Why focus on Content and Language Integrated Learning in LOTE?

CLIL creates situations for content-based, meaningful language use in LOTE classrooms or in other subjects, hereby promoting learners’ motivation for LOTE. However, CLIL experts stress that CLIL often is reduced to Content and English Integrated Learning (CEIL). ‘Although the first ‘L’ in CLIL is meant to stand for any language, it would be an extreme case of denial to claim that this is also the case in reality. CLIL languages tend to be recruited from a small group of prestigious languages, and outside the English-speaking countries, the prevalence of English as CLIL medium is overwhelming.’

Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011):
“Content-and-language integrated learning: from practice to principles?” Annual Review of applied linguistics 31, s. 182-204; quote on p. 183.  The CLIL-LOTE-START project Haataja et al., 2011, s. 4. Available here.  made the point that:

“the translation of CLIL into classroom practice as well as its further development […] have been mainly restricted to English-language contexts. This is even though the promotion of Languages Other Than English (LOTE) is a primary objective for language teaching in schools and one of the main aims of European language policy.”

There is a general need to give more attention to transitions across educational levels, both institutional/sociocultural and cognitive transitions See Gueudet et al. (2016).
Gueudet, G., Bosch, M., Disessa, A., Kwon, O. & Verschaffel, L. (2016). Transitions in Mathematics Education. Springer. .

In an English language teaching context, Burns et al. (2013) Anne Burns et al. (2013).
Key Factors and Challenges in Transition from Primary to Secondary Schooling in ELT: An International Perspective. ELT Research Papers 13–08. London, UK: British Council. 

See for a discussion of potential challenges of transitioning from secondary CLIL to tertiary EMI education: Macaro et al. (2019). Transition from secondary school CLIL to EMI at university: Initial evidence from research in Italy. ELT Research Papers 19.07.  British Council. conclude in respect to the transition from primary to secondary education that ‘in many countries, syllabus documents do not take into account continuity of content and methodology in the transition from Level 1 to Level 2’ and that it is crucial that ‘the knowledge and experiences students acquire at Level 1 are not lost at Level 2 and so that students do not become demotivated about learning English.’

Within CLIL, transitions across educational levels are clear field for
development ’Notable is the paucity of references in the literature to CLIL in relation to transition. Even major surveys on MFL teaching and learning in primary and secondary schools (e.g. Tinsley and Doležal, 2019) do not include CLIL.’ (Chambers 2020, p. 69)

Gary N. Chambers (2020). What Pupils Say about Transition (KS2–3) and What This Might Mean for CLIL. In: K. Bower et al. Curriculum Integrated Language Teaching. CLIL in Practice. Cambridge University Press, p. 63-92. . CLIL can in itself be represented as a horizontal transition between language and content Elisabeth Kolb (2016),
“Schulische Übergänge”, in Burwitz-Melzer Eva, Mehlhorn Grit, Riemer Claudia, Bausch Karl-Richard, Krumm Hans-Jürgen (eds), Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht, 6., völlig überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage, Francke, Tübingen, p. 192. . Furthermore, this website considers CLIL LOTE transitions in a horizontal direction Beacco et al. (2016).
A Handbook for Curriculum Development and Teacher Training. The Language Dimension in All Subjects, Council of Europe.

See also the distinction between vertical and horizontal coherence in Beacco et al. (2016). for the development and implementation of curricula for plurilingual and intercultural education. Council of Europe. by supporting a plurilingual perspective in CLIL. Instead of teaching the target language in isolation, the project promotes a pluralistic approach to languages in CLIL (CLsIL) The concept of Content and Languages Integrated Learning (CLsIL) has been introduced by Candelier et al. in the “Discovery Module” of the Framework of Reference for Pluralistic Approaches to Languages and Cultures (FREPA/CARAP).

Based on Candelier et al’s (2012) definition for pluralistic approaches to languages and cultures, CLsIL is in our project defined as follows: The term ‘Content and Languages Integrated Learning (CLsIL)’ refers to didactic approaches that use teaching/learning activities involving several (i.e. more than one) languages/varieties of languages in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), instead of dealing with the target language in isolation.  offering curricula and teaching/learning activities involving more than one language, including home languages.