Success or Failure? Polish CLIL Teachers’ Perspective: A Qualitative Study Based on Interviews

Katarzyna Papaja

doi:10.18290/rh257310.7

Published : 2025-12-29

Vol. 73 No. 10 (2025)

Success or Failure? Polish CLIL Teachers’ Perspective: A Qualitative Study Based on Interviews

Katarzyna Papaja

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2808-443X

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18290/rh257310.7

Abstract

This study explores the effectiveness of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) from the perspective of teachers within the Polish educational context. While CLIL has been recognized as a successful model for integrating subject content with foreign language instruction, its implementation in Poland remains under-researched, particularly concerning teacher competence and perceptions. Drawing on qualitative data from interviews with 149 CLIL teachers across primary, junior high, and high schools, the study examines how educators perceive success and failure in their CLIL practice, alongside the perceived advantages and disadvantages of the approach. Findings suggest that while many teachers view CLIL as an opportunity for professional development and learner advancement, significant challenges persist. These include curriculum overload, insufficient teacher training, lack of appropriate materials, and systemic issues such as final assessments conducted in Polish rather than the CLIL target language. Despite these obstacles, many teachers report a sense of accomplishment linked to student engagement and success, both academically and professionally. The study underscores the need for targeted institutional support, curriculum reform, and improved teacher preparation to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of CLIL in Poland.

Keywords:

CLIL, teacher education, qualitative research, content and language integration learning, reflection, professional development

Details

References

Statistics

Authors

Download files

pdf

Altmetric indicators

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

Alonso, E., Grisaleña, J., & Campo, A. (2008). Plurilingual education in secondary schools: Analysis of results. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(1), 36–49.

Apsel, C. (2012). Coping with CLIL: Dropouts from CLIL streams in Germany. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(4). Retrieved on 5 July 2028 from http://www.icrj.eu.

Banegas, D. L. (2011). Content and language integrated learning in Argentina 2008–2011. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 33–50.

Banegas, D. L. (2017). Teacher-developed materials for CLIL: Frameworks, sources, and activities. Asian EFL Journal, 19(3), 31–48.

Bruton, A. (2011). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the research. System, 39(4), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.08.002

Cammarata, L. (2009). Negotiating curricular transitions: Foreign language teachers’ learning experience with content-based instruction. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue canadienne des la langues vivantes, 65(4), 559–585. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.65.4.559

Cantón, A. O., & San Isidro, X. (2019). Language as the articulator of CLIL ecosystem: the Spanish case. Nebrija Journal of Applied Linguistics to Language Teaching, 13(27), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.26378/rnlael1327338

Cherro Samper, M. (2015). Evaluation of the implementation of CLIL (Content and language integrated learning) methodology in the didactics of the English language in preschool education course taught in the preschool education teacher undergraduate program at the University of Alicante. [PhD Thesis]. Universidad de Alicante. Retrieved on 2 June 2020 from: https://rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/52889/1/tesis_myriam_cherro_semper.pdf

Coonan, C. (2007). Insider views of the CLIL class through teacher self-observation-introspection. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,10(5), 625–646. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb463.0

Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge University Press.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated (CLIL) classrooms. John Benjamins.

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 182–204. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000092

Díaz, P. C., & Requejo, P. (2008). Teacher beliefs in CLIL education project. Porta Linguarum, 10, 151–161. https://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.31786

Durán-Martínez, R., Beltrán-Llavador, F., & Martínez-Abad, F. (2022). Training priorities in primary education bilingual programmes in Spain. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(3), 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1827387

Feryok, A. (2008). The impact of TESOL on maths and science teachers. ELT Journal, 62(2), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl054

Gierlinger, E. W. (2007). Modular CLIL in lower secondary education: Some insights from a research project in Austria. In C. Dalton-Puffer & U. Smit (Eds.), Empirical perspectives on CLIL classroom discourse (pp. 79–118). Peter Lang.

Gondová, D. (2012). Identifying the needs of CLIL teachers at lower and upper-secondary schools. Journal of Interdisciplinary Philology, 3(3), 5–22.

Hillyard, S. (2011). First steps in CLIL: Training the teachers. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 1–12.

Infante, D., Benvenuto, G., & Lastrucci, E. (2009). The effects of CLIL from the perspective of experienced teachers. In D. Marsh, P. Mehisto, D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. J. Frigols-Martin, S. Hughes & G. Lange (Eds.), CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field. (pp. 156–163). University of Jyväskylä.

Johnson, M. (2012). Bilingual degree teacher’s beliefs: A case study in a Tertiary Setting. Pulso Revista de Educación, 35, 49–74. https://doi.org/10.58265/pulso.5046

Lazarević, N. (2022). CLIL teachers’ reflections and attitudes: Surviving at the deep end. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(2), 571–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2019.1703897

Lo, Y. Y. (2019). Development of the beliefs and language awareness of content subject teachers in CLIL. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 22(7), 818–832. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2017.1318821

Lofft Basse, R. (2016). Assessment for Learning in the CLIL classroom. A corpus based study of teacher motivational L2 strategies and student motivation and metacognitive abilities [PhD Thesis]. Universida Autonoma de Madrid. https://repositorio.uam.es/bitstream/handle/10486/671766/basse_lofft_rachel.pdf?sequence=1

Lopriore, L. (2018). Reframing teaching knowledge in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): a European perspective. Language Teaching Research, 24(1), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818777518

Lorenzo, F., Casal, S., & Moore, P. (2010). The effects of content and language integrated learning in European Education: Key findings from the Andalusian Bilingual Sections Evaluation Project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 418–442. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp041

Lyster, R. & Ballinger, S. (2011). Content-based language teaching: Convergent concerns across divergent contexts. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168811401150

Maley, A. (2011). Squaring the circle – Reconciling materials as constraint with materials as empowerment. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Materials Development in Language Teaching (pp. 379–402). (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2010). European Framework for CLIL Teacher Education. ECML.

Massler, U. (2012). Primary CLIL and its stakeholders: What children, parents and teachers think of the potential merits and pitfalls of CLIL modules in primary teaching. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(4), 36–46.

Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Content and language integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Macmillan Education.

Méndez García, M. C. (2014). A case study on teachers’ insights into their students’ language and cognition development through the Andalusian CLIL Programme. Porta Linguarum, 22, 23–39.

Moore, P., & Lorenzo, F. (2007). Adapting authentic materials for CLIL classrooms: An empirical study. VIEWZ: Vienna English Working Papers, 16(3), 28–35.

Muszyńska, B., & Papaja, K. (2019). Zintegrowane kształcenie przedmiotowo-językowe (CLIL). Wprowadzenie [Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Introduction]. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Nagatomo, D. H. (2012). Exploring Japanese university English teachers’ professional identity. Multilingual Matters.

Navés, T. (2009). Effective content and language integrated learning (CLIL) programmes. In Y. Ruiz de Zarobe & R. M. Jiménez Catalán (Eds.), Content and Language Integrated Learning: Evidence from Research in Europe (pp. 22–40). Multilingual Matters.

O’Dwyer, F., & de Boer, M. (2015). Approaches to assessment in CLIL classrooms: Two case studies. Language Learning in Higher Education, 5(2), 397–421. https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2015-0019

Otto, A., & Estrada, J. L. (2019). Towards an understanding of CLIL assessment practices in a European context. CLIL Journal of Innovation and Research in Plurilingual and Pluricultural Education, 2(1), 31–42.

Papadopoulos, I., & Griva, E. (2014). “Learning in the traces of Greek culture”: A CLIL project for raising cultural awareness and developing L2 Skills. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 8(1), 76–92.

Papaja, K. (2014). Focus on CLIL. A qualitative evaluation of content and language integrated learning (CLIL) in Polish secondary education. Cambridge Scholars.

Paran, A. (2010). ELT Journal Debate: CLIL – Content and language is an illusion? In 44th Annual International IATEFL Conference and Exhibition, Harrogate, 7th-11th April 2010. Retrieved on 11 May 2010 from: http://iatefl.britishcouncil.org/2010/sessions/2010-04-10/elt-journal-debate-clil-content-and-language-illusion

Pavón Vázquez, V., & Rubio, F. (2010). Teachers’ concerns and uncertainties about the introduction of CLIL programmes. Porta Linguarium, (14), 45-58. kttps://doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.31943;

Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.630064

Savic, V. (2010). Are we ready for implementing CLIL in primary language classrooms? British Council Serbia ELTA Newsletter, May. Retrieved on 7 June 2010 from http://www.britishcouncil.org/ro/serbia-elta-newsletter-2010- may.htm

Serragiotto, G. (2007). Assessment and evaluation in CLIL. In D. Marsh & D. Wolff (Eds.), Diverse contexts – Converging goals: CLIL in Europe (pp. 271–286). Peter Lang.

Van Lier, L. (1988). The Classroom and the Language Learner. Longman.

Várkuti, A. (2010). Linguistic benefits of the CLIL approach: Measuring linguistic competences. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(3), 67–79.

Vázquez, G. (2007). Models of CLIL: An evaluation of its status drawing on the German experience: A critical report on the limits of reality and perspectives. Revista española de lingüística aplicada, Vol. Extra 1, 95–111.

Wesche, M.B. (2010). Content-based second language instruction. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 275–293). Oxford University Press.

Wolff, D. (2012). The European framework for CLIL teacher education. Synergies Italie, (8), 105–116.

Yassin, S. M., Tek, O. E., Alimon, H., Baharom, S., & Ying, L.Y. (2010). Teaching science through English: Engaging pupils cognitively. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(3), 46–59.