In recent years, CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) has become a buzzword among educators who want to make classrooms more dynamic and prepare students for a global world. While this approach has worked well in many bilingual and international schools, bringing it into public schools is a different story—full of both promise and hurdles.
One of the biggest challenges is finding teachers who can do it all. Many public school teachers are trained to teach either a subject like math or history or a foreign language—but rarely both at once. A good CLIL teacher needs to feel comfortable explaining science in English, for example, while also helping students build the language skills they need to talk about it. This combination of deep content knowledge and strong language ability doesn’t appear overnight. It calls for training programs that truly prepare teachers for this dual role.
Then there’s the question of how schools are structured. Many public school systems work with rigid national curricula, where lessons, textbooks, and exams are all set in stone. Teachers often don’t have the freedom to experiment with cross-curricular methods or adapt lessons for a bilingual approach. CLIL, on the other hand, thrives on flexibility. It needs teachers and students to move fluidly between language and content—and that can’t happen when every minute of the lesson is scripted.
Student readiness is another piece of the puzzle. In a typical public school classroom, students come from all sorts of language backgrounds. Some may be comfortable enough to tackle history or science in a foreign language. Others may struggle to form basic sentences. Good CLIL lessons include scaffolding—visuals, simplified texts, group work—so everyone can follow along. But underfunded schools may not have the resources, staff, or time to give students this extra support.
Assessment adds to the challenge. Most schools still rely on standardized tests that separate language learning and subject knowledge. CLIL calls for new kinds of tests that measure how well students use language to explain what they know. Creating these tools, training teachers to use them fairly, and making sure they fit national standards takes time and careful planning.
There are cultural concerns too. In some countries, people worry that using a foreign language in the classroom might weaken the national language or give unfair advantages to students from wealthier families. In Turkey, for instance, CLIL is often seen as something only expensive private schools can offer. If we want CLIL to become truly inclusive, it needs to be shown as a way for all students—no matter their background—to build new skills and confidence.
Making this shift takes more than just individual effort. School leaders and policymakers need to back teachers up with training, clear guidelines, and enough resources to make CLIL sustainable. Teachers who feel supported are more likely to keep trying new things, even when it’s tough.
Despite all these obstacles, CLIL is not out of reach for public schools. In fact, its focus on critical thinking, cultural awareness, and real-life skills fits perfectly with what education systems around the world want for their students. But big changes don’t happen overnight. Small pilot programs, team teaching, and sharing ideas between schools can help bridge the gap.
In the end, if we really want CLIL to work for everyone, we need to see it as more than just a trend for elite schools. It can be a path toward classrooms that prepare all students to learn, communicate, and connect in our multilingual world—if we’re willing to invest in teachers, rethink rigid systems, and believe that every student deserves the chance to learn in new ways.
References
- Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge University Press.
- Mehisto, P. (2012). Criteria for producing CLIL learning material. Encuentro, 21, 15–33.
- Eurydice Report (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. Brussels: European Commission.
- Bentley, K. (2010). The TKT Course CLIL Module. Cambridge University Press.
- Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., Lorenzo, F., & Nikula, T. (2014). Language Use and Language Learning in CLIL Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.