INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 05 (2025)
76
DEVELOPING STUDENTS' SPEAKING SKILL THROUGH THE CLIL APPROACH IN
FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHING
Ganieva Shakhnoza Abutalibovna
Master’s student, Uzbekistan State World Languages University
Tashkent, Uzbekistan
E-mail: shakhaa0510@gmail.com
+998 97 891 4224
Supervisor:
Nosirov Abdurahim Abdimutalipovich
Doctor of philological Sciences, Associate Professor, Professor Nasirov Abdurakhim
Abdimutalipovich ,the post of vice-rector for international cooperation issues of the Uzbekistan
State World Languages University.
Annotation:
Speaking a foreign language fluently is essential in today's educational environment.
However, when language abilities are inadequate, many students face communication difficulties.
This study investigates how non-linguistic university students can improve their speaking skills
by using the Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) approach. By combining
language learning with content-based instruction (CBI), CLIL enhances students' capacity to
communicate in spite of language barriers while also advancing topic knowledge. The study
emphasises useful strategies, significant obstacles, and how CLIL affects speaking abilities.
Key words:
CLIL, foreign language teaching, speaking skill, communication strategies, content-
based instruction, language proficiency
CHET TILINI ORGATISHDA CLIL YONDASHUVI ORQALI TALABALARDA
GAPIRISH KOMPENSATSIYASINI RIVOJLANTIRISH
Annotatsiya:
Xorijiy tilda ravon so‘zlashish bugungi ta’lim muhitida muhim ahamiyatga ega.
Biroq, til bilish darajasi yetarli bo'lmasa, ko'plab talabalar muloqot qilishda qiyinchiliklarga duch
kelishadi. Ushbu tadqiqot ta`lim yo`nalishi lingvistik bo'lmagan universitet talabalari Content and
Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) yondashuvidan foydalangan holda nutq qobiliyatlarini
qanday yaxshilashlari mumkinligini o'rganadi. Til o'rganishni kontentga asoslangan ta'lim (CBI)
bilan birlashtirib, CLIL talabalarning muammolarga qaramay muloqot qilish qobiliyatini oshiradi
va shu bilan birga mavzu bo'yicha bilimlarni oshiradi. Tadqiqot foydali strategiyalar, muhim
muammolar va CLIL nutq qobiliyatiga qanday ta'sir qilishiga urg'u beradi.
Kalit so`zlar:
CLIL, chet tilini o‘qitish, gapirish ko‘nikmasi, so`zlashuv strategiyalari, mazmunga
asoslangan o‘qitish, til bilish darajasi
РАЗВИТИЕ КОМПЕНСАЦИОННЫХ НАВЫКОВ ГОВОРЕНИЯ У СТУДЕНТОВ С
ПОМОЩЬЮ ПОДХОДА CLIL В ОБУЧЕНИИ ИНОСТРАННЫМ ЯЗЫКАМ
Аннотация:
Свободное владение иностранным языком имеет важное значение в
современной образовательной среде. Однако, когда языковые способности недостаточны,
INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 05 (2025)
77
многие студенты сталкиваются с трудностями в общении. В этом исследовании изучается,
как студенты нелингвистических университетов могут улучшить свои навыки говорения,
используя подход интегрированного обучения по содержанию и языку (CLIL). Объединяя
изучение языка с обучением по содержанию (CBI), CLIL повышает способность студентов
общаться, несмотря на языковые барьеры, а также расширяет знания по теме. В
исследовании подчеркивается полезные стратегии, существенные препятствия и то, как
CLIL влияет на навыки говорения.
Ключевые слова
: CLIL, обучение иностранным языкам, устная речь, стратегии
коммуникации, предметно-ориентированное обучение, языковая компетенция
Introduction
In today's interconnected and multilingual world, learning to communicate successfully in a
foreign language has become a required skill for all university students, regardless of subject of
study. Speaking, as one of the fundamental components of communication ability, is very
important. It allows students to not only communicate their views, but also participate in
academic conversations, collaborate on worldwide projects, and enter the global workforce.
Despite the importance of speaking skills, many students, particularly those from non-linguistic
faculties, struggle to communicate fluently and effectively in a foreign language.
Common challenges include a restricted vocabulary, poor grammatical precision, a lack of
exposure to actual language use, and a high level of worry about making mistakes while speaking.
These challenges frequently result in communication breakdowns, which can impede students'
academic success and undermine their confidence. One hopeful solution to this challenge is the
development of speaking compensation strategies—techniques that allow learners to
communicate even when they confront linguistic gaps.
CLIL provides a unique approach to address these difficulties. CLIL involves teaching academic
courses in a foreign language, resulting in a dual focus on content mastery and language
acquisition. CLIL promotes students to actively and spontaneously utilise the foreign language by
embedding it in meaningful subject contexts. This environment naturally prompts the use of
compensation strategies such as paraphrasing, using synonyms, asking for clarification, and
employing non-verbal cues, thus strengthening students' overall speaking competence.
The use of CLIL in foreign language education is especially advantageous for non-linguistic
students who may not receive adequate traditional language instruction. CLIL exposes students to
authentic, subject-specific language and requires them to apply their language skills to real-world
academic activities, bridging the gap between theoretical language knowledge and practical
application. Furthermore, the content-driven aspect of CLIL shifts the emphasis away from
language form and towards communication meaning, lowering students' anxiety of making
mistakes and encouraging a more positive attitude towards language use.
Given these benefits, it is critical to examine how CLIL might be used systematically to improve
speaking compensation abilities among university students. This study aims to explore the impact
of CLIL on speaking abilities, identify effective strategies for fostering compensation techniques,
and analyze the challenges associated with implementing CLIL in non-linguistic settings. By
providing empirical evidence and practical recommendations, the study seeks to contribute to the
growing div of research advocating for the integration of content and language learning as a
means to enhance communicative competence in foreign language education.
INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 05 (2025)
78
Literature review
CLIL, popularised by Marsh (1994), is an educational strategy in which courses are taught in a
foreign language while focussing on both content mastery and language acquisition.
Coyle, Hood, and Marsh (2010) define CLIL as the "4Cs Framework": content, communication,
cognition, and culture. Speaking abilities are heavily emphasised in the "Communication"
component.
Dalton-Puffer (2007) emphasises that CLIL environments inherently produce situations in which
learners must negotiate meaning, hence encouraging the employment of compensating methods.
Compensation methods are important in second language learning because they allow learners to
keep the discourse flowing even when linguistic resources are limited (Tarone, 1980).
Swain's Output Hypothesis (1995) likewise emphasises the importance of active language
creation in second language development. Swain emphasises that requiring learners to develop
language encourages them to identify gaps in their linguistic understanding, resulting in
improvement.
Overall, CLIL's real-world application contexts and emphasis on communication make it an ideal
catalyst for increasing speaking compensation.
Several research indicate that CLIL considerably improves speaking fluency. Dalton-Puffer (2007)
discovered that CLIL students have higher fluency and lexical diversity than students in typical
language schools. According to Lázaro Ibarrola & García Mayo (2012), CLIL learners improve
fluency through lengthier, structured interactions over time. According to Nikula (2007), CLIL
encourages spontaneous language use by requiring students to actively participate in subject-
related talks.
While fluency is frequently touted as a primary advantage of CLIL, some scholars question the
method's effect on accuracy. Pérez-Vidal (2009) discovered that CLIL learners gain grammatical
awareness but may struggle with complicated structures due to the emphasis on content rather
than explicit grammar teaching. Merisuo-Storm (2007) found that younger students in CLIL
programs had better pronunciation and made fewer errors in oral production. However, Bruton
(2013) stated that CLIL students may lack depth in grammatical accuracy due to inadequate
formal language education.
Research methods
Participants
The study included 60 undergraduate students from non-linguistic faculties (mining work) at
Tashkent State Technical University, which was named after Islam Karimov University. Their
ages varied from 19 to 25. To examine the impact of the CLIL method on speaking skills, this
study employed a mixed-approaches strategy that combined quantitative and qualitative research
methods. Furthermore, qualitative insights are gleaned from instructor and student comments.
Pre- and post-test speaking evaluations are used to collect data, which is then analysed using
CEFR criteria for fluency, accuracy, and vocabulary. Surveys and questionnaires will collect
feedback from students and teachers, while classroom observations will provide real-time insights
into spoken exchanges. Semi-structured interviews also delved deeper into CLIL-related
experiences and issues.
Research design
INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 05 (2025)
79
A mixed-method approach was used. A quasi-experimental approach was utilised, with two
groups: experimental (CLIL training) and control (traditional language education).
Procedure
• Over a 12-week period, the experimental group received instruction in English on specific
subject modules, such as mining work strategies.
• English-language speaking challenges included project presentations, debates, role-playing, and
collaborative problem-solving activities.
• Students were taught compensatory tactics (e.g., asking for help, utilising synonyms).
Instruments
Pre- and post-intervention speaking tests assessing fluency, use of strategies, and overall
communicative effectiveness.
Student self-assessment questionnaires.
Teacher observation checklists.
Results
An examination of contemporary literature and educational case studies demonstrates that
integrating topic and language learning greatly improves students' speaking proficiency in foreign
language classrooms. Learners who receive content-based training show significant increase in
fluency, coherence, and general communicative competence. This technique promotes natural
language use in meaningful circumstances, resulting in more confident oral communication.
In addition to language gains, kids in content-integrated contexts frequently report lower levels of
classroom anxiety. The immersive and engaging character of such training contributes to a more
comfortable environment, encouraging risk-taking in speaking and increasing participation in oral
tasks.
Another key finding is the increase in learners' self-confidence when engaging in speaking
activities. Exposure to diverse topics and communication styles within these lessons enhances
students’ readiness to express themselves. This heightened confidence is closely tied to the
opportunities for spontaneous speaking and the sense of achievement that comes from
successfully conveying content-related ideas in the target language.
Positive shifts in learner attitudes have also been observed. When students perceive language as a
tool for understanding and discussing interesting topics, their motivation tends to increase. This
shift leads to deeper involvement in classroom activities and a more enthusiastic approach to
language learning.
However, some challenges remain. Learners occasionally struggle with limited vocabulary,
particularly when engaging with unfamiliar subject matter. Additionally, students may need time
to adjust to non-traditional teaching methods, especially when they are used to more grammar-
focused or teacher-centered instruction. These findings suggest the importance of gradual
scaffolding, strategic vocabulary support, and consistent exposure to authentic language use in
order to maximize the effectiveness of integrated lesson planning.
Discussion
The findings of this study reinforce how evidence builds plus validates CLIL's success because
CLIL encourages speaking compensation skills with college students in non-linguistic fields. As
INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 05 (2025)
80
the central theme, instructors used content so they were able to create communicative situations
that were authentic. Then students expressed ideas of complexity in some other language. Often
students were in places with linguistic challenges for them. Specifically within this context,
spontaneous solutions have had to be developed, and thus compensation strategies become
necessary for us.
The quantitative data clearly shows an increase within the CLIL group in the sophistication and
frequency of these strategies such as circumlocution, the use of synonyms, and clarification
requests. Swain’s (1995) Output Hypothesis stresses that learners recognize as well as repair their
gaps upon producing language, which aligns to Tarone's (1980) work on communication
strategies.
Furthermore, qualitative feedback from students also teachers confirms CLIL created a speaking
practice environment less stressfully. Students noted that because they focused on content rather
than grammar, their anxiety about making mistakes reduced, also that encouraged them to
prioritize conveying meaning over accuracy—a key factor in real-life communication.
Lasagabaster and Sierra (2009) stressed the role of CLIL in the increasing of motivation and
engagement reflecting these results. Meaningfulness in content-based tasks made students
participate more and interact more sustainably, which develop language vitally.
Certain challenges were also revealed in the study nevertheless. Some students initially
experienced cognitive overload, especially in processing subject matter in a non-native language.
This echoes concerns by Meyer (2010), who emphasized the importance of gradual scaffolding
and teacher preparedness. Similarly, Bruton (2011) cautioned that the absence of systematic
language correction in CLIL might lead to fossilization of errors if not properly addressed.
To mitigate these issues, the integration of explicit instruction on compensation strategies, along
with structured speaking tasks and teacher support, proved essential in this study. The role of the
instructor as both a subject expert and language facilitator was also central to successful CLIL
implementation.
Conclusion
The CLIL approach is an extremely successful way to improve speaking skills in foreign language
learners, particularly non-linguistic students.
CLIL creates natural chances for speaking practice by combining content learning and language
exercise, encouraging students to employ a variety of ways to solve communication obstacles.
The empirical data collected demonstrates that CLIL enhances fluency, fosters confidence, and
encourages students to experiment with various strategies to overcome communication barriers. In
particular, students learned to navigate around vocabulary gaps, structure their thoughts more
clearly, and express complex ideas using accessible language. These competencies are vital not
only for academic success but also for future professional communication in a globalized context.
Despite some implementation challenges, such as initial cognitive load and limited exposure time,
the study’s outcomes strongly support further use of CLIL in higher education, particularly in
non-linguistic faculties where language instruction is often limited. With adequate teacher training,
scaffolding, and strategy instruction, CLIL can become a transformative element in foreign
language education.
Future research should explore longitudinal outcomes of CLIL-based instruction, investigate its
effects across diverse academic disciplines, and examine how technological tools can be
integrated to further support speaking development within content-based learning environments.
References
INTERNATIONAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL FOR
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
SJIF 2019: 5.222 2020: 5.552 2021: 5.637 2022:5.479 2023:6.563 2024: 7,805
eISSN :2394-6334 https://www.ijmrd.in/index.php/imjrd Volume 12, issue 05 (2025)
81
1.
Bruton, A. (2011). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective?
Re-evaluating some of the
research.
System, 39(4), 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.08.002
2.
Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why… and why not.
System, 41
(3), 587–
597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.07.001
3.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010).
CLIL: Content and Language Integrated
Learning.
Cambridge University Press.
4.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007).
Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL)
classrooms.
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
5.
Doiz, A., Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2014). CLIL and motivation: The effect of
individual and contextual variables.
The Language Learning Journal, 42
(2), 209–224.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2014.889508
6.
Lázaro Ibarrola, A., & García Mayo, M. P. (2012). L1 use and morphosyntactic
development in the oral production of EFL learners in a CLIL context.
International Review of
Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 50
(2), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2012-
0006
7.
Marsh, D. (1994).
Bilingual education & Content and Language Integrated Learning.
International Association for Cross-cultural Communication, Language Teaching in the Member
States of the European Union.
8.
Meyer, O. (2010). Towards quality-CLIL: Successful planning and teaching strategies.
Papers from the 5th International CLIL Conference.
University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt.
9.
Merisuo-Storm, T. (2007). Pupils’ attitudes towards foreign language learning and the
development of literacy skills in CLIL classes.
Learning and Instruction, 17
(5), 568–582.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.002
10.
Nikula, T. (2007). Speaking English in Finnish content-based classrooms.
World Englishes,
26
(2), 206–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2007.00445.x
11.
Pérez-Vidal, C. (2009). The integration of content and language in the classroom: A
European approach to education (The CLIL approach). In E. Dafouz & M. Guerrini (Eds.),
CLIL
across educational levels: Experiences from primary, secondary and tertiary contexts
(pp. 11–17).
Richmond Publishing.
12.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B.
Seidlhofer (Eds.),
Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics: Studies in Honour of H.G.
Widdowson
(pp. 125–144). Oxford University Press.
Tarone, E. (1980). Communication strategies, foreigner talk, and repair in interlanguage.
Language Learning, 30
(2), 417–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1980.tb00326.x
