pág. 13117
DISEÑO DE UN PLAN DE ESTUDIOS DE
CIENCIAS NATURALES BASADO EN CLIL
PARA EDUCACIÓN PRIMARIA
DESIGNING A CLIL-BASED NATURAL SCIENCE SYLLABUS FOR
PRIMARY EDUCATION SCHOOL
Yeimi Carolina Velasco López
Universidad El Bosque 1
Laura Andrea Vaquiro Hortua
Universidad El Bosque 2
Laura Gianela Pineda Bello
Universidad El Bosque 3
pág. 13118
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i5.20531
Diseño de un plan de estudios de ciencias naturales basado en CLIL para
educación primaria
Yeimi Carolina Velasco López1
yeimycarolina96@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3847-0554
Universidad El Bosque 1
Laura Andrea Vaquiro Hortua
Lauravaquiro472@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1343-5440
Universidad El Bosque 2
Laura Gianela Pineda Bello
Piinedalaura3@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8582-1640
Universidad El Bosque 3
RESUMEN
Este artículo presenta un proyecto de innovación centrado en el diseño de un plan de estudios, basado
en el Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extranjeras (CLIL) para la enseñanza de ciencias
naturales en inglés, en un colegio privado de Bogotá, Colombia. El estudio integró aprendizaje de
contenidos científicos e inglés, mediante un plan de estudios basado en contenidos (CBS) y estrategias
de aprendizaje basado en proyectos (ABP). Se realizó un análisis de necesidad con docentes y directivos,
seguido de la alineación curricular y la implementación piloto de planes de clase en un grupo de tercer
y quinto grado. El estudio adoptó un diseño cualitativo e interpretativo mediante observaciones de clase,
diario reflexivo del docente y entrevistas a los estudiantes. Los hallazgos evidenciaron dos categorías
principales: (1) el impacto pedagógico y metodológico del enfoque CLIL y del ABP, y (2) el diseño
instruccional y la adaptabilidad docente. Los resultados mostraron que los estudiantes mejoraron su
comprensión científica, sus habilidades lingüísticas y su motivación, mientras que los docentes
demostraron flexibilidad en la adaptación de estrategias. El proyecto resalta el potencial del enfoque
CLIL para promover un aprendizaje significativo en ciencias e inglés, ofreciendo un modelo replicable
para la educación primaria.
Palabras clave: CLIL; plan de estudios basado en contenidos; aprendizaje basado en proyectos;
educación primaria; bilingüismo en Colombia.
1 Autor principal
Correspondencia: yeimycarolina96@gmail.com
DOI: https://doi.org/10.37811/cl_rcm.v9i5.20531
Diseño de un plan de estudios de ciencias naturales basado en CLIL para
educación primaria
Yeimi Carolina Velasco López1
yeimycarolina96@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3847-0554
Universidad El Bosque 1
Laura Andrea Vaquiro Hortua
Lauravaquiro472@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-1343-5440
Universidad El Bosque 2
Laura Gianela Pineda Bello
Piinedalaura3@gmail.com
https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8582-1640
Universidad El Bosque 3
RESUMEN
Este artículo presenta un proyecto de innovación centrado en el diseño de un plan de estudios, basado
en el Aprendizaje Integrado de Contenidos y Lenguas Extranjeras (CLIL) para la enseñanza de ciencias
naturales en inglés, en un colegio privado de Bogotá, Colombia. El estudio integró aprendizaje de
contenidos científicos e inglés, mediante un plan de estudios basado en contenidos (CBS) y estrategias
de aprendizaje basado en proyectos (ABP). Se realizó un análisis de necesidad con docentes y directivos,
seguido de la alineación curricular y la implementación piloto de planes de clase en un grupo de tercer
y quinto grado. El estudio adoptó un diseño cualitativo e interpretativo mediante observaciones de clase,
diario reflexivo del docente y entrevistas a los estudiantes. Los hallazgos evidenciaron dos categorías
principales: (1) el impacto pedagógico y metodológico del enfoque CLIL y del ABP, y (2) el diseño
instruccional y la adaptabilidad docente. Los resultados mostraron que los estudiantes mejoraron su
comprensión científica, sus habilidades lingüísticas y su motivación, mientras que los docentes
demostraron flexibilidad en la adaptación de estrategias. El proyecto resalta el potencial del enfoque
CLIL para promover un aprendizaje significativo en ciencias e inglés, ofreciendo un modelo replicable
para la educación primaria.
Palabras clave: CLIL; plan de estudios basado en contenidos; aprendizaje basado en proyectos;
educación primaria; bilingüismo en Colombia.
1 Autor principal
Correspondencia: yeimycarolina96@gmail.com
pág. 13119
Designing a CLIL-based natural science syllabus for primary education
school
ABSTRACT
This article presents an educational innovation project focused on the design of a Content and Language
Integrated Learning (CLIL) for teaching natural sciences in English at a private school in Bogota,
Colombia. The study integrated scientific content and English language learning through a Content-
Based Syllabus (CBS), complimented by Project-Based Learning (PBL) strategies. An initial needs
analysis was conducted with teachers and school leaders, followed by the alignment of curricular content
and the piloting of lesson plans in a third and fifth grade. The study adopted a qualitative, interpretative
design using classroom observations, teacher, reflective journal, and students' interviews. Findings
revealed two main categories: (1) the periodical and methodological impact of CLIL and PBL, and (2)
instructional design, and teacher adaptability. Results demonstrate that students improved their scientific
understanding, language, skills, and motivation while teachers displayed flexibility in adapting
strategies. The project highlights CLIL’s potential to foster meaningful learning in science and English,
offering a replicable model for primary education in similar contexts.
Keywords: CLIL; content-based; syllabus; Project-Based Learning; primary education; bilingualism in
Colombia.
Artículo recibido 18 setiembre 2025
Aceptado para publicación: 05 octubre 2025
Designing a CLIL-based natural science syllabus for primary education
school
ABSTRACT
This article presents an educational innovation project focused on the design of a Content and Language
Integrated Learning (CLIL) for teaching natural sciences in English at a private school in Bogota,
Colombia. The study integrated scientific content and English language learning through a Content-
Based Syllabus (CBS), complimented by Project-Based Learning (PBL) strategies. An initial needs
analysis was conducted with teachers and school leaders, followed by the alignment of curricular content
and the piloting of lesson plans in a third and fifth grade. The study adopted a qualitative, interpretative
design using classroom observations, teacher, reflective journal, and students' interviews. Findings
revealed two main categories: (1) the periodical and methodological impact of CLIL and PBL, and (2)
instructional design, and teacher adaptability. Results demonstrate that students improved their scientific
understanding, language, skills, and motivation while teachers displayed flexibility in adapting
strategies. The project highlights CLIL’s potential to foster meaningful learning in science and English,
offering a replicable model for primary education in similar contexts.
Keywords: CLIL; content-based; syllabus; Project-Based Learning; primary education; bilingualism in
Colombia.
Artículo recibido 18 setiembre 2025
Aceptado para publicación: 05 octubre 2025
pág. 13120
INTRODUCTION
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) represents a teaching approach that combines
curriculum topics with language acquisition, aiming for a dual-centered form of instruction (Coyle et
al., 2010). It aids learners by improving communication abilities, expanding comprehension of academic
subjects, nurturing analytical thinking, and encouraging integrated learning. By employing English as a
medium for gaining knowledge, CLIL facilitates mental skill development and a wider awareness of
global contexts (Coyle et al., 2010).
To better grasp CLIL’s influence, it is important to examine the various aspects it encompasses. As
Mariño (2014) stated: “All of the reasons the authors state is given in terms of context, content, language,
learning, and culture. CLIL prepares students for future studies and offers them a different point of view
of sciences” (p. 153). This means that CLIL not only teaches subject matter but also creates a rich
learning environment where context and culture are intertwined with academic content. Additionally,
“students in CLIL programs have real access to specific information within different knowledge areas”
(Mariño, 2014, p. 153). This integrated approach not only prepares students for future academic studies
but also provides them with a unique perspective on various subjects, particularly in the sciences.
CLIL’s main advantage is its ability to go beyond just teaching content and language, incorporating
broader dimensions of learning. As highlighted by Martinez y Gutierrez (2015), “the 4Cs require that
learning go beyond content and language and also address cognition and culture; cognition encompasses
higher-level thinking, such as the development of critical thinking skills” (p. 249). In other words,
content refers to knowledge in a real-world context; communication refers to the usage of a foreign
language; cognition refers to thinking skills due to their scaffolding during the process between lower
and higher cognitive processes; and culture refers to how students develop and understand other cultures.
As explained by Chaya & Inpin (2020), “among the 4Cs, communication plays an important role
because it requires an awareness of different types of language as used for different purposes” (p. 31).
This framework of the 4Cs not only acquires knowledge but also engages in deeper thinking processes.
Moreover, the cultural aspect gives context to their understanding which means it prepares students for
real-life challenges.
INTRODUCTION
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) represents a teaching approach that combines
curriculum topics with language acquisition, aiming for a dual-centered form of instruction (Coyle et
al., 2010). It aids learners by improving communication abilities, expanding comprehension of academic
subjects, nurturing analytical thinking, and encouraging integrated learning. By employing English as a
medium for gaining knowledge, CLIL facilitates mental skill development and a wider awareness of
global contexts (Coyle et al., 2010).
To better grasp CLIL’s influence, it is important to examine the various aspects it encompasses. As
Mariño (2014) stated: “All of the reasons the authors state is given in terms of context, content, language,
learning, and culture. CLIL prepares students for future studies and offers them a different point of view
of sciences” (p. 153). This means that CLIL not only teaches subject matter but also creates a rich
learning environment where context and culture are intertwined with academic content. Additionally,
“students in CLIL programs have real access to specific information within different knowledge areas”
(Mariño, 2014, p. 153). This integrated approach not only prepares students for future academic studies
but also provides them with a unique perspective on various subjects, particularly in the sciences.
CLIL’s main advantage is its ability to go beyond just teaching content and language, incorporating
broader dimensions of learning. As highlighted by Martinez y Gutierrez (2015), “the 4Cs require that
learning go beyond content and language and also address cognition and culture; cognition encompasses
higher-level thinking, such as the development of critical thinking skills” (p. 249). In other words,
content refers to knowledge in a real-world context; communication refers to the usage of a foreign
language; cognition refers to thinking skills due to their scaffolding during the process between lower
and higher cognitive processes; and culture refers to how students develop and understand other cultures.
As explained by Chaya & Inpin (2020), “among the 4Cs, communication plays an important role
because it requires an awareness of different types of language as used for different purposes” (p. 31).
This framework of the 4Cs not only acquires knowledge but also engages in deeper thinking processes.
Moreover, the cultural aspect gives context to their understanding which means it prepares students for
real-life challenges.
pág. 13121
Content-Based Syllabus (CBS)
Different types of syllabi outline what is to be learned, the course goals, the teaching methods, and the
time required (Núñez, 2007). In second language teaching, different syllabi are connected, as Benbella
(2019) noted, with some focusing on functional aspects of language, while others emphasize the
development of learners' communicative skills. CBS emphasized learning about something or a specific
topic that will be acquired rather than learning about grammar structure. CBS describes its principles
from communicative language teaching (Benbella, 2019). This approach aligns with the principles of
communicative language teaching, which prioritize real-life communication skills over rote
memorization.
A CBS is an educational framework that prioritizes the instruction of subject matter while also
promoting language acquisition. According to Snow (2016), this approach centers the course content as
the driving force behind the curriculum, allowing language skills to be developed organically within the
context of the subject matter. By integrating a content-based curriculum, educators create a dynamic
learning environment where students engage with relevant topics, enhancing both their understanding
of the subject and their language proficiency simultaneously. This dual focus not only enriches the
learning experience but also equips students with the necessary skills to navigate both academic and
real-world contexts effectively.
Also, the context in which language skills are applied in real-world scenarios is a key aspect of content-
based curriculum development. The purpose of this approach is fundamental to education, as it enables
learners to apply their language skills in practical, real-life situations. Gibbons (2002) asserts that, by
designing a stimulating educational setting, teachers support both mastery of subject content and the
development of language abilities, enabling learners to apply their linguistic skills in real-world
situations.
In that sense, curricula focused on content enable teachers to design educational settings that cultivate
both topic mastery and linguistic competence (Hempel-Jorgensen, 2015). This method enhances
understanding of scientific ideas while developing terminology and expressive skills. Also, activities
connected to the subject matter promote cognitive engagement and learning in the target language,
fostering active participation and stronger memory of the material (Jalilzadeh & Tahmasebi, 2014).
Content-Based Syllabus (CBS)
Different types of syllabi outline what is to be learned, the course goals, the teaching methods, and the
time required (Núñez, 2007). In second language teaching, different syllabi are connected, as Benbella
(2019) noted, with some focusing on functional aspects of language, while others emphasize the
development of learners' communicative skills. CBS emphasized learning about something or a specific
topic that will be acquired rather than learning about grammar structure. CBS describes its principles
from communicative language teaching (Benbella, 2019). This approach aligns with the principles of
communicative language teaching, which prioritize real-life communication skills over rote
memorization.
A CBS is an educational framework that prioritizes the instruction of subject matter while also
promoting language acquisition. According to Snow (2016), this approach centers the course content as
the driving force behind the curriculum, allowing language skills to be developed organically within the
context of the subject matter. By integrating a content-based curriculum, educators create a dynamic
learning environment where students engage with relevant topics, enhancing both their understanding
of the subject and their language proficiency simultaneously. This dual focus not only enriches the
learning experience but also equips students with the necessary skills to navigate both academic and
real-world contexts effectively.
Also, the context in which language skills are applied in real-world scenarios is a key aspect of content-
based curriculum development. The purpose of this approach is fundamental to education, as it enables
learners to apply their language skills in practical, real-life situations. Gibbons (2002) asserts that, by
designing a stimulating educational setting, teachers support both mastery of subject content and the
development of language abilities, enabling learners to apply their linguistic skills in real-world
situations.
In that sense, curricula focused on content enable teachers to design educational settings that cultivate
both topic mastery and linguistic competence (Hempel-Jorgensen, 2015). This method enhances
understanding of scientific ideas while developing terminology and expressive skills. Also, activities
connected to the subject matter promote cognitive engagement and learning in the target language,
fostering active participation and stronger memory of the material (Jalilzadeh & Tahmasebi, 2014).
pág. 13122
Likewise, organized teaching techniques within Content-Based Instruction (CBI), such as genuine
resources, stepwise guidance, and specific reading strategies, improve comprehension and language
growth (Glenn, 2020). These practices stimulate thoughtful interaction with topics, supporting both
grasp and assessment of content. In that sense, by incorporating practical materials, CBI generates
purposeful learning opportunities that simultaneously reinforce academic expertise and language
capability.
Project-Based Learning (PBL)
PBL is a student-focused approach that complements CLIL by prioritizing hands-on, authentic activities.
This facilitates language development while integrating subject knowledge, giving learners practical
chances to apply language in meaningful situations (Zhang et al., 2023). Therefore, PBL cultivates
essential 21st-century abilities, such as teamwork, effective communication, and analytical reasoning,
which are crucial in bilingual classrooms and real-life contexts (Bell, 2010). This involves students in
both the content of their projects and the linguistic skills needed to accomplish them, encouraging
practical and interactive use of language in CLIL environments (Fragoulis, 2009).
Given the above, applying PBL in instructional design promotes active student engagement in the
learning process. It supports social, intellectual, and professional development through cooperative and
independent activities, reinforcing both subject comprehension and language proficiency while fostering
advanced thinking skills necessary for bilingual or additional-language education (Aksela & Haatainen,
2022).
English as a Second Language (ESL), English as a Foreign Language (EFL), and CLIL
CLIL is particularly significant for both EFL and ESL because it integrates language acquisition with
subject learning, shifting from isolated language instruction to a comprehensive, context-based approach
(Dalton-Puffer, 2011). This combination enables learners to simultaneously develop linguistic and
content knowledge, strengthening English instruction.
Evidence shows that CLIL surpasses conventional EFL approaches by enhancing student interest and
cognitive involvement through purposeful, real-world communication (Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2010).
In that way, embedding academic topics within language lessons promotes authentic and meaningful
use of the language, advancing both fluency and communication skills.
Likewise, organized teaching techniques within Content-Based Instruction (CBI), such as genuine
resources, stepwise guidance, and specific reading strategies, improve comprehension and language
growth (Glenn, 2020). These practices stimulate thoughtful interaction with topics, supporting both
grasp and assessment of content. In that sense, by incorporating practical materials, CBI generates
purposeful learning opportunities that simultaneously reinforce academic expertise and language
capability.
Project-Based Learning (PBL)
PBL is a student-focused approach that complements CLIL by prioritizing hands-on, authentic activities.
This facilitates language development while integrating subject knowledge, giving learners practical
chances to apply language in meaningful situations (Zhang et al., 2023). Therefore, PBL cultivates
essential 21st-century abilities, such as teamwork, effective communication, and analytical reasoning,
which are crucial in bilingual classrooms and real-life contexts (Bell, 2010). This involves students in
both the content of their projects and the linguistic skills needed to accomplish them, encouraging
practical and interactive use of language in CLIL environments (Fragoulis, 2009).
Given the above, applying PBL in instructional design promotes active student engagement in the
learning process. It supports social, intellectual, and professional development through cooperative and
independent activities, reinforcing both subject comprehension and language proficiency while fostering
advanced thinking skills necessary for bilingual or additional-language education (Aksela & Haatainen,
2022).
English as a Second Language (ESL), English as a Foreign Language (EFL), and CLIL
CLIL is particularly significant for both EFL and ESL because it integrates language acquisition with
subject learning, shifting from isolated language instruction to a comprehensive, context-based approach
(Dalton-Puffer, 2011). This combination enables learners to simultaneously develop linguistic and
content knowledge, strengthening English instruction.
Evidence shows that CLIL surpasses conventional EFL approaches by enhancing student interest and
cognitive involvement through purposeful, real-world communication (Lasagabaster & Sierra, 2010).
In that way, embedding academic topics within language lessons promotes authentic and meaningful
use of the language, advancing both fluency and communication skills.
pág. 13123
CLIL encourages intensive engagement by employing language as a tool for interdisciplinary learning
rather than solely as a subject (Genesee et al., 2014). This methodology creates genuine learning
scenarios where students build both academic competence and language proficiency, making it highly
effective for English instruction.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that the relationship between ESL and CLIL has gained importance
because both focus on improving language skills through substantive content (García-Sánchez &
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 2014). In that sense, integrating cultural components in CLIL lessons increases
student involvement, motivation, and intercultural awareness, making cultural learning a core part of
acquiring both language and subject knowledge.
Explanation
The innovation project began by understanding the context of the school, students, and teachers while
also exploring classroom learning environments. To gather this information, we conducted a survey
involving various stakeholders within the institutions. The survey was a key part of the needs analysis,
which is essential before creating a syllabus that aligns with institutional academic needs. According to
Hutchison & Waters (1987), conducting a need analysis allows syllabus designers to identify both
targets needs and learning needs, which is crucial to make instructional relevant. Similarly, Richards
(2001) highlights that the needs analysis functions as a bridge between institutional goals and classroom
practices, guaranteeing curricular coherence. Once the needs analysis was completed, the process moved
into syllabus design. As Graves (2000) explains, syllabus design is not a static product but a dynamic
process in which teachers select, sequence, and adapt content to fit the learning context.
The survey was completed by academic coordinator, English teacher, and science teachers. From the
responses, we identify that while the sea levels units followed A logical sequence, the workbook use
was often disconnected from the syllabus. Additionally, the teachers highlighted the benefits they
observed from PBL and collaborative learning, noting how these approaches increased student reflection
on real-world situations. However, they also pointed out challenges, particularly the limited time
available for language classes due to the diverse range of subjects that students are required to complete.
As a second step, taking into consideration the needs analysis, we begin comparing the materials used
in the current science class with the new course book that will be introduced next year for teaching
CLIL encourages intensive engagement by employing language as a tool for interdisciplinary learning
rather than solely as a subject (Genesee et al., 2014). This methodology creates genuine learning
scenarios where students build both academic competence and language proficiency, making it highly
effective for English instruction.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that the relationship between ESL and CLIL has gained importance
because both focus on improving language skills through substantive content (García-Sánchez &
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, 2014). In that sense, integrating cultural components in CLIL lessons increases
student involvement, motivation, and intercultural awareness, making cultural learning a core part of
acquiring both language and subject knowledge.
Explanation
The innovation project began by understanding the context of the school, students, and teachers while
also exploring classroom learning environments. To gather this information, we conducted a survey
involving various stakeholders within the institutions. The survey was a key part of the needs analysis,
which is essential before creating a syllabus that aligns with institutional academic needs. According to
Hutchison & Waters (1987), conducting a need analysis allows syllabus designers to identify both
targets needs and learning needs, which is crucial to make instructional relevant. Similarly, Richards
(2001) highlights that the needs analysis functions as a bridge between institutional goals and classroom
practices, guaranteeing curricular coherence. Once the needs analysis was completed, the process moved
into syllabus design. As Graves (2000) explains, syllabus design is not a static product but a dynamic
process in which teachers select, sequence, and adapt content to fit the learning context.
The survey was completed by academic coordinator, English teacher, and science teachers. From the
responses, we identify that while the sea levels units followed A logical sequence, the workbook use
was often disconnected from the syllabus. Additionally, the teachers highlighted the benefits they
observed from PBL and collaborative learning, noting how these approaches increased student reflection
on real-world situations. However, they also pointed out challenges, particularly the limited time
available for language classes due to the diverse range of subjects that students are required to complete.
As a second step, taking into consideration the needs analysis, we begin comparing the materials used
in the current science class with the new course book that will be introduced next year for teaching
pág. 13124
science in English. To organize the information, we create a matrix to visualize the connections between
the topic in both coursebook, allowing us to identify areas of alignment and potential gaps. For instance.
In first, second and third grade. They were many connections in terms of topics. After reviewing the
themes and schools needs to integrate science into English classes, we decided to introduce the CLIL
approach to combine content and language learning from two key reasons. First, CLIL is increasingly
used in bilingual education settings, as it enhances both language proficiency and subject knowledge by
teaching a subject through a foreign language. Second, the CLIL approach emphasizes communication
and culture, which are as important as content, helping to connect real world situations with the
curriculum.
Moreover, we needed a strong foundation to develop a syllabus then aligned with the requirements and
goals of the innovative project. With this in mind, we choose a content-based approach. which ensured
a strong connection between subject matter language development and cognitive skill. This approach
supports the development of both lower and higher-order thinking skills as the course progresses.
The third step in this process was to reorganize the content to ensure a logical sequence of topic and
cognitive skill development. We also connected the activities that were most aligned with the learning
objectives, enhancing the flow and coherence of this science syllabus. In this way, we created a sequence
that allows students to recognize content from their Spanish Science class and connect it with the new
syllabus, which focuses on science content in English, while also improving their second language skills,
particularly in communication.
After the creation of the syllabi, we designed lessons plans that followed the outline of the syllabus,
including weekly learnings, aptitudes and activities based on PBL. Hamer (2007) emphasizes that lesson
planning should integrate communicating goals with meaningful tasks to maximize students'
engagement. Likewise, Kokotsaki et al. (2016) point out that PBL activities foster motivation,
collaboration, and problem-solving skills when carefully integrate into lesson design. This ensured that
our plans did not only cover scientific content but also encouraged authentic communication and higher
order thinking.
The next step in the project involves piloting phase, where the connections between cyclical CBL and
PBL were tested through the implementation of the lesson plans in a third-grade primary group and
science in English. To organize the information, we create a matrix to visualize the connections between
the topic in both coursebook, allowing us to identify areas of alignment and potential gaps. For instance.
In first, second and third grade. They were many connections in terms of topics. After reviewing the
themes and schools needs to integrate science into English classes, we decided to introduce the CLIL
approach to combine content and language learning from two key reasons. First, CLIL is increasingly
used in bilingual education settings, as it enhances both language proficiency and subject knowledge by
teaching a subject through a foreign language. Second, the CLIL approach emphasizes communication
and culture, which are as important as content, helping to connect real world situations with the
curriculum.
Moreover, we needed a strong foundation to develop a syllabus then aligned with the requirements and
goals of the innovative project. With this in mind, we choose a content-based approach. which ensured
a strong connection between subject matter language development and cognitive skill. This approach
supports the development of both lower and higher-order thinking skills as the course progresses.
The third step in this process was to reorganize the content to ensure a logical sequence of topic and
cognitive skill development. We also connected the activities that were most aligned with the learning
objectives, enhancing the flow and coherence of this science syllabus. In this way, we created a sequence
that allows students to recognize content from their Spanish Science class and connect it with the new
syllabus, which focuses on science content in English, while also improving their second language skills,
particularly in communication.
After the creation of the syllabi, we designed lessons plans that followed the outline of the syllabus,
including weekly learnings, aptitudes and activities based on PBL. Hamer (2007) emphasizes that lesson
planning should integrate communicating goals with meaningful tasks to maximize students'
engagement. Likewise, Kokotsaki et al. (2016) point out that PBL activities foster motivation,
collaboration, and problem-solving skills when carefully integrate into lesson design. This ensured that
our plans did not only cover scientific content but also encouraged authentic communication and higher
order thinking.
The next step in the project involves piloting phase, where the connections between cyclical CBL and
PBL were tested through the implementation of the lesson plans in a third-grade primary group and
pág. 13125
private school. This study followed a qualitative, interpretive design, focusing on understanding
classroom experiences through multiple data sources, including classroom observations, reflective
journals, and student interviews. It also followed the design of an action research approach, as defined
by Crawford, R. (2022), to implement an educational innovation study focused on enhancing teaching
and learning through reflective practice. This group was selected based on its diversity, linguistic
background, and openness to language through student centered methodology. This stage assessed the
effectiveness of integrating content and language learning with project based and collaborative learning
approaches in a real classroom setting, providing valuable insights for future implementations and
improvements. Additionally, the data collected through classroom observations, reflected teachers'
journal entries, and student interviews during the pilot phase was analyzed to identify any challenge and
areas for further development.
Pedagogical and Methodological Impact of CLIL and PBL
This category focuses on the pedagogical methodological transformations that took place during the
sessions. One of the most significant changes observed was the adoption of innovative and meaningful
methodologies, particularly the usage of practical hands-on activities. For instance, students completed
reflective journals throughout the process of observing plant growth. Students were tasked with closely
monitoring the growth of their plants, documenting their care routines, and identifying signs that
indicated a need for more or less sunlight, water, or air. They were encouraged to reflect on the outcomes
of their actions, recognizing how environmental factors directly influenced the plant's health. In cases
where essential resources like water or sunlight were lacking, the plants withered and eventually died,
offering a tangible lesson in responsibility and the impact of attentive care.
The connection between the terms of growth, nutrients, and necessities was consistently present, as well
structures as “my plant needs more water”, or “my plant needs sunlight, as I do”. The usage of real-life
analogies and modeling provided students with concrete and engaging ways to relate to complex
scientific content. These strategies allowed learners to move beyond passive absorption of information
and instead participate actively in their education. As one student described, "we had almost never done
that, but I think it's cool and not stressful" (interview, April 09, 2025, S1).
private school. This study followed a qualitative, interpretive design, focusing on understanding
classroom experiences through multiple data sources, including classroom observations, reflective
journals, and student interviews. It also followed the design of an action research approach, as defined
by Crawford, R. (2022), to implement an educational innovation study focused on enhancing teaching
and learning through reflective practice. This group was selected based on its diversity, linguistic
background, and openness to language through student centered methodology. This stage assessed the
effectiveness of integrating content and language learning with project based and collaborative learning
approaches in a real classroom setting, providing valuable insights for future implementations and
improvements. Additionally, the data collected through classroom observations, reflected teachers'
journal entries, and student interviews during the pilot phase was analyzed to identify any challenge and
areas for further development.
Pedagogical and Methodological Impact of CLIL and PBL
This category focuses on the pedagogical methodological transformations that took place during the
sessions. One of the most significant changes observed was the adoption of innovative and meaningful
methodologies, particularly the usage of practical hands-on activities. For instance, students completed
reflective journals throughout the process of observing plant growth. Students were tasked with closely
monitoring the growth of their plants, documenting their care routines, and identifying signs that
indicated a need for more or less sunlight, water, or air. They were encouraged to reflect on the outcomes
of their actions, recognizing how environmental factors directly influenced the plant's health. In cases
where essential resources like water or sunlight were lacking, the plants withered and eventually died,
offering a tangible lesson in responsibility and the impact of attentive care.
The connection between the terms of growth, nutrients, and necessities was consistently present, as well
structures as “my plant needs more water”, or “my plant needs sunlight, as I do”. The usage of real-life
analogies and modeling provided students with concrete and engaging ways to relate to complex
scientific content. These strategies allowed learners to move beyond passive absorption of information
and instead participate actively in their education. As one student described, "we had almost never done
that, but I think it's cool and not stressful" (interview, April 09, 2025, S1).
pág. 13126
This student emphasized the refreshing nature of these approaches. As Gibbons (2002) and Glenn (2020)
highlighted as a core benefit of content-based learning: using authentic, real-world tasks to foster both
subject understanding and language development. The incorporation of real-life analogies and modeling
not only made the content more relatable but also encouraged active participation in learning. The
incorporation of real-life analogies and modeling not only made the content more relatable but also
encouraged active participation in learning. Learners perceived these methods as enjoyable and low-
pressure, facilitating a more thorough grasp of challenging scientific ideas.
Also, learner-focused instruction was another significant element of the project’s approach. Students
were motivated to take initiative in their learning through participatory activities, with their engagement
and independence reflecting core principles of both CLIL and PBL. As noted by Snow (2010) and
Benbellal (2019), CBI and content-based syllabi prioritize the integration of meaningful content with
language learning, encouraging students to actively engage in constructing knowledge. To sum up, the
student-centered approach fostered a deeper understanding of scientific concepts and promoted critical
thinking and creativity, which are key outcomes targeted with CBI.
An additional essential aspect in this area was the educator’s adaptability and reflective practice. The
teacher consistently adapted lessons in response to student needs, interests, and prior knowledge. This
reflects Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of the Zone of Proximal Development, which highlights that learning
occurs when support of scaffolding allows students to move from assisted performance to independent
mastery. By integrating strategies such as word walls, sentence starters and visual aids, the teacher
provided the necessary scaffolding to bridge the gap between students’ linguistic limitations and their
cognitive abilities.
The activity was proposed so that students could create a model of the cell, clearly label each organelle,
and mention its function using analogy verbs (for example, “the wall protects the cell”). However, due
to the complexity of the activity, I printed a guide with the verbs in bold, designed a repetition exercise
to connect each verb with its corresponding organelle, and created a table with the students to denote,
in a simple way, the differences between cells (teacher journal, March 21, 2025, entry #2). In that way,
when students demonstrated familiarity with content, the teacher replaced a planned repetition exercise
This student emphasized the refreshing nature of these approaches. As Gibbons (2002) and Glenn (2020)
highlighted as a core benefit of content-based learning: using authentic, real-world tasks to foster both
subject understanding and language development. The incorporation of real-life analogies and modeling
not only made the content more relatable but also encouraged active participation in learning. The
incorporation of real-life analogies and modeling not only made the content more relatable but also
encouraged active participation in learning. Learners perceived these methods as enjoyable and low-
pressure, facilitating a more thorough grasp of challenging scientific ideas.
Also, learner-focused instruction was another significant element of the project’s approach. Students
were motivated to take initiative in their learning through participatory activities, with their engagement
and independence reflecting core principles of both CLIL and PBL. As noted by Snow (2010) and
Benbellal (2019), CBI and content-based syllabi prioritize the integration of meaningful content with
language learning, encouraging students to actively engage in constructing knowledge. To sum up, the
student-centered approach fostered a deeper understanding of scientific concepts and promoted critical
thinking and creativity, which are key outcomes targeted with CBI.
An additional essential aspect in this area was the educator’s adaptability and reflective practice. The
teacher consistently adapted lessons in response to student needs, interests, and prior knowledge. This
reflects Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of the Zone of Proximal Development, which highlights that learning
occurs when support of scaffolding allows students to move from assisted performance to independent
mastery. By integrating strategies such as word walls, sentence starters and visual aids, the teacher
provided the necessary scaffolding to bridge the gap between students’ linguistic limitations and their
cognitive abilities.
The activity was proposed so that students could create a model of the cell, clearly label each organelle,
and mention its function using analogy verbs (for example, “the wall protects the cell”). However, due
to the complexity of the activity, I printed a guide with the verbs in bold, designed a repetition exercise
to connect each verb with its corresponding organelle, and created a table with the students to denote,
in a simple way, the differences between cells (teacher journal, March 21, 2025, entry #2). In that way,
when students demonstrated familiarity with content, the teacher replaced a planned repetition exercise
pág. 13127
with a deeper comparative task between animal and plant cells. This flexibility highlighted a dynamic
and responsive pedagogy rooted in reflective practice.
Moreover, students' perception of English as a tool rather than a barrier played a vital role in the overall
experience. Many expressed feeling safe and supported enough to ask questions when they encountered
difficulties. This resonates with Krashen’s (1982) Affective Filter Hypothesis, which argues that when
students feel comfortable and motivated, their ability to acquire a second language improves
significantly. Likewise, Dörnyei (2014) explains that motivation in second language learning is dynamic
and increases when learners perceive progress and support from teachers. These findings demonstrate
how CLIL can reduce anxiety and increase confidence when properly scaffolding. One student stated:
“Me siento libre de preguntar lo que no entiendo” [“I feel free to ask what I don't understand”]
(entrevista, 9 de abril de 2025, S1).
This excerpt shows the trust cultivated within the classroom environment among students and the
teacher. English was not taught in isolation but integrated into the learning of science, giving it real
communicative value. In that sense, and despite the positive reception, students encountered certain
challenges throughout the implementation. With the analysis of the teacher journal, the teacher
mentions: “El reto fue adaptar el material al nivel de inglés de los estudiantes… y dar instrucciones
claras” [“The difficulty was adapting the material to the English level of students… and the clear
instructions”] (teacher journal, March 21, 2025, entry #2).
Nevertheless, as students engaged with science through authentic material in English, they developed
gradually subject-specific vocabulary and improved their ability to express their ideas. This was possible
because students were able to connect prior vocabulary knowledge to comprehend the new content
presented in English (Glenn, 2020). When adapting to learning content in English, some students felt
overwhelmed by the constant use of the foreign language, especially during tasks that require oral
production: “Los estudiantes se sintieron frustrados porque no entendían todas las palabras en inglés, y
los mismos estudiantes seguían participando. Esto hizo que algunos se sintieran excluidos o distraídos”
[“Students felt frustrated because they didn’t understand all the English words, and the same students
kept participating. This made some of them feel left out or distracted”] (journal entry 1, April 09, 2025,
S2, own translation)
with a deeper comparative task between animal and plant cells. This flexibility highlighted a dynamic
and responsive pedagogy rooted in reflective practice.
Moreover, students' perception of English as a tool rather than a barrier played a vital role in the overall
experience. Many expressed feeling safe and supported enough to ask questions when they encountered
difficulties. This resonates with Krashen’s (1982) Affective Filter Hypothesis, which argues that when
students feel comfortable and motivated, their ability to acquire a second language improves
significantly. Likewise, Dörnyei (2014) explains that motivation in second language learning is dynamic
and increases when learners perceive progress and support from teachers. These findings demonstrate
how CLIL can reduce anxiety and increase confidence when properly scaffolding. One student stated:
“Me siento libre de preguntar lo que no entiendo” [“I feel free to ask what I don't understand”]
(entrevista, 9 de abril de 2025, S1).
This excerpt shows the trust cultivated within the classroom environment among students and the
teacher. English was not taught in isolation but integrated into the learning of science, giving it real
communicative value. In that sense, and despite the positive reception, students encountered certain
challenges throughout the implementation. With the analysis of the teacher journal, the teacher
mentions: “El reto fue adaptar el material al nivel de inglés de los estudiantes… y dar instrucciones
claras” [“The difficulty was adapting the material to the English level of students… and the clear
instructions”] (teacher journal, March 21, 2025, entry #2).
Nevertheless, as students engaged with science through authentic material in English, they developed
gradually subject-specific vocabulary and improved their ability to express their ideas. This was possible
because students were able to connect prior vocabulary knowledge to comprehend the new content
presented in English (Glenn, 2020). When adapting to learning content in English, some students felt
overwhelmed by the constant use of the foreign language, especially during tasks that require oral
production: “Los estudiantes se sintieron frustrados porque no entendían todas las palabras en inglés, y
los mismos estudiantes seguían participando. Esto hizo que algunos se sintieran excluidos o distraídos”
[“Students felt frustrated because they didn’t understand all the English words, and the same students
kept participating. This made some of them feel left out or distracted”] (journal entry 1, April 09, 2025,
S2, own translation)
pág. 13128
The teacher noted that some students were participating less due to language barriers. In context, CLIL
goes beyond teaching content and language by incorporating cognition and culture. Ensuring that
students can both access the material and engage with it cognitively links to the cognition dimension,
where scaffolding enables the progression from lower-order to higher-order thinking skills. This
suggests that the challenge of adapting materials is not a language-access issue, but a natural part of
enacting CLIL’s bases, where content, communication, cognition, and culture must be integrated to
create meaningful learning experiences. There is the importance of continuing scaffolding,
differentiation, and emotional support when implementing CLIL strategies. Additionally, the CLIL had
an emotional component to learning as shown in an interview. One student mentioned: “Algunos
contenidos fueron difíciles. Pensé que iba a ser complicado aprender, pero después de la sesión lo
entendí, y al final me sentí interesado en el proceso” [“Some content was difficult. I thought it was going
to be hard to learn, but after the session, I did understand it, and in the end, I felt interested in the
process”] (interview, April 09, 2025, S2, own translation).
This suggests that students progressed from basic word recognition to constructing meaningful
knowledge, and they became motivated to continue exploring scientific concepts in English, as
described by Lasagabaster & Sierra (2010), who highlight the role of interest and motivation in the
learning of content through a foreign language.
Moreover, the analysis of the reflective journals and the interviews conducted revealed a high degree of
interest and enthusiasm among students when learning processes such as plant grow or the 3D cell
model, which is consistent with Lasagabaster & Sierra’s (2010) findings on the importance of
engagement in CLIL environments. A student also mentioned: “Lo más difícil para mí ha sido
acostumbrarme a aprender tanto inglés” [“The most difficult thing for me has been getting used to
learning so much English”] (interview, April 09, 2025, S3, own translation). This illustrates the
emotional weight of the process.
The teacher further observed that some learners required additional support, such as simplified
explanations and visual aids. Nevertheless, the learning was evident. Students who initially doubted
their abilities shared later: "I said I couldn't learn them, but I did", illustrating their resilience and
increased self-efficacy. Likewise, motivation and engagement remained consistently high throughout
The teacher noted that some students were participating less due to language barriers. In context, CLIL
goes beyond teaching content and language by incorporating cognition and culture. Ensuring that
students can both access the material and engage with it cognitively links to the cognition dimension,
where scaffolding enables the progression from lower-order to higher-order thinking skills. This
suggests that the challenge of adapting materials is not a language-access issue, but a natural part of
enacting CLIL’s bases, where content, communication, cognition, and culture must be integrated to
create meaningful learning experiences. There is the importance of continuing scaffolding,
differentiation, and emotional support when implementing CLIL strategies. Additionally, the CLIL had
an emotional component to learning as shown in an interview. One student mentioned: “Algunos
contenidos fueron difíciles. Pensé que iba a ser complicado aprender, pero después de la sesión lo
entendí, y al final me sentí interesado en el proceso” [“Some content was difficult. I thought it was going
to be hard to learn, but after the session, I did understand it, and in the end, I felt interested in the
process”] (interview, April 09, 2025, S2, own translation).
This suggests that students progressed from basic word recognition to constructing meaningful
knowledge, and they became motivated to continue exploring scientific concepts in English, as
described by Lasagabaster & Sierra (2010), who highlight the role of interest and motivation in the
learning of content through a foreign language.
Moreover, the analysis of the reflective journals and the interviews conducted revealed a high degree of
interest and enthusiasm among students when learning processes such as plant grow or the 3D cell
model, which is consistent with Lasagabaster & Sierra’s (2010) findings on the importance of
engagement in CLIL environments. A student also mentioned: “Lo más difícil para mí ha sido
acostumbrarme a aprender tanto inglés” [“The most difficult thing for me has been getting used to
learning so much English”] (interview, April 09, 2025, S3, own translation). This illustrates the
emotional weight of the process.
The teacher further observed that some learners required additional support, such as simplified
explanations and visual aids. Nevertheless, the learning was evident. Students who initially doubted
their abilities shared later: "I said I couldn't learn them, but I did", illustrating their resilience and
increased self-efficacy. Likewise, motivation and engagement remained consistently high throughout
pág. 13129
the intervention. Learners expressed genuine enthusiasm for the lessons, making spontaneous comments
such as: “Me gustan. Creo que son chéveres” [“I like them. I think they’re cool”] (interview, April 09,
2025, S2, own translation).
This enthusiasm was further reinforced by the active methodologies implemented, which encouraged
students to express themselves through play, drawing, movement, and collaborative work. These
multimodal experiences catered to diverse learning styles, making the lessons both accessible and
relevant.
Instructional Design and Teacher Adaptability in CLIL Contexts
Through the teacher's journal, we analyzed the adaptability of CLIL in this context (primary school). As
we had mentioned, teacher adaptability plays a critical role here. While reviewing the material, we were
able to identify when students demonstrate difficulties with the scientific vocabulary (predator, prey,
habitat). The teacher introduced vocabulary activities such as word walls, visual organizers, or sentence
starters to provide immediate language support. This aligns with Glenn’s (2020) conclusions that
organized approaches, including step-by-step guidance and focused vocabulary exercises, enhance
understanding and encourage analytical interaction with genuine resources.
Notably, students showed the capacity to apply what they learned in class to practical, real-life situations.
Several shared that they had explained concepts such as the food pyramid or ecological relationships at
home. This shows that beyond memorizing facts, students internalized and communicated what they
learned. In this context, English became a tool not only for understanding but also as a medium for
sharing scientific knowledge, reinforcing the long-term benefits of integrated instruction.
Limitations
One of the primary limitations of this study was the brevity of pilot implementations. The innovation
was introduced and evaluated over three-week period, in which each week included two instructional
sessions, one lasting 70 minutes and the other 35 minutes. This condensed timeframe restricted the
opportunity to observe long term effects on student’s learning outcomes, engagement, and sustained
integration of the proposed methodologies. Moreover, the short duration hindered the interactive
refinement of the syllabus and instructional materials. Without sufficient time for revelation of feedback
cycles, the findings predominately reflect initial reactions and short-term impacts rather than enduring
the intervention. Learners expressed genuine enthusiasm for the lessons, making spontaneous comments
such as: “Me gustan. Creo que son chéveres” [“I like them. I think they’re cool”] (interview, April 09,
2025, S2, own translation).
This enthusiasm was further reinforced by the active methodologies implemented, which encouraged
students to express themselves through play, drawing, movement, and collaborative work. These
multimodal experiences catered to diverse learning styles, making the lessons both accessible and
relevant.
Instructional Design and Teacher Adaptability in CLIL Contexts
Through the teacher's journal, we analyzed the adaptability of CLIL in this context (primary school). As
we had mentioned, teacher adaptability plays a critical role here. While reviewing the material, we were
able to identify when students demonstrate difficulties with the scientific vocabulary (predator, prey,
habitat). The teacher introduced vocabulary activities such as word walls, visual organizers, or sentence
starters to provide immediate language support. This aligns with Glenn’s (2020) conclusions that
organized approaches, including step-by-step guidance and focused vocabulary exercises, enhance
understanding and encourage analytical interaction with genuine resources.
Notably, students showed the capacity to apply what they learned in class to practical, real-life situations.
Several shared that they had explained concepts such as the food pyramid or ecological relationships at
home. This shows that beyond memorizing facts, students internalized and communicated what they
learned. In this context, English became a tool not only for understanding but also as a medium for
sharing scientific knowledge, reinforcing the long-term benefits of integrated instruction.
Limitations
One of the primary limitations of this study was the brevity of pilot implementations. The innovation
was introduced and evaluated over three-week period, in which each week included two instructional
sessions, one lasting 70 minutes and the other 35 minutes. This condensed timeframe restricted the
opportunity to observe long term effects on student’s learning outcomes, engagement, and sustained
integration of the proposed methodologies. Moreover, the short duration hindered the interactive
refinement of the syllabus and instructional materials. Without sufficient time for revelation of feedback
cycles, the findings predominately reflect initial reactions and short-term impacts rather than enduring
pág. 13130
transformation in educational practice. Therefore, future research should consider extending the
implementation period to facilitate deeper integration of the innovation and enable a more
comprehensive assessment of its pedagogical effect over time.
Institutional Constraints and Cultural Resistance
In addition to temporal limitations, the institutional context presented significant challenges to the
adaptation of innovation methodologies. The study was conducted within a school environment
characterized by traditional structure. In addition, temporary limitations on the instruction, curriculum,
and teacher center instructional practice. This cultural framework brough obstacles to the
implementation of student-centered approaches such as PBL and CLIL.
Institutional resistance to pedagogical change influenced both the execution and outcome of the syllabus,
classrooms, management practice, social rigid seating arrangement and external emphasis of discipline
delayed the facilitation of group tasks and collaboration activities. During the observation period,
opportunities for peer interactions were minimal, resulting in a disconnect between CLIL’s
communicative emphasis and PBL’s collaborative learning objectives.
Although students demonstrated a willingness to engage and ask questions, the prevailing classroom
norms did not support spontaneous dialogue or peer-to-peer learning. The expectations of passive
behaviors, evidenced by absence of movement, contributed to low levels of engagement, and limited the
potential for meaningful learning experience. These findings underscore the importance of aligning
institutional culture with pedagogical innovations to ensure successful implementation and
sustainability.
Resistance to change, both from educators and institutional norms, may have influenced the depth and
authenticity of the innovation’s integration into the syllabus. In particular, the emphasis following a
book, standardized testing as quizzes and rigid subject boundaries limited opportunities for
interdisciplinary collaboration and language immersion, core components of both PBL and CLIL.
Another remarkable limitation related to CLIL was the goal of connecting content, language, cognition,
communication, and culture. However, after implementing this innovation, some limitations became
evident due to the context. Before extending the syllabus with CLIL and PBL, the needs analysis
revealed that students’ level of English was low. Despite this, the textbook used to create the syllabus
transformation in educational practice. Therefore, future research should consider extending the
implementation period to facilitate deeper integration of the innovation and enable a more
comprehensive assessment of its pedagogical effect over time.
Institutional Constraints and Cultural Resistance
In addition to temporal limitations, the institutional context presented significant challenges to the
adaptation of innovation methodologies. The study was conducted within a school environment
characterized by traditional structure. In addition, temporary limitations on the instruction, curriculum,
and teacher center instructional practice. This cultural framework brough obstacles to the
implementation of student-centered approaches such as PBL and CLIL.
Institutional resistance to pedagogical change influenced both the execution and outcome of the syllabus,
classrooms, management practice, social rigid seating arrangement and external emphasis of discipline
delayed the facilitation of group tasks and collaboration activities. During the observation period,
opportunities for peer interactions were minimal, resulting in a disconnect between CLIL’s
communicative emphasis and PBL’s collaborative learning objectives.
Although students demonstrated a willingness to engage and ask questions, the prevailing classroom
norms did not support spontaneous dialogue or peer-to-peer learning. The expectations of passive
behaviors, evidenced by absence of movement, contributed to low levels of engagement, and limited the
potential for meaningful learning experience. These findings underscore the importance of aligning
institutional culture with pedagogical innovations to ensure successful implementation and
sustainability.
Resistance to change, both from educators and institutional norms, may have influenced the depth and
authenticity of the innovation’s integration into the syllabus. In particular, the emphasis following a
book, standardized testing as quizzes and rigid subject boundaries limited opportunities for
interdisciplinary collaboration and language immersion, core components of both PBL and CLIL.
Another remarkable limitation related to CLIL was the goal of connecting content, language, cognition,
communication, and culture. However, after implementing this innovation, some limitations became
evident due to the context. Before extending the syllabus with CLIL and PBL, the needs analysis
revealed that students’ level of English was low. Despite this, the textbook used to create the syllabus
pág. 13131
required students to face the challenge of exploring new vocabulary, with a cognitive focus on building
and applying it in simple structures such as the present simple and basic descriptions. Nevertheless,
connecting the text with the students proved to be difficult. For instance, language use may be minimized
to avoid discomfort, or collaborative tasks may be reduced to individual assignments to align with
traditional assessment models.
CONCLUSIONS
The study offered two significant contributions: fostering active, learner-centered instruction, and
illustrating how CLIL principles can guide curriculum and lesson development. Results showed that
CLIL is successful when lessons incorporate learner-focused approaches, experiential activities, and
scaffolding, supporting Mehisto et al. (2008), who claim that CLIL merges content, communication,
cognition, and culture to create authentic learning experiences. Furthermore, CLIL enhanced both
language skills and critical thinking, as students applied scientific knowledge to practical scenarios
(Morton, 2020).
Another key contribution was showing how science classes can serve as meaningful contexts for
language acquisition, connecting communication, culture, and subject matter. Likewise, highlighting
terminology linked to scientific topics expanded students’ vocabulary and deepened their
comprehension. Finally, integrating CLIL with project-based approaches encouraged active
participation and heightened student motivation.
In that sense, although challenges arose, a range of engaging activities proved essential for facilitating
the learning process, while obstacles like language difficulties and adapting materials were identified.
Therefore, the project highlighted the potential of content-based science instruction to enhance
educational experiences.
Finally, it is necessary to mention that future studies could investigate the long-term impact on language
development, extend implementation to other grade levels, and provide targeted teacher training in CLIL
approaches. Overall, the project offers a practical model for combining science and English instruction
in Colombian primary schools.
required students to face the challenge of exploring new vocabulary, with a cognitive focus on building
and applying it in simple structures such as the present simple and basic descriptions. Nevertheless,
connecting the text with the students proved to be difficult. For instance, language use may be minimized
to avoid discomfort, or collaborative tasks may be reduced to individual assignments to align with
traditional assessment models.
CONCLUSIONS
The study offered two significant contributions: fostering active, learner-centered instruction, and
illustrating how CLIL principles can guide curriculum and lesson development. Results showed that
CLIL is successful when lessons incorporate learner-focused approaches, experiential activities, and
scaffolding, supporting Mehisto et al. (2008), who claim that CLIL merges content, communication,
cognition, and culture to create authentic learning experiences. Furthermore, CLIL enhanced both
language skills and critical thinking, as students applied scientific knowledge to practical scenarios
(Morton, 2020).
Another key contribution was showing how science classes can serve as meaningful contexts for
language acquisition, connecting communication, culture, and subject matter. Likewise, highlighting
terminology linked to scientific topics expanded students’ vocabulary and deepened their
comprehension. Finally, integrating CLIL with project-based approaches encouraged active
participation and heightened student motivation.
In that sense, although challenges arose, a range of engaging activities proved essential for facilitating
the learning process, while obstacles like language difficulties and adapting materials were identified.
Therefore, the project highlighted the potential of content-based science instruction to enhance
educational experiences.
Finally, it is necessary to mention that future studies could investigate the long-term impact on language
development, extend implementation to other grade levels, and provide targeted teacher training in CLIL
approaches. Overall, the project offers a practical model for combining science and English instruction
in Colombian primary schools.
pág. 13132
REFERENCES
Aksela, M., & Haatainen, O. (2022). The key characteristics of project-based learning: How teachers
implement projects in K-12 science education. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science
Education Research, 4(2), 1–18.
https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/341788/s43031_021_00042_x.pdf
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House,
83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
Benbellal, A. (2019). Cotation of type A or type B, that is the question: A critical examination of
product-oriented and process-oriented syllabuses in foreign language learning and teaching.
Journal of Studies in Language, Culture and Society, 2(2), 121–137.
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking
forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011
Chaya, P., & Inpin, B. (2020). Effects of integrating movie-based mobile learning instruction for
enhancing Thai university students’ speaking skills and intercultural communicative
competence. English Language Teaching, 13(7), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n7p27
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning (1st ed.).
Cambridge University Press.}
Crawford, R. (2022). Action research as evidence-based practice: enhancing explicit teaching and
learning through critical reflection and collegial peer observation. Australian Journal of Teacher
Education, 47(12), 53-75. https://doi.org/10.14221/1835-517X.6065
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles?
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000092
Fragoulis, L. (2009). Project-based learning in the teaching of English as a foreign language in Greek
primary schools: From theory to practice. English Language Teaching, 2(3), 113–119.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v2n3p113
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning (2nd ed.). Heinemann.
Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Heinle & Heinle.
REFERENCES
Aksela, M., & Haatainen, O. (2022). The key characteristics of project-based learning: How teachers
implement projects in K-12 science education. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science
Education Research, 4(2), 1–18.
https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/341788/s43031_021_00042_x.pdf
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House,
83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
Benbellal, A. (2019). Cotation of type A or type B, that is the question: A critical examination of
product-oriented and process-oriented syllabuses in foreign language learning and teaching.
Journal of Studies in Language, Culture and Society, 2(2), 121–137.
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking
forward. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 243–262. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt011
Chaya, P., & Inpin, B. (2020). Effects of integrating movie-based mobile learning instruction for
enhancing Thai university students’ speaking skills and intercultural communicative
competence. English Language Teaching, 13(7), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n7p27
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated learning (1st ed.).
Cambridge University Press.}
Crawford, R. (2022). Action research as evidence-based practice: enhancing explicit teaching and
learning through critical reflection and collegial peer observation. Australian Journal of Teacher
Education, 47(12), 53-75. https://doi.org/10.14221/1835-517X.6065
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles?
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000092
Fragoulis, L. (2009). Project-based learning in the teaching of English as a foreign language in Greek
primary schools: From theory to practice. English Language Teaching, 2(3), 113–119.
https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v2n3p113
Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning (2nd ed.). Heinemann.
Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Heinle & Heinle.
pág. 13133
Hempel-Jorgensen, A. (2015). Working-class girls and child-centred pedagogy: What are the
implications for developing socially just pedagogy? International Studies in Sociology of
Education, 25(2), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2015.1045010
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach.
Cambridge University Press.
Jalilzadeh, K., & Tahmasebi, A. (2014). Content-based syllabus. European Scientific Journal, 10(10),
223–233. https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/4093
Kean, A. C., & Kwe, N. M. (2014). Meaningful learning in the teaching of culture: The project-based
learning approach. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 2(2), 189–197.
http://jets.redfame.com
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature.
Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than
similarities. ELT Journal, 64(4), 367–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp082
Mariño, C. (2014). Towards implementing CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) at CBS
(Tunja, Colombia). Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 16(2), 151–160.
http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?pid=S0123-46412014000200003&script=sci_arttext
Martínez, M., & Gutiérrez, J. (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.
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and language integrated
learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Macmillan Education.
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2004). Programa Nacional de Bilingüismo: Colombia Very Well!
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. https://www.mineducacion.gov.co
Morton, T. (2020). Funciones del discurso cognitivo: Un puente entre el contenido, la alfabetización y
el lenguaje para la enseñanza y la evaluación en CLIL. Revista CLIL de Innovación e
Investigación en Educación Plurilingüe y Pluricultural, 3(1), 7–17.
Hempel-Jorgensen, A. (2015). Working-class girls and child-centred pedagogy: What are the
implications for developing socially just pedagogy? International Studies in Sociology of
Education, 25(2), 132–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2015.1045010
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centred approach.
Cambridge University Press.
Jalilzadeh, K., & Tahmasebi, A. (2014). Content-based syllabus. European Scientific Journal, 10(10),
223–233. https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/4093
Kean, A. C., & Kwe, N. M. (2014). Meaningful learning in the teaching of culture: The project-based
learning approach. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 2(2), 189–197.
http://jets.redfame.com
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature.
Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More differences than
similarities. ELT Journal, 64(4), 367–375. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccp082
Mariño, C. (2014). Towards implementing CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) at CBS
(Tunja, Colombia). Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 16(2), 151–160.
http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?pid=S0123-46412014000200003&script=sci_arttext
Martínez, M., & Gutiérrez, J. (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.
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: Content and language integrated
learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Macmillan Education.
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. (2004). Programa Nacional de Bilingüismo: Colombia Very Well!
Ministerio de Educación Nacional. https://www.mineducacion.gov.co
Morton, T. (2020). Funciones del discurso cognitivo: Un puente entre el contenido, la alfabetización y
el lenguaje para la enseñanza y la evaluación en CLIL. Revista CLIL de Innovación e
Investigación en Educación Plurilingüe y Pluricultural, 3(1), 7–17.
pág. 13134
Núñez, I. (2007). Del diseño curricular al diseño syllabus: Las diferentes etapas para diseñar un
programa. Academia.edu.
https://www.academia.edu/18203260/Nunez_y_bodegas_irma_dolores_1_2
Snow, C. (2016). Research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 3). Routledge.
Tao, L., Lei, Z., & Yan, M. (2023). A study of the impact of project-based learning on student learning
effects: A meta-analysis study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1202728.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1202728
Uccelli, P. (n.d.). The challenge of academic language. ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258844877_The_Challenge_of_Academic_Languag
e
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard
University Press.
Zhang, W., Lu, M., & Yang, P. (2023). An empirical study about the impact of project‐based learning
on reading literacy of primary students in a blended learning environment. Psychology in the
Schools, 60(12), 4930–4945. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22949
Núñez, I. (2007). Del diseño curricular al diseño syllabus: Las diferentes etapas para diseñar un
programa. Academia.edu.
https://www.academia.edu/18203260/Nunez_y_bodegas_irma_dolores_1_2
Snow, C. (2016). Research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. 3). Routledge.
Tao, L., Lei, Z., & Yan, M. (2023). A study of the impact of project-based learning on student learning
effects: A meta-analysis study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1202728.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1202728
Uccelli, P. (n.d.). The challenge of academic language. ResearchGate.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258844877_The_Challenge_of_Academic_Languag
e
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard
University Press.
Zhang, W., Lu, M., & Yang, P. (2023). An empirical study about the impact of project‐based learning
on reading literacy of primary students in a blended learning environment. Psychology in the
Schools, 60(12), 4930–4945. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22949