Willingness, Proficiency, or Supports? Challenges in Implementing Content and Language Integrated Learning for Taiwan K-12 Teachers ^†

Abstract

After the Taiwanese government launched the Blueprint for Developing Taiwan into a Bilingual Nation by 2030, the Implementation Project of Bilingual Instruction in several domains of primary and junior high school education was promoted by the Taiwan Ministry of Education. Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is a dual-objective strategy in which students simultaneously acquire language skills and subject knowledge. CLIL has been widely implemented and proven to be successful in European countries. This strategy will become the primary method of bilingual education for instructors in grades K-12. Other non-European countries, such as Latin America and Indonesia, however, found difficulties applying CLIL in class. The issues need to be identified to encourage researchers and practitioners to find solutions. The purpose of this paper is to identify the barriers to implementing CLIL from the perspective of K-12 teachers. We surveyed 102 K-12 teachers in Keelung using a questionnaire. The findings indicate that (1) 49.0% of teachers feel concerned if they are required to teach half of their content in English, (2) 64.8% of teachers are willing to improve their English proficiency in their spare time for implementing CLIL in class, and (3) only 36.3% of teachers are willing to adopt CLIL in class, while 50.0% of teachers are willing to implement CLIL if a teaching assistant system supports them with English course materials. Teaching assistant systems that provide English course materials might influence teachers’ willingness to implement CLIL in class.

1. Introduction

Taiwan has advanced English education from the fifth grade to the third grade in elementary schools since 2005. While this advancement has been in place for nearly two decades, its effectiveness has been less than anticipated [1]. The reasons for the lack of effectiveness may be because (1) Taiwan’s English education is in an examination-led teaching atmosphere, and English for students is merely a subject at school rather than a useful tool after school, and (2) the non-English speaking environment in Taiwan prevents students from using English in their daily lives, reducing students’ motivation to learn English.

In the past, it has been thought that learning a second or foreign language is best done in a way that emphasizes meaning rather than accuracy. Such an environment makes it hard to reach the target level of language, but it can be carried out through the creation of situations that encourage language practice and use in a meaningful way [2]. Perspectives from research in cognitive psychology, language learning theories, and second language acquisition have helped to support the development of content and language integrated learning programs that allow students to learn a new language naturally through meaningful communication. Content and language integrated learning (CLIL) is a dual-focused educational approach where students acquire language skills and subject knowledge at the same time [3]. The principal property of CLIL is that students “learn to use language and use language to learn” [4]. Chamot et al. [5] suggested that the CLIL environment enables non-English speaking students to learn English as a lingua franca and utilize English in an academic context within a globalized international setting. In recent years, scholars have suggested that the CLIL approach is about the aforementioned two objectives of learning and about learning the culture implied behind the language as well. Therefore, the CLIL approach has been presently developed into a “language, subject literacy and learning” teaching method [6].

In 2018, the Taiwan government launched the Blueprint for Developing Taiwan into a Bilingual Nation by 2030 to cultivate bilingual talents to increase Taiwan’s global competitiveness. The Implementation Project of Bilingual Instruction in Some Domains of Primary and Junior High School Education was soon promoted by the Taiwan Ministry of Education [7]. Since CLIL has been widely implemented and proven to be successful in European countries [8,9], most Taiwanese primary and junior high schools have adopted CLIL to implement bilingual classes. CLIL tends to be the primary method of bilingual education for instructors in grades K-12. However, other non-European countries, such as Latin America [10] and Indonesia [11], have found difficulties applying CLIL in class.

Issues need to be identified to encourage researchers and practitioners to contribute more solutions. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to identify the barriers to implementing CLIL from the perspective of K-12 teachers. We surveyed 102 K-12 teachers in Keelung using a questionnaire. The results imply that the teaching assistant systems that provide English course materials might influence teachers’ willingness to implement CLIL in class.

2. Related Work

2.1. CLIL in Indonesia

Isnaini et al. [11] studied the challenges in implementing CLIL for Indonesian primary school students from the head teacher’s viewpoint. They suggested that the main challenges emerging during CLIL implementation include teachers’ lack of knowledge, teaching experience, and sufficient preparation.

2.2. CLIL in Ecuador

On the other hand, Vega et al. [10] attempted to compare language learning outcomes between CLIL and English for specific purposes programs for Ecuadorean college students. Their study revealed no significant increase in language proficiency or difference in achievement between the two programs. They also pointed out that the students’ initial language levels influence the learning effectiveness of the CLIL program. Due to the historical and cultural differences between Taiwan and other countries, the issues in implementing CLIL in Taiwan should be clearly identified. The bilingual education plan must be tailored to local needs to achieve tangible outcomes.

3. Material and Methods

We designed an online questionnaire containing potential challenges in implementing CLIL for K-12 teachers in Taiwan from three aspects: teachers’ willingness, English proficiency, and support for CLIL curriculum development. The questions are listed below:

3.1. Willingness

• How willing are you to teach 50% of your subject in English?
• How concerned do you feel if you are now required to adopt CLIL in class?

3.2. English Proficiency

• How willing are you to spend your leisure time improving your English proficiency to smoothly adopt CLIL?

3.3. Support for CLIL Curriculum Development

• How willing would you be to implement CLIL in your class if a teaching assistant system could generate 50% of the English content, including materials and exercises when developing the CLIL curriculum?
• How willing would you be to implement CLIL in your class if a teaching assistant system could not only generate 50% of the English content, including materials and exercises, when developing the CLIL curriculum but also support students with self-study?

The participants were asked to answer the questions with a 5-point Likert scale, as shown in

Table 1. Five-point Likert scale in this study.

	1	2	3	4	5
Willing	Completely unwilling	Unwilling	Neutral	Willing	Completely willing
Concerned	Extremely concerned	Concerned	Neutral	Uncon-cerned	Extremely unconcerned

. In addition to the above questions, we also asked participants to leave comments on implementing CLIL in K 12 classes. We recruited 102 K-12 teachers in Keelung City as participants to answer the above questions anonymously. Figure 1 illustrates the age and gender distributions of the recruited participants. Female is the major subgroup, and almost half of the K-12 teachers are between the ages of 41 and 50.

4. Results and Discussion

The results related to teachers’ willingness are shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3. Teachers who are completely unwilling to teach their subjects with half the content in English make up 23.5%, the highest portion of all teachers, while only 36.3% of all teachers are willing to teach their subjects in English (Figure 2I). Figure 2II shows that teachers who feel extremely concerned about adopting CLIL in class make up 30.5%, the highest portion of all teachers. Figure 3 depicts the level of willingness of teachers between the ages of 41 and 50. Similar to the result shown in Figure 2II, teachers who feel extremely concerned when adopting CLIL in class make up 39.62%, the highest portion in this subgroup.

Figure 4 presents the results related to teachers’ English proficiency. In total, 64.8% of teachers are willing to spend their leisure time improving their English proficiency to adopt CLIL. The results in Figure 2 and Figure 3 imply that teachers may not be confident enough with their English proficiency. The lack of English proficiency appears to reduce teachers’ willingness to adopt CLIL.

The results related to the support for CLIL curriculum development are shown in Figure 5. Overall, 50% of teachers are willing to implement CLIL with a teaching assistant system providing English course materials (Figure 5I). A total of 53.9% of teachers are willing to implement CLIL with a teaching assistant system that not only provides English course materials but also helps students with self-study (Figure 5II). The teaching assistant system that generates English course materials seems to increase the teachers’ willingness to deploy CLIL in class. Furthermore, the teaching assistant system supporting students with self-study boosts the teachers’ willingness to deploy CLIL in class more. Figure 6 presents the female teachers’ results related to support for CLIL curriculum development. The willingness to deploy CLIL in class accounts for 57.54% of all female teachers. The results in Figure 6 are almost in line with the results in Figure 5.

Table 2. Teachers’ comments on implementing CLIL categorized by topics.

Topic	Percent
Teachers’ English proficiency	31.37%
Students’ competency levels	19.60%
Bilingual education policy	12.75%
Curriculum development	8.82%
Appropriate subjects for CLIL	5.88%
Supporting measures	4.90%
Others	8.82%
No comments	7.84%

describes the results of teachers’ comments manually categorized by topics. In total, 31.37% of teachers feel concerned about their English proficiency regarding the implementation of CLIL. The results suggest that teachers’ English proficiency is currently the major challenge in implementing CLIL in class. One possible explanation for the results is that the existing teacher training process does not contain training in bilingual teaching. English proficiency is not a requirement for K12 teachers. In addition, there is no shortcut to improving English proficiency to an appropriate level for implementing CLIL. Improving teachers’ English proficiency is a long-run plan. However, short-term solutions are still in demand because teachers are the key players implementing CLIL in class.

In addition to teachers’ English proficiency, 19.60% of teachers are concerned about students’ competency levels. Teachers’ comments imply that students who already fail to understand Chinese lectures are likely to struggle even more with English lectures. Students’ learning effectiveness might decrease because of the language barrier. However, students can still defeat their learning hardship as long as they are highly motivated to learn.

According to the results shown in Figure 5 and Figure 6, a teaching assistant system that provides English course materials and helps students with self-study may be a short-term solution. Inspired by the concept of technology-enhanced CLIL [12], which was initially proposed to find useful discursive patterns that promote knowledge co-construction and language development, we identify the roles of technologies in facilitating CLIL implementation from teachers’ perspectives, and this is shown in Figure 7. Technologies such as natural language processing and text-to-speech processing are helpful for teachers to develop bilingual curricula. Other technologies, such as augmented reality and chatbots, can be designed with proper human–computer interactions to help students with self-study. Integrating the technologies mentioned above may put the teaching assistant system into practice.

5. Conclusions

Implementing CLIL in class is currently imperative in Taiwan. This work discovers that teachers’ English proficiency is the main challenge in implementing CLIL in class. Our findings also indicate that the teaching assistant system providing English teaching materials and helping students with self-study increases teachers’ willingness to implement CLIL in class. Based on the results of this work, we also identify the roles of technologies in facilitating CLIL implementation from teachers’ perspectives. Integrating proper technologies to develop teaching assistant systems may be a short-term solution to mitigate teachers’ lack of confidence in their English proficiency.