation; overcoming parents’ negative attitude to the use of
the methodology of subject and language integrated teaching in non-language lessons.
Challenge
Resiliance
Sustainability
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
61
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Resilience presupposes: life challenges; learners’ ability to study; self-esteem and confidence; self-
efficiency and ability to overcome challenges; social problem-solving approaches; learning environment
and tools.
Sustainability means: concentration of content, communication, cognition and culture; dual focus on
learners’ skills and process of learning while content knowledge and language obtaining.
As for our analyses of the situation with CLIL implementation in Mykolaiv region it should be mentioned
that by introducing CLIL approach it is obviously necessary to have support from local educational
authorities and school directory.
According to the questionnaire developed for CLIL teachers of Mykolaiv and Mykolaiv region which was
carried out by the scale from 1 till 10 the following results were obtained and presented in the Table 1.
Table 1.
CLIL implementation questionnaire at Mykolaiv and Mykolaiv region
Positive feedback
Challenges
Improve
communication
skills (speaking
fluency) in L2
Improve social
interaction skills
in L2
Increase
motivation
Improve content
knowledge in
L2
Improve
cognitive
abilities
Specific
7
10
8
8
9
1) Balancing content and language
instruction;
2) Developing suitable materials;
3) Support of local and directly
educational establishments authorities
Analysing the results of the questionnaire proposed to the participants of “CLIL Methodology Course” on
MNU Moodle it should be mentioned that secondary educational establishments as well as higher
educational establishments have the same similarities and differences of CLIL application teaching
different courses at different levels.
Similarities in CLIL application lie in the following:
• Language immersion –- learners are immersed in the target language through subject content,
promoting natural and meaningful language use;
• Integrated learning – combination of content and language learning requires learners to simultaneously
acquire subject knowledge and language skills;
• Focus on communication – the studied content encourages learners to use the language actively in
academic and real-world contexts;
• Interdisciplinary approach – CLIL involves integrating multiple disciplines, fostering a comprehensive
learning experience that connects different areas of knowledge.
• Methodology – teachers need to use specialized strategies that balance content and language instruction
at different levels of study, such as scaffolding, modeling, and interactive activities.
Differences in CLIL application can be viewed as follows:
1. Complexity of content for different levels:
• At secondary level the content is generally simpler and more concrete, focusing on basic concepts
and vocabulary;
• At higher level the content is becomes more complex and abstract, involving advanced theories,
specialized terminology, and critical analysis;
2. Language proficiency expectations:
• At secondary level learners are often at a beginner or intermediate level of language proficiency
that requires more foundational language support;
62
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
• At higher level learners have higher language proficiency that allows to use more sophisticated
language;
3. Methods of assessment:
• At secondary level assessments are often formative, focusing on basic comprehension and
language use through simple tasks and activities;
• At higher level assessments are more summative and difficult, including essays, presentations, and
exams that require in-depth understanding and critical thinking;
4. Teacher proficiency and knowledge:
• At secondary level teachers often need to have strong skills in basic language teaching and
classroom management;
• At higher level teachers are required to have deep content knowledge and the ability to facilitate
high-level academic discourse in the target language;
5. Learning materials:
• At secondary level materials are more visual, interactive, and accessible, using pictures, games,
and simple texts to engage younger learners;
• At higher level materials are more text-based and complex, including academic articles, research
papers, and technical documents relevant to the subject matter;
6. Learner autonomy:
• At secondary level the process of learning is more guided with teachers’ direct instruction and
support;
• At higher level the process of learning is more autonomous and learners are expected to take more
responsibility for their learning and engage in independent research and study.
Collaboration with foreign educational establishments and participation in Erasmus+ projects (the EU's
programme to support education, training, youth and sport) fosters CLIL implementation in Ukrainian
educational establishments at different levels of study.
Further and successful implementation of CLIL depends significantly on elaborating manuals on different
educational courses and support of the policymakers. One more step to fruitful CLIL application is creation
of CLIL hubs to support educators in CLIL implementation by methodological instructions and manuals.
The steps of creating CLIL hubs and developing CLIL curricula are described by D. Marsh, P. Mehisto,
D. Wolff, M.J. Frigols Martín (2011) in the manual “The European Framework for CLIL Teacher
Education” that aims to offer principles and ideas for working out CLIL professional development
curricula. It is also serves as a tool for reflection, providing a conceptual approach for practical usage.
As for the limitation of the studies presented in the article it is necessary to pay attention to the percentage
of theoretical and practical basis not to be disconnected between classroom activities and real situation
application. Summing up, teachers should pay more attention to the practical use of CLIL to engage learners
in effective learning (Lokshyna et al., 2015). To prevent a disconnect between classroom activities and real-
world applications in CLIL application, a teacher should follow such methodological strategies:
1. To design activities based on case studies and project work that reflect real-world scenarios related to
the content matter;
2. To incorporate authentic materials such as news articles, videos, podcasts, and other media that
professionals in the field might use;
3. To implement interdisciplinary projects that require learners to apply knowledge and skills from
multiple subjects, similar to real-world contexts;
4. To design assignments that require learners to solve real-life problems or create products that have
practical applications outside the classroom;
5. To use digital tools and platforms that professionals use that allow learners to know standard
technology and practices;
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
63
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
6. To provide continuous feedback that highlights the practical applications of learners’ work and how it
connects to real-world expectations and standards;
7. To encourage collaborative projects that is based on teamwork in professional settings, helping learners
develop communication and collaboration skills;
8. To incorporate reflective practices where learners analyse how their classroom learning can be applied
in real-life situations, fostering a deeper understanding of the relevance of their studies;
9. To adapt language instruction to the specific vocabulary, structures, and genres relevant to the content
matter that ensures real life communication;
10. To ensure assessments reflect real-world tasks and applications, such as presentations, reports, or
portfolios that demonstrate practical skills and knowledge.
Considering that higher education reform in Ukraine is currently in a transitional phase, secondary schools
are already actively implementing CLIL approach with integrated lessons. However, there is still a shortage
of highly trained staff - teachers with sufficient professional and linguistic competencies. Therefore, the
Germanic Philology Department at V.O. Sukhomlynskyi National University of Mykolaiv employs partial
immersion of CLIL while teaching professionally oriented programmes at different levels of study. This
involves teaching certain fundamental disciplines in English, which enhances learning motivation,
development of communication skills, and intercultural awareness. Integrating English language into
professionally oriented classes boost learners’ motivation, making learning process more deliberate and
intentional. Current research on CLIL emphasizes the learner's role in independently shaping their own
needs and interests. Focusing on the context, abstracting from linguistic issues, and avoiding constant
comparisons between native and foreign languages are crucial steps in overcoming language barriers. In
the context of Ukrainian didactics, CLIL involves interdisciplinary connections and relies on creating an
artificial foreign language environment to facilitate language immersion in the educational process.
When implementing CLIL approach in non-language specialties, it is important to note that working with
professionally oriented texts using immersion helps uncover the content and meaning of these texts. Before
reading, learners make assumptions and propose hypotheses, which are then compared with the data and
evidence as they read. With a significant amount of information on their specialization, learners can guess
the text content based on their knowledge. Subject knowledge is primary, as learners often lack vocabulary
needed to fully understand foreign language texts in their professional field of study. However, having a
strong grasp of the subject matter allows them to infer the meaning of words, phrases, and sentences from
the context. When learners study texts in a foreign language related to their professional field, they do not
need extensive vocabulary because CLIL supports text comprehension, boosting learners’ confidence and
self-assessment.
The methodical organization of CLIL lessons can vary based on the training content, still several stages can
help plan an effective CLIL lesson:
• Choose an engaging topic for language specialities, for other majors follow the curriculum guidelines;
• Identify key vocabulary words to focus on, starting with 6 to 10 words initially, and gradually
increasing to 20 depending on the learners' level;
• Decide what specific grammatical structures are to be used in the lesson;
• Create or select educational material related to the topic taking into account that CLIL lessons generally
incorporate all aspects of language learning, with special emphasis on reading and listening, using
authentic texts such as magazine articles and online content;
• Use Graphic organizers to visually represent knowledge, concepts, ideas, and their relationships;
• Assign creative tasks related to homework or class activities, such as projects, cases, essays, and other
written and oral assignments. These tasks help learners personalize the information, enhancing
psychological assimilation of the content.
Conclusion
The Ukrainian education system highlights the following benefits of CLIL: employing a foreign language
in authentic contexts to address genuine professional challenges, fostering a comprehensive and integrated
understanding of the subjects studied, optimizing classroom time, gaining deeper insights into the core
issues, and enhancing learners’ motivation.
64
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 23 22 - 6 30 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
The successful application of CLIL approach in Ukraine can be achieved by following such prerequisites:
1) Using English instruction in preschool educational settings;
2) Revising English language curricula for both secondary and tertiary education;
3) Integrating the “CLIL Methodology” course into the curriculum for future teachers; professional
development;
4) Implementing CLIL approach for teaching English at all pedagogical and non-pedagogical disciplines;
5) Organizing professional development courses at Ukrainian higher education institutions with issuing
certificates for both language and subject teachers. Language instructors can enhance their
understanding of English instruction using CLIL, while subject teachers can refine their English
proficiency and familiarize themselves with the fundamental principles of content and language
integrated teaching.
6) Establishing digital CLIL lesson plans, methodological resources, and electronic textbooks tailored for
teachers across pedagogical and non-pedagogical specialties;
7) Establishing language immersion centers at secondary and tertiary educational establishments
institutions in Ukraine, with corresponding funding to support their operations.
By implementing CLIL in secondary and tertiary education we come across some challenges, including the
need for comprehensive teacher training, the development of appropriate instructional materials, ensuring
equitable access to CLIL programmes, and addressing potential resistance to change among stakeholders.
Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of CLIL in promoting language proficiency, academic
achievement, and global competence make it a promising approach for enhancing education in Ukraine.
Bibliographic References
Allen, M. (2004). Reading Achievement of Students in French Immersion Programs. Educational
Quarterly Review, 9(4), 25-30. https://acortar.link/753Qfq
Adrián, M. M., & Mangado, M. J. G. (2015). L1 Use, Lexical Richness, Accuracy and Syntactic Complexity
in the Oral Production of CLIL and NON-CLIL Learners of English. Atlantis, 37(2), 175-197. URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/24757789
Artsyshevska, A., Hrynya, N., & Kyznetsova, L. (2021). Implementation of CLIL Approach in a Bilingual
Environment. Young Scientist, 10.1(98.1), 4-7. URL:
https://molodyivchenyi.ua/index.php/journal/article/view/4070/4001
Ball, P., & Lindsay, D. (2012). Language Demands and Support for English-Medium Instruction in Tertiary
Education. Reflections on the Basque experience. In English – Medium Instruction at Universities. Global
Challenges. Multilingual Matters.
Bobyl, S. V. (2014). Content and Language Integrated Learning in the Process of Studying RKI at Technical
Universities: [preprint]. Materials of the III All-Ukrainian Scientific and Practical Conference.
Prydniprovsky Scientific Center of the National Academy of Science of Ukraine and the Ministry of
Education and Science of Ukraine, Kyrovohrad State Pedagogical University. Kyrovohrad, pp. 37-41.
URL http://eadnurt.diit.edu.ua/jspui/handle/123456789/3104
Budko, L.V., Maksymovych, G.O., & Shulga, T.V. (2024). Content and Language Integrated Learning
Model in Teaching a Foreign Language on a Non-Language University. Innovative Pedagogy, 67,
127-131. URL: http://www.innovpedagogy.od.ua/archives/2024/67/part_1/29.pdf
Collins, H. (2011). Language and practice. Social Studies of Science, 41(2), 271-300. URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41301905
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2010.
Dafouz, E., & Hibler, A. (2013). “Zip Your Lips” or “Keep Quiet”: Main Teachers’ and Language
Assistants’ Classroom Discourse in CLIL Settings. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 655-669.
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43651698
Dalton-Puffer, Ch. (2007). Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 330. URL: https://acortar.link/HIhRCj
de Zarobe, Y.R. (2015). Language Awareness and CLIL. In: Cenoz, J., Gorter, D., & May, S. (eds)
Language Awareness and Multilingualism. Encyclopedia of Language and Education. Cham: Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02325-0_13-1.
Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 301 p.
Volume 13 - Issue 77
/ May 2024
65
h tt ps: //a mazo ni ai nv est ig a. in fo/ I S S N 232 2 - 6 3 0 7
This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Reproduction, distribution,
and public communication of the work, as well as the creation of derivative works, are permitted provided that the original
source is cited.
Douglas, M. O. (2017). Assessing the Effectiveness of Content-Based Language Instruction (CBLI) in
Japanese at the College Advanced Level. Japanese Language and Literature, 51(2), 199-241. URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/44508415
European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. (2006). Content and
Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Publications Office of the European Union.
URL: https://acortar.link/9IUzPy
Graddol, D. (2006). English Next. British Council, pp. 132. URL:
https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/pub_english_next.pdf
Heyer, M. (2000). Creating a Language-Promoting Classroom: Content-Area Teachers at Work. In Hall,
Joan Kelly and Lorrie Stoops Verplaetse (eds.) Second and foreign language learning through
classroom interaction. Mahwah N.J. and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 265-285.
Hura, T., Dubinina, K., Khryk, V., Kazanishena, N., & Biliavska, T. (2023). El papel de la educación a
distancia en la formación de especialistas. Revista Eduweb, 17(4), 74-86.
https://doi.org/10.46502/issn.1856-7576/2023.17.04.8
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for Specific Purposes: A Learner-Centered Approach.
Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. (2014). English for Academic Purposes. In Leung, C. & Street, B. (eds.) The Routledge
Companion to English Studies. London: Routledge, 356 p. URL:
https://www.academia.edu/22895101/English_for_Academic_Purposes
Khodakovska, O. O. (2016). The Peculiarities of CLIL Approach. Modern Communicative Methods of
Teaching English: IVth All Ukrainian Scientific and Methodological Conference (October 28, 2016).
Zhytomyr, pp. 63-67. (In Ukrainian). URL:
https://dspace.nlu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/14363/1/Khodakovska_63-67.pdf
Knysh, I., Palshkova, I., Balalaieva, O., Kobernyk, H., & Tiahur, V. (2024). Augmented Reality in Higher
School as a Tool for Implementation of STEM Education. Amazonia Investiga, 13(74), 180-192.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.74.02.15
Kuzminska, N., Stavytska, I., Lukianenko, V., & Lygina, O. (2019). Application of CLIL Methodology in
Teaching Economic Disciplines at University. Advanced Education, 6(11), 112-117.
https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.167150
Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols Martín, M. J. (2011). European Framework for CLIL Teacher
Education. A framework for the professional development of CLIL teachers. European Centre for
Modern Languages and its publications. URL: https://acortar.link/scrnTT
Marsh, D. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Servicio de Publicaciones de la
Universidad de Córdoba. URL: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60884824.pdf
Mehisto, P. (2012). Criteria for producing CLIL learning materials. Encuentro, 12, 15-33.
Moore, P., & Lorenzo, F. (2015). Task-Based Learning and Content and Language Integrated Learning
Materials Design: Process and Product. The Language Learning Journal, 43(3), 334-357. DOI:
10.1080/09571736.2015.1053282
Lokshyna, O. I., Shparyk, O.M., & Dzhurylo, A.P. (2015). The European Vector of School Education
Content Transformations in Ukraine. Science and Education a New Dimension. Pedagogy and
Psychology, III(30), 7-10. URL: https://acortar.link/dgFdAJ
Roll, H., Bernardt, M., Enzenbach, Ch., Fischer, H.E., Gürsoy, E., Krabbe, H., Lang, M., Manzel, S., &
Uluçam-Wegmann, I. (2019). Writing in Subject Lessons at Lower Secondary Level Including Turkish.
Münster: Waxmann (Multilingualism, 48). URL:
https://www.waxmann.com/?eID=texte&pdf=4088Volltext.pdf&typ=zusatztext
Stoika, O., Butenko, N., Miziuk, V., Zinchenko, O., & Snikhovska, I. (2023). Information technologies in
the educational process of higher educational institutions. Amazonia Investiga, 12(63), 156-163.
https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.63.03.14
Sulym, V., Melnykov, A., Popov, M., Vechirko, O., & Malets, D. (2023). Improving education through
implementation of information technologies into the educational process. Amazonia Investiga, 12(68),
281-293. https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.68.08.26
Tkalia, I.A., Cherkashyna, N.I., & Ognivenko, Z.G. (2020). CLIL as a Reflection of Contemporary Global
Trend. Problems of Contemporary Education, 11, 59-62. URL:
https://periodicals.karazin.ua/issuesedu/article/view/17648
Wollf, D. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). English Studies, 23(1), 97-106. URL:
https://angl.winter-verlag.de/data/article/3453/pdf/91201010.pdf