THE USE OF CLIL IN TEACHING SECOND YEAR

STUDENTS IN COOKING PROGRAM AT THE COLLEGE

OF ABC: TEACHERS' AND STUDENTS' ATTITUDES

1
Abstract
Purpose of thesis
Theory of clill
Method
Findings
Implication
Key words
CLILL
LANGUAGE ATTITUDE
COOKING PROGRAM

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION...................................................................................4
1.1. Background to the study....................................................................................4
1.2. Statement of problems........................................................................................5
1.3. Aims and objectives of the study.......................................................................8
1.4. Research questions..............................................................................................8
1.5. Scope of the study...............................................................................................9
1.6. Significance of the study.....................................................................................9
1.7. Definition of the key terms...............................................................................10
1.8. Organization of the study.................................................................................10
CHAPTER 2: LITTERATURE REVIEW...................................................................12
Introduction................................................................................................................12
2.1. Content and Language Intergrated Learning (CLIL)...................................12
2.1.1. Definition of CLIL.....................................................................................12
2.1.2. The main feature of CLIL.........................................................................17
2.1.3. The CLIL’s 4Cs Pedagogic Framework...................................................19
2.1.4. The effectiveness of CLIL..........................................................................21
2.1.5. Aspects influence a successful CLIL classroom.......................................23

2
 2.1.6. CLIL teachers.............................................................................................25
2.1.7. The challenges of learning and teaching by CLIL...................................26
2.2. Atitudes and its components............................................................................27
2.3. Previous research..............................................................................................29
2.3.1. Foreign research.........................................................................................30
2.3.2. Vietnamese research..................................................................................33
2.4. Conceptual framework.....................................................................................34
Summary..................................................................................................................... 35
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.........................................................36
3.1. Research design.................................................................................................36
3.2. Research site......................................................................................................36
3.3. Sample and sampling procedures....................................................................36
3.4. Research instruments.......................................................................................36
3.5. Data collection procedures...............................................................................36
3.6. Data analysis procedures..................................................................................36
3.7. Reliability and Validity.....................................................................................36
Summary..................................................................................................................... 36
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS..........................................................37
4.1. Results................................................................................................................37
4.1.1. Teachers’ attitudes toward CLIL.............................................................37
4.1.2. Students’ attitudes toward CLIL..............................................................37
4.2. Discussion..........................................................................................................37
4.2.1. Teachers’ attitudes toward CLIL.............................................................37
4.2.2. Students’ attitudes toward CLIL..............................................................37
Summary..................................................................................................................... 37
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................38
5.1. Summary of the main findings.........................................................................38
5.2. Pedagogical implications..................................................................................38
5.3. Limitations........................................................................................................38
5.4. Recommendations for the further research....................................................38

3
4
LIST OF FIGURES

5
 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides the introduction to the current research, includes:

Background, statement of the problems, aims and objectives of the study, research
questions, research scope and significance and some terms mentioned in the research.

1.1. Background to the study

For many educational programs worldwide, a shift in job market demands and
social integration of language learners necessitated an adjustment in curriculum to
accommodate the shift in language use since English has gained widespread acceptance
as the world's de facto language, typically Total Physic Response (TPR), Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT), Project-based Learning (PBL), Content-based Instruction
(CBI), Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), English Medium Instruction
(EMI). Among these, CLIL is one of the most innovative new approach. It is a "all-
encompassing term" (Mourssi & Kharosi, 2014) that refers to a variety of educational
techniques, including CBI, immersion, bilingual education, and multilingual education.
Generally, there is a wealth of research demonstrating that students study academic or
other subjects while also learning a foreign language at school at the same time.
According to some scholars, EFL teachers can use CLIL to create a classroom climate
that encourages students to interact with social issues, cultural complexities, and
language complications. According to SLA (Second Language Acquisition) research,
CLIL programs are more effective because they create settings for naturalistic language
instruction and acquisition, as well as the amount of time and exposure provided to
students who wish to use language in the classroom environment (Dalton-Puffer & Smit,
2007). In summary, CLIL has inherent advantages, and it genuinely benefits learners in a
vriety of ways.

In 1994, David Mash, a multilingual and bilingual educational researcher, was

credited with the invention of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) (Coyle,
Hood, & Marsh, 2010). This method is similar to but not the same as language immersion
or content-based teaching (Marsh, 2002). CLIL, according to Ball (2006), is an umbrella

6
term that encompasses that learning via any language that is not the learner's native
language. CLIL is a "dual-focused educational approach" in which a foreign language is
utilized for both subject and language learning and teaching to increase both content and
language mastery to a particular degree (Marsh and Langé, 2000). This definition
demonstrates that CLIL includes teaching the subject via language and emphasizes the
significance of the language used in teaching content. CLIL instructors should be aware
that content drives language acquisition throughout their students' learning processes, and
language serves as a vehicle to acquire content.

This dual emphasis is thought to improve the linguistic capacity of the student,
risk-taking, meta-linguistic awareness, active participation, motivation, problem-solving,
capacity to think, levels of concentration, meta-cognitive ability, autonomy, study skills,
and foster intercultural understanding and social awareness. CLIL is a highly adaptable
method that exists in a variety of forms throughout the globe to meet the economic,
socio-political, and educational requirements of different settings. CLIL establishes a
genuine communication environment with an emphasis on meaning (Marsh and Langé,
2000).

Empirical evidence suggests that CLIL increases language competency

(Lasagabaster, 2008). CLIL programs offer more and better quality exposure to the
foreign language, as CLIL provides a more natural learning environment than regular
EFL sessions. Indeed, CLIL mimics the conditions under which infants are exposed while
learning their native language (Marsh, 2002). An emphasis on content, in this manner,
provides a purpose for language use while simultaneously decreasing anxiety, resulting in
safer learning and engagement environments. The advantages of integrated learning in
acquiring the target language are supported by research, which indicates that CLIL
students have a much better command of the foreign language than their non-CLIL
counterparts (San Isidro, 2009, 2010). CLIL students have proved to outperform regular
EFL students (Lasagabaster, 2008).

7
 Although CLIL has been around for more than 20 years and has been extensively
developed in Europe since the late 1990s (Coyle, Hood, & Marsh, 2010), it is still a novel
technique in Vietnam. Moreover, the apply of CLIL seems to limit to some extent. Some
may claim that STEM education has received much attention in Vietnam lately.
However, rather than integrating content and language learning domains, this
interdisciplinary and practical method combines four particular disciplines - Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics - into a coherent learning paradigm focused
on real-world applications.

The working committee of the National Foreign Language (NFL) Project,

previously known as Project 2020, recognized the importance of this approach and has
worked hard to promote it in both research and teaching practice in schools throughout
the nation (Government, 2008: 2017). However, the apply of this method in the
hospitality and vocational education field is shortage. Especially, it is lack of qualified
study of CLIL in teaching and learning cooking program in vocational education. Thus,
the demands for conducting such research to shed light on this research gap is worth
mentioning.

1.2. Statement of problems

Nowadays, English has become a very popular language around the world. The
number of English users worldwide is now more than 700 million, which is an
astonishing number that proves the popularity of the English language and is the primary
language of international communication. So, it is believed that better English ability will
increase the opportunity to offer a good position in any multinational company and in the
tourism industry, one of the biggest and most profitable industries. That is why teaching
English in the College of Tourism Vung Tau (VTVC) is extremely important. However,
there are numerous challenges teachers face every day in classrooms.

CLIL class was offered at VTVC in cooking program recently. The cooking
teachers and language teachers of the school has considered the CLIL method thoroughly
to come to the application of it in real class. They chose to be part of a CLIL program

8
through some understanding of its benefits. Language teachers consider CLIL's dual
emphasis helps provide a unique opportunity to build a complimentary link between
language and subject and authenticity of purpose that is frequently lacking in more
typical language classes (Pinner, 2013b). Meanwhile, content teachers think CLIL can
offer students the opportunity to gain an advantage in an increasingly competitive
environment. For example, participating in a CLIL program may allow students to stand
out in the job market and academic settings. In addition, implementing CLIL is
sometimes seen as an opportunity for professional development, a kind of new challenge,
or as a route to developing effective social capital in the university community (Brown &
Iyobe, 2014).Moreover, students at VTVC were encouraged to enroll in CLIL class.
Some students had attended serveral CLIL class pointed out that studying content in
English gave them access to a wider academic world than they could normally access in
Vietnamese due to the dominance of English in academic publishing. They also sensed
that they would be in a better position to obtain and take advantage of opportunities to
study aboard by doing at least some of their undergraduate studies in English.

However, through a period of implementing CLIL approach. There were several

issues that promted the researcher to come up with the study. First, the content teacher is
not familiar with the CLIL teaching style. They have not been involved in any official
training for this CLIL method before. The fact that content teachers in VTVC only teach
some English terminologies whilst they encounter it in classroom teaching. They base on
their overseas training and working experiences to equip the students with the needed
language used in the working environment. For example, when teaching students utensils
in the kitchen, the teacher usually points out all of the utensils and teaches them how to
pronounce those new words. It's more accessible and more practical for them to recollect
the new vocabulary in this way. So, there is a strong coordination between content and
language in teaching with this method that the teacher needs to update to achieve the
teaching target.

9
 In short, for all the reasons mentioned, we can see that the teaching and learning
by CLIL approach at VTVC is receiving many challenges and needs to be evaluated
properly. This research is vital for the author to investigate and examine the teacher and
students' attitude (affective, cognitive and behavioral attitudes) when implementing the
CLIL teaching method in cooking classes for second-year students. The ultimate goal of
this research is to calculate the practical side of implementing CLIL in all content classes
in VTVC.

1.3. Aims and objectives of the study

This study aims to explore teacher and student attitudes of CLIL in teaching and
learning in the cooking program at the VTVC. The research objectives are as follows:

- To find out the teachers' attitudes of the use of CLIL in teaching the
cooking program at the VTVC.

- To examine the students' attitudes of the use of CLIL in learning the

cooking program at the VTVC.

- To investigate any significant differences in the teachers’ and students’

attitudes towards the use of CLIL in the cooking program at the VTVC.

1.4. Research questions

The following research questions must be addressed in order to achieve previously

mentioned goals:

- What are the teachers' attitudes of the use of CLIL in teaching the
cooking program at the Vung Tau tourism vocational college?

- What are the students' attitudes of the use of CLIL in learning the
cooking program at the VTVC?

- Are there any significant differences in the teachers’ and students’

attitudes towards the use of CLIL in the cooking program at the VTVC?
If yes, what are they?

10
 1.5. Scope of the study

The research focuses on the attitudes of teachers and students toward the use of
CLIL in teaching the cooking program at the Vung Tau Tourism College based in
Vietnamese setting. The research does not generalize to all programs and institutive in the
Vietnamese educational system.

This study was conducted at the Vung Tau Tourism College located at 459 Truong
Cong Dinh, Ward 7, Vung Tau City, Ba Ria – Vung Tau. The subjects of the study
included 34 male and female sophomores. The students were all at the age of twenty and
had compulsorily learnt English for at least five years at secondary and high school. They
were supposed to be equal in English proficiency of beginner level. A mix-research
method is applied to evaluate and examine this topic. Two instruments: Questionnaires
and semi-structured interviews are utilized to collect data from the research's subjects:
cooking teachers and second-year students in the cooking class.

1.6. Significance of the study

CLIL in teaching is not a new research aspect. Research for how effective the
CLIL teaching methods in higher education has been conducted and reviewed by many
scholars. This study provides practical significance at the research school, namely
improving the teaching quality for the cooking program for vocational tourism students.

The ultimate goal of this research is to investigate if it is practical to implement

CLIL in teaching content classes in VTVC. Also, the research could help to re-adjust the
organization of teaching and learning English in the cooking industry and grasp the actual
needs of learners and teachers to make appropriate adjustments to the reality. With this
purpose, the author helps set up reliable materials that the school manager can consider
when making related decisions.

1.7. Definition of the key terms

In order to give a particular comprehension of the topics addressed, specific

terminology must be defined for the purpose of this study:

11
 Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): CLIL is a method of
teaching learners a topic while also learning a second language. Students may be taught a
scientific course in English, for example, they will learn about science and acquire
appropriate vocabulary and language skills. CLIL is not a method for simplifying
material or reteaching what pupils already know in a new language. Successful CLIL
courses must genuinely combine language and content to achieve both the subject matter
and the language.

Attitude is a collection of actions, beliefs, and feelings toward a particular person,

event, object, or thing. Attitudes are frequently the consequence of education or
experience, and they may have a significant impact on behaviour.

English for specific purposes (ESP) generally refers to teaching English to

university students or individuals already employed, emphasizing the specific
terminology and abilities required. Some ESP courses such as English for tourism,
English for waiters, etc.

1.8. Organization of the study

There are five parts of this research study:

Chapter 1 serves as an introduction. Background information, the purpose of the

study, the aims and objectives, the research questions, the scope of the inquiry, the
significance of the study, definitions of key terms, and the thesis structure are all included
in the first chapter.

Chapter 2 is a research study that discusses CLIL methods for developing English
skills and their effectiveness in helping students to comprehend culinary topics in
English. This section also includes a summary of previous research done by both
international and Vietnamese scholars. Finally, a conceptual framework is presented in
the literature review.

12
 Chapter 3 describes the study's methodology. It includes the study design,
research location, sample and sample techniques, research equipment, data collecting
process, and data processing processes.

Chapter 4 presents the study's findings based on data analysis from the
questionnaire and semi-structured interview. Data from prior discussion studies are also
compared and contrasted with the results of this study.

Chapter 5 summarizes the thesis's significant results, the study's implications, the
research's limitations, and suggestions for further research.

13
 CHAPTER 2: LITTERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

This chapter provides an insight into CLIL. First, it discusses the CLIL definition
includes some comparisons to other bilingual education. Second, some features and the
4C framework of CLIL are provided. This chapter also pays attention to the effectiveness
and challenges of CLIL when implementing it through various studies. Then, a
conceptual framework is established from knowledge gain.

2.1. Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)

2.1.1. Definition of CLIL

A variety of CLIL definitions were offered since the idea seems even to CLIL
specialists to be "vague" or "fuzzy" (Gierlinger, 2012). CLIL defined by Marsh (2002):

“CLIL can be thought of as a generic ‘umbrella term’ which encompasses a wide

range of initiatives in which the learning of second/foreign languages and other subjects
has a joint curricular role in education. Usage of this term allows us to consider the
myriad variations of such education without imposing restrictions which might fail to
account of school or region-specific implementation characteristics...It does not give
emphasis either to language teaching or learning, or to content teaching and learning, but
sees both as integral parts of the whole.” (Marsh, 2002, p.52)

Later on, Marsh et al., (2012) in the European Framework for CLIL Teacher
Education, defined CLIL as in p.11 of the report, “a dual-focused educational approach in
which an additional language is used for the learning and teaching of content and
language with the objective of promoting both content and language mastery to
predefined levels”. Coyle et al. (2010) further emphasize that the focus is not simply on
content or language in the CLIL education and learning process. Each one is intertwined
even though at one moment the emphasis is higher.

Sometimes, CLIL is regarded as a general term for a variety of methods,

programs, and approaches whose common denominator is to teach subject content in one
14
or more additional languages, for example, content-based instructions, bilingual language
programs, multi-languages curriculum, dual language programs, immersive programs,
foreign languages as academic languages and so on. Garcia (2011) reports that there are,
for each educational situation, at least 33 separate titles with a curriculum role for
foreign/second language(s) students and other disciplines. There are roughly 40 terms
used in this topic area on the website www.content-english.org. The effort at pinpointing
CLIL is similar to creating a sandcastle using fast sand, says Gierlinger (2012).

This study follows the CLIL’s definition by Marsh et al. (2012) and Coyle et al.
(2010) because its reasonable fit to the current’s research aims, objectives, and questions.

2.1.2. The CLIL’s 4Cs Pedagogic Framework

According to Coyle, Hood and Marsh (2010), for a CLIL lesson to be successful,
it has to combine some main principles, which are known as the 4Cs. The 4Cs framework
(see Figure 2) are content, communication, cognition and culture:

- Content. It is the “subject matter” (Coyle et al., 2010, p. 41). It is the vocabulary,
grammar… It is the heart in the learning process and it is the subject. Teachers of each
subject must agree to avoid repeating the same content in other lessons because the
students must acquire new content.

- Communication. It is “language learning and using” (Coyle et al., 2010, p.41).

That means, using language to learn while learning to use the language in itself to
communicate. The students must be able to express themselves both orally and in writing.
Hence, according to Coyle et al., (2010), we can divide language acquisition (shown in
Figure 1) into three perspectives:

 Language OF learning. It is the language that is needed to understand the

concepts and skills that are related to the theme or topic (vocabulary,
grammar…)

 Language FOR learning. It is the language that is needed to communicate in

an environment where the foreign language is used. The learners have to

15
 learn strategies such as working in pairs, working cooperatively, how to ask
questions...

 Language THROUGH learning. It is the language that is created when

learners apply what has been learned from the contents of a subject (predict
solutions and use of ICT).

Language
OF learning

CLIL linguistic
progression language
learning and language
using

Language Language
THROUGH FOR
learning learning

Figure 2.1. The Language Triptych (Coyle, Marsh and Hood, 2010, p.36)

- Cognition. It is the “learning and thinking processes” (Coyle et al., 2010: 41). In
other words, “CLIL promotes cognitive or thinking skills which challenge learners”
(Lesca, 2012: 31), so they will work in groups or in pairs to discuss with each other and
they will be able to carry out a self-assessment.

- Culture. It is the development of “intercultural understanding and global

citizenship” (Coyle et al., 2010: 41), so that the communication with people from other

16
countries and who have a different culture is more effective if learners understand both
cultures (the perspectives we have on the traditions of different countries).

Below, a picture (Figure 2) is shown to understand the 4Cs in a better way. “CLIL
involves a triple focus on content, language (communication) and cognition, where
culture is the outcome of the interaction of these three aspects” (Marongiu, 2019: 872).
Besides, “content is taught through strategies that involve language processing for
meaning comprehension. Great emphasis is placed on lexicon, and grammatical features
are instrumental to text processing” (Marongiu, 2019: 87). In other words, thanks to
language the teachers can make students learn the content and receive the necessary
resources to be able to debate it, justify it and explain it through communication.

Communicat
-ion

Culture
contexts

Cognitio
Content
-n

Figure 2.2. The 4Cs framework for CLIL (Coyle, 2005, p.7)

2.1.3. The main features of CLIL

There are some features to achieve a successful implementation of CLIL. One of

them is “the balance between language and content” (Cenoz, 20133) since learning the
language and content has the same importance. Thus, “the main idea is to teach foreign

17
languages efficiently and less attention is paid to how content is learned” (Cenoz, 2013)
so it is more important to use the foreign language than not to make mistakes.

However, according to Mehisto, Marsh and Frigols (2008: 29-30) there are six
core features of CLIL methodology:

The first one is the ‘multiple focus approach’, where there must be a combination
of content and language classes for learning to be effective because students learn new
content while improving language fluency. This will be possible with the support and
coordination of all subjects. Indeed, the learning must be organized “through cross-
curricular themes and projects” (Mehisto et al., 2008, p.29) and reflection must be
supported “on the learning process” (Mehisto et al., 2008, p.29).

The second one is the ‘safe and enriching learning environment’, in which teachers
should provide authentic materials and real situations in their lessons so that they deal
with language and content.

The third feature is the ‘authenticity’, in which “connections between learning and
students’ lives should be made regularly in CLIL activities as well as connections with
other speakers of the CLIL language. Current materials from media or other sources
should be used as often as possible” (Lesca, 2012, p.4). This is very important because
the more authentic and real the learning, the more effective and motivating it will be for
the students.

The fourth one is the ‘active learning’, where the students have to participate more
in classes (more active role) since they must be the protagonists in communication. They
have to work and carry out activities cooperatively with their classmates (in pairs) and
with the help of their teachers. Furthermore, “students help set content, language and
learning skills outcomes” (Mehisto et al., 2008, p.29).

The fifth core feature is the use of the ‘scaffolding’ technique, where teachers have
to teach students from the knowledge and skills they have. Furthermore, they have to
encourage them to carry out new challenges, losing their fears and leaving their comfort

18
zone. They have to promote the hidden skills of the students since they have to face a
higher level than they already have, but the input must always be meaningful and
understandable for them.

The last feature is the ‘cooperation’, all teachers in both linguistic and non-
linguistic areas have to plan the lessons cooperatively as it is very useful for teachers
from other areas such as geography or history to be helped by language teachers.
Therefore, EFL classes and CLIL classes have to complement and be coordinated.
“While CLIL is definitely perceived as a means of getting more exposure to English and
having more opportunities of using English for communication, EFL classes serve to
concentrate on specific language problems such as grammar, pronunciation, and so on”
(Lasagabaster and Doiz, 2016, p.2). This shows that if the student is fluent in speaking in
the foreign language (being able to communicate and interact), he/she will be more
successful than if he perfectly masters the grammar of the foreign language. In turn,
parents and other local communities must support students in their learning.

These core features are summarized in Table 1 in order to have a better vision of
them.

Table 2.1: Core features of CLIL

Core features of CLIL Relevant aspects

Multiple focus approach - there must be a combination of content and

language classes for learning to be effective

- It is possible with the support and

coordination of all subjects.

- the learning is organized “through cross-

curricular themes and projects”

- reflection is supported on “the learning

process”

19
Safe and enriching learning - teachers should provide students with
environment authentic materials and real situations

Authenticity - connections between learning and students’

lifes should be made regularly

- current materials should be used frequently

Active learning - students have to participate in class

- they have to work and carry out activities

cooperatively

Scaffolding - teachers have to teach students from the

knowledge and skills they have

- students have to carry out new challenges

- the input must always be meaningful and

understandable for students

Cooperation - all teachers have to plan the lessons

cooperatively

- parents and other local communities must

support students in their learning.

2.1.4. Advantages and disadvantages of CLIL

The use of this methodology in the classroom implies some benefits and drawbacks
which should be mentioned below. Table 2 summarizes CLIL’s main advantages and
disadvantages.

Advantages of CLIL

The increasing use of the CLIL approach in the lessons shows that the advantages
are evident. As having been stated in this paper, the CLIL methodology has a dual focus
that brings benefits in its implementation. According to Ellison and Almeida (2017) it is
believed that this brings benefits to “learners’ linguistic ability, metalinguistic awareness,

20
motivation, risk-taking, active participation, problem- -solving, levels of concentration,
capacity to think, meta-cognitive ability, study-skills and autonomy, as well as fostering
social awareness and intercultural understanding” (p.44).

Therefore, one of the main advantages of using CLIL is the “high levels of
motivation perceived among students” (Lasagabaster and Doiz, 2017, p.3). According to
Lasagabaster and Doiz (2017) “students were more motivated than non-CLIL students
with respect to the degree of interest, instrumental motivation, attitudes towards learning
English at school, and effort made” (p.3). Indeed, other authors as Cekrezi (2011)
supported the motivation as an advantage found in the students because they use the
language in a real environment. Students do not learn only grammar, but also the
language is personalized through the teaching of something meaningful. They feel
motivated because they want to reach a higher level than they already have, but teachers
have to be careful with this because it can provoke in the students, who are outside their
comfort zone, the desire to give up learning other languages.

According to Marsh (2000) a great advantage is that CLIL “offers opportunities to

allow youngsters to use another language naturally, in such a way that they soon forget
about the language and only focus on the learning top”. Moreover, as Doiz, Lasagabaster
and Sierra (2014) mention in an article, another benefit is that thanks to CLIL the cultural
awareness and motivation of the students is increased and cognitive development is
promoted, because this methodology is based on authenticity. Indeed, Ouazizi (2016)
states that one of the benefits is that CLIL “offers ‘repetition’ of the syllabus learned in
the mother tongue gives additional time and opportunity to the students to revise and fix
what they have been learning in their mother tongue” (p.128).

According to Cimermanova (2017), other benefits that the CLIL methodology

brings about, is that the contexts are meaningful. With the CLIL approach, students have
a teaching in which the language and activities are authentic and the contexts are
meaningful, so they are not aware that they are acquiring a new language. They focus on
studying the content and acquire the language effortlessly and in a relaxing environment.

21
The student does not focus on the language but on the content, thus reducing their
anxiety. Indeed, they have to use their prior knowledge and experience.

Finally, CLIL gives the school itself significant advantages. The schools that adopt
CLIL, as reported by Papaja (2009), are viewed in their modernity, and instructors are
"promoters of an international way of life" (p.34). CLIL has a capacity as an innovative
method to break down "outdated pedagogical ideas" and to transform Europe's current
school system, the author argued. Eventual favorable impacts of CLIL require empirical
data validation.

Therefore, it can be seen that CLIL has many positive aspects. In summary, some
of CLIL advantages are the improvement of the linguistic and communicative
competence, concentration, autonomy, motivation and participation of the learners.
Furthermore, it promotes social and intercultural awareness and is based on the
authenticity of contexts. All these benefits characterize the use of the CLIL approach in
schools. Teachers must know how to enhance the skills and needs of students so that they
receive the best teaching through this method.

Disadvantages of CLIL

Although there are many benefits that this approach has brought to the classroom,
it contains several drawbacks as mentioned below:

According to Cimermanova (2017) there are some drawbacks of using CLIL in the
educational centers. For example, she mentions that in most cases, less than 50% of the
communication in the CLIL classroom is conducted in the foreign language. In addition,
she points out that CLIL lessons are generally scheduled as content lessons and not as
part of language lessons, and most students only use a foreign language in CLIL and EFL
classes. Furthermore, most of the teachers who teach the non-linguistic subjects in a
foreign language are non-native speakers or do not have a high level of the target
language. “CLIL is an approach that needs a teacher who is competent in the subject,
field of teaching and at the same time proficient language user depending on the type of

22
integration” (Cimermanova 2017, p.5). Teachers must be trained to teach their classes
using the CLIL methodology but nowadays, there is little methodological training for
teachers and this is essential to solve the lack of linguistic competence in English or in
other foreign languages.

An additional drawback is the lack of materials in educational centers since the

material that teachers have in the schools and high schools is only textbooks. Most of the
resources that exist are online materials edited by other teachers, so resources are
insufficient. Therefore, “this material does not systematically follow the aims of the
content language” (Cimermanova, 2017, p.6). And “there is a deficient development of
content materials and instructional resources, and teachers can easily be deterred by the
intimidating task of having to prepare their own materials” (Perez-Canado, 2013, p.19).

Another disadvantage is that not all the students feel motivated to learn a foreign
language. Some students do not like to learn other languages or find it more difficult than
others so they do not want to learn the common subjects (geography, history…) by means
of another language. They are not comfortable speaking in a foreign language, so this
methodology can cause fear, insecurity and anxiety. CLIL “poses a greater cognitive
challenge which may cause the learner to feel confused, overwhelmed, or even
frustrated” (Perez-Canado, 2013, p.19).

These are all some of the disadvantages that the CLIL approach can cause in
schools. These are disadvantages that can disappear with the passage of time and with an
effective methodology in the classroom. Moreover, there are many more advantages than
disadvantages.

2.1.5. Factors that influence a successful CLIL classroom

Since CLIL studies revealed that typical elements like teaching methods,
characteristics of learners, pedagogical techniques, age, contextual conditions, and class
composition that affect ways CLIL isolates itself in different locations and nations must
be taken into account (Coyle, 2011). Therefore, in many research, participants and

23
learning environment of CLIL approach are key factors that influence a successful CLIL
classroom. Specifically, in this thesis, they are teacher factors, learner factor, resource
factor (Keith, 2014).

2.1.5.1. Teacher factors

A CLIL teacher may be a foreign language teacher or subject content teacher (e.g.,
a geography teacher). Whoever they are, they will need to develop "multiple types of
expertise" (Marsh et al., 2012) owing to the fusion of language and content subject
knowledge bases (Ellison “CLIL as a Catalyst”) which make CLIL methodology
complex. A consequence of this is that they will need to adjust their regular practice
accordingly and adopt an "inter-disciplinary mindset" (Marsh, 2012, p. 66) as opposed to
a subject specific one, and the necessary complementary 'sensitivity', of language or
content teacher. Thus, a language teacher will need to also think and act like a content
teacher and vice versa.

In CLIL therefore, it is not just a matter of changing the medium of instruction

(Pavon & Rubio, 2018), but of mindsets and methods. Both demand that teachers adopt a
highly reflexive attitude as they proceed through their CLIL practice (Ellison, 2019).
CLIL teachers should be aware that CLIL classroom methodology should be
communicative, incorporating many visuals to embed content so that learners can
understand. Also, it should encourage learners to collaborate as much as possible. Finally,
the CLIL class should be cognitively challenging and sequenced to move learners from a
cognitively less demanding and context-embedded position to express ideas in more
cognitively demanding and context-embedded positions.

A particular challenge for some content teachers is the additional language itself.
Language proficiency levels differ across contexts. Ideally, they should not be lower than
C1 level on the Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe, 2021).
That does not necessarily mean that a language teacher is best placed to be the CLIL
teacher because it is unlikely that they will know the specific language of the discipline,
not to mention have the in-depth understanding of the subject content. CLIL, therefore,

24
necessitates collaboration between language and content teachers where each pools their
expertise and practical theory of their respective knowledge bases (Pavon & Ellison).
Teacher collaboration can include: observation of each other teaching regular lessons in
order to gain awareness of subject literacy, methodology, cognitive challenge, language
use and classroom management; planning CLIL lessons together where both content and
language are accounted for, and tasks and materials are designed and appropriately
scaffolded; and team teaching or observation of CLIL lessons.

CLIL teacher’s problem: One of the key issues teachers confront during CLIL
education is time management in the classroom. Because students may spend more time
interacting with other students, the activities completed in class may take longer than
intended. However, if the exercises are not well organized, the learners would have taken
more time and had difficulties participating.

Teacher training is one of the most challenging areas of many complicated CLIL-
related concerns, as concerned by Wolff (2007). Coyle (2010) argued that the full
potential of CLIL could not be achieved, and the methodology is unsustainable without
the necessary teacher preparation programs. In the areas of expertise for instructors in
CLIL, there is a growth of interest (Hansen Pauly et al., 2009). However, it has stayed out
of the emphasis on how competencies should be cultivated.

In short, CLIL teachers can be considered as one of the major elements of

successful CLIL classrooms. With experienced CLIL teachers, the CLIL classroom can
be in a high degree of achieving its objective.

2.1.5.2. Learner factors

Students must take an active role in CLIL classes for them to be successful. This is
because CLIL is a student-centered method that requires ongoing participation on the part
of students. Among the numerous characteristics of the CLIL technique, Coyle, Hood,
and Marsh (2010) emphasize that it requires teachers and students to embrace student-
centered approaches and to involve all pupils. CLIL classes can be challenging to teach,

25
even at the beginning, because they demand the instructor to devote substantial time and
effort into engaging their students in a process that requires frequent student involvement
in order for them to absorb the subject in a foreign language. Anzenberger (2015)
presented a similar argument, arguing that because CLIL teachers are expected to act as
facilitators, a transcendental role is played by CLIL students in their studies. As a result,
students are expected to participate actively in class, with the majority of tasks requiring
peer collaboration to contribute to the development of content and learning skills goals.

A very important effective element in the CLIL classroom is the students’

motivation towards learning CLIL. Masgoret & Gardner (2003) refers motivation, which
in all situations may be characterized as the driving factor, to the reaction of a person to
everything related to the current environment in which language is taught. For many
years, research on psychology and education has been a significant field of motivation
study. The broad view of instructors who tend to see student motivation as the primary
determinant in educational achievement, in general, is reflected in this concern (Dörneyi,
2001). Undoubtedly, most students, at least at the beginning of the courses, have a fairly
favorable attitude about CLIL. In the majority of situations, they are highly driven
because they realize how vital it is for their future careers to be very proficient in English
as L2. It might be all the more stimulating to look at things in a foreign language. Most
learners fantasize about somewhere else being exceptionally well compensated. They are
aware that a good understanding of content in a foreign language context might benefit
their future.

It is said that CLIL is for learners of all abilities, and learners who are considered
less able in languages are found to cope well with CLIL as the focus is not solely on
language learning (Marsh, 2012). However, CLIL is demanding for learners as it requires
more concentration, cognitive agility in processing content concepts through another
language code, and active knowledge construction and demonstration of understanding
through peer interaction. These are also where benefits are derived. When a school is
beginning a CLIL programme, it is advisable to start implementation with one class at the

26
beginning of an educational cycle and monitor this class against others at the same
educational level within the school if that is possible. This will allow for comparisons to
be made between CLIL classes and non-CLIL (control) classes in terms of progress in
language and content areas. Pupils' opinions should also be heard regarding how they feel
about CLIL and their perception of learning.

2.1.5.3. Resource factors

The relevance of the classroom environment: As in Dörnyei (2007) 's note, L2

acquisition is impossible without appropriate inspiration and pleasure in the classroom
and cognitively competent instructional practice to keep learners motivated over the long
term. When it comes to generating excellent test scores, boring but methodical teaching
may be successful, but it seldom inspires a lifelong dedication to the subject matter.

Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011)’s latest work proposes a sophisticated dynamic system
model that combines cognition, motivations, and impact to bring the learner's identity and
sense of self along with language experience. They stated that individuals would have a
major effect on their learning, the way they feel with themselves and others, and how
they evaluate the successes of a certain L2 learning environment. This is reflected in
studies on the 'investment' of learners in and via alternative languages and the conclusion
that the identity and environment of the student combined are key motivating factors
(Cummins, 2001; Pavelenko, 2002).

A CLIL curriculum: A CLIL curriculum needs to include samples of language that

skills and thinking demand of learners, so that teachers can both make sure that these
functions of language are practiced but also so that teachers can listen out for them and
moderate teaching to make sure any difficulties and gaps are remedied in later learning.

Teaching resources: CLIL courses often use native speaker textbooks from the
United Kingdom or the United States. While the quality of these publications can
typically be ensured, they have always been a challenge for CLIL students on some
levels. Native speaker textbooks have high language demands, not just for subject-

27
specific language but also for general academic language, the "hidden" language of
learning. This means that for CLIL lessons using imported texts to be effective, the
instructor must undertake a lot of customization, which takes a lot of time and energy.
Even after adaptation, there may still be a cultural peculiarity in the literature, posing
additional hurdles for local English learners. While translating local textbooks might
avoid the cultural and linguistic issues that come with native speaker literature,
translation itself has its own set of hurdles. Translated textbooks may still be too
advanced for students unless the language is toned down to the students' level. It will
contain complex native language vocabulary that is merely conveyed in English as a
foreign language. Other issues with translated textbooks include the absence of pictures
or drawings, resulting in a textbook that is just a "book of text." Another lacking essential
aspect of translated textbooks is action! It is believed that a skills-based curriculum
should be the focus of CLIL texts. Through CLIL, all aspects of language would be
practised, including listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The textbook also needs to
be extremely dynamic in terms of activity, requiring learners to participate in solitary,
pair, small group, and large group activities and presentation work, among other things.
Some lucky circumstances have CLIL materials that are "custom-made". For example, a
'custom-made' CLIL resource is producing and publishing English language textbooks for
courses to be taught alongside the content classes. This kind of book provides learners
with a deeper understanding of the language they encounter in content classes, practice
the general academic language from these classes, and practice cross-curricular skills
needed for surviving and thriving in an educational environment in a language other than
the home language/s. The lesson is simple: CLIL is easier and more successful with
"custom-made" materials, but it may be considerably more complex and ineffective
without them.

2.2. Language Attitudes and its components

Eagly and Chaiken (1993) defined attitude as a way of evaluating an object based
on the degree of sympathy or disapproval according to the emotions of the object giving

28
the attitude. Attitudes can then be divided into three components: affective, behavioral,
and cognitive. These three components are closely related to each other to describe the
attitude toward target objects effectively. Also, CLIL, according to Marsh et al. (2012), is
considered as “a continuum or umbrella term” that incorporates all strategies that give
students with specific academic language support to assist them in acquiring knowledge
about the subject through that language.

2.2.1. Affective attitudes

The affective component, also known as an emotional attitude, relates to a

person's expression of emotions toward other people or things, according to Wenden
(1991). That is, when people fancy something, they have positive emotions about it and
treat it positively. Similarly, Eagly and Chaiken (1998) defined affective attitudes as
emotional responses and choices, such as likes and dislikes for an object. Furthermore,
according to Agarwal & Malhotra (2005), the assessment of affective attitudes is
included emotions, feelings, and evaluative judgments on beliefs, resulting in an attitudes'
integrated model. Besides, language acquisition is an emotional process that is affected
by a variety of emotional variables (Feng & Chen, 2009).

When it comes to CLIL, it is said to have a significant impact on their learning

procedure if the students have both positive and negative feelings for it (Railsback,
2002). It implies that learners' inner sentiments and emotions should be considered in
order to improve their learning results (Choy & Troudi, 2006).

2.2.2. Cognitive attitudes

A cognitive component, that is, the notion that categories are inferred from
consistency in reactions to discriminable distinct stimuli, is often utilized by humans in
thinking (Triandis, 1971). Furthermore, Abidin et al., (2012) demonstrate that the
cognitive component is linked to learners' ideas and knowledge regarding teaching and
learning techniques, classroom activities, and other topics. As described by Schiffman
and Kanuk (2004), the cognitive component is the mix of attitude object experiences and

29
information in various courses, which is referred to as information and perceptions.
Cognitive elements in language acquisition include the linking of prior information with
new knowledge, the production of new knowledge, the verification of new knowledge,
and the application of new knowledge in various circumstances.

In terms of CLIL, it is thought that when individuals connect a positive

characteristic with an item, they will have a more favorable attitude toward it.

2.2.3. Behavioral attitudes

According to Triandis (1971) and Wenden (1991), a behavioral component is

linked to an action tendency. The behavioral component attempts to describe the
individual's engagement in tasks as well as their behaviors in relation to the attitude
object. It has a significant impact on how people act and behave. Similarly, Defleur and
Westie (1963) described the behavioral component as a response or reaction of a person
to an attitude object. To put it another way, each individual's conduct or response in
certain circumstances is a behavioral component of attitude. According to Kara (2009),
good attitudes lead to positive language learning practices, which may increase students'
eagerness and enthusiasm. Students are emotionally invested in their learning and make
every attempt to study more and get more knowledge and skills for everyday life.

With respect to attitudes toward CLIL, the behavioral component is likely related
to whether people approach or avoid it.

In short, the affective component is concerned with how individuals feel about the
attitude object, while the behavioral component is concerned with how people act toward
the attitude object, and the cognitive component is linked to how individuals perceive the
attitude object.

Furthermore, as Middlebrook (1980) defined, attitude is a person's overall,

experienced, fundamental disposition that governs their thinking, emotions, and
behaviors. Ahmed (2015), on the other hand, claims that attitude relates to the learner's
emotions about language usage and its social standing, which may either help or impede

30
the learning process. As a result, attitudes refer to one's willingness to react positively or
negatively to an object, person, organization, or event. Students' attitudes toward English
language learning have been shown to be very favorable in recent research performed in
ESL and EFL settings (Ahmed, 2015; Sicam & Lucas, 2016).

2.3. Previous research

Research on the effectiveness of CLIL has been conducted widely over the past
few years. In this section, several research related to the author's topic is reviewed.

The investigation by Wim Thijssen and Luc Ubaghs (2011) shows the perception
of the effect of CLIL by teachers and students. Wim Thijssen and Luc Ubaghs (2011)
discovered that student trust and effectiveness were not significantly correlated. They
claimed, “A possible reason for this discrepancy is that students evaluate the advantages
of CLIL teaching less than teachers do”. Teaching instruction (TD) and teacher remedy
(TF) have a favorable association with teacher confidence in their studies. This feature
was predicted, given that this link was established by Dobbins (Dobbins, 1996).
Regardless of CLIL‐teaching, practical teacher didactics and corrective feedback have a
positive correlation with the efficiency of the students in the literature.

From the teacher's point of view, both students and teachers had a less trusting
knowledge of English, but the students had a more favorable attitude. The authors stated
that “… this difference could come from the fact that students have less self‐criticism
compared with teachers.” (p.61)

The teacher's didactic perceptions of students and teachers did not differ much
from those of Wim Thijssen and Luc Ubaghs.

On the other line, Marta Aguilar and Rosa Rodríguez (2011) studied the lecturer
and student perceptions on CLIL at a Spanish university. The typical instructor seems
reasonably dubious about the utility of the technique. In their study, engineering
instructors tended to link the language employed in CLIL with the vehicular language.
They argued: “Their priority is content, not language teaching, yet they use CLIL to their

31
advantage. These lecturers have to be shown that CLIL training can enrich the learning
and the teaching experience and that they can incorporate strategies that are not
excessively demanding (in terms of time or effort)”. Some broad guidelines might be
given to teachers:

-         Providing or asking students to make summaries or maps with highlighted

keywords and conceptual relations.

-         Utilizing material already written in English.

-         Preparing a fundamental terminology glossary.

-         Relying on the role of code-building to switch.

-         Increasing interaction possibilities.

These rules might be conveyed as if a wedge that incorporates both academic and
academic English.

Marta Aguilar and Rosa Rodríguez (2011) pointed “The reflection is that the
techniques for good engineering epistemology communication and good teaching and
learning practice must be tailored to every discipline, anchored to genre knowledge, and
situated cognition.” (p.185)

Kathleen Corrales and César Maloof (2011) carried out a study on how content-
based learning supports the development of learners in foreign language situations has
shown that using CBI seemed effective because of the positive impact on interest,
motivation, and motivation the participation in meetings, and reduced levels of anxiety.

They noted: “When looking at the data, we discovered that there was an
interesting dynamic between meaningful learning, motivation, and interest. Students
became motivated because the material presented in class was interesting and meaningful
for them since it was related to their area of study. We believe that this dynamic was
significant to the development of language as can be seen in the excerpts below.” (p.294)

32
 They discovered that previous knowledge of some Spanish subjects enabled them
to be understood and learned in English. It seemed “that having the cognitive structure in
Spanish provided some scaffolding for the students and allowed them to deal with
language constraints while at the same time enabling them to link the new information to
the old” (p.286). They argued: “According to constructivist theory, prior knowledge is
vital in order to learn anything because it provides ‘anchors’ to which the new knowledge
is connected. The more connections that are made, the more learning will take place”
(p.287). They indicated that content that students previously knew allowed new
information and language characteristics to be linked.

Students discovered that language models were utilized to produce the classroom
materials, such as anatomy and physiology chapters and other legitimate resources. In
addition, the authors reported: “This input enabled them to develop lexis and improve
comprehension and speaking skills. In light of studies on second language acquisition, it
makes sense that the learning of complex vocabulary and structures that students reported
above is best taught by complex materials (i.e., authentic content)” (p.289).

The participants indicated that the precise technique and methods utilized by the
teacher were one of the most important aspects of the language learning process. The
emphasis on oral production in foreign languages, such as 'read and report,' panel
debates, oral presentations, small and group discussions, and more, was incorporated in
this approach. These approaches were identified as essential for growth by participants.

Another study was conducted by Jenny Denman, Rosie Tanner, and Rick de
Graaff (2013) to investigate CLIL in junior vocational secondary education. Their study
revealed that CLIL offers pupils the opportunity of working on vocational literacy and
language skills at the junior level in the Netherlands (called "tvmbo"). They said “It also
appears that motivation increases in junior secondary vocational students who enjoy a
challenge. Teachers and students are quite optimistic and certainly enthusiastic about the
challenge of further developing a junior vocational bilingual stream” (p.292). Their
survey has shown that many teachers are happy to teach kids to be optimistic and hopeful

33
about the future. The multilingual "tvmbo" provided the pupils an opportunity, a
challenge, and the self-esteem and motivation of the students may be improved by
participating in the 'tvmbo' stream. Teachers recognized that it takes time to create an
efficient "tvmbo," particularly developing a lively program for the EIO. Strong "Tvmbo"
teams may have a significant influence on the success of education and learning and work
with them on integrated cross-curricular content and language initiatives. According to
the writers, more than 70% of students suggested that a friend or family member would
get "tvmbo." They thought that it was entertaining and inspiring to enhance their English
abilities. The research's conclusion “The challenges for “tvmbo” are being met with
optimism, teamwork, and professional development, which in turn expand the
opportunities for teachers and students alike.” (p.287)

In the Vietnamese setting, research for CLIL is not novel. In 2008, CLIL was
initially launched under a National Foreign Language 2020 project by the Vietnam
Ministry of Education and Training (MoET). Since then, research on implementing the
methods has received a serious contribution.

The research of Nhan (2013) examined some difficulties and effects of the
promotion of CLIL programs in Vietnam, which focused on the latest MOET policy on
talented secondary education. The first part referred to the background and importance of
the 2008 and 2010 MOET declarations, which had formally laid out the implementation
of CLIL. Then, the author was looking at the difficulty in the implementation of such a
policy about its effects on key stakeholders from a socio-linguistic and linguistic
viewpoint. Finally, a few suggestions were given to policymakers and practitioners to
further apply CLIL in the context mentioned above. This article would provide a practical
overview of CLIL practice in order to educate policymakers and educators in Vietnam
about the improvement of language training. It also aimed to contribute to the existing
area of CLIL research globally in a more pluralistic way.

Research by Trang and Nga (2015) focused on applying CLIL in primary lessons
from the teachers’ perspective. The results indicated that CLIL lesson planning was time-

34
intensive and challenging in terms of the preparation of educational aids and the
integration of content objectives and language goals with cognition and cultural targets
under the 4Cs framework (content, cognition, communication, and culture). However,
when sessions were completed, teachers were generally satisfied with student
performance. Teacher perspectives regarding the development and implementation of
CLIL alongside regular English courses in Vietnam provide insights into the future and
other settings for CLIL research (Trang and Nga, 2015).

Thuy (2016)’s paper studied the implementation of CLIL at the high school level.
In this paper, Thuy (2016) addressed four criticisms of the importance of CLIL in the
Vietnamese setting, the willingness of instructors, the preparedness of students, and CLIL
materials. Furthermore, a case study showed how instructors perceive CLIL, how they
apply CLIL, and the problems they face in practice. Thuy's (2016) case study at Quoc
Hoc High School in Hue revealed that teachers were largely certain about the objectives
of CLIL implementation and promotion in Vietnam. Teachers also typically expressed
favorable views on the advantages of CLIL (Thuy, 2016).

Another research by Oanh (2018) discovers the impact of CLIL on primary ESL
student's vocabulary and content learning. This study aims to describe a CLIL (Content
and Language Integrated Learning) initiative that was developed to help primary children
gain L2 vocabulary and content knowledge. The research was carried out over a 12-week
period with 60 elementary pupils at Nguyen Du Secondary School's Center of Foreign
Languages Smart World in Kien Giang Province, Vietnam. In addition, the research’s
goal is to see if students who participate in CLIL can learn more content knowledge in
various disciplines and if they can make substantial advances in L2 vocabulary
knowledge. Two trials were planned for the study's two groups of second-grade
participants. An initial test conducted before the experiment revealed that the two groups
have comparable levels of vocabulary and subject understanding. The experimental group
received ten 90-minute English classes with additional CLIL exercises, while the control
group received the identical content without any CLIL assignments. CLIL activities in

35
the former group introduced pupils to subject knowledge in geography, culture, tradition,
ethnic food, and children's games. Diverse activities related to the course subject were
implemented, and efforts were made to develop teaching techniques to meet the needs
and interests of the pupils. The results showed that CLIL substantially influenced the
experimental groups' learning of L2 vocabulary knowledge and topic knowledge, with the
experimental groups outperforming the control group that was not exposed to CLIL.

Tran (2018) also conducted research to discover high school English teachers'
attitudes, perspectives, and experiences with Content and Language Integrated Learning
(CLIL) in Vietnam. The primary data collecting instruments for the study were survey
questionnaires and in-depth interviews. The research was carried out in six northern
Vietnam provinces, with the participation of 300 high school English teachers. According
to the findings, a substantial percentage of Vietnamese high school English instructors
lack a solid grasp of CLIL and CLIL teaching experience. Also, high school teachers
were reported to be eager to invest in this educational technique. They showed a
willingness to learn about, participate in, and apply CLIL training as part of their
professional growth.

Research gap

It can be seen that the above research mainly focuses on researching CLIL on
primary, secondary, some research on a university level (e.g., Tho, 2015). However, these
researches ignored the student's view on if the implementation of CLIL in these
institutions is effective. Especially, no previous research into the use of CLILL to teach
culinary students in a vocational school, setting in Vietnam has been conducted according
to the author's knowledge. With all reasons above, it is necessary to conduct this research
to fill in the research gap mentioned.

2.4. Conceptual framework

It should be noticed that in this research when evaluating the attitudes of teachers
and students of the effectiveness of CLIL lessons, the effectiveness of the CLIL must be

36
clear and accessible. Three types of attitudes include cognitive, behavioral, and affective
are mentioned as a tool to evaluate the teachers and students who participated.  Some
effectiveness as fostering authentic communication, increasing the number of hours of
target language exposure, making communication meaningful, stimulating engagement,
and increasing the number of domains and functions of language. Other factors that affect
a successful CLIL lesson should be considered like students’ motivation towards learning
CLIL, the development of learner's identity, and the relevance of the classroom
environment.

The Use of CLIL in Teaching Second Year

Stuudents in Cooking Program at Vocational
College in Vung tau: Teachers' and Students'
Attitudes

Cognitive attitudes Affective attitudes Behavioral attitudes

Content
Communication
4C Framework Cognition
Culture

Figure 2-1 Conceptual framework

Also, this framework helps address the research question 3 given in Part I, by
determining the attitudes of each participant toward each component, and utilizing that
information to conduct comparisons to determine the research question 3.

Summary

37
 The primary purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of previous research
related to content and language integrated learning (CLIL). The definition of CLIL is
given, then some features of CLIL, the 4C framework, the effectiveness, and some
challenges of CLIL are discussed.

38
 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Introduction

The methodology of the study is presented in this chapter, which thoroughly

explains the research. Firstly, the study design will be defined. Secondly, general
information about the school and the students will be supplied in the setting and
participants section. The participant groups will be briefly discussed. The materials and
tools utilized to gather data and their reliability and validity will be discussed next.
Finally, the researcher will provide details regarding the data gathering methodology.

3.1. Research design

In order to carefully scrutinize teacher and student attitudes of CLIL in teaching

and learning in the cooking program at the VTVC, the research followed a mixed
research design. According to Murphy and Maguire (2011), a mixed-method design can
help investigators obtain a deeper grasp of the problem and provide more thorough
evidence, giving them complete comprehensiveness. Accordingly, quantitative data were
collected with the analysis of a closed-ended survey question, and qualitative data were
collected with the semi-structured interviews.

3.2. Research site

This present study was conducted at the College of Tourism Vung Tau. Students
in Vungtau tourism college are provided with well-equipped classrooms projectors,
televisions, speakers, which meet all the requirements for English language teaching.
They are even provided a multi-function classroom in which students can study listening
and E-learning effectively.

College of Tourism Vung Tau (VTVC) is a public institution directly under the
Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism, whose mission is to train tourism human
resources with high-quality training programs in tourism-restaurant-hotel, foster
vocational skills for workers, research and apply techniques and technologies to improve
the quality of training effectiveness in order to serve the industrialization and

39
modernization of the country in the context of global economic integration. According to
the VTVC’s official 2020 curriculum, the school offers a total of 12 training programs
which are College of Hotel Management (2 years), College of Reception Management (2
years), College of Restaurant Management (2 years), College of Food Processing
Techniques (2 years), College of Tourism (2 years), College of Business Accounting (2
years), Intermediate Level of Accommodation Major (1 year), Intermediate Level of
Reception Major (1 year), Intermediate Level of Restaurant Major (1 year), Intermediate
Level of Food Processing Techniques (1 year), Intermediate Level of English (15
months), Intermediate Level of Tourism (1 year).

Besides that, there are authentic restaurants and hotels, a reception area for college
students to practice real-time English conversation. Every year, students have multiple
opportunities to practice in large enterprises in Ba Ria - Vung Tau province, which train
their vocational skills and allow them to speak practical English conversations. This
encourages students to learn English at college to induce enough knowledge to use in the
real world. Besides, the teachers at VTVC are high-qualified trained from Australian
tourism college and Alexis Heck tourism school in Luxembourg. Therefore, they are
qualified to teach English simultaneously with vocational skills.

VTVC students learn in a professional setting similar to reality, under the

supervision of competent instructors who have studied in Germany, Luxembourg,
Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. Along with the practical training program
at the school, students also have the opportunities to practice at restaurants, hotels, tourist
areas with an international working environment inside and outside the province to gain
experience. Besides, they are also equipped with 261 different English books with 792,
including English-learning books and specialized English books.

In recent years, the school has been outfitted with several contemporary facilities
for English teaching and learning, such as the internet, speakers, headphones, computers,
projectors, televisions, etc. However, due to particular teachers' inadequate raw IT skills,
the utilization of these new resources in instruction was not frequent. Their teaching style

40
remained conventional. According to statistics, the majority of students did not perform
well in English since their level of English was still poor.

According to the VTVC updated curriculum, the academic year is forty-eight

weeks long, divided into Semester 1 (twenty-two weeks) and Semester 2 (twenty-six
weeks). However, only five weeks in Semester 1 and 4 weeks in Semester 2 are used for
English lessons. In semester 1, there are 54 hours spent on the English subjects, in which
25 hours are for theory lessons, 24 hours are for practice lessons, and 5 hours are for
tests. In semester 2, there are only 36 hours spent on this subject, in which 15 hours are
for theory lessons, 16 hours are for practice lessons, and 5 hours are for tests. All lessons
must rigorously follow this curriculum distribution.

Applying CLIL in Cooking Class

CLIL was employed in the European Culinary classroom by the author’s college
to construct a cooking challenge for her students. The objectives of this course aim to
help students acquire the following knowledge and skills:

 In terms of Content:
 Students learn how to apply the knowledge about the dishes learned in the theory
and preparation module into practice.
 Students practice proficiently the most basic cooking methods such as boiling, stir-
frying, frying, stewing, etc.
 Students can memorize the names and uses of spices, ingredients, vegetables and
fruits.
 Students know how to select, classify, recognize and distinguish between fresh
and less fresh foods for food processing.
 Students could cook some essential European dishes.
 In terms of Communication:

41
  Students are exposed to the English language throughout their studies,
communicate in English and learn how to use everyday English words found in
the kitchen and specialized words for European dishes.
 In terms of Culture:
 Students learn about European culinary culture, kitchen labour organization,
accounting norms, nutrition, food hygiene, and Europe standards' safety.
 In terms of Cognition:
 Students can work together in a group and freely exchange and express their
opinions on the subject.
Moreover, this course includes 60 sessions to teach 15 European dishes. That
means one dish acquired four sessions. The following table illustrates the course's main
content:

Table 3-1: European Culinary Course’s Curriculum

No. Content Time

1 Italian meat ball soup 4 sessions

2 Shrimp bisque 4 sessions

3 Seafood with saffron soup 4 sessions

Roast leg of lamb with potatoes and

4 4 sessions
onions

5 Barbecue spareribs of pork 4 sessions

6 Duck in orange sauce 4 sessions

7 Baked clam with cheese 4 sessions

8 Escalope of pork 4 sessions

42
 9 Fish Meuniere 4 sessions

10 Goujon of fish 4 sessions

11 Stuffed chicken breast with cheese 4 sessions

12 Grilled prawn with Mikado sauce 4 sessions

13 Chicken in Dijon mustard cream sauce 4 sessions

14 Beef Goulash 4 sessions

15 Roast rabbit with bacon 4 sessions

CLIL Lesson plan creation: The CLIL lesson plan should follow Lesca (2012)’s
factor when planning CLIL lesson plan. For sample lesson plan of this CLIL program,
please take a look at appendix 7

4Cs (content, communication,

Cognition, culture)

Student's role: How to make

lessons as student centered as
possible

Teacher's role: Engaging

Factors to consider when
students; Providing input;
planning CLIL lessons
Providing support

Language support: Grammar,

Vocaulary (When and how to
teach them)

Materials (Selection;
Adaptation; Designing
exercises etc.)

Figure 3.1. CLIL lesson plan (Lesca, 2012)

43
 3.3. Sample and sampling procedures

Because it would have been difficult to acquire a random sample of second-year

students’ representative of the entire college, this study used a convenience sample. The
availability and speed with which data may be acquired are advantages of this sort of
sampling. The downsides include the possibility that the sample does not reflect the entire
population and may be influenced by volunteersThe availability and speed with which
data may be acquired are advantages of this sort of sampling. Furthermore, the researcher
is in charge of these students, so it is convenient for her to collect data. The downsides
include the possibility that the sample does not reflect the entire population and may be
influenced by volunteers. Additionally, even if random sampling had been practicable, it
would not have sufficiently represented all second-year students throughout the country,
or even within a single region. Second-year students attending community colleges,
private universities, religiously connected institutions, and commuter universities in
urban areas, for example, would not have been represented.

The subjects of the study included 34 male and female EFL second-year learners
and 5 cooking teachers at the College of Tourism Vung Tau.

The College of Tourism Vung Tau’s second-year students were asked to take part
in the study. These students were chosen because they had studied English at the school
for at least one year and may have more clear objectives and more significant experience
learning English than fresh students. This experience might help students better
comprehend and communicate their feelings about studying English at the VTCV and the
obstacles and successes they encountered. The majority of the participants came from
rural locations. Only a few were engaged and self-assured in their English study, whereas
the majority were not. Because English was a required subject, they all learned it.
Besides, since the researcher desires to explore the effectiveness of CLIL in teaching the
cooking program, not only students but also cooking teachers are examed to adopt multi-
dimensional perspectives.

44
 34 second-year students took part in Research Question 1. They were at different
age levels and had spent at least seven years learning English for compulsory education.
According to the results of a survey conducted before the research to analyze the students'
backgrounds, over 90% of the students failed in the English Entrance Exam. Last
semester, these students had varying levels of proficiency and a comparable overall
average English score. For research question 2, there were 5 students and 5 cooking
teachers joining in the semi-structured interview.

Table 3.1. Sample in research question 1 and research question 2

34 second-year cooking students

( questionnaire)
Research question 1
5 second-year cooking students

( interview)

Research question 2 5 cooking teachers ( interview)

Table 3.2. The demographic information of students

No N=34
Content
. Frequency Percent (%)
Male 14 41.2
1 Gender
Female 20 58.8
18 years old 0 0
19 years old 27 79.4
2 Age 20 years old 4 11.8
21 years old 2 5.9
over 21 years old 1 2.9
3 Extra English Yes 9 26.5
No 25 73.5
45
 classes

The demographic information of students was presented in Table 3.2. As can be

seen in Table 3.2, the students’ general information was shown clearly with 3 main items,
including gender, age, learning at extra English classes.

Gender: In terms of gender, there were 14 male students and 20 female students,
accounting for 41.2 percent and 58.8% of the total student population, respectively.
Despite the little difference in numbers between the genders, it was clear that females
outnumbered males.

Age: It can be seen that almost students are at the age of 19, accounting for 79.4%.
Following that is the age of 20 (11.8%), the age of 21 (5.9%), and over 21 years old
(2.9%).

Learning at extra English classes: The students in this study did not concern to
participate in the extra English classes. More than two-third of the students responded no
to extra English class with the frequency of 25, accounting for 73.5%. Only one-thirds of
the students attend extra English class with the frequency of 9, accounting for 26.5%. In
short, the students who studied at extra English class was lower than those who did not.

Teacher demographic information: The total number of teacher participants was 5.

Four were female, making up 80%, and one was male, accounting for 20%. All of the
teachers were between the age of 34-40 at the time of surveying. Also, all of the teacher
participants were at the Faculty of restaurant management in VTVC. In addition, 60% of
them had an educational level as MA, and 40% were a bachelor. The teaching experience
of interviewed teachers varied from 2 to 10 years. Their knowledge of foreign culture
was also proved through the experience of being in several Western countries such as
France, Italy, England, Holland, and Switzerland. This demographic information proved
that the characteristics of participants were suitable for the current research.

46
 3.4. Research instruments

A research instrument is a tool that the writer uses to gather data. A mixed-
method, quantitative and qualitative, was employed to collect data for addressing the two
research questions. The data of the experiment took from the close-end questionnaire and
semi-structured interview. The researcher was entirely in charge of describing the
questionnaire, giving guidance, and delivering it to participants. The participants were
thoroughly informed about the study's purpose and were given complete freedom to
complete the questionnaire and the interview. The questionnaire and interview questions
had been confirmed for validity and reliability before being provided to participants by an
expert in English language studies. The questionnaire is based on the research of Peter
(2014) on Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of English in CLIL Lessons at an Austrian
HTL for Business Informatics and Medical and Health Informatics.. Besides, the
interview questions are based on the study on Students’ Attitudes and Perceptions of
Content and Language Integrated Learning in a Secondary School (Rizagul, 2017).

The questionnaire was distributed to 34 second-year students at the College of

Tourism Vung Tau. Then the semi-structured interviews were participated by five
second-year students and five cooking teachers. The interviewer asks a few prearranged
questions, and the rest of the questions are not scheduled beforehand.

3.4.1. Questionnaire

According to Crouch and Housden (1996), A questionnaire is a research instrument

that consists of a series of questions that are completed by a sample population to get
information. When participants could be approached and were willing to collaborate, the
most usual way was to employ a questionnaire (Orodho, 2008). The researcher chose
questionnaires because they are cost-effective and provide participants adequate time to
respond to questions, allowing them to express themselves fully. Closed questions
demanded less effort and investigation from respondents while avoiding interviewer bias
because participants marked their replies in a box.

47
 In this research, the questionnaire was adapted from the research of Peter (2014) on
Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of English in CLIL Lessons at an Austrian HTL for
Business Informatics and Medical and Health Informatics. The questionnaire from
Peter’s was similar to the current topic, the application of CLIL. However, the researcher
had adjusted some of its item to fit the situations at VTVC and the current research
context.

The current questionnaire was divided into two parts which are Part I, and Part II.
Part I consists of 3 items that provide demographic data such as their genders, ages, and
extra English class attention; In part II, participants were required to conduct a
questionnaire composed of 22 items on a five-point Likert scale divided into three small
parts: cognitive component referring to the achieved knowledge and skills about the
CLIL method (item C1- item C11), affective component referring to participants’
emotional reactions toward the CLIL method (item A1 – item A6), and behavioral
component referring to participants’ tendencies to behave toward the CLIL method (item
B1 – item B6). Part II, which attempted to conduct a poll on participants' attitude of the
effectiveness of CLIL in teaching the cooking program, received a '5' for Strongly Agree
(SA), a '4' for Agree (A), a '3' for Neutral (N), a '2' for Disagree (D), and a '1' for Strongly
Disagree (SD).

Table 3.3. Structure of Questionnaire - Part II

No. Statements of Part II Purpose of use

item C1- item C11 To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
01
English communication in and
out class
item A1 – item A6 To clarify the emotion/ feeling of
02 students when participating in
CLIL lessons.
03 item B1 – item B6 To clarify students’ intention
48
 toward recommending CLIL to
others

Furthermore, in order to obtain the best valid results, the questionnaire was translated
into Vietnamese so that the students would have no trouble comprehending the questions.
Questionnaires were delivered directly for more excellent follow-ups and further
conversation between the researcher and respondents on issues that needed clarity. In this
research, respondents' confidentially was maintained, resulting in more precise and
credible information from respondents. Participants were more likely to answer personal
questions openly, which was beneficial in this research study. The participants were
informed of the study's purpose, the importance of their contributions, and the ensured
security of the participants.

3.4.2. Semi-structured interview

Interactions in which one person (the interviewer) attempts to collect information

from another person by asking questions about their lives and experiences are known as
interviews. Despite the fact that interviewers normally prepare a list of preset questions,
in-depth, semi-structured interviews typically develop in a conversational way, allowing
participants the option to pursue issues that they believe are significant to their research
(Longhurst, 2009). The semi-structured interview will be used in this study to get data
from the participants. During the interviews, the researcher and the informant converse to
bring their experiences and perspectives in their language.

A key disadvantages of semi-structured interviews are that they require a lot of

time, effort, and a high level of interviewer expertise. Interviewers must be
knowledgeable, sympathetic, poised, and quick on their feet. Interview preparation,
scheduling, performance, and analysis are rarely as straightforward as they appear. Also,
semi-structured interviews need to spend a significant amount of time going through
massive amounts of notes and transcripts.

49
 However, the semi-structured interview is an excellent tool for engaging in in-
depth discussions. Researchers can often get sophisticated findings from attentively
examining the talks and initial superficial reactions that take place during an semi-
structured interview session. Body language and facial gestures such as hunches,
laughter, and stillness communicate secret information about a person even when they are
not speaking. This information is useful in investigating a range of exchange-related
themes (Ritchie & Lewis, 2003). Moreover, interviewers is able to synthesis multiple
ideas in order to be effective in fostering adaptation. A single researcher can engage in
SSI discussions on a variety of different topics (Deterding & Waters, 2018).

The semi-structured interview allows the researcher to ask pertinent questions

while also allowing for a more conversational approach to the interview, making it an
appropriate instrument for doing the research (Fylan, 2005). Semi-structured interviews,
rather than structured interviews, are recommended by Fylan (2005) when dealing with
sensitive topics. The interviews ranged in length from 32 minutes to 75 minutes, with an
average length of 48 minutes. During the interviews, the researcher produced an audio
recording and transcribed what was said. To allow participants to independently check
and explain their own knowledge, the transcripts of the interviews were made available to
them.

The researcher favors individual interviews with participants because, in her

experience and observation, individuals are more likely to be influenced by their peers.
As a result, the individual sequential interview is the most incredible option for avoiding
this issue. Three interview models were presented by Wilkinson and Birmingham (2003)
for consideration. One of them, which is the semi-structured interview, was chosen in this
research. More questions are set, and there is enough leeway to allow the interviewee to
direct the flow of information. The arrangement and sequence of the questions in the
semi-structured interview are guided by ongoing responses of the interviewees to the
issues asked. As a result, the researcher is better equipped to interpret the data. Students
would be asked five interview questions, while teachers would be asked the same number

50
of interview questions. Participants’ perceptions are at the heart of the first question. The
second question elicits responses from participants on their preferences for or opposition
to the CLIL approach. Question 3 deals with obstacles that must be overcome. The fourth
one identifies their favorite CLIL-based cooking teaching activity. Lastly, their
recommendations are revealed in the final questions.

3.5. Data collection procedures

Pilot test

During the academic school year 2021-2022, data would be collected at the end of
May. To address significant issues with research tools such as validity, reliability, and
objectivity, the questionnaires and tests were pre-tested before being presented to the
sample. Firstly, a questionnaire and semi-structured interview had been randomly
administered to 3 students and one teacher who are not participants. This was done to
highlight any ambiguous or poorly stated questions in the questionnaire and the interview
and determine whether the instructions to the participants were clear. After that, these
students and teachers individually joined in the interview to cogently express their
thoughts. This was done one week before the actual research study to allow the adequate
researcher time to make any necessary revisions to ensure the research was credible.
Following that, the researcher would consider making any necessary changes to the
questionnaire and semi-structured interview questions.

Data collection procedures

In terms of data collection, 34 questionnaires were sent to second-year students at

the College of Tourism Vung Tau. The questionnaire was handed to the respondents for
three days to complete. The researcher scheduled a single day for questionnaire
distribution and a single day for data collection, cutting down on several appointments
that would have resulted in unnecessary time. To collect qualitative data, 5 of 34 students
and 5 teachers were given a semi-structured interview. The interview's goal was made
plain ahead of time. Each respondent took five to seven minutes to answer in Vietnamese

51
the interview questions. The responses were recorded and analyzed. Qualitative content
analysis was used to assess the information acquired during the semi-structured
interview. They would respond to questions regarding the effectiveness of CLIL in
teaching the cooking program at the VTVC. To protect the security of student data, all
completed surveys were submitted anonymously.

3.6. Data analysis procedures

The SPSS version 21.0 software package will analyze the data in terms of (mean,
standard deviation, and frequency) to determine the value. As mentioned above, there are
two types of data: quantitative and qualitative. The mean scores for attitudes of teachers
and students about the effectiveness of CLIL in teaching the cooking program at the
VTVC are interpreted following:

 1-1.80: strongly disagree

 1.81-2.60: disagree
 2.61-3.40: neutral
 3.41- 4.20: agree
 4.21 – 5.00: strongly agree
To collect and evaluate qualitative data, semi-structured interview questions were
employed. Data were only collected and translated into English for research. The
interview response was then assessed using a content analysis method that included
familiarizing and organizing, coding and recoding, and summarizing and interpreting. A
code ranging from S1 to S7 was issued to each interviewee. On a page, they wrote down
their primary expressions related to the variables discussed.

3.7. Reliability and Validity

Validity, reliability, and objectivity are some of the criteria used to evaluate
research tools. The validity of an instrument must always be evaluated in the context of
the researcher's beliefs about specific regions or topics, according to Fraenkel & Wallen
(1996). In another way, the researcher requires tools to corroborate results about the
people under investigation's characteristics (perceptions and attitudes).
52
 The survey questions were developed in accordance with the study's goals and
objectives, as well as the research concerns being addressed. Item responses that were
written in straightforward English that respondents could comprehend and understand
indicated the reliability of the instruments.

The instrument's content validity was validated by consulting with professionals.

Testing to see if the material being measured can be accurately represented by the sample
under study is known as content validity (also known as reliability) (Orodho, 2008). The
validity of test items was evaluated by subject matter experts, such as university
supervisors hired by the researcher. Additionally, by determining if the questionnaire was
pertinent to the study's questions, the experts provided feedback on the questionnaire's
usefulness. As a consequence of the consultation, a number of their suggestions were
incorporated into the final survey.

Before being delivered to the sample, the questionnaires were pre-tested to address
critical issues with research instruments such as validity and reliability. To ensure the
validity and reliability, the questionnaire along with the interview question was reviewed
by an expert in the field of English language studies. Then students who did not
participate in the study were provided with the questionnaire to read and evaluate, and the
questionnaire was subsequently be amended based on their feedback.

The researcher used closed-ended questionnaires to validate the data, which

reduced the chances of respondents supplying false information. This was done to
emphasize any unclear or poorly phrased questions and see if the responders' directions
were clear.

To ensure its validity and reliability, SPSS was used to examine the respondents'
scores. SPSS analyzed the data to check the Cronbach's Alpha to ensure that the items
were reliable. According to Fraenkel and Wallen (2009), if the Cronbach's Alpha is
greater than.700, the items are reliable. The questionnaire was generally reliable, as
evidenced by the fact that most Cronbach's Alpha tests for each item were greater
than.700, as shown in Table 3.4. As a result, the data was both genuine and trustworthy.

53
 Table 3.4. Cronbach’s Alpha Score

Cronbach’s Number of
Alpha Score items
ATTITUDES TOWARD THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CLIL IN TEACHING THE
COOKING PROGRAM AT THE VTVC.
Affective component 0.793 6
Behavioral component 0.760 6
Cognitive component 0.762 11

Summary

The chapter included a description of the study design and the motivation for
choosing it, the samples used in the study, and how research instruments were created.
This chapter also discussed the validity and reliability of research instruments such as
questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. To get accurate data, questionnaires and
semi-structured interviews were used. The analysis and presentation of gathered findings
and the discussion of such discoveries were the focus of the next chapter.

54
 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1. Results

4.1.1. Teachers’ attitudes toward CLIL

Teacher’s cognitive attitude toward CLIL

Teacher’s behavioral attitude toward CLIL

Teacher’s affective attitude toward CLIL

4.1.2. Students’ attitudes toward CLIL

Students’ cognitive attitude toward CLIL

Students’ behavioral attitude toward CLIL

Students’ affective attitude toward CLIL

4.2. Discussion

4.2.1. Teachers’ attitudes toward CLIL

4.2.2. Students’ attitudes toward CLIL

4.2.3. Significant differences in the teachers’ and students’ attitudes towards

the use of CLIL in the cooking program at the VTVC

Summary

55
 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. Summary of the main findings

5.2. Pedagogical implications

5.3. Limitations

5.4. Recommendations for the further research

56
 APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR RESPONDENTS
Dear my participants,
Thank you for volunteering to participate in this 5-10 minute survey.
This survey aims to find out students' attitudes towards the use of CLIL in teaching
second-year students in the culinary program. This interview is not intended to
assess your knowledge or proficiency in English. All information you provide is for
research purposes only. And, you are not judged for giving any information based
on your own opinion.
PART I: PERSONAL INFORMATION
1. Gender:  Male  Female
2. Age:  18  19  20  21  over 21
3. Do you attend any extra English Course?  Yes  No
PART II: ATTITUDES TOWARD THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CLIL IN
TEACHING THE COOKING PROGRAM AT THE VTVC.
Please rate how much you think these statements are true about you by crossing (X)
(1) Strongly disagree (2) Disagree (3) Neutral (4) Agree (5) Strongly agree

Code Statements 1 2 3 4 5
Affective component
A1 I am more motivated in content lessons in the English language
because I also learn English at the same time.

A2 I participate more actively in English content lessons than in

English language lessons.

A3 I appreciate feedback or corrections made by classmates.

A4 I feel comfortable using English in the CLIL class
A5 I become more responsible to work in teams while implementing
hands-on activities in the CLIL class.
A6 I find it enjoyable to cooperate with my classmates to cook dishes
in the CLIL class
Behavioral component
B1 I pay attention to provide constructive feedback to my friends in the
CLIL class.

57
B2 I spend more time for self-study in the CLIL class.
B3 I spend more time practicing speaking skills in the CLIL class.
B4 I would like to study other subjects in English in the future.
B5 I would like to recommend CLIL to other people
B6 I would like many teachers to use CLIL.
Cognitive component
From C1-C7: (1) Never; (2) Rarely; (3) Often; (4) Nearly Always;
(5) Always
C1 When difficult cooking concepts are explained for the first time,
how often are these explained in Vietnamese?
C2 How often does your teacher demand you to ask questions in
English?
C3 How often does your teacher correct your English grammar?
C4 How often does your teacher correct your pronunciation?
C5 If you have questions, how often do you ask these questions in
English?
C6 How often do you correct language errors of your classmates?
C7 How often does your teacher correct student’s English?
C8 How often do you have difficulty understanding the vocabulary of
the content subject?
C9 How often do you have difficulty understanding the content
teachers when they speak English?
C10 How often do you speak English to other students when you discuss
the cooking related topics?
C11 How often do you research of Western culinary culture?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

58
APPENDIX 2: BẢNG KHẢO SÁT DÀNH CHO SINH VIÊN
Xin chào các em,
Cảm ơn em đã tự nguyện tham gia bài khảo sát dự định kéo dài từ 5-10 phút này..
Bài khảo sát này nhằm mục đích tìm hiểu thái độ của sinh viên đối với việc sử dụng
CLIL trong việc dạy sinh viên năm thứ hai trong chương trình nấu ăn. Cuộc phỏng
vấn này không nhằm mục đích đánh giá kiến thức hoặc trình độ tiếng Anh của em.
Mọi thông tin em cung cấp chỉ để phục vụ mục đích nghiên cứu cho bài nghiên cứu
này. Em không bị đánh giá khi đưa ra bất cứ thông tin nào theo ý kiến của bản thân
mình.
PHẦN I: THÔNG TIN CÁ NHÂN
1. Giới tính:  Nam  Nữ
2. Tuổi:  18  19  20  21  over 21
3. Em có tham gia khóa học thêm Tiếng Anh nào không?  Yes  No
PHẦN II: THÁI ĐỘ ĐỐI VỚI HIỆU QQUAR CỦA CLIL TRONG GIẢNG DẠY
CHƯƠNG TRÌNH BẾP TẠI VTVC
Vui lòng đánh giá mức độ em nghĩ những nhận định này đúng về bản thân mình bằng
cách đánh dấu (X) vào ô số tương đương
(1) Hoàn toàn không đồng ý (2) Không đồng ý (3) Bình thường (4) Đồng ý
(5) Hoàn toàn đồng ý

Code StatEments 1 2 3 4 5
Affective component
A1 Em có động lực hơn khi học nấu ăn và Tiếng Anh cùng lúc.

A2 Em tham gia tích cực hơn vào các bài học bếp bằng tiếng Anh hơn
là các bài học tiếng Anh chuyên ngành riêng biệt.
A3 Em đánh giá cao phản hồi góp ý của các bạn cùng lớp.
A4 Em cảm thấy thoải mái khi sử dụng tiếng Anh trong lớp CLIL.
A5 Em có trách nhiệm hơn khi làm việc theo nhóm trong hoạt động
thực hành trong lớp CLIL.
A6 Em thấy thú vị khi hợp tác với các bạn cùng lớp để nấu các món ăn
trong lớp CLIL.
Behavioral component
B1 Em coi trọng sự góp ý mang tính xây dựng cho bạn bè trong lớp

59
 CLIL.
B2 Em có nhiều thời gian hơn cho việc tự học trong lớp CLIL.
B3 Em có nhiều thời gian hơn để luyện kỹ năng nói Tiếng Anh trong
lớp CLIL.
B4 Em muốn học các môn khác bằng tiếng Anh trong năm học sắp tới.
B5 Em muốn giới thiệu CLIL cho những người khác.
B6 Em muốn nhiều giáo viên sử dụng CLIL.
Cognitive component
Từ câu C1 đến C7: (1) Không bao giờ; (2) Hiếm khi; (3) thường
xuyên; (4) gần như luôn luôn; (5) luôn luôn
C1 Tiếng Việt có thường được sử dụng giải thích các khái niệm âm
thực Tiếng Anh không?
C2 Giáo viên có thường yêu cầu em đặt câu hỏi bằng tiếng Anh không?
C3 Giáo viên có thường sửa ngữ pháp tiếng Anh cho em?
C4 Giáo viên có thường sửa cách phát âm cho em không?
C5 Em có thường chủ động hỏi bằng tiếng Anh không?
C6 Em có thường sửa lỗi Tiếng Anh cho các bạn cùng lớp không?
C7 Giáo viên có thường sửa lỗi Tiếng Anh cho sinh viên không?
C8 Em có thường gặp khó khăn khi học từ vựng về ẩm thực không?
C9 Em có thường thấy khó hiểu khi giáo viên dạy chương trình nấu ăn
bằng Tiếng Anh không?
C10 Em có thường sử dụng tiếng Anh khi thảo luận về các chủ đề ẩm
thực không?
C11 Em có thường tìm hiểu về văn hóa ẩm thực phương Tây không?

CẢM ƠN CÁC EM ĐÃ THAM GIA TRẢ LỜI KHẢO SÁT

60
 APPENDIX 3: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR STUDENTS

Guideline for Group Interview

Date: ____________________ Location: __________________

Time to start: _____________ Time to finish: ______________

Introduction

Thank you for your voluntary participation in this interview that is expected to last
between ten minutes and fifteen minutes. You will answer some questions during the
interview, and you may wish to stop the interview at any time.

This interview aims to understand students’s attitudes toward the use of CLIL in teaching
second year students in cooking program. This interview does not aim to evaluate your
knowledge or English level of proficiency.

With your permission, the interview will be audio-recorded. All the information you
share in the recording is treated confidentially and anonymously. If you were not clear
about the topic, it would be good to ask questions.

A: Interviewee’s background information:

Name: ________________________________________________________

Age: ________________________________________________________

Major: ________________________________________________________

B: Main interview questions

1. What do you think about CLIL method in general?

2. How do you think about teaching cultural knowledge, especially Western culinary
culture in CLIL class?

3. What do you think about teaching critical thinking in CLIL class?

61
4. How do you think about imparting Western culinary knowledge in CLIL class?

5. What do you think about the ability to enhance communication in English in CLIL
classes?

6. What do you think about the CLIL teaching model and the English language teaching
model (ESP), in terms of motivation? Which model do you like? Why?

7. In the next semester, do you want to teach according to CLIL model?

8. Do you want to expand this model to the whole school?

9. What is your favorite activity in the CLIL lectures?

10. In your opinion, what are the challenges in CLIL class? Why?

11. What suggestions do you have for the CLIL program at your school?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

62
 APPENDIX 4: PHỎNG VẤN HỌC SINH (VIETNAMESE VERSION)

GIỚI THIỆU

Cảm ơn Em đã tham gia cuộc phỏng vấn này. Cuộc phỏng vấn có thời lượng từ 10-15
phút. Em sẽ trả lời một số câu hỏi trong cuộc phỏng vấn, và Em có thể dừng cuộc phỏng
vấn bất cứ lúc nào Em muốn.

Mục đích của cuộc phỏng vấn này là để hiểu thái độ của Em đối với việc sử dụng Tiếng
Anh trong học tập môn học chuyên ngành. (được gọi là phương pháp CLIL: Content
language integrated learning- phương pháp này kết hợp dạy nội dung kiến thức chuyên
ngành và Tiếng Anh).

Cuộc phỏng vấn này không nhằm mục đích đánh giá kiến thức cũng như sự hiểu biết về
Tiếng Anh. Ngoài ra, cuộc phỏng vấn này sẽ được ghi âm với sự đồng ý của Em. Tất cả
thông tin Em chia sẻ chỉ được sử dụng cho nghiên cứu này. Trước khi cuộc phỏng vấn
diễn ra, Em có câu hỏi nào không?

Nếu không, chúng ta bắt đầu.

CÂU HỎI

A) Thông tin của sinh viên được phỏng vấn

Tên sinh viên: ________________________________________ Tuổi: _________

Chuyên ngành: ________________________________________

B) Câu hỏi phỏng vấn

1. Em nghĩ như thế nào về phương pháp CLIL nói chung?

2. Em nghĩ như thế nào về việc dạy kiến thức văn hóa, đặc biệt văn hóa ẩm thức phương
Tây trong lớp CLIL?

3. Em nghĩ như thế nào về việc dạy tư duy phản biện trong lớp CLIL?

63
4. Em nghĩ như thế nào về việc truyền đạt kiến thức môn ẩm thực phương Tây trong lớp
CLIL?

5. Em nghĩ như thế nào về khả năng tăng cường giao tiếp bằng Tiếng Anh trong lớp dạy
CLIL?

6. Em nghĩ như thế nào về mô hình dạy CLIL và mô hình dạy Tiếng Anh chuyên ngành
(ESP), xét về góc độ tạo động lực học tập (motivation)? Em thích mô hình nào? Tại sao?

7. Trong học kỳ tới em có muốn dạy theo mô hình CLIL không?

8. Em có muốn mở rộng mô hình này ra toàn trường không?

9. Hoạt động nào em tâm đắc nhất trong các bài giảng bằng phương pháp CLIL?

10. Theo em, có những thử thách nào trong lớp CLIL? Tại sao?

11. Em có đề xuất gì cho chương trình CLIL tại trường?

CẢM ƠN CÁC EM ĐÃ THAM GIA PHỎNG VẤN

64
 APPENDIX 5: INTERVIEW PROTOCAL FOR TEACHERS

Guideline for Group Interview

Date: ____________________ Location: __________________

Time to start: _____________ Time to finish: ______________

Introduction

Thank you for your voluntary participation in this interview that is expected to last
between ten minutes and fifteen minutes. You will answer some questions during the
interview, and you may wish to stop the interview at any time.

This interview aims to understand teachers’ attitudes toward the use of CLIL in teaching
second year students in cooking program. This interview does not aim to evaluate your
knowledge or English level of proficiency.

With your permission, the interview will be audio-recorded. All the information you
share in the recording is treated confidentially and anonymously. If you were not clear
about the topic, it would be good to ask questions.

Questions A: Interviewee’s background information:

Name: ________________________________________________________

Age: ________________________________________________________

Department:
___________________________________________________________________

Educational level: ______________________________________________

Years of teaching experience: _____________________________________

Numbers of times to go abroad: ____________________________________

Which countries: ________________________________________________

65
Questions B:

Cognitive

1. What do you think about CLIL method in general? (Vừa cognitive, vừa affective)

2. What do you think about teaching cultural knowledge, especially Western culinary
culture in CLIL class?

3. What do you think about teaching critical thinking in CLIL class?

4. How do you think about imparting knowledge of Western cuisine in CLIL class?

5. What do you think about the ability to enhance communication in English in CLIL
classes?

Affective

6. What do you think about the CLIL teaching model and the ESP model in terms of
motivation? Which model do you like? Why?

Behavioral

7. In the next semester, do you want to teach according to CLIL model?

8. Do you want to expand this model to the whole school?

9. What activities do you enjoy the most in the CLIL lectures? (Affective)

10. According to you, what are the challenges in CLIL classes? Why?

11. What suggestions do you have for the CLIL curriculum at the school?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

66
 APPENDIX 6: PHỎNG VẤN GIÁO VIÊN (VIETNAMESE VERSION)

GIỚI THIỆU

Cảm ơn Thầy Cô đã tham gia cuộc phỏng vấn này. Cuộc phỏng vấn có thời lượng từ 10-
15 phút. Thầy/ Cô sẽ trả lời một số câu hỏi trong cuộc phỏng vấn, và Thầy/ Cô có thể
dừng cuộc phỏng vấn bất cứ lúc nào Thầy/ Cô muốn.

Mục đích của cuộc phỏng vấn này là để hiểu thái độ của Thầy/ Cô đối với việc sử dụng
Tiếng Anh trong giảng dạy môn học chuyên ngành.

Cuộc phỏng vấn này không nhằm mục đích đánh giá kiến thức cũng như sự hiểu biết về
Tiếng Anh. Ngoài ra, cuộc phỏng vấn này sẽ được ghi âm với sự đồng ý của Thầy/ Cô.
Tất cả thông tin Thầy/ Cô chia sẻ chỉ được sử dụng cho nghiên cứu này. Trước khi cuộc
phỏng vấn diễn ra, Thầy/ Cô có câu hỏi nào không?

Nếu không, chúng ta bắt đầu.

CÂU HỎI

A) Thông tin của Thầy/ Cô được phỏng vấn

Tên Thầy Cô: ________________________________________

Chuyên ngành: ________________________________________

Thầy Cô giảng dạy Tiếng Anh được bao lâu: ______________________

Số lần Thầy Cô đi nước ngoài: __________________________

Thầy Cô đã đi đến nước nào? ____________________________________________

B) Câu hỏi phỏng vấn

1. Thầy/cô nghĩ như thế nào về phương pháp CLIL nói chung?

2. Thầy/cô nghĩ như thế nào về việc dạy kiến thức văn hóa, đặc biệt văn hóa ẩm thức
phương Tây trong lớp CLIL?

67
3. Thầy/cô nghĩ như thế nào về việc dạy tư duy phản biện trong lớp CLIL?

4. Thầy/cô nghĩ như thế nào về việc truyền đạt kiến thức môn ẩm thực phương Tây trong
lớp CLIL?

5. Thầy/cô nghĩ như thế nào về khả năng tăng cường giao tiếp bằng Tiếng Anh trong lớp
dạy CLIL?

6. Thầy/cô nghĩ như thế nào về mô hình dạy CLIL và mô hình dạy Tiếng Anh chuyên
ngành ( ESP), xét về góc độ tạo động lực học tập (motivation) ? Thầy/cô thích mô hình
nào? Tại sao?
7. Trong học kỳ tới Thầy/cô có muốn dạy theo mô hình CLIL không?
8. Thầy/ cô có muốn mở rộng mô hình này ra toàn trường không?
9. Hoạt động nào Thầy/cô tâm đắc nhất trong các bài giảng bằng phương pháp CLIL?
10. Theo Thầy/cô, có những thử thách nào trong lớp dạy CLIL? Tại sao?

11. Thầy/cô có đề xuất gì cho chương trình dạy CLIL tại trường?
CẢM ƠN CÁC THẦY CÔ ĐÃ THAM GIA PHỎNG VẤN

68
 APPENDIX 7: CLIL SAMPLE LESSON PLAN
Aims
- To present the content of the unit (how to cook BBQ spareribs of pork)
- To introduce the concept of the recipe and its main features.
- To help learners understand that learning can be achieved in a second language.

Criteria For Assessment

Teacher, peer, self-assessment processes, summative assessment (answer the quiz questions)
will be used to access how well learners:
- Understand the recipe, know its culture, know how to present in English as well as know
how to cook BBQ spareribs of pork or other meat recipes.

TEACHING OBJECTIVES
Content
- Introduction of the topic
- Ingredients
- Verbs of preparation
- Instructions
- Cooking the dish
Cognition
- Provide learners with opportunities to understand the key
concepts (basic BBQ spareribs of pork) and apply them
in different ways of cooking meat.
- Enable learners to identify the ingredients as well as
instructions of BBQ spareribs of pork.
- Encourage them to transfer from BBQ spareribs of
pork to adapt to other recipes
- Arouse learners curiosity – creative use of language

Culture
- Identify BBQ spareribs of pork as a Western dish and their own meat dishes.
- Become aware of the importance of the correct steps and add seasonings at the right
time.
- Understand BBQ spareribs of pork as a main course dish
- Understand that they can learn, no matter which language they are using.

Communication
Language of Language for learning Language through learning
learning  Asking each other questions: -Distinguish language needed to

69
 Key vocabulary: -What do you know carry out activities.
spareribs, honey, about…….. - language revised by both the
vinegar, mustard, - Can you tell me teacher and learners.
Worcestershire something about………? Make sure of peer
sauce, tomato - What are the ingredients? explanations
puree, brown stock,  Imperatives and instruction -Record, predict and learn new
Thyme, jacket orders words which arise from
potato, lettuce -Firstly/ then/ next/ finally. - activities
Verbs: How do you cook…?
marinate,  - What are the instructions of
heat, stir-fry, ….?
season,
braise, grill
LEARNING OUTCOMES
By the end of the lesson, learners will be able to:
+ call the names of ingredients in English
+ read and understand the recipe in English
+ explain how to make BBQ spareribs of pork in English
+ cook the dish

Level: European Culinary Lesson: BARBECUED Timing: 4 sessions

SPARERIBS OF PORK
Aims:
- Know the ingredients and processing steps of making BARBECUED
SPARERIBS OF PORK
Key skills (Students will be able to):
- Consider questions about the ingredients and processing steps of making
BARBECUED SPARERIBS OF PORK
Transferable skills:
1. Communicative
- Can organize information about scientific phenomena in an efficient way
2. Methodological

70
- Can active thinking skills to relate, analyze and interpret processes.
- Can apply study skills that include strategic thinking and cooperation.
3. Personal
- Can develop collaborative activities with creativity and confidence.
Teaching Objectives Learning outcomes:
A. Content A. Content
- Ingredients and processing steps of - Recognize Ingredients of
making BARBECUED BARBECUED SPARERIBS OF
SPARERIBS OF PORK PORK
- Able to make BARBECUED
SPARERIBS OF PORK themselves
B. Cognition B. Cognition
- Applied learned cooking rules in - Recognize the correct ingredients to
making BARBECUED make BARBECUED SPARERIBS
SPARERIBS OF PORK OF PORK
- Choose the correct ingredients to - Applied correctly learned cooking
make BARBECUED SPARERIBS rule in making BARBECUED
OF PORK SPARERIBS OF PORK
C. Communication
C.1. Language of learning
Key phrases needed:
- We need…
- You can add some
- That’s right
- chop the onion up finely
- creamy in texture
Key vocabulary: seasoning, herbs, olive or vegetable oil, vinegar,
C.2. Language for learning

71
 - Understanding instruction
- Sharing information with classmates
- Language for predictions
C.3. Language through learning
- Language through activities
- Language that emerges from experiments
D. Culture
- Raise interest in European Culinary
- Raise interest in cooking process
- A look at rule of cooking
References for reinforcement:
https://www.oxfordonlineenglish.com/cooking-class
https://pos.toasttab.com/blog/on-the-line/culinary-terms

Content Teacher and Student’s activities Skills Time

Checking the last Last lesson review: Teamwork 15 mins

lesson’s content and - Teacher prepare PowerPoint Speaking
vocabularies “Roast game of the lucky wheel for Reading
leg of lamb with last lesson of “Roast leg of Content-
potatoes and onions” lamb with potatoes and related
- onions”. knowledge
- Student are divided into 6
teams to compete.
Warm-up - Teacher prepares a video of Speaking 15 mins
Introduction to the making BARBECUED Listening
lesson of making SPARERIBS OF PORK and Note -taking
BARBECUED asks some questions related to
SPARERIBS OF the topic. “What dish is

72
PORK presented in the video?”,
- “What ingredients are there?”,
“How many steps to make the
dish?”, “What to serve with?”
- Students individually answer
questions.
- Then teacher introduces the
lesson of making
BARBECUED SPARERIBS
OF PORK
Vocabulary and - Based on the video in warm-up Speaking 15 mins
content of the dish activities, teacher introduces
ingredients the ingredients of the lesson
introduction - Students get their ingredients
Learn vocabularies and present in their table.
and content of the - Teacher then play bingo game
dish ingredients: to help students learn the
Spareribs vocabularies
Honey
Vinegar
Mustard
Worcestershire sauce
Onion
Tomato puree
Brown broth
Minced garlic
Salt, pepper Thyme
Vocabulary and - Based on the video in warm-up Speaking, 20 mins
content of the dish activities, teacher introduces

73
making procedure
introduction
Steps to make
barbecued spareribs:
-Spareribs are washed
and seasoned with
minced onion,
tomato, and garlic.
-Heat oil for onion,
garlic, tomato sauce.
Then add honey,
vinegar, mustard,
Worcestershire sauce,
brown stock. Then
season with salt,
pepper and thyme
leaves
-Braise the ribs until
cooked, take out the
ribs and grill until the
surface is golden.
-Serve hot with salad
or baked potatoes.
- .
Practice to make the Practice time!
barbecued
spareribs:
- Teacher guides
the making procedure of the note-taking,
dish. Teacher points out teamwork
phrases to learn and as students
to jot down for the next activity
at the same time.
- Students take note the phrases
to prepare for the next activity.
- Students then are divided into
pairs to prepare a phone
conversation. Their topic is to
use phrases and words in the
lesson to guide preparing the
barbecued spareribs.
- Teacher notes students on
winning couple will get an
advantage in the last activity
Cooking 110
skills, mins
speaking
Listening
74
 students to Critical
make the dish. thinking
- Students skills
follow the
instruction and
practice
themselves.
- Students are
encouraged to
asked
questions
while making.
- Teacher goes
around class
and scaffolds
any students
who need help.
- Teacher gives
point (10
scale) for the
most delicous
and explicite
dish of the day
(The couple
winning tin
phone
conversation
activity will
get 1 score

75
 bonus). The
winner will get
0.5 point in
participation
score of the
course.

Last minutes Lesson review and homework: 5 mins

reminder and Homework: to learn and practice the
homework: barbecued spareribs vocabularies,
- Teacher steps of making.
review all the
lesson again
and gives
homework for
students

76
 REFERENCES

Abidin, M. J. Z., Pour-Mohammadi, M., & Alzwari, H. (2012). EFL students' attitudes
towards learning English language: The case of Libyan secondary school
students. Asian social science, 8(2), 119.
Agarwal, J., & Malhotra, N. K. (2005). An integrated model of attitude and affect:
Theoretical foundation and an empirical investigation. Journal of Business
research, 58(4), 483-493.
Aguilar, M., & Rodríguez, R. (2011). Lecturer and student perceptions on CLIL at a
Spanish university. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
(15(2)), 183–197.
Ahmed, S. (2015). Attitudes towards English language learning among EFL learners at
UMSKAL. Journal of Education and Practice, 6 (18), 6-16.
Anzenberger, P. (2015). Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions of English in CLIL Lessons
at an Austrian HTL for Business Informatics and Medical and Health Informatics.
Master of Science in Teaching English, 98.
Ball, P. (2006). Defining CLIL parameters.

Biçaku, R. Ç. (2011). CLIL and teacher training. Procedia-Social and Behavioral

Sciences, 15, 3821-3825.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the Theory of Formative Assessment.
Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, (21(1)).
Broadfoot, P. (2008). An Introduction to Assessment. London: Continuum
Bruton, A. (2011). Are the Differences between CLIL and Non‐CLIL Groups in
Andalusia Due to CLIL?: A Reply to Lorenzo, Casal and Moore. 2010. Applied
Linguistics, (32(2)).
Butler, Y. G. (2005). Content‐based instruction in EFL contexts: Considerations for
effective implementation. JALT Journal, (27(2)), 227–245.
Choy, S. C., & Troudi, S. (2006). An Investigation into the Changes in Perceptions of and
Attitudes Towards Learning English in a Malaysian College. International Journal
of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 18(2), 120-130.
Clegg, J. (2003). The Lingue E Scienze Project: Some Outcomes. L’uso veicolare della
lingua straniera in apprendimenti non linguistici. Centro Diffusione Comunitaire
Quaderni, 6, 88-107.

77
Conn, C. E. (2010). Learning the Hard Way (But Still Learning!): Using Team Teaching
as a Vehicle for Pedagogical Change. Business Communication Quarterly, 73, 87-
91.
Coonan, C. M. (2011). CLIL in (Language) Teacher Training. Studi Di Glottodidattica,
2(1), 114.
Coonan, D. (2003). Planning for CLIL, A general outline and thoughts on two micro
features. L’uso veicolare della lingua straniera in apprendimenti non linguistici.
Centro
Diffusione Comunitaire Quaderni, 6, 23-47.
Corrales, K., & Maloof, C. (2011). Student perceptions on how content based instruction
supports learner development in a foreign language context (Research Report).
Universidad del norte, Barranquilla, Colombia.
Coyle, D. (2006). Content and language integrated learning: Motivating learners and
teachers. Scottish Languages Review, 13, 1-18.
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and Language Integrated Learning: Towards a Connected
Research Agenda for CLIL Pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual
Education and Bilingualism, (10(5)), 543–562. Retrieved from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED490775.pdf.
Coyle, D. (2008). CLIL—A pedagogical approach from the European perspective. In N.
H. Hornberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education (pp. 1200-1214).
Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Coyle, D. (2010). Foreword. In D. Lasagabaster & Ruiz de Zarobe Y. (Eds.), CLIL in
Spain: Implementation, Results and Teacher Training . Newcastle: Cambridge
Scholars Publishing.
Coyle, D. (2011). Post‐method Pedagogies: Using A Second or Other Language as A
Learning Tool in CLIL Settings. In Y. Zarobe, J. Sierra, & F. Puerto (Eds.), Content
and Foreign Language Integrated Learning: Contributions to Multilingualism in
European Contexts . Bern: Peter Lang.
Coyle, D. (2013). Listening to learners: an investigation into ‘successful learning’ across
CLIL contexts. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
(16(3)), 244–266.
Coyle, D., Holmes, B. & King, L. (2009). Towards an integrated curriculum – CLIL
National Statement and
Guidelines.http://.rachelhawkes.com/PandT/nationalstatement.pdf (accessed
16.07.2021)

78
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL.

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and language integrated
learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crouch, S. and Housden, M. (1996). Marketing Research for Manager. Oxford:
Butterworth Heinemann.

Cummins, J. (2001). Negotiating Identities: Education for Empowerment in a diverse

society. Los Angeles: California Association for Bilingual Education.
Dalton-Puffer, C. & Smit, U. (2007). Empirical Perspectives on CLIL Classroom
Discourse. Frankfurt/Wien: Peter Lang Verlag
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to
principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182-204.
Dalton‐Puffer, C., Nikula, T., & Smit, U. (2010). Language Use and Language Learning
in CLIL Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Darn, S. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): A European
Overview. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED490775.pdf.
Deller, S. & Price, C. (2007). Teaching other subjects through English. Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Denman, J., Tanner, R., & Graaff, R. de. (2013). CLIL in junior vocational secondary
education: challenges and opportunities for teaching and learning. International
Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, (16(3)), 285–300.
Deterding, N. M., & Waters, M. C. (2018). Flexible Coding of In-depth Interviews: A
Twenty-first-century Approach. Sociological Methods and Research.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118799377
Dobbins, R. (1996). Student teacher self‐esteem in the practicum. Australian Journal of
Teacher Education, (21(2)).
Dörneyi, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Harlow: Longman.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: Quantitative, Qualitative
and Mixed Methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and Researching Motivation. Harlow:
Pearson Education.

79
Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Harcourt brace
Jovanovich college publishers.
Eurydice Report (2006) Content and Language Learning (CLIL) at Schools in Europe.
Brussels: Eurydice.
Feng, R., & Chen, H. (2009). An Analysis on the Importance of Motivation and Strategy
in Postgraduates English Acquisition. English Language Teaching, 2(3), 93-97.
Fraenkel, R.J. and Wallen, N.E. (1996). How to design and evaluate Research in
Education. New York: McGraw Hill.

Fylan, F. (2005). Semi-structured interviewing. In J. Miles & P. Gilbert (Eds.), A

handbook of research methods for clinical and health psychology (pp.65-77). New
York, NY: Oxford University Press

Garcia, O. (2009). Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective.

Chichester: Wiley‐Blackwell.
García, O. (2011). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective.
Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Gierlinger, E (2012). T. “CLIL Models”. https://clilingmesoftly.wordpress.com.
(accessed on 16/07/2021).
Grin, F. (2005). The value added of CLIL: A language policy evaluation approach. Paper
presented at the conference The Changing European Classroom—The Potential of
Plurilingual Education. Luxembourg, March 9-11.
Hansen Pauly M, A., Favilli, F., & Novotná, J. (2009). Teacher education for CLIL
across contexts. From scaffolding framework to teacher portfolio for Content and
Language Integrated Learning.
Harrop, E. (2012). Content and Language Integrated (CLIL): Limitation and Possibilities.
Encuentro, 21(62), 66
Hillyard, S. (2011). First steps in CLIL: Training the teachers. Latin American Journal of
Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 1-12.
Josephson, J. (2014). uneducated educator: 8 Rules for education. Retrieved from
http://theuneducatededucator.edublogs.org/2014/07/23/7‐rules‐for‐education.

80
Knell, E., Qiang, H., Pei, M., Chi, Y., Siegel, L. S., Zhao, L., & Zhao, W. (2010). Early
English immersion and literacy in Xi'an, China. Modern Language Journal, (91(3)),
395–417.
Kibuuka, P. and Karuga, R.(2003). Certificate Geography for Secondary School, Form
One. Nairobi: Oxford University Press.
Lasagabaster, D. (2008). Foreign language competence in content and language
integrated courses. The Open Applied Linguistics Journal, 1(1).

Lasagabaster, D., & Huguet A. (2007). Multilingualism in European Bilingual Contexts:

Language Use and Attitudes: Clevedon.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2010). Immersion and CLIL in English: More
differences than similarities. ELT journal, 64(4), 367-375.
Leavitt, M. (2006). Team-teaching: The benefits and challenges. Speaking of Teaching,
16(1), 14.
Lesca, U. (2012). An introduction to CLIL. Notes based on a CLIL course at British
Study Center-Oxford. Instituto di Instruzione Superiore-Quintino Sella-Biella: IIS
Q. Sella Biella: Recuperado el, 18.
Llinares, A., & Morton, T. (Eds.) (2017). Applied Linguistics Perspectives on CLIL.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Longhurst, R. (2009). Interviews: In-Depth, Semi-Structured. New Zealand : University
of Waikato.
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight
potential.

Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight

potential. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
Marsh, D., & Langé, G. (2000). Using languages to learn and learning to use
languages. Finland: University of Jyväskylä.

Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols Martín, M. J. (2012). European framework
for CLIL teacher education.
Masgoret, A. M., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation and second language
learning: A meta‐analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates.
Language Learning, 2003(53(1)), 123–163.

81
McDougald, J. (2015). Teachers´ attitudes, perceptions and experiences in CLIL: A look
at content and language. Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J., 17(1), pp. 25-41. Retrieved
from http://dx.doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2015.1.a02
Mehisto, P. (2008). CLIL counterweights: Recognising and decreasing disjuncture in
CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 93-119.
Middlebrook, P. N. (1980). Social psychology and modem life. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Murphy, L., & Maguire, W. (2011), Applying mixed methods research in evaluating
clinical trials. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 8(1), pp. 72-90.
Mourssi, A., & Kharosi, A. S. A. M. (2014). The Benefits And Challenges Of
Implementing Content And Language Integrated Learning (Clil) At The Higher
College Of Technology- Sultanate Of Oman. International Journal of Language
Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 7(4), pp. 272-283
Nhan, T. (2013). Promoting content and language integrated learning in gifted high
schools in Vietnam: Challenges and impacts. Internet Journal of Language, Culture
and Society, 38, 146-53.
Oanh, T. T. H. (2018). The Impact Of Clil On Primary School Students’english
Vocabulary Development And Content Knowledge. Diversity And Unity, 75.
Ohmori, A. (2014). Exploring the potential of CLIL in English language teaching in
Japanese Universities: An innovation for the development of effective teaching
and global awareness. The Journal of Rikkyo University Language Center, 32, 39-
51.
Orodho, J.A. (2008). Techniques of writing research proposals and reports in education
and social sciences. Nairobi: Masola Publishers.
Papaja, K. (2012). The impact of students’ attitude on CLIL: A study conducted in higher
education. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning.
Volume 5 (2). Pages: 28-56
Pavelenko, A. (2002). Post‐structuralist Approaches to the Study of Social Factors in
Second Language Learning and Use. In Portraits of the L2 User. Clevedon:
MultiLingual Matters.
Railsback, J. (2002). Project-Based Instruction: Creating Excitement for Learning. By
Request Series.
Richards, J. & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

82
Rizagul, S. (2017). Students’ Attitudes and Perceptions of Content and Language
Integrated Learning in a Secondary School. Master’s thesis, Nazarbayev University
Graduate School of Education, Nur-Sultan.
Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (2003). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science
students and researchers. SAGE.
San Isidro Agrelo, X. (2009). CLIL, un nuevo horizonte en la formación del
profesorado. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated
Learning, 2(1).

San Isidro, X. (2010). An insight into Galician CLIL: Provision and results. CLIL in
Spain: Implementation, results and teacher training, 55-78.

Schiffman, L. G., & Kanuk, L. L. (2004). Consumer Behaviour 8th edition Published by
Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River, NJ, 35-43.
Shaw, P. (2013). Adjusting practices to aims in integrated language learning and
disciplinary learning. Recherche et pratiques pédagogiques en langues de
spécialité. Cahiers de l'Apliut, 32(3), 15-29.
Sicam, F. P. M., & Lucas, R. I. G. (2016): Language attitudes of adolescent Filipino
bilingual learners towards English and Filipino. Asian Englishes, 18 (2), 109-128.
DOI: 10.1080/13488678.2016.1179474.
Stern, H. (1998). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University
Press
Sudhoff, J. (2010). CLIL and Intercultural Communicative Competence: Foundations and
Approaches towards a Fusion. International CLIL Research Journal, (1(3).
Suhaida, O., & Joan, J. (2014). Exploring CLIL in English as a Second Language (ESL)
Lessons at the Tertiary Level: A Pilot Study at a Public University in Sabah,
Malaysia. Asian Journal of Humanities and Social Studies, 2. Retrived from
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Exploring-CLIL-in-English-as-a-Second-
Language-at-A-Omar-James/6469a441963bdfcfb3f3e5b1f432ac466ddbdfa8#paper-
header
Thijssen, W., & Ubaghs, L. (2011). Teachers' and students' perceptions of the effects of
content and language integrated (CLIL) chemistry education: a case study at a
secondary school in the Netherlands. Technische Universiteit Eindhoven (TUE),
Eindhoven. Retrieved from http://alexandria.tue.nl/extra2/afstversl/esoe/716591.pdf.

83
Tho, V. D. (2015). The Introduction of Clil (Content And Language Integrated Learning)
To English Teaching And Learning At University Of Economics Ho Chi Minh City.
Thuy, L. N. T. (2016). Reconsidering the first steps of CLIL implementation in
Vietnam. European Journal of Language Policy, 8(1), 29-56.
Trần, T. T. H. (2018). Vietnamese High School English Teachers’attitudes, Perceptions
And Experience In Clil.
Trang, B. L. D., & Nga, T. T. T. (2015). CLIL in Primary English Lessons: Teachers’
Perspectives1. Language Education in Asia, 6(2), 90-106.
Triandis, H. C. (1971). Attitude and Attitude Change. Wiley Foundations of Social
Psychology Series.
Viet Nam Government (2008). Decision 1400/QD-TTg on the Approval of the Project
entitled “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the National Education
System, Period 2008-2020”.

Viet Nam Government (2017). Decision 2080/QD-TTg on the Approval of the

Adjustment to Project entitled “Teaching and Learning Foreign Languages in the
National Education System, Period 2017-2025”.

Wenden, A. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy.

Wolff, D. (2007). CLIL: Bridging the gap between school and working life. In D. Marsh,
& D. Wolff (Eds.), Diverse contexts—converging goals. CLIL in Europe (pp. 15-
25). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Yu, V. W. S., & Atkinson, P. A. (1988). An investigation of the language difficulties
experienced by Hong Kong secondary school students in English ‐medium schools.
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, (9(4)), 307–322.
Zughoul, M. R., Ahlawat, K., & Mezher, A. (1988). Quality before quantity and age in
foreign language introduction: an investigation into the effects of an early start in
EFL learning on students‟ achievement. The Educational Journal, 16.

84