A Study of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) on the Development of English Spelling and Reading Skills of Year 2 EAL Students at Udon Thani International School
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14456/rc-sdj.2026.7Keywords:
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), English Spelling Skills, EAL Students, Primary Education, Language LearningAbstract
Background and Objective: English serves as an important medium in international schools, particularly for students learning English as an Additional Language (EAL). This research aimed to examine the effects of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) on the English spelling skills of Grade 2 EAL students at Udon Thani International School by comparing their post-test and pre-test scores, and to investigate students’ satisfaction with the CLIL learning approach.
Methodology: Eight Grade 2 EAL students participated in the study selected through purposive sampling. The research instruments designed included Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) based with 8 lesson plans, an English spelling achievement test, and a student satisfaction questionnaire. The instructional intervention was conducted over 4 weeks, totaling 8 hours. Data were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, and a paired-samples t-test to examine differences between post-test and pre-test scores, while descriptive statistics were used to analyze student satisfaction. The instructional activities included vocabulary exposure, guided spelling practice, and interactive learning tasks that encouraged students to use English in meaningful classroom contexts.
Results: The results revealed that the English spelling scores of Grades 2 EAL students after learning through the CLIL approach were significantly higher than their scores before the intervention. In addition, the students reported a high level of satisfaction with the learning content, instructional activities, and teacher support provided through the CLIL approach. The improvement suggests that integrating language learning with academic content can support students’ understanding of spelling patterns and promote early literacy development.
Discussion and Suggestions: The findings suggest that Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) serve as an instructional approach for developing English spelling skills among primary-level EAL students. Integrating language learning with academic content promotes meaningful learning experiences, increases learner engagement, and supports language development. Contextualized learning activities also help students connect vocabulary knowledge with real learning situations. Therefore, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) should be encouraged for use in English language instruction at the primary education level. Further research involving larger samples and longer instructional periods is recommended to strengthen the generalizability of the findings.
References
Boonsunee, P., Kewara, P., & Nam-fah, N. (2025). Implementing content and language integrated learning (CLIL) in a secondary English classroom in Thailand: An investigation of communication and cognitive skills. BRU ELT Journal, 3(3), 345–360. https://so14.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/bru_elt_journal/article/view/2423
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.
Carlins, C. M., Jr., & Siripol, P. (2024). CLIL or EMI? A case study of non-English in-service teachers teaching reflection in an international school. Community and Social Development Journal, 25(1), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.57260/rcmrj.2024.265323
Castellano-Risco, I. (2024). Conclusion. In Lexical demands in CLIL primary-school textbooks (Chapter 7). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-75160-8_7
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2021). Pedagogical translanguaging. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009029384
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Daffern, T. (2025). Developing spelling skills. In N. M. Mackenzie & J. Scull (Eds.), Understanding and supporting young writers from birth to 8 (2nd ed., pp. 97–123). Routledge.
Ehri, L. C. (2020). The science of learning to read words: A case for systematic phonics instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1), S45–S60. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.334
International Baccalaureate Organization. (2020). Making the PYP happen: A curriculum framework for international primary education. International Baccalaureate Organization.
Kaewkamnerd, K., Dibyamandala, J., & Mangkhang, C. (2023). Content and language integrated learning management to promote English reading comprehension skills in pop culture context of secondary students. Panyapiwat Journal, 15(1), 371–386. (In Thai)
Koç, Ö., Yüksel, G., & Altun, E. (2021). Technology acceptance and usage behavior of content and language integrated learning teachers in Turkey. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 4(2), 113–124.
Llinares, A., & Nikula, T. (2024). CLIL students’ production of cognitive discourse functions: Comparing Finnish and Spanish contexts. Language and Education, 38(3), 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2023.2211049
Luo, W.-H. (2024). Promoting content and English learning in a bilingual curriculum at the elementary school level. Education 3–13, 52(3), 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2022.2099925
Maipokaa, S., & Soontornwipast, K. (2021). Effects of intensive and extensive reading instruction on Thai Primary Students’ English Reading Ability. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 14(1), 146-175.
Nkurunziza, S. (2024). The role of phonological awareness in early reading development. European Journal of Linguistics, 3(3), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.47941/ejl.2051
Petersen‐Brown, S., & Kromminga, K. R. (2024). Systematic review and meta‐analysis of the implementation and effectiveness of spelling instruction and intervention. Psychology in the Schools, 61(8), 3315–3338. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23223
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2021). Inclusion and diversity in bilingual education: A European comparative study. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 26(9), 1129–1145. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2021.2013770
Pittas, E., & Tompkins, L. (2024). A systematic review of student learning outcomes in CLIL in LOTE. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1447270. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1447270
Rahman, M. M. (2023). Vocabulary acquisition through content and language integrated learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18(12), 45–60
.
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., & Querol-Julián, M. (2025). Multilingualism and multimodality in the CLIL/EMI classroom. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 46(5), 1397–1415. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2025.2482734
Sangploy, P., & Prasansaph, S. (2023). The effects of the instruction based on content and language integrated learning (CLIL) approach for developing reading comprehension in English language for grade 5 students. Journal of Education, Silpakorn University, 21(2), 243–260. (In Thai)
San Isidro, X., & Lasagabaster, D. (2022). Students’ and families’ attitudes and motivation towards CLIL. Language Learning Journal, 50(3), 356–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2020.1724185
Sari, T. T., & Khoiriyah. (2025). Content and language integrated learning activities and vocabulary learning for young learners. European Journal of English Language Studies, 5(4), 229-241. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejels.5.4.229
Scull, J., & Lyons, D. (2024). Teaching phonics in context—Stories of teachers’ practice and students’ outcomes. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 47, 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44020-024-00058-6
WIDA Consortium. (2020). WIDA Screener: Administration, scoring and interpretation guide. University of Wisconsin–Madison.
Zeng, Y., Kuo, L.-J., Chen, L., Lin, J.-A., & Shen, H. (2025). Vocabulary instruction for English learners: A systematic review connecting theories, research, and practices. Education Sciences, 15(3), 262. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030262
