Clil Models to Develop Students' Communication Skills Based on Their Attitudes Toward Reading


This study proposed Content and Language Instruction Learning (CLIL) as a model for building students’ English communication skills, which are essential in the 21st century. The CLIL model is proposed based on students’ attitudes toward reading materials in their EFL reading classes. This survey study involved 828 Junior High School students completing an online questionnaire about their reading attitudes. Nine teachers were interviewed to obtain data about the challenges they faced in teaching reading and how they coped with those challenges. The study discovered that some students have apprehension feelings toward English reading material that make them unable to catch up with the class. Additionally, teachers encounter challenges while planning and selecting learning materials because of students’ different abilities. Besides, the CLIL model has been implemented by one of the teachers, even though it has not been planned further. Thus, models B1, B2, B3, and B4 of CLIL are proposed to solve the problem found. However, this study is limited to the CLIL model recommendation based on the context, so further researchers need to elaborate on the implementation of the model across primary and tertiary school levels.

Keywords: CLIL, students’ attitude, EFL reading

[1] Akhmetova A, Imambayeva G, Csapó B. A study of reading attitude and reading achievement among young learners in middle school. Heliyon. 2022 Jul;8(7):e09946.

[2] Cain K, Oakhill J. Matthew effects in young readers: reading comprehension and reading experience aid vocabulary development. J Learn Disabil. 2011;44(5):431–43.

[3] Coyle D, Hood P, Marsh D. CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.

[4] Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 4th ed. Singapore: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2014.

[5] Darling-Hammond L. Constructing 21st-century teacher education. J Teach Educ. 2006;57(3):300–14.

[6] Evnitskaya N, Dalton-Puffer C. Cognitive discourse functions in CLIL classrooms: eliciting and analysing students’ oral categorizations in science and history. Int J Biling Educ Biling. 2020;1–20.

[7] Fang F, Liu Y. ‘Using all English is not always meaningful’: Stakeholders’ perspectives on the use of and attitudes towards translanguaging at a Chinese university. Lingua. 2020;247:102959.

[8] Feddermann M, Möller J, Baumert J. Effects of CLIL on second language learning: disentangling selection, preparation, and CLIL-effects. Learn Instr. 2021;74:101459.

[9] Fitranti A. Kajian literatur implementasi program bilingual pada pendidikan berbasis pesantren. Jurnal Pendidikan Islam. 2021;6(2):154–75.

[10] Granel N, Leyva-Moral JM, Bernabeu-Tamayo MD, Gómez-Ibáñez R, Watson CE, Aguayo-González MP. Student satisfaction with content and language integrated learning in nursing education: A cross-sectional study. Nurse Educ Pract. 2019 Jul;38:21–6.

[11] Griffin P, Care E, editors. Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach. New York City: Springer; 2014.

[12] He W, Xu G, Kruck SE. (2014). Online IS education for the 21st century. Journal of Information Systems Education. 2014;25(2): 101–106. doi:

[13] Hirschaman K, Wood B. 21st century learners: changing conceptions of knowledge, learning and the child. The New Zealand Annual Review of Education. 2018;23:20– 35.

[14] Hurajová, A. (2015). An overview of models of bilingual education. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 2015;6(6S1):186– 190.

[15] Karima K. Language attitudes of bilingual learners: A qualitative case study contextualized in an Indonesian Islamic boarding school (Unpublished undergraduate thesis, Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim, Malang). Available from

[16] Kim S, Raza M, Seidman E. Improving 21st-century teaching skills: the key to effective 21????-century learners. Res Comp Int Educ. 2019;14(1):99–117.

[17] Lo Y, Jeong H. Impact of genre-based pedagogy on students’ academic literacy development in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). Linguist Educ. 2018;47:36–46.

[18] Mahmudi I, Saputra Y. Evaluasi program bilingual di Pondok Pesantren Darunnajah 2, Cipining Bogor. Jurnal At-Ta’dib. 2018;13(2):62–82.

[19] McKenna MC, Conradi K, Lawrence C, Jang BG, Meyer JP. Reading attitudes of middle school students: results of a US survey. Read Res Q. 2012;47(3):283–306.

[20] Muniroh S, Febrianti Y, Kusumaningrum SR, Rachmajanti S, Sobri AY. Challenges in managing bilingual schools: A solution through higher education for prospective leaders. European Journal of Educational Research. 2022;11(4):2513–22.

[21] Rasman. To translanguage or not to translanguage? The multilingual practice in an Indonesian EFL classroom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 2018;7(3):687– 694.

[22] Rezandy, MA, Artini, LP, Dewi NLPES. (2020). Teacher’s strategies in promoting the 21st century learning skills on online class in tourism vocational high school. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran. 2020;4:603–608.

[23] Rosiers K. The subtle interactional dance of a teacher: the negotiation of pupilteacher translanguaging practices in a Brussels’ Dutch-medium secondary school. Linguist Educ. 2020;58:100796.

[24] Schatz A, Krashen S. Attitudes toward reading in grades 1-6: some decline in enthusiasm but most enjoy reading. Knowl Quest. 2006;35(1):46–8. Available from:

[25] Stehle SM, Peters-Burston E. Developing student 21st century skills in selected exemplary inclusive STEM high schools. Int J STEM Educ. 2019;39(6):1–15.

[26] Surdyanto A. A brief view on bilingual schools in the capital of Indonesia. IJEE: Indonesian Journal of English Education. 2018;5(1):1–15.

[27] Woolly G. Reading comprehension: Assisting children with learning disabilities. New York: Springer; 2011.

[28] Yang WH, Yang LZ. Evaluating learners’ satisfaction with a distance online CLIL lesson during the pandemic. English Teaching and Learning. 2022;46(2):179–201.