BibTeX

@inProceedings{olsson-johansson-2025-progression-353664,
	title        = {Progression of Swedish and English vocabulary among CLIL and non-CLIL students in upper primary school},
	abstract     = {In education based on Content and language integrated learning, CLIL, a second or foreign language
(L2) is the language of instruction in school subjects such as geography or mathematics, for the purpose
of developing language proficiency and subject content knowledge simultaneously (e.g. Dalton-Puffer et
al., 2022). In Sweden, CLIL targeting English is an increasingly popular option, attracting students with
various language background profiles. In CLIL in upper primary school, English can be used as the language
of instruction up to 50 percent of the school day, alongside Swedish. Concerns have been raised
that students’ competence in Swedish will suffer, not least considering the young age of the students.
The purpose of this study is to explore the effect of CLIL education on primary school students’ progression
of receptive vocabulary in English and Swedish, comparing the development between CLIL and
non-CLIL groups. Further, the possible impact of language background on the progression is explored;
few studies have paid attention to language background in relation to learning in CLIL. The following
research questions are addressed:
1) Is there any difference in the progression of English and Swedish receptive vocabulary between CLIL
and non-CLIL students? If so, what kind of difference?
2) Is there any difference in this progression pertaining to students’ language background? If so, what
kind of difference?
350 CLIL students and 90 non-CLIL students from a total of six schools participated in the study. More
than 50 percent of the students (or their parents) were born outside Sweden. Two frequency-based vocabulary
tests, one in English (based on Webb, Sasao and Balance, 2017) and one in Swedish (based
on Lindberg and Johansson, 2019), were administered in school year 5 and at the end of school year 6.
Students also completed a language background survey. Statistical analyses, e.g. T-tests and regression
analyses, were conducted to compare test results and progression between CLIL and non-CLIL students,
also adding language background into the analyses.
Preliminary results indicate a positive CLIL effect for English vocabulary, in particular regarding academic
and low-frequency words. Among students with a non-Swedish language background, the progression
of English vocabulary was significantly stronger in the CLIL group than in the non-CLIL group. The
progression of Swedish vocabulary was similar in CLIL and non-CLIL groups, thus indicating that CLIL
does not impede this development. In the presentation, results will be illustrated and discussed.
The study was funded through the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
Dalton-Puffer, C., Hüttner, J., & Llinares, A. (2022). CLIL in the 21st Century: Retrospective and prospective challenges
and opportunities. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 10(2), 182-206.
Lindberg, I., & Johansson, S. (2019). The Development of Swedish Receptive Vocabulary in CLIL: A Multilingual
Perspective.In L.K. Sylvén (Ed.). Investigating content and language integrated learning: insights from Swedish high
schools, (pp. 236-269). Multilingual Matters.
Webb, S., Sasao, Y., & Balance, O. (2017).The updated vocabulary levels test: Developing and validating two new
forms of the VLT. ITL–International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 168 (1), 33–69.},
	booktitle    = {EuroSLA Tromsö, Norge, 27 juni 2025},
	author       = {Olsson, Eva and Johansson, Sofie},
	year         = {2025},
}