Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Vol. 9:1 (2021) ► pp.31–57

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Does CLIL promote intercultural sensitivity?

A case-study in Belgian CLIL and non-CLIL secondary schools

ORCiD logo with link | Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Published online: 8 July 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.19015.loc
Abstract
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) refers to the teaching of non-linguistic subjects through an additional language. Culture is considered as one of the corner stones of CLIL pedagogy. There is currently little research that explores the role of culture or intercultural sensitivity in CLIL, however. The present study investigates to what extent two different educational contexts (CLIL and non-CLIL) influence students’ level of intercultural sensitivity, using the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale ( (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural communication sensitivity scale. Human Communication, 31, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). The sample consists of 177 secondary grammar school students from 2 CLIL schools (n = 98) and 2 non-CLIL / regular schools (n = 79). The results show that intercultural sensitivity is not as self-evident as one may expect in a CLIL setting. Some other factors come into play, i.e. gender, language background and school grade.
Samenvatting
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) verwijst naar het onderwijzen van niet-linguïstische onderwerpen via een extra taal. Cultuur wordt beschouwd als een van de hoekstenen van de CLIL-pedagogiek. Er is momenteel echter weinig onderzoek gedaan naar de rol van cultuur of interculturele gevoeligheid bij CLIL. De huidige studie onderzoekt in hoeverre twee verschillende educatieve contexten (CLIL en niet-CLIL) het niveau van interculturele gevoeligheid van studenten beïnvloeden, met behulp van de Intercultural Sensitivity Scale ( (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural communication sensitivity scale. Human Communication, 31, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). De steekproef bestaat uit 177 middelbare scholieren van 2 CLIL-scholen (n = 98) en 2 niet-CLIL / reguliere scholen (n = 79). De resultaten laten zien dat interculturele gevoeligheid niet zo vanzelfsprekend is als je zou verwachten in een CLIL-setting. Enkele andere factoren spelen een rol, zoals geslacht, taalachtergrond en leerjaar.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Intercultural sensitivity in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL)
  • 3.The study
    • 3.1Goals and research questions
    • 3.2Participants
    • 3.3Research tools, procedure and data analysis
    • 3.4Confirmatory factor analysis and scale reliability results
  • 4.Results: The groups compared
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
References (60)
References
Alred, G., & Byram, M. (2002). Becoming an intercultural mediator: A longitudinal study of residence abroad. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Education, 23(5), 339–352. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, P. H., Lawton, L., Rexeisen, R. J., & Hubbard, A. C. (2005). Short-term study abroad and intercultural sensitivity: A pilot study. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(4), 457–469. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bhawuk, D., & Brislin, R. (1992). The measurement of intercultural sensitivity using the concepts of individualism and collectivism. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16(4), 413–436. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2009). Choosing the right type of rotation in PCA and EFA. Shiken-JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter, 13(3), 20–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
CEFR: Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (2001). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
CEFR: Companion volume with new descriptors (2018). Council of Europe, [URL]
Çetin Köroğlu, K. Z. (2016). Measuring English language teacher candidates’ intercultural sensitivity: A key element to foster intercultural communicative competence. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET), 3(1), 43–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, G. M. (2010). The impact of intercultural sensitivity on ethnocentrism and intercultural communication apprehension. Intercultural Communication Studies, 19(1), 1–9.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen, G. M., & Starosta, W. J. (1997). A review of the concept of intercultural sensitivity. Human Communication, 11, 1–16.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2000). The development and validation of the intercultural communication sensitivity scale. Human Communication, 31, 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chocce, J., Johnson, D. A., & Yossatorn, Y. (2015). Predictive factors of freshmen’s intercultural sensitivity. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 10(5), 778–782. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coyle, D. (2002). Against all odds: Lessons from content & language integrated learning in English secondary schools, in D. So and G. Jones (eds.), Education and Society in Plurilingual Contexts (pp. 37–55). VUB press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). CLIL – a pedagogical approach from the European perspective. In N. Van Deusen-Scholl, & N. Hornberger, Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd edition (pp. 97–111). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coyle, D., Holmes, B., & King, L. (2009). Towards an integrated curriculum – CLIL National Statement and Guidelines. The Languages Company.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cui, G., & Van den Berg, S. (1991). Testing the construct validity of intercultural effectiveness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 15(2), 227–241. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Outcomes and processes in CLIL: Current research from Europe, in W. Delanoy, and L. Volkman (eds). Future Perspectives for English Language Teaching (pp. 139–157). Carl Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer. (2009). Communicative competence and the CLIL lesson. In: Y. Ruiz de Zarobe, & R. M. Jiménez Catalan (eds.). Content and Language Integrated Learning Evidence from Research in Europe (pp. 197–214). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, J., & Brember, I. (2001). The closing gap in attitudes between boys and girls: A five-year longitudinal study. Educational Psychology, 21(1), 103–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Smet, A., Mettewie, L., Galand, B., Hiligsmann, Ph., & Van Mensel, L. (2018). Classroom anxiety and enjoyment in CLIL and non-CLIL: Does the target language matter? Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(1), 47–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: theory and applications (2nd Ed.). Sage Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eurydice, European Union Directorate-General for Education and Culture. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. Eurydice European Unit.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernández Fontecha, A. F., & Terrazas Gallego, M. (2012). The role of motivation and age in vocabulary knowledge. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 91, 39–62.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finch, H. (2006). Comparison of the performance of varimax and promax rotations: Factor structure recovery for dichotomous items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43(1), 39–52. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fritz, W., Mollenberg, A., & Chen, G. M. (2002). Measuring intercultural sensitivity in different cultural contexts. Intercultural Communication Studies, 11(2), 165–176.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gómez-Parra, M. E. (2020). Measuring intercultural learning through CLIL. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 9(1), 43–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hammer, M. R., Bennett, M. J., & Wiseman, R. (2003). Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 271, 421–443. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holm, K., Nokelainen, P., & Tirri, K. (2009). Relationship of gender and academic achievement to Finnish students’ intercultural sensitivity. High Ability Studies, 20(2), 187–200. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hu, A. (2003). Schulischer Fremdsprachenunterricht und migrationsbedingte Mehrsprachigkeit. Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
IBM Corp. Released 2016. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. IBM Corp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koro, R. (2016). To what extent is a CLIL approach useful in teaching intercultural understanding in MFL? (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Institute of Education. University of Reading, UK.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krumpal, I. (2013). Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review. Quality & Quantity, 47(4), 2025–2047. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lin, Y., & Rancer, A. S. (2003). Sex differences in intercultural communication apprehension, ethnocentrism, and intercultural willingness to communicate. Psychological Reports, 921, 195–200. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Littlejohn, A. (2008). The tip of the iceberg: Factors affecting learner motivation. Regional Language Centre Journal, 39(2), 214–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lochtman, K. (2018). Plurilingualism in schooling policies: The Brussels melting pot. Language Education and Multilingualism, 11, 157–167. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McMurray, A. (2007). Measuring intercultural sensitivity of international and domestic college students: The impact of international travel (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). University of Florida, USA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Medina-Lopez-Portillo, A. (2004). Intercultural learning assessment: The link between program duration and the development of intercultural sensitivity. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 10(1), 179–199. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Méndez García, M. C. (2012). The potential of CLIL for intercultural development: a case study of Andalusian bilingual schools. Language and Intercultural Communication, 12(3), 196–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morales, A. (2017). Intercultural sensitivity, gender, and nationality of third culture kids attending an international high school. Journal of International Education Research, 13(1), 35–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nikula, T., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Llinares, A. (2013). CLIL classroom discourse. Research from Europe. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 1(1), 70–100. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rohia, A., & Sommier, M. (2018). Viewing CLIL through the eyes of former pupils: insights into foreign language and intercultural attitudes. Language and Intercultural Communication, 18(6), 631–647. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Romanowski, P. (2018). CLIL’s role in facilitating intercultural learning. Applied Linguistics Papers, 25(2), 71–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruokonen, I., & Kairavuori, S. (2012). Intercultural sensitivity of the Finnish ninth graders. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 451, 32–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spector, P. (1992). Summated rating scale construction. Sage. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steinkühler, D. (2010). Delayed project terminations in the venture capital context. Josef Eul Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Straffon, D. A. (2003). Assessing the intercultural sensitivity of high school students attending an international school. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 271, 487–501. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sudhoff, J. (2010). CLIL and intercultural communicative competence: foundations and approaches towards a fusion. International CLIL Research Journal, 1(3), 30–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Surmont, J., Struys, E., Van Den Noort, M., & Van De Craen, P. (2016). The effects of CLIL on mathematical content learning: A longitudinal study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 6 (2). 319–337. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tamam, E. (2010). Examining Chen and Starosta’s model of intercultural sensitivity in a multiracial collectivistic country. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 39(3), 173–183. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, E. (1994). A learning model for becoming interculturally competent. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 18(3), 389–408. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tompkins, A., Cook, T., Miller, E., & LePeau, L. A. (2017). Gender influences on students’ study abroad participation and intercultural competence. Journal of Student Affairs and Research Practice, 54(2), 204–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tuncel, I., & Arıcıoğlu, A. (2018). The factors affecting the intercultural sensitivity perception level of psychological counselling and guidance students. International Education Studies, 11(3), 61–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wang, W., & Zhou, M. (2016). Validation of the short form of the intercultural sensitivity scale (ISS-15). International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 551, 1–7. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables: Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modelling: Concepts, issues, and applications (p. 56–75). Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, J. F. (2015). Examining Chen and Starosta’s model of intercultural sensitivity in the Taiwanese cultural context. I.J. Modern Education and Computer Science, 61, 1–8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yurtseven, N., & Altun, S. (2015). Intercultural sensitivity in today’s global classes: Pre-service teachers’ perceptions. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 2(1), 49–54. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zoon Roh, S. (2014). Factors affecting intercultural sensitivity of Korean adolescences. International Information Institute, 17(9), 4127–4136.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lemut Bajec, Melita, Tina Štemberger & Silva Bratož
2025. Enhancing intercultural competences with the CulCLIL model. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue