Maximizing
Synergies: Combining
COIL and CLIL inTertiary Education
Mahboubeh Rakhshandehroo
prakhshandehroo@gmail.com
CHER 2023
September 1, 2023

CLIL & COIL
CLIL
Since mid-1990s (Europe)
language-driven (soft) – commonin JP; content-driven (hard)
flexibility, fostering learnerautonomy, global competencies &agency, shift between language
and content as required

COIL
Since 2004 (SUNY)- 2014 in JP
Innovative & cost-effective,
nurturing learners’ intercultural
skills and openness, fostering
confidence in utilizing ELF,
higher levels of student
engagementSources: Coyle et al., 2010; De Wit & Altbach, 2023; IIGE, 2021; Kavanagh & Kojima, 2023; Thompson & McKinley, 2018

CLIL/COIL course
limited research exploring theintegration of CLIL & COIL in a single
course:• Saito et al. (2023) CLIL/COIL course
between JP and the US• Ayunts et al. (2022) à CLIL/COIL
course between Brazil and Armenia

This study: a hard CLIL/COIL course
titled ‘Internationalization of Higher
Education (IoHE)’ between JP and theUSMain exploratory researchquestion
What are the potential
difficulties and advantages
associated with the combined
application of COIL and CLIL
within a single course at theuniversity level?

Methodology
Mixed-methods research design (Creswell & Clark, 2017)
A leading private Japanese university
Undergraduate Japanese and American/international students
Student reflective report and a qualitatively-driven survey data (via Google forms)
gathered at the end of the course
Fall 2021 & Fall 2022, two student cohorts (2021, N=60, 2022, N=61, in total 121
students)

Theoretical background
The Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework (Garrison, Anderson &Archer, 2000).

CognitivePresenceSocialPresence

TeachingPresenceVariables
Satisfaction with the course

Categories
5 (very satisfied)
4 (satisfied)
3 (neither satisfied nor satisfied)
2 (dissatisfied)
1 (very dissatisfied)

2021 % (N=60)
51.3
38.5
10.2
00

2022 % (N=61)
51.9
33.3
14.8
0
0

5 (very satisfied)Satisfaction with the COIL 4 (satisfied)component
3 (neither satisfied nor satisfied)
2 (dissatisfied)
1 (very dissatisfied)

46.2
38.5
15.3
00

48.1
37.1
14.8
0
0

5 (extremely likely)
Likelihood of recommending 4 (likely)
this course to other students
3 (neutral)
2 (unlikely)
1 (extremely Unlikely)

66.7
23.1
10.2
00

59.3
29.6
11.100• ‘Also, since the class was conducted in collaboration
with an overseas school, I was happy to hear theopinions of real students’. (Participant 12)

SocialPresence• ‘It was my first time to take a class with students inUS and it was fun. I enjoyed being able to experience
things that I couldn’t experience in my regularclasses’. (Participant 2)• ‘What I learned from this class is to complete thepresentation as a group. There were manydisagreements in my group, and it took me a longtime to decide on a theme. However, at that time,[student A] and [student B] took the initiative to put
it together. Once the theme was decided, the question
creation and PowerPoint creation were smooth… I
felt a sense of accomplishment that everyone in theteam was able to work together’. (Participant 26)• ‘At first, I was not very good at speaking English, so I
tried to communicate using words I knew, although I am
not sure if I could pronounce them well. American students
speak very fluent English, so it was difficult for me tounderstand them. Therefore, I was able to understand littleby little by watching the videos [via Flip] over and overagain’. (Participant 1)

TeachingPresence• ‘I strongly remember the struggles with posting the videoon Flip. This does not mean I had difficulty with systems.
Speaking English in front of a laptop was uncomfortable
for me because I couldn’t know if my English made sense.
When I am talking in English, I usually ask if my English
is well, or person gets what I want to say. Remoteactivities that I cannot do these things made me worried.
However, this experience made me not only worried but
also made me grow. Skills to make English drafts,presentations, knowledge of immigrants … I feel new skills
that I got through this class and experiences of thecooperation with COIL partner will be profitable for thefuture’. (Participant 84)• ‘I could know the importance of having wider mind
and looking at the other situations by comparing withJapanese current situation’. (Participant 24)

CognitivePresence• ‘I was able to learn that people of the samegeneration from other countries have similar
opinions on the same issues, and I feel that this will
increase the possibility of solving these problems [ofglobalization].’ (Participant 100)
• ‘COIL activities were my first opportunity which
involved students from other countries. I enjoyedfeeling the difference in their and my way of thinking
and culture in each activity each time. Especially, I
was interested in that US student had a different wayof thinking about gender differences’ (Participant 17)

Social Presence
COIL - engaging with same-aged peers:familiarity, authenticity, and gaining insights
through learning from the experience.
CLIL - PBL, collaborative learning: expand
social network, comprehend the basic dynamics
of teamwork, assume responsibility, and gain asense of fulfillment upon the successful
completion of group assignments.
Cognitive Presence
COIL - the opportunity to assess
information within a global context:
comparative approach (identification ofsimilarities and differences), broadening
cognitive horizons, personal growth, theappreciation of diversity, and theenhancement of respect for others.
CLIL - materials relatable to students,cognitive scaffolding, collaborative
learning, reflective learning includingreflective short reports

Teaching PresenceIssue: students’ perceived inadequacies inEnglish, specifically a lack of confidence inEnglish pronunciation
COIL - asynchronous collaborative activities
via Flip - flexibility to review videos, accesstranscripts
CLIL - structured and scaffolded activities,group work, seek clarifications from theirinstructor and peers-->improvement in students’ proficiency inEnglish (specifically in areas ofpronunciation, listening, and speaking),
ultimately fostering their confidenceCLIL/COIL coursepromote global competencies & prepare students for a globalized workforce,
contributing to internationalization efforts in HE (de Wit, 2016; IIGE, 2021)
Flexibility, enhance critical thinking, particularly through cooperative educational
approaches (Helm, 2020; Hemmi & Banegas, 2021)
positive impact on student learning and engagement (Saito et al., 2023, Ayunts etal., 2022)
Students’ self-perceived limitations in their English language competencies à theCOIL as an incentive, exposure to a range of English dialects

Discussion• Limitations: a single course at a Japanese privateuniversity, relatively small sample size (N=121), reliedon self-reported data from student reflective reports
and survey responses, did not assess the long-term
impact of the integration of COIL and CLIL on student
learning outcomes or their future academic andprofessional development.
• Implications: can promote student agency & enhance
global competencies in HE.
• Future research: assessing the sustainability andtransferability of these approaches across different
contexts and disciplines

References
Ayunts, A. Dias, E. Fernandes, E. Guarino, T. Prestes A. L. (2022). Mentoring Chain in a COIL experience, ICERI2022 Proceedings, 8677–8685.
Coyle, D., Hood, P. and Marsh, D. (2010). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.
Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization. Journal of studies in international education, 10(3), 241–266.
De Wit, H. (2016). Internationalisation and the role of online intercultural exchange. Online intercultural exchange: Policy, pedagogy, practice, 4, 69–82.
De Wit, H., & Altbach, P. G. (2023). International Higher Education for the Future: Major Crises and Post-Pandemic Challenges. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 55(1), 17–23.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2 (2–3) , 87–105.
Helm, F. (2020). EMI, Internationalisation, and the Digital. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(3), 314–325.
Hemmi, C., & Banegas, D. L. (Eds.). (2021). International perspectives on CLIL. Palgrave Macmillan.
IIGE. (2021). I-Paper. Kansai University. Retrieved from https://www.kansai-u.ac.jp/Kokusai/IIGE/resources/whitepaper.php
Kavanagh, B., & Kojima, S. (2023). Soft CLIL: The Predominant Approach for Language Specialists at Japanese Universities. Asian Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning (Asian CLIL) Vol.
1. 5–17.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2011). Internationalization or Englishization: Medium of Instruction in Today's Universities. Hong Kong: Centre for Governance and Citizenship, Hong Kong Institute of Education.
Macaro, E., Curle, S., Pun, J., An, J., & Dearden, J. (2018). A systematic review of English medium instruction in higher education. Language Teaching, 51(1), 36–76.
Rakhshandehroo, M. (2022). Creating inclusive internationalization spaces in EMI classrooms through COIL: evidence from Japan. CIHE Perspectives. 21, 32–33.
Saito, Y., Matsuyoshi, S., & Miyagi, R. (2023). [Eigo-ka kyōiku-hō ni okeru, kaigai daigaku kyōshoku katei to no gōdō purojekuto - CLIL, koiru purasu fuku gengo shugi kyōiku no kokoromi]. A joint projectwith teaching courses of foreign universities in English language education: CLIL, COIL plus a trial of bilingual education. Setsunan University Educational Research, (19), 49–64.
Thompson, G. & McKinley, J. (2018). Integration of content and language learning. In the TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (1st ed.). Edited by John I. Liontas. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.