Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
www.cjes.eu
Experience of CLIL in the natural science disciplines in Kazakhstan’s
schools
Aygerim Konyssova
1
, Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University, B.Sattarkhanov Ave. 29,
Turkistan, Republic of Kazakhstan, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3926-5888
Kalipa Atemova 2, L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, Department Of Social Pedagogics and Self-
Knowledge, Yanushkevich Ave 6, Nur-Sultan, Republic of Kazakhstan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3864-
1431
Selime Chakanova 3, Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University, World languages
Department, B.Sattarkhanov Ave. 29, Turkistan, Republic of Kazakhstan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-
8670-2377
Ashikbayeva Gulmira 4, Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh- Turkish University, Turkistan, Kazakhstan,
Address: 29 Sattarhanov Street, Turkistan city, Kazakhstan https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9446-8533
Saltanat Konyssova 5, Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University, B.Sattarkhanov Ave. 29,
Turkistan, Republic of Kazakhstan, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4506-6081
Gulnaz Konkabayeva 6, Kazakhstan State Pedagogical University, Department of Russian Language and
Literature, A. Baitursynov str. 13, Shymkent, Republic of Kazakhstan, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2236-
4262
Suggested Citation:
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of
CLIL in the natural science disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science.
17(5), 1588-1602. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
Received from January 15, 2022; revised from March 22, 2022; accepted from May 20, 2022.
©2022 Birlesik Dunya Yenilik Arastirma ve Yayincilik Merkezi. All rights reserved.
Abstract
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects are taught in English through the use of the CLIL
approach following trilingual education that has been implemented in several pilot schools since 2007. In the Kazakhstani
background, however, the CLIL approach is still in its infancy, and little is known about the views of stakeholders that can be
useful for understanding its current condition and for effective adoption. The present study aimed to explore the attitudes
and perceptions of the students of the CLIL approach in one of the trilingual schools. The study used a mixed approach to
the design of case studies and semi-structured interviews and questionnaires as tools for data collection. Nine teachers
participated in one-on-one interviews and a total of 53 school teachers (39 women and 14 men aged 20-60) participated in
the survey. The study showed that students are primarily positive about the CLIL approach.
Keywords: CLIL technology; English; integrated learning; natural sciences; teachers.
* ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE: Aygerim Konyssova, Khoja Akhmet Yassawi International Kazakh-Turkish University,
B.Sattarkhanov Ave. 29, Turkistan, Republic of Kazakhstan,
E-mail address: aygerim.konysova@ayu.edu.kz
Cypriot Journal of Educational
Sciences
Volume 17, Issue 5, (2022) 1588-1602
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1589
1. Introduction
Although one of the long-term priorities of Kazakhstan is to create people with knowledge of
Kazakh, Russian, and English (Nazarbayev, 2012), trilingual education has been introduced through
pilot schools throughout the country since 2006. The English language is not only taught as a subject
within the trilingual education curriculum, but also as a part of the Material and Language Integrated
Learning (CLIL) approach, which facilitates both subject content and language instruction (Coyle,
Hood, & Marsh, 2010).
Although this strategy is commonly used and studied in European countries (Marsh, 2002), it
is still in its infancy in the sense of Kazakhstan and thus “needs to develop and determine methods of
implementation” (Oskolkova, 2014, p. 1).In addition, nothing is understood about the introduction of
CLIL in pilot schools (Smagulova, 2012), although their perspectives could be communicated to other
conventional schools. Therefore, to clarify and promote CLIL practice in Kazakhstan, this analysis aims
to shed light on CLIL implementation. The principle of the Trinity of Languages, proclaimed by
President Nazarbayev in 2006 at the XII Convention of the Assembly of Citizens of Kazakhstan, began
to encourage trilingualism in an already bilingual community (Zhetpisbayeva & Arinova, 2012).
Since then, this concept has grown into a trilingual strategy that has changed our culture.
Kazakh language should be a consolidating force among all ethnicities according to the policy, while
Russian is the nation's historical advantage, and English is a tool that would open up new limitless
opportunities for any person (Nazarbayev, 2012). This is strengthened by the fact that today’s school
teacher must work in search of innovation, developing his method of education worthy of the stream
of time. To the question of what the nature of such a teacher should be, we decided to look for the
answer, taking a step back in history. After all, such thoughts have long been expressed in the ancient
ideas of the Kazakh people, and the works of great scholars.
The issue of professional development of teachers based on national education was identified
by Kazakhstani scientists (Atemova et al., 2018) in their research, formulated their views on the
heritage of great scholars, and defined the professional qualities of teachers. These qualities still
have not lost their relevance. Besides, leadership skills also play a significant role for people with
pedagogical specialties. As innovations and technologies are introduced, professional leadership skills
will help prepare future professionals to be globally competitive (Atemova et al., 2018). According to
the research and conclusions outlined above, the views of great thinkers and modern scientists
complement each other. The main policy of the modern education system in the Republic of
Kazakhstan is to train specialists who will be competitive in a multilingual global environment.
Significant reforms in the education system were implemented following the trilingual
strategy. President Nursultan Nazarbayev (2012) claimed in his annual address to the nation that
education was one of independent Kazakhstan's key goals and that learning English was very
important for successfully entering the global arena. The possibilities presented by any of the three
languages are deemed to contribute to the purpose. Trilingual education has thus become one of
Kazakhstan's “major trends in the education system” (MoES, 2013).
1.1. Related Research
Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) is the focused approach to be used in
schools for trilingual instruction (Irsaliev, Karabassova, Mukhametzhanova, Adil, Bekova & Nurlanov,
2017). This technique makes "learning content via an additional language" (British Council, 2016). In
other words, through this approach, students learn both the additional vocabulary and the subject.
As most children in Kazakhstan grow up learning Kazakh and Russian, as opposed to English, they feel
less strain when researching subjects through these languages. Since English is a foreign language
and is often taught in the classroom setting, it is considered to be the most demanding aspect of the
trilingual education curriculum. The state target, therefore, is set; our further concern, therefore, is
to ensure its successful realization.
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1590
While trilingual education was introduced in 2007, it is still in its infancy, as the tasks and key
metrics proposed in the main policy papers are still being enforced. There was a large reaction in
culture to trilingual schooling, both positive and negative. The most influential debates are around
teaching by English ICT, Physics, Chemistry, and Biology (IPCB). Some see it as a gain, some as a
challenge to the language of Kazakh and the general acquisition of these subjects. The newly
published State Education and Science Growth Policy in the Republic of Kazakhstan (SPED) (MoES,
2016) specifies that trilingual education will be introduced from 2017 to 2023 by converting the
experiences of piloting schools into conventional secondary schools. A careful and detailed
investigation of the experiences of pilot schools is required to ensure that this translation is
successful.
According to Idrissova, Smagulova & Tussupbekova (2015), there is "a lack of clear idea of
how content topics are taught in classrooms through English and a lack of educational research".
Therefore, inadequate experience and lack of educational study among key stakeholders, along with
a lot of controversies and debates (Baitukenov, 2016), may impede the realization of trilingual
education. The need to seek stakeholder viewpoints if their views are to be incorporated into the
extension of the software has been corroborated by Mehisto and Asser (2007). The value and
necessity of researching the viewpoints of learners are acknowledged by many international studies
because they are one of the key players in the education sector (Dalton-Puffer, Hüttner,
Schindelegger & Smit, 2009).
It is uncertain, however, how Kazakhstani students view the approach to CLIL, and what their
challenges and accomplishments are. For scholars, politicians, clinicians, and CLIL students, prior
studies may extract useful knowledge. In reality, “student perspectives inform and illuminate the
very circumstances of learning and teaching” (Schocker, Ditfurth, 2001, as cited in Massler, 2012).
Due to the lack of research on the views of stakeholders in the Kazakhstani context, significant
factors in the adoption of CLIL may be ignored. Massler (2012) believes that "the lack of student
research can distort how the implementation of CLIL can be understood and formulated". While the
extensive foreign study has been carried out, no studies have been found in the context of
Kazakhstan that deals with understanding how IPCB subjects are taught in English from the viewpoint
of students as one of the key stakeholders.
1.2. Purpose of study
Taken together, the research challenge is made up of a lack of awareness of how teaching in
English takes place in the schools, a lack of research on this topic, and ultimately little time left for
the national introduction of trilingual education. The present research aims to examine the behaviors
and expectations of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) of students to clarify the
current state of adoption of CLIL in a pilot school (PS) that is charged with transferring its experience
to regional mainstream schools.
Three research questions were designed to achieve the research goal
1. What are the attitudes and opinions of students towards CLIL in a pilot school?
2. What advantages and obstacles do students see in CLIL?
The first research question aims to define the attitudes and expectations of the teachers
towards learning subject topics through English. The second research question tries to identify how
the CLIL approach is helpful to the Kazakhstani education context and what kind of difficulties they
encounter while learning English topics. This question helps one to gain insights into the planned
phased introduction of the trilingual curriculum, where various programs are accessible to students
of different grades.
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1591
1.3. Literature review
1.3.1. Concept Of CLIL
CLIL is typically an umbrella word "which covers all the various types of core subjects of
teaching through a foreign language" (Marsh, as quoted in Roiha, 2014), and precisely “it is a dual-
focused educational approach in which an additional language is used for both content and language
learning and teaching” (Coyle, Hood, & Marsh, 2010).
A foreign language or a language other than the mother tongue is referred to by the word
additional language. It may be Russian and English, for instance, in Kazakh high school. The
justification for combining content and language is "to achieve a high level of language awareness, to
accommodate various learning styles, to provide greater exposure to L2, to enhance language and
communication skills, and to increase learner motivation through greater authenticity". Furthermore,
it is intended to improve both material awareness and language management.
CLIL has been widely used as an introduction to multilingual education as a creative approach
to teaching and studying foreign languages and has been considered one of the popular approaches
in European contexts. As reported by Coyle (2007), however, "there is no single blueprint that can be
applied in different countries in the same way". In the field of trilingual education, Kazakhstan strives
to use this approach (Irsaliyev et al., 2017).
These working meanings, which derived from the discussion of four main principles,
influenced the present research in terms of the organization of the chapter of the examination of
literature, the creation of the interview and questionnaire, and were, therefore, central to the
interpretation and discussion of the outcomes. The entire set of main principles, in other words,
determines the present analysis. The concentration on the voices of CLIL students is key to various
research, including primary (Massler, 2012), secondary (Lasagabaster & Doiz, 2016), vocational
(Dalton-Puffer, Hüttner, Schindelegger & Smit, 2009), or student institutions of higher education
(Tsuchiya, Perez Murillo, 2015). These surveys have either centered independently on exploring
student expectations or together with other audiences, such as students, parents, and
administrators. In both cases, to explain and improve teaching and learning, the viewpoints of
students were considered invaluable.
Some researchers recognized the importance of perspectives that students can provide; for
example, in the Pladevall-Ballester (2015) report, the insights into the success of the CLIL program in
Catalonia; and on teaching approaches used in CLIL classrooms in the Vázquez, Molina & Ávila López
study (2014). Other researchers (Massler, 2012) identified the state of adoption and CLIL conditions
in schools along with the problems and accomplishments of students, while others checked the
viability of different CLIL models in some contexts (Ikeda, 2013).
In the implementation of CLIL technology, it adapts to the types of CLIL depending on the class's
academic performance (Ikeda, 2013) (Figure 1)
Figure 1
Types of CLIL
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1592
As this chart shows there are eight different types of CLIL. This categorization is based on
objectives, Frequency, Proportion, and language use. There are two kinds of CLIL objectives: the so-
called hard CLIL and soft CLIL methods. Hard CLIL means that the subject or subject curriculum is
taught in a foreign language. However, the main lesson objective is the content objective, not the
language, while in the so-called soft CLIL form; the content of the subject is subordinate to the
language goal.
The viewpoints of various stakeholders were contrasted by some researchers and thus the
areas of convergence and divergence of their views could be established. Wegner (2012), for
instance, revealed that their opinions vary on learning the language and content and the distribution
of CLIL classes by contrasting the experiences of students and teachers. As a result, these researchers
provide students, parents, and administrators with realistic guidance and add to the current body of
study. One clear example is the research by Massler (2012), where he proposed that CLIL should be
introduced by modules in the first stages to ensure painless learning.
It can be inferred that researchers' sincere interest in investigating students' experiences
shows the significance of the voices of students. It is worth noting that the vast majority of
experiments have been performed during the past decade. The recent appearance of this
phenomenon and, most significantly, the region for further study may suggest this. In addition, the
findings of their studies indicate important ideas in their contexts that are appropriate for the
improvement of CLIL. In the next chapter, their efforts will be discussed in more depth.
This is the chapter's central section since it reviews the very subject of the chapter, the
international observational research on CLIL attitudes and opinions of secondary school students.
Five main themes are given below for the study of international studies. These are behaviors and
expectations of CLIL by students; perceptions of students learning the content in CLIL classes;
perceptions of students learning the language in CLIL classes; perceptions of CLIL pedagogy by
students; perceived advantages of CLIL; and perceived CLIL obstacles. The review of current literature
on the experiences of CLIL by students has revealed multiple separate variables influencing their
positive or negative perceptions. They are concerned with methods of language and instruction
unique to the CLIL approach. Several research on CLIL associate the experiences of learners with the
language element (Yassin, 2009).
Some students see CLIL as an "opportunity for better future careers and education," as
Denman et al. (2013) suggest, largely because CLIL offers an opportunity to improve their language
skills. In addition, a methodological analysis by Yassin (2009) correlated the experiences of students
with their standard of English. They report that learners with strong English command appear to be
optimistic about CLIL and vice versa. However, other scholars who have researched the link between
language proficiency and cognition have found that, because of their poor level of English, students
do not have negative impressions (Vázquez, 2014).
Furthermore, the literature review showed an agreement among academics that the
interpretations of CLIL by students are mainly related to teaching strategies that are typical of CLIL.
For example, Czura & Papaja (2013) note that as they are more student-centered, students view CLIL
classes positively; students love becoming active learners and gaining more support from their
teachers. In addition, due to "intense visibility and genuine circumstances" (Lasagabaster& Sierra,
2009), and better organization of lessons, students find CLIL "more fun" and "meaningful (Hunt,
2011). These observations have been supported by other research (Vázquez, 2014). Given these
positive outcomes of CLIL, there were still several negative aspects revealed by many reports. "CLIL
was found "too complicated", "boring" and "no use" by a smaller number of learners (Coyle, 2013),
"confusing", "unpleasant" and "more difficult (Finardi, 2016). The involvement of English in studying
the material induced some negative impressions in these tests.
Another research (Herrera, 2015) shows how the impressions of CLIL by students could shift over
time. Before and after taking CLIL courses, Herrera explored students' impressions of CLIL."In
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1593
particular, the study highlights that the initial perceptions of learners of upcoming CLIL classes and
perceptions were completely different after being taught in CLIL classes: their perceptions changed
from "difficult, awkward, and illogical" to "a nice way to practice English, more fascinating. The
author (Herrera, 2015) concludes that such a transition takes place when students build their
learning methods to cope with challenges, and during the classes, their teachers should also create a
collaborative environment. These results show that considering the unfavorable image of CLIL classes
due to language problems, they can be alleviated over time by good teaching methods. Another
research (Lasagabaster, 2014) correlated one and three years of familiarity with the experiences of
students. They find that the more students are introduced to CLIL, the more beneficial they believe
CLIL is. As such, it can be inferred that derogatory attitudes derive more from the inexperience of
students rather than the lack of ability or expertise to participate in CLIL schools.
Given all this evidence, it seems that CLIL's positive views dominate over negative ones. The
writers have put forward three key reasons that underpin students' expectations. There are
influences linked to grammar, the essence of CLIL embodied in the creative teaching approaches in
which teaching is student-centered with exercises that make students engaged learners, and finally
time. More significantly, however, these studies demonstrate that the teaching and learning
strategies used in CLIL classes can be important for building one's expectations and can, in turn,
provide useful input on their effective execution.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data collection instrument
According to the above methodology, among the teachers of the natural science cycle,
special questionnaires were obtained to test the skills of integrated teaching of the English language.
Over the past three years, “Ustaz” Professional learning Center LLP has attended English courses for
about 8500 teachers. The mentoring project has been running for a year as part of this course. The
questionnaire was taken from teachers of natural sciences in Turkestan, Kazakhstan: chemistry,
physics, biology, and computer science. It describes and includes the joint work of mentors, i.e
subject teachers under the supervision of language teachers for 2018-2019.
2.2. Participants
A total of 53 school teachers (39 women and 14 men aged 20-60) participated in the survey.
It allowed determining the extent to which CLIL technology penetrates the classroom.
2.3. Procedure
The survey was created at docs.google.com, obtained through WhatsApp, and conducted
anonymously.
The questionnaire consists of three stages:
In the first stage, we identified the general basic information about the participants.
Here we determined such information as age, gender, subject of teaching, pedagogical
experience, living in rural and urban areas, basic knowledge of English, or studying other foreign
languages at school or university.
We tried to draw attention to the fact that if earlier English was studied at school or
University, they are more familiar with English than those who studied French or German and
assumed that this would make it easier to learn English.
Secondly, taking into account the age characteristics of students is important in teaching
language. We believe that intensive integrated teaching of the English language is facilitated by the
psychological perception of both young and adult professionals.
Thirdly, the environment, the presence of a multilingual environment in rural and urban
areas, the availability of information sources in different languages, and the good functioning of the
Internet increase interest in learning English.
Fourth, there is an even distribution of forces for mastering knowledge and language.
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1594
And if inexperienced professionals, first of all, make an effort to master both science and
language, then an experienced teacher does not make much effort to master science but to master
the language.
We considered that this is also one of the factors creating the conditions for integrated
learning. We placed the questionnaire form for determining these data in the following table 2.
Table 2
Participants’information
In the second stage of the questionnaire, we wanted to find out whether participants
support the introduction of CLIL technology in the education system of Kazakhstan, and whether it is
difficult or easy to apply.
Next, we offer a table that shows the views of teachers to CLIL. Because we are convinced
that teacher interest and positive feedback about CLIL will have an effective impact on mastering this
technology.
Table 3
Teachers’ attitude scores towards using CLIL on Likert’s scale
Scale Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
(highest) (high) (moderate) (low) (lowest)
Score 5 4 3 2 1
In the third stage of the questionnaire, we sought to show the development of the skills of
using the CLIL method in the educational process and the level of knowledge of a foreign language of
teachers of the natural science cycle.
Following the tasks set in the third part of the questionnaire, we surveyed science teachers
to determine the level of formation of integrated English language teaching skills.
The questionnaire included the following questions:
How would you describe your level of English?
What motivates you to learn/develop English?
Which aspect was easier for you in teaching the integrated English language?
Which of the following can you do?
Analyzing the answers to these questions, we noticed that the CLIL technology had a positive
impact on the integrated teaching of the English language, but there were some difficulties.
3. Results
As noted in the first stage, the collected data on the survey of school teachers trained in
integrated English language learning in chemistry, biology, computer science, and physics were
analyzed. According to the results of a survey of 53 school teachers, 38 women and 15 men between
the ages of 20 and 60 were enrolled. This information is shown in table 4:
Participants Information
Age 20 to 60 years old
Gender male, female
Work experience 1-31 years or above
Science subjects Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Computer Science
Basic foreign languages English, German, French
School area Village, city
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1595
Table 4
Participants’ Age and Gender
Gender
Frequency
%
Valid percent
Cumulativepercent
Valid
Female
38
71,7
71,7
71,7
Male
15
28,3
28,3
100,0
Total
53
100,0
100,0
Аge
Frequency
%
Valid percent
Cumulativepercent
Valid
20-30
4
7,5
7,5
7,5
31-40
26
49,1
49,1
56,6
41-50
17
32,1
32,1
88,7
51-60
6
11,3
11,3
100,0
Total
53
100,0
100,0
When determining the age characteristics of participants: between the ages of 20 and 30
years were 7.5%, from 31 to 40 years- 49.1%, from 41 to 50 years-32.1%, from 51 to 60 years-11.3%.
The purpose of determining the work experience of teachers in the school was to identify the
percentage of teachers who have sufficient experience in teaching a given subject. According to the
diagram below, young specialists with work experience from 1 to 10 years accounted for 22.6%,
teachers with 11-20 years of experience - 49.1%, that is, most of the percentage, specialists with 21-
31 years of experience - 22.6 %, teachers with more than 31 years of experience - 5.7%.
Thus, the percentage of teachers with more than 10 years of experience in this subject is
71.7%. From these statistics, it is clear that the specialists are prepared from a methodological point
of view. Therefore, we concluded that the process of integrated learning should be aimed, first of all,
at the formation of their language skills. For that reason, the use of the CLIL technique will give an
effective result. The percentage of teacher experience is shown in the following table 5.
Table 5
Work experience
Frequency
%
Valid percent
Cumulative
percent
Valid
1-10
12
22,6
22,6
22,6
11-20
26
49,1
49,1
71,7
21-31
12
22,6
22,6
94,3
31 in above
3
5,7
5,7
100,0
Total
53
100,0
100,0
Teaching chemistry, physics, biology, and computer science in integrated teaching of the
English language aroused great interest and contributed to the activation of science teachers. In
particular, biology teachers - 43.4% mainly attended the English language course. This showed that,
unlike other science teachers, biologists took an active interest in innovative technologies. According
to the results of the questionnaire, it turned out that the vast majority of teachers were
"Elementary" level accounting for 47.8%, and a computer science teacher's attendance consist of
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1596
20.8%, while 36.4% mastered the pre-intermediate level. This shows that computer science teachers
who work with electronic systems are good at the English language.
Figure 2
Teachers’ activity indicator
Table 6
The basic foreign language of participants
What foreign language did you learn at school?
Итого
English
German
French
Аge
20-30
Frequency
3
1
0
4
% в Аge
75,0%
25,0%
,0%
100,0%
31-40
Frequency
12
5
9
26
% в Аge
46,2%
19,2%
34,6%
100,0%
41-50
Frequency
11
5
1
17
% в Аge
64,7%
29,4%
5,9%
100,0%
51-60
Frequency
3
3
0
6
% в Аge
50,0%
50,0%
,0%
100,0%
Total
Frequency
29
14
10
53
% в Аge
54,7%
26,4%
18,9%
100,0%
As a result of the survey, it was found that 54.7% of respondents studied English at school.
The rest of the teachers noted that they studied German and French at school. From this data, it
follows that when integrating the English language into natural science subjects, different levels of
complexity must be taken into account and the methodology should be applied depending on the
level of training of teachers. The given data above determines the necessary information and the
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1597
selection of appropriate material to enable course participants to learn CLIL and then apply it in the
classroom.
In conclusion, according to the first stage of the survey, it turned out that 49.1% of teachers
who participated in English courses were middle-aged (31-40 years) teachers, 49.1% had more than
10 years of experience, and 54.7% had a base in English. In turn, these indicators show the
predominance of qualified, flexible, and capable teachers of subject-language integration.
However, despite their extensive experience, it is important that teachers are interested in
learning English, their attitude to the language, and understanding its needs. As a result of the
survey, we identified the attitudes of teachers toward mastering CLIL technology in the five points
listed below. (Table 7)
Table 7
Teacher's attitude to CLIL
№
Statements
Strongly
agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
disagree
1
I agree with
implementing CLIL in the
education system of
Kazakhstan.
18 (34%)
32 (60.4%)
2 (3.8%)
1 (1.9%))
-
2
I have learned new ways /
methods while integrating
English into my subject
15 (28.3%)
37 (69.8%)
1 (1.9%)
-
-
3
I am using English easily
and simply in my subject
9 (17.0%)
35 (66.0%)
6 (11.3%)
3 (5.7%)
-
4
The students’ interest has
increased in CLIL lesson
17 (32.1%)
30 (56.6%)
5 (9.4%)
1 (1.9%)
-
5
Learning English has
influenced my personal
development.
17 (32.1%)
31 (58.5%)
4 (7.5%)
1 (1.9%)
-
According to the statistics shown in the table above, in general, teachers supported
Integrated English Learning using CLIL technology. We found that teachers generally agree between
80-90% in 5 different statements presented in the statistics shown in the table above. Almost 100%
of teachers, exactly 98.1%, have learned new methods and techniques in integrating the English
language. The number of teachers who consent to the accomplishment of CLIL technology in the
education system and the number of teachers who have influenced the personal development of
English proficiency are more than 90%, 94.4%, and 90.6% respectively. Among the statements,
neutral and disagreeable teachers said that it was not easy to integrate English and that the
percentage of teachers who had difficulty identifying students' interests was higher than other
statements, at 17 % and 11.3 %, respectively. However, the highest percentages on these issues are
teachers, with 83 % and 88.7 % agreeing. There were no teachers who would disagree with all
statements.
In the third stage, after determining the level of English proficiency of teachers (Table 5), it
was necessary to determine teachers’ motivation of learning the language. According to the survey
results, the main interest of subject teachers in learning a foreign language lies in the fact that the
vast majority of them among 31-40 years old (34.6%), that is 40.9% have a high interest in learning
both the language and customs of other countries, self-development, career growth, through
communication with people from other countries. It should be noted that teachers' interest in
learning English is determined, first of all, by their spiritual development and improvement. Analyzing
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1598
the results of the survey, we came to the following conclusion: for teachers, professional spiritual,
and moral development was more important than material needs. This is evidenced by the indicators
in figure 3.
Figure 3.
Motivation for language learning
Subject teachers trained in integrated English language teaching have developed different
levels of skills in conducting classes using CLIL. When conducting classes, some difficulties occurred,
and some teachers noticed a successful organization of the lesson, and this is due to their age
characteristics, work experience, competence, and knowledge of the English language. These results
are shown in figure 4.
Figure 4
An indicator of the successful application of CLIL in the classroom
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1599
Figure 5
Indicator of the formation of teachers ' skills in integrated learning
As can be seen from the diagram, the organized course has shown positive results despite
the difficulties and benefits for teachers during the class. Many teachers showed that in addition to
using CLIL in the lesson, at the initial stage they know the terminology (25%) in English, at the next
stage they should be fluent in communicative and speech constructions (50%) in English, but some
teachers could conduct classes completely in English using CLIL.
4. Discussion
The education system of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as a whole, is going through a transition
period to integrated teaching of subjects through English (Bokayev et al., 2021). Therefore, it is
important to analyze the world experience of training and use them following the peculiarities of the
country's education. This study believes that in the future, the above approaches and technologies
will help to find and offer a single effective way to integrate English with science subjects in the
Republic of Kazakhstan’s schools.
When teaching methods of integrated teaching of English in the classroom of natural
sciences, it is necessary to take into account the age-related characteristics of specialists and the
level of their basic language training (Krotik & Morhun, 2021). Depending on the level of language
training of specialists, it would be effective to train CLIL according to step-by-step instructions. That
is, at the initial stage, it is necessary to master 25% of the basic terms of the English language, at the
next stage it is necessary to learn 50% of the terminological vocabulary and instill skills in using them
when communicating depending on situations, at the third stage should be able to correctly use
approximately 75% of grammatical and stylistic terms in specialties in English, which contributes to
the expansion of the vocabulary of students, in the fourth stage, at the end of the educational
process, it is necessary to switch to the free use of English 100% when teaching the studied
discipline.
It is important to take into account that a sufficient level of professional training for
specialists makes it possible to teach a subject in English (Dearden, 2018). It should be noted that a
specialist with fundamental theoretical training, that is, a specialist who has worked in this field for
many years and has a deep knowledge of the theoretical aspects of the subject, will now make every
effort to master the language. However, due to the lack of pedagogical experience, a young specialist
is obliged to direct all efforts to master the English language, while improving his theoretical
knowledge, despite the intense perception of information.
Teachers who integrate English with the subjects of the natural science cycle should pay
attention to their teaching load and salary to stimulate their professional creativity. To improve, and
develop the content and technology of integrated English language teaching in natural science
subjects at schools, it is necessary to start training future specialists in the process of studying at the
University.
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1600
5. Conclusion
Summing up, we can say that the experience of using CLIL technology in Kazakhstan by
teachers of the natural science cycle (chemistry, physics, biology, computer science) and the
mechanisms of its implementation have not yet been systematized and require improvement. The
use of CLIL as an effective method of subject-language integrated teaching of English requires
clarification for many teachers as new innovative technology. By studying this technology, we have
seen that integrated learning provides effective results.
In this article, to achieve our goals, we based our research on the scientific works of scientists
who have studied this problem. As a result of the analysis and comparison of many studies, we are
convinced that the technology of subject-language integrated teaching (English) of natural science
disciplines has long been introduced in Western countries and has emerged as a more effective
method.
Therefore, we believe that the positive direction of our research was influenced by the
conclusions and recommendations of foreign scientists when teaching teachers of natural science
subjects in English at school. Among foreign scientists, it is important to note the valuable ideas in
the articles by Marsh, Coyle, and others.
Along with this, the actual information for our article was the use of innovative methods and
forms of organization of training, applied during the practical training course "Ustaz kasibi biliktikti
arttyru", held in the Republic of Kazakhstan. Overall, these findings enhance our understanding of
the current state of the CLIL approach and may assist policymakers and practitioners in making more
informed decisions to use the CLIL approach more effectively for the implementation of trilingual
education.
References:
Alimbekova, A., Abildina, S., Utebayev, I., & Atemova, K. (2018). Student Self-Governance as a factor for
professional leadership development in the system of higher education. Espacios, 39(35), 1-1.
http://www.revistaespacios.com/a18v39n35/18393501.html
Baitukenov, T. (2016, August 12). Trilingualism: Utopia or reality? Retrieved from
http://news.1.kz/news/trekhjazychie---utopija-ili-realnoct.html
Bokayev, B., Torebekova, Z., Abdykalikova, M., & Davletbayeva, Z. (2021). Exposing policy gaps: the experience
of Kazakhstan in implementing distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Transforming
Government: People, Process and Policy. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/TG-
07-2020-0147/full/html
Coyle, D. (2007). CLIL: towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of
Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543-562. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0
Coyle, D. (2013). Listening to learners: An investigation into ‘successful learning’ across CLIL contexts.
International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16, 244-266.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13670050.2013.777384
Coyle, D., Hood, P. & Marsh, D. (2010) CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning.Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Czura, A. & Papaja, K. (2013). Curricular models of CLIL education in Poland. International Journal of Bilingual
Education and Bilingualism, 16(3), 321-333.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13670050.2013.777388
Dalton-Puffer, C., Hüttner, J., Schindelegger, V. &Smit, U. (2009). Technology-geeks speak out: what students
think about vocational CLIL. International CLIL Research Journal,1(2), 19-25. Retrieved from
http://www.icrj.eu/21/article3.html
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1601
Dearden, J. (2018). The changing roles of EMI academics and English language specialists. In Key Issues in
English for specific purposes in higher education (pp. 323-338). Springer, Cham.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-70214-8_18
Denman, J., Tanner, R., & de Graaff, R. (2013). CLIL in junior vocational secondary education: Challenges and
opportunities for teaching and learning. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism, 16(3), 285-300. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13670050.2013.777386
Finardi, K., Silveira, N. & de Alencar, G. (2016). First aid and waves in English as a foreign language: Insights
from CLIL in Brazil. Electronic Journal of Science Education,20(3), 11-30. Retrieved from
http://ejse.southwestern.edu
Herrera, L.R. (2015). Mexican secondary school students’ perception of learning the history of Mexico in
English. Profile Issues in Teachers’ Professional Development, 17(1), 105-120.
http://dx.doi.org/10.15446/profile.v17n1.44739.
Hunt, M. (2011). Learners’ perceptions of their experiences of learning subject content through a foreign
language. Educational Review, Aquatic 63(3), 365–378.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00131911.2011.571765
Idrissova, M., Smagulova, B., & Tussupbekova, M. (2015). Improving listening and speaking skills in mixed-level
groups (on the material of the New English File). Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 276-
284. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042815045280
Ikeda, M. (2013). Does CLIL work for Japanese secondary schools? International CLILResearch Journal, 2 (1), 31-
43. Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/21/article3.html
Irsaliev, S., Karabassova, Ch., Mukhametzhanova, A., Adil, A., Bekova, M. &Nurlanov, Y. (2017). Teaching in
three languages: International experience and recommendations for Kazakhstan. Retrieved from
http://iac.kz/ru
Irsaliev, S., Karabassova, Ch., Mukhametzhanova, A., Adil, A., Bekova, M. &Nurlanov, Y. (2017). Teaching in
three languages: International experience and recommendations for Kazakhstan. Retrieved from
http://iac.kz/ru
Krotik, V. K., & O Morhun, O. (2021). The Development of Intercultural Competence of Secondary School Pupils
and University Students. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ) Special Issue on Covid, 19.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3851760
Lasagabaster, D. &Doiz, A. (2016). CLIL students' perceptions of their language learning process: delving into
self-perceived improvement and instructional preferences. Language Awareness, 25(1-2), 110-126.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09658416.2015.1122019
Lasagabaster, D., Sierra, J.M. (2009). Language attitudes in CLIL and traditional EFL classes. International CLIL
Research Journal, 1(2), 4-17. Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/12/article1.html
Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE: The European Dimension: Actions, trends, and foresight potential. European
Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/education/languages/pdf/doc491_en.pdf.
Massler, U. (2012). Primary CLIL and its stakeholders: what do children, parents, and teachers think of the
potential merits and pitfalls of CLIL modules in primary teaching? International CLIL Research Journal,
1 (4), 36-46. Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/14/article4.html
Mehisto, P., & Asser, H. (2007). Stakeholder perspectives: CLIL programme management in
Estonia. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 683-701.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2167/beb466.0
MoES. (2013). Ortamektepteokytuprocesindekoptildiliktidamytumaseleleru. On developing multilingualism in
secondary schools. Retrieved from icrov-pvl.gov.kz/loader/load/46
MoES. (2016). State Program of Education and Science Development for 2016- 2019.Retrieved April, 30, from
http://www.edu.gov.kz/ru/gosudarstvennaya-programma-razvitiya-obrazovaniya-i-nauki-respubliki-
kazahstan-na-2016-2019-gody
Konyssova, A., Atemova, K., Chakanova, S., Gulmira, A., Konyssova, S. & Konkabayeva, G. (2022). Experience of CLIL in the natural science
disciplines in Kazakhstan’s schools. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science. 17(5), 1588-1602.
https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v17i5.7334
1602
Nazarbayev, N. (2012). The message of the president of the Republic of Kazakhstan. N. Nazarbayev to the
people of Kazakhstan. Strategy- 2050: the new political course of the established state, Astana.
Retrieved from https://strategy2050.kz/ru
Oskolkova, A. (2014). The significance of content and language-integrated learning of the English language. The
Kazakh-American Free University AcademicJournal, 6. Retrieved from http://www.kafu-academic-
journal.info/journal/6/180/
Pladevall-Ballester, E. (2015) Exploring primary school CLIL perceptions in Catalonia: students', teachers' and
parents' opinions and expectations. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
18(1), 45-59. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13670050.2013.874972
Roiha, A.S. (2014) Teachers’ views on differentiation in content and language integrated learning (CLIL):
Perceptions, practices, and challenges. Language and Education,28(1), 1-18.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09500782.2012.748061
Tsuchiya, K. & Pérez Murillo, M. (2015). Comparing the language policies and the students’ perceptions of CLIL
in tertiary education in Spain and Japan. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated
Learning, 8, 25-35. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1132145
Vázquez, V.P., Molina, M.P. & Ávila López, F.J. (2014). Perceptions of teachers and students of the promotion of
interaction through task-based activities in CLIL. PortaLinguarum, 23, 75-91. Retrieved from
http://www.ugr.es/~portalin/articulos/PL_numero23/5%20%20Victor%20Pavon.pdf
Wegner, A. (2012). Seeing the bigger picture: what students and teachers think about CLIL. International CLIL
Research Journal, 1 (4), 29-35. Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/12/article2.html
Yassin, S., Idris, S., Marsh, D., Tek, O.E. & Ying, L. Y. (2009). Learners’ perceptions towards the teaching of
science through English in Malaysia: a quantitative analysis. International CLIL Research Journal, 1 (2),
54-69. Retrieved from http://www.icrj.eu/12/article6.html 54
Zhetpisbayeva, B. & Arinova, O. (2012). Ot idei Triedinstvo yazykov N.A.Nazarbayeva do poliyazychnogo
obrazovaniya v Kazakhstane. [From the idea of Trinity of languages to polylingual education in
Kazakhstan]. VestnikKarGU. Retrieved from https://articlekz.com/article/5831
