Using AI to Support CLIL Teacher Language

Document Type : Research Article


Department of English Studies, University of Almería, Spain


This paper aims to identify different characteristics of content and language integrated learning (CLIL) teacher language and how AI and, more particularly, ChatGPT can support the language needed for use in CLIL teaching. The paper examines and analyses key writings in CLIL in order to identify the components of CLIL teacher language.  The specification of the components of this language allows for specific language needs to be identified and has implications for the implementation of CLIL in terms of teacher training, teaching materials and other forms of teacher support. Subsequently, the authors propose how these types of CLIL teacher language can be supported through the use of AI.


Andujar, A. (2023). ChatGPT for language learning: Towards an appropriate use of Open AI. In Sedano, B., Arrosagaray, M., & Sanz Gil., M. (Eds.), Positive impacts of MALL (mobile-assisted language learning). Granada: Comares.
Andrews, S. (2007). Teacher language awareness. Cambridge University Press.
Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J. (2016). Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford University Press.
Banegas, D. L. (2012). CLIL teacher development: Challenges and experiences. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning5(1), 46-56.
Bertaux, P., Coonan M. C., Frigols-Martín, M. J., & Mehisto, P. (2010). The teacher’s competences grid. retrieved 21/03/22
Brevik, M., & Moe, E. (2012). Effects of CLIL teaching on language outcomes. Collaboration in language testing and assessment26, 213-227.
Brady, I. K., & García-Pinar, A. (2019). Bilingual education in the region of Murcia: A qualitative study on the teachers' views. ELIA, 19, 179-205.
Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why… and why not. System41(3), 587-597.
Butler, Y. G. (2005). Content-based instruction in EFL contexts: Considerations for effective implementation. JALT Journal27(2), 227-240.
Coonan, M. C. (2007). Insider views of the CLIL class through teacher self-observation-introspection. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism10(5), 625-646.
Coonan, C. M. (2011). CLIL in (language) teacher training. Studi di Glottodidattica5(2), 1-14.
Costa, F., & d’Angelo, L.  (2011). CLIL: A suit for all seasons. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning 4(1), 1-13
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism10(5), 543-562.
Coyle, D., Hood P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press.
Coyle, D., & Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL: Pluriliteracies teaching for deeper learning. Cambridge University Press.
Cummins, J. (1984) Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. Multilingual Matters.
Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL activities. Cambridge University Press.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). John Benjamins Publishing.
Freeman, D., Katz, A., Garcia Gomez, P., & Burns, A. (2015). English-for-teaching: Rethinking teacher proficiency in the classroom. ELT Journal69(2), 129-139.
Gierlinger, E. (2015). ‘You can speak German, sir’: On the complexity of teachers' L1 use in CLIL. Language and Education29(4), 347-368.
Gondová, D. (2012). Identifying the needs of CLIL teachers at Lower and upper-secondary schools. Journal of Interdisciplinary Philology3(3), 5-22.
He, P., & Lin, A. M. (2018). Becoming a “language-aware” content teacher: Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) teacher professional development as a collaborative, dynamic, and dialogic process. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education6(2), 162-188.
Helm, F., & Guarda, M. (2015). “Improvisation is not allowed in a second language”: A survey of Italian lecturers’ concerns about teaching their subjects through English. Language Learning in Higher Education5(2), 353-373.
Kao, Y. T. (2022). Understanding and addressing the challenges of teaching an online CLIL course: A teacher education study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(2), 656-675.
Kung, W-F. (2018). “English-only or nothing”: Practitioners’ perspective on the policy and implementation of CLIL in higher education. Education Journal, 46(1), 93-115.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. Cambridge University Press.
Lo, Y. Y. (2015). How much L1 is too much? Teachers’ language use in response to students’ abilities and classroom interaction in content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism18(3), 270-288.
Lopriore, L. (2020). Reframing teaching knowledge in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): A European perspective. Language Teaching Research24(1), 94-104.
Margić, B. D., & Vodopija-Krstanović, I. (2018). Language development for English-medium instruction: Teachers’ perceptions, reflections, and learning. Journal of English for Academic Purposes35, 31-41.
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE—The European dimension. Actions, trends, and foresight potential. European Commission Report, Public Services Contract DG EAC 36 01 Lot 3.
Massler, U., Stotz, D., & Queisser, C. (2014). Assessment instruments for primary CLIL: The conceptualization and evaluation of test tasks. The Language Learning Journal42(2), 137-150.
Mattheoudakis, M., & Alexiou, T. (2017). Sketching the profile of the CLIL Instructor in Greece. Research Papers in Language Teaching & Learning8(1), 52-65.
McDougald, J. (2015). Teachers’ attitudes, perceptions, and experiences in CLIL: A look at content and language. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal17(1), 25-41.
Moore, P., & Lorenzo, F. (2007). Adapting authentic materials for CLIL classrooms: An empirical study. VIEWZ: Vienna English Working Papers16(3), 28-35.
Morton, T. (2013). Critically evaluating materials for CLIL: Practitioners’ practices and perspectives in critical perspectives. In J. Gray (Ed.) Language teaching materials. London:  Palgrave MacMillan.
Morton, T. (2018). Reconceptualizing and describing teachers’ knowledge of language for content and language integrated learning (CLIL). International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism21(3), 275-286.
Nikula T. (2010). Effects of CLIL on a teacher’s classroom language use. In C. Dalton-Puffer, T. Nikula, & U. Smit (Eds.), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., & García, A. L. (2013). CLIL classroom discourse: Research from Europe. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education1(1), 70-100.
Otto, A., & Estrada, J. L. (2019). Towards an understanding of CLIL assessment practices in a European context: Main assessment tools and the role of language in content subjects. Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education2(1), 31-42.
Papaja, K. (2013). The role of a teacher in a CLIL classroom. Retrieved from
Pavón, V., Ávila, J., Gallego, A., & Espejo, R. (2014). Strategic and organizational considerations in planning CLIL: A study on the coordination between content and language teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism18(4), 409-425.
Pavon, V., & Rubio, F. (2010). Teachers’ concerns and uncertainties about the introduction of CLIL programs. Porta Linguarum, 14, 45-58.
Pavon, V. (2014). Enhancing the quality of CLIL: Making the best of the collaboration between language teachers and content teachers. Encuentro23, 115-127.
Pena Díaz, C., & Porto Requejo, M.D. (2008). Teacher beliefs in a CLIL education project. Porta Linguarum, 10, 151-61. 
Pokrivčáková, S. (2015). Research implications for training CLIL teachers in SlovakiaIn Hanesová, D. (ed.), Learning together to be a better CLIL teacher (pp. 23-28). Banská Bystrica: UMB
Reierstam, H. (2015). Assessing language or content? A comparative study of the assessment practices in three Swedish upper secondary CLIL schools. University of Gothenburg.
San Isidro, X., & Lasagabaster, D. (2019). Code-switching in a CLIL multilingual setting: A longitudinal qualitative study. International Journal of Multilingualism16(3), 336-356.
Thornbury, S. (1997). About language. Cambridge University Press.
van Kampen, E., Meirink, J., Admiraal, W., & Berry, A. (2018). Do we all share the same goals for content and language integrated learning (CLIL)? Specialist and practitioner perceptions of ‘ideal’ CLIL pedagogies in the Netherlands. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(2), 222-236.
Vilkancienė, L., & Rozgienė, I. (2017). CLIL teacher competences and attitudes. Sustainable Multilingualism11(1), 196-218.
Wewer, T. (2014). Assessment of young learners’ English proficiency in bilingual content instruction CLIL. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Turku].
Wilmes, S. E. (2017). Science workshop: Let their questions lead the way. In A. Oliveira & M. Weinburgh (Eds.), Science teacher preparation in content-based second language acquisition. ASTE series in science education (pp. 323-340). Dordrecht: Springer.
Zemach, D. (2021). What is CLIL? The global trend in bilingual education explained.