María Nieva-Marroquín

1. CLIL programmes often prioritise meaning and content learning. Why is attention to grammar development still necessary in CLIL contexts?
Research has shown that CLIL provides learners with more exposure to the target language by means of content subjects such as Science or Arts. Since the main priority of CLIL is that content is understood, learners may not rely on accurate forms, such as the omission of the -s. Therefore, attention to grammar can help learners notice grammatical forms that may otherwise be unnoticed.

2. Your research investigates explicit instruction and form-focused approaches. How can teachers integrate grammar support without reducing opportunities for meaningful communication?
Grammar support does not need to replace meaningful communication. In my research, explicit instruction of grammar was brief and closely connected to the language that learners need. Teachers can use short periods of form-focused instruction before, during or after meaning-based activities. Also, tasks such as text editing or text reconstruction which are related to the content of the subject (e.g. mammals or the environment) can also help learners discuss language whilst they work towards a meaningful outcome. In other words, attention to form becomes part of the lesson rather than an isolated grammar lesson.

3. What benefits did you observe from combining noticing, awareness activities, and explicit instruction? The results suggest that explicit attention to form can help in the development of some grammatical features, although the effects were not uniform. For example, in the text-editing group that received explicit instruction, overall grammatical accuracy (tested by means of a Grammaticality Judgement Task in the form of a pre-, post- and delayed post-test) improved significantly, with particularly clear gains for expletive subject production and subject-verb order. However, the third-person singular -s production did not show significant improvements. In the text-reconstruction group that received instruction, improved in subject production and overall accuracy. This suggests that noticing, awareness and practice can be beneficial, but its effectiveness may depend on the specific grammatical feature and on the type of task.

4. What implications does your research have for teachers working with young CLIL learners?
The most important takeaway is that young CLIL learners can benefit from explicit attention to grammar when it is brief and connected to communicative work. Teachers do not need to choose between teaching content and addressing language form. My findings also show that task type matters: different collaborative tasks encouraged learners to focus on different aspects of language. Teachers should therefore select tasks and form-focused techniques according to the grammatical feature they want learners to notice, rather than assuming that all forms will benefit equally from the same task.

5. How do you see the relationship between language accuracy and content learning evolving in future CLIL classrooms?
I think that future CLIL classrooms will increasingly treat content and language accuracy as complementary rather than competing. A more balanced approach could combine content-based interaction with moments of attention to form. The aim would not be grammatical perfection, but help learners develop more precise language while they continue to use English as a tool for learning and communicating with their classmates and teachers.