TKT: CLIL cheat sheet

CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) is an approach in which subject content is taught through an additional language, with planned dual objectives for content and for language.

Coyle's 4Cs framework names the four planning dimensions of a CLIL lesson: Content (subject matter), Communication (language), Cognition (thinking skills) and Culture (intercultural understanding).

Language in CLIL is planned in three roles: the language OF learning (key subject vocabulary and structures), language FOR learning (classroom functional language) and language THROUGH learning (language that emerges from activities).

Cummins' BICS/CALP distinction: basic interpersonal communicative skills develop in roughly two years, while cognitive academic language proficiency needs five to seven years or more.

In Cummins' quadrant model, high cognitive demand combined with low context support is the most demanding situation; adding visuals, realia and modelling supplies the context that makes demanding content accessible.

Bloom's taxonomy separates LOTS (remember, understand, apply) from HOTS (analyse, evaluate, create); cognitive challenge is kept high while language support is increased, not the reverse.

Soft CLIL is language-led and usually delivered by a language teacher through subject topics; hard CLIL is subject-led and delivered by a subject teacher through the target language.

Language objectives in CLIL are derived from the content and its texts and tasks, not from a separate graded grammar syllabus.

The amount of exposure to the target language in a programme determines how much scaffolding, recycling and pre-teaching learners will need.

A CLIL lesson plan states both a content objective and a language objective, plus learning outcomes that are observable and can be checked at the end of the lesson.

Language demands are analysed from the text and task before planning: key vocabulary, collocations, functions (defining, explaining cause) and the structures learners must use.

Prior knowledge is activated early (brainstorm, KWL chart, visuals, realia) so that new content is attached to existing schema rather than presented in isolation.

A common sequence is pre-task (vocabulary, schema building, text-type awareness), task (content work with language support) and post-task (language focus and consolidation).

Backward design starts from the intended outcomes and the evidence of assessment, then selects the activities and support that build towards them.

Scaffolding is planned to be withdrawn: the plan shows which supports (models, sentence frames, glossaries, writing frames) are used at each stage and which fade by the end.

Each plan includes at least one stage where learners use the target language for a genuine communicative purpose, such as presenting findings to a partner or group.

The plan records anticipated difficulties and a backup move (simplified explanation, diagram, L1 clarification) for the language demands identified.

Interaction patterns are chosen to match the aim: teacher-fronted talk for input and modelling, pair and group work for learner language production, individual work for consolidation.

Mixed-ability grouping suits content tasks where peer support aids comprehension; same-ability grouping suits focused language practice at a similar level.

Word walls, labelled displays, bilingual glossaries and accessible dictionaries in the room support learner independence and reduce reliance on the teacher.

Fixed routines and group roles (chair, recorder, reporter, timekeeper) shorten transitions and increase on-task use of the target language.

Instructions are given in short sequenced steps with demonstration, and understanding is checked by an action or a concept question, not by 'Do you understand?'.

Errors are treated as a normal part of learning; correction is focused mainly on the language objective of the lesson rather than on every error.

First-language use is permitted strategically for clarifying a difficult concept, but tasks are designed with an information gap so the target language is necessary to complete them.

Productive group talk and off-task noise are distinguished by circulating and listening; seating is arranged so the teacher can monitor all groups quickly.

Scaffolding types include modelling, bridging to prior knowledge or L1, contextualising with visuals and realia, schema building and re-presenting a text as a diagram or table.

Display questions check content recall; open referential questions and a wait time of several seconds produce longer and more complex learner answers.

Jigsaw and expert-group structures give each learner a piece of the content to master and teach, increasing both content processing and language use.

DARTs (directed activities related to texts) such as sequencing, labelling, matching and predicting make subject texts accessible without removing the content.

Graphic organisers (concept map, flow chart, Venn diagram, table) make thinking visible and lower the linguistic load of a demanding task.

Dual coding with images, diagrams and demonstrations alongside spoken explanation supports comprehension of abstract content.

Focus on form in CLIL is brief and often reactive, arising from language needed during content work, rather than a separate extended grammar lesson.

Thinking language is modelled explicitly (e.g. 'I predict ... because ...', 'The evidence suggests ...') so learners can express cognitive processes.

Materials are judged against four criteria: authenticity and validity of content, cognitive challenge, linguistic accessibility, and support for both content and language objectives.

Adapt rather than adopt: shorten sentences, unpack nominalisations, add headings, bold key terms and add visuals or glossaries while keeping the cognitive demand.

Simplification must not become 'dumbing down'; if the thinking required is removed, the material no longer teaches the subject.

Access features include an exemplar of the expected outcome (model report, labelled diagram) that learners analyse before producing their own.

Language support is matched to the task's function: sentence frames, substitution tables and word banks supply the specific language the task requires.

Subject texts are sourced from reliable subject-specific material and checked for copyright before being adapted or reproduced.

Readability is checked against learners' academic language level, and the vocabulary that appears in the text is pre-taught rather than left to inference.

Tasks are written so learners must produce the target language, not only recognise it; teacher notes give both content answers and expected language.

Content and language are assessed separately: one task can yield two sets of marks or criteria, one for subject accuracy and one for language use.

Content is assessed through low-language-load formats such as diagrams, tables, labelling, matching and short answers, so language does not mask subject knowledge.

Formative assessment happens during learning and informs the next teaching steps; summative assessment happens at the end of a unit and certifies achievement.

Success criteria and rubrics are shared with learners in advance and used for peer and self-assessment as well as for teacher marking.

Whether language counts towards the mark is decided before marking begins; if language is not part of the criteria, errors in language are not penalised.

Diagnostic assessment at the start of a unit identifies gaps in both subject knowledge and the language needed to access the unit.

Can-do statements, including CEFR descriptors, and portfolios record progress in language over time alongside content achievement.

Feedback is specific and feed-forward: it states what to improve next and how, rather than only noting what was wrong.