Although CLIL can operate successfully bilingually, it can also be introduced as a tool for promoting plurilingualism in education and beyond. Thus CLIL should not be associated with any one particular language, but viewed as an educational approach to support linguistic diversity. Initial CLIL exposure in a widely-taught language can be used as a springboard for later expansion into another widely-taught or less widely-taught language.

Criteria Selection for CLIL streams should not necessarily be based on first or target language competence, because of the significance of learner motivation in achieving successful outcomes. Guidelines should be drawn up to facilitate the inclusion of a broad range of learners in a framework which encompasses diverse models of CLIL. This would help to unlock the potential of CLIL beyond specifically privileged minority groups.

One commonly-cited additional value of CLIL is the enhanced development of learning strategies and skills, which are related to broader cognitive applications. Exposure to trans-disciplinary training in language-specific study skills could enhance the development of specifically subject-related productive skills. This can be achieved through closer integration of first, target and non-language specialists in the curriculum.

Performance Assessment of CLIL learner performance has to be sensitive to the subject-language duality inherent within many models of CLIL. Integrated pedagogical classroom learning needs to be assessed using similarly integrated assessment tools. Viewing an examination text from a solely language or subject point of view negates the trans-disciplinary characteristics of CLIL. Testing and assessment apparatus need to be introduced which allow learners to show the breadth of their knowledge and skills in relation to both content and language.

Formal recognition of learner achievement in certain types of high-activity CLIL should be made at national level. Efforts to have such documentation recognised by authorities and institutions trans-nationally should follow.

Initial teacher education in CLIL is a pre-requisite for consolidating this approach in mainstream education. Specialised programmes need to be developed which would encourage inter-disciplinarity by providing subject and language specialisation and certification. Such programmes need to be more than add-on modules, and might involve a longer time-frame of study than conventional programmes. They might also require a closer working relationship between training institutions and schools, maximising the development of practitioners' skills in the learning of the linguistic, scientific and pedagogical aspects of CLIL.

Experienced teachers of subjects and languages should be provided with the opportunity to move into CLIL through the provision of in-service development programmes. The outcomes from these programmes could then also inform the development of curricula for initial teacher education in CLIL. A continuing programme of in-service development is necessary for all practitioners, thereby providing up-to-date information concerning advances in CLIL, and maintaining both subject and language proficiencies. In-service packages should also be seen as a necessary part of context-specific development regionally and institutionally.

A trans-national higher degree programme, designed and implemented by key European centres of expertise in this field, should be made available. Such a venture could act as a catalyst in establishing a flagship academic programme for European CLIL, which could then have a multiplier effect on trans-national initial and in-service education, and on research initiatives.

External systems of quality assurance should be made available regionally and nationally for teachers and schools which wish to have a professional profile or review of competencies. Assessment teams would ideally comprise expertise in both research and practice. Recommendations arising from such assessment would focus on the range of knowledge and skills required for good practice in CLIL, which includes factors such as language proficiency, pedagogical competence and socio-cultural awareness. In addition, part of such assessment would require some focus on institutional capacity and implementation. Practitioners should also be encouraged to engage in continuous self-assessment, using tools such as diagnostic language tests (or, for example, European Language Portfolio and Common European Framework of Reference) and classroom practice review, in order to identify developmental areas.

Council of Europe and European Commission supported initiatives have produced a range of resources relevant to CLIL. A jointly compiled compendium of such output would be highly advantageous in ensuring ease of access by a wide range of CLIL interest groups. Practitioners should be encouraged to use not only the well-publicised existing tools, such as the Common European Framework of Reference and the European Language Portfolio, but also to seek out those less widely known project outcomes, such as EuroCLIC, which might have direct relevance for their own situations.

To assist in the provision of quality materials, which could be integrated into a range of national curricula, an Internet Materials Bank could be developed and piloted. In the first stage the Bank should only focus on a small range of modular or topic-based learning materials, specified according to level and language. The materials bank should ideally comprise downloadable resources, which would be designed with a view to flexibility and ease of adaptation, and links to other similar sites. Reviews of other suitable materials in published sources should also be included, alongside guidelines for practitioners to create their own materials.

It is necessary to define, concretise and exemplify how CLIL can be implemented in different contexts, and have this information produced in a style which is accessible to a non-specialist audience. Brief descriptions of variables and options should be supported by case-study exemplification, with an overview of the range of models implemented. By examining facts drawn from existing experiences, interest groups would be able to select features of established practice which might be suitable for their local situations.

There is a need to establish a coalition between educationalists, parents /learners, and administrative and political interest groups. This requires that the feasibility of CLIL be expressed in clear and accessible terms, alongside evidence of potential outcomes and cost-benefit analysis. This can be achieved through establishing a trans-national CLIL Consortium to examine key features of good practice, and tangible outcomes in relation to required investment. The Consortium, comprising multi-disciplinary expertise, would then establish and implement a strategic dissemination plan for regional, national and trans-national policy groups. The strategy plan should be able to capitalise on the European Year of Languages 2001.

A publicity drive targeting language planning groups, which sets out to provide information on the potential impact of CLIL on minority language interests and needs, should be incorporated into the strategic dissemination plan.

Insight into those topics and modules, within subjects, which are reported as being particularly suitable for CLIL, should be considered in terms of the development of elements of a curriculum relevant to various European contexts. If such topics/modules were taught across Europe in different languages, a key problem in materials development would be overcome.

Case studies of successful implementation of CLIL, ranging from pre-school to higher education, should be carried out to examine the full range of potential of this approach for all age groups.

Pilot projects should be used to bring together existing expertise and established infrastructures in, for example, specialist schools such as International Baccalaureate, European and others. This would establish dialogue and complementarity between these schools and mainstream educational institutions.

Initiatives should be made to include a wider range of expertise in CLIL than has previously been the case. Such expertise, generally research-driven, is needed to explore the multi-disciplinary and holistic features of CLIL. Objective empirical data are increasingly required to substantiate claims made for and against CLIL. The analysis of such data is instrumental in allowing informed decision-making on future development. Key issues requiring attention include:

• Linguistic multiplier effects of CLIL
• Concept formation in different languages
• Cognition and code-switching
• Development of pragmatic and metalinguistic skills
• Attitudinal change
• Comparative approaches to subjects
• Impact on first (and home/heritage) language and cultural identity
• Professional and societal long-term impact of CLIL
• Second language learning/acquisition vis-à-vis CLIL
• Early learning in a CLIL environment
• Partial competencies
• Methodological integration of languages and non-language subjects
  
  Previous relevant research findings should be brought together with the results from these areas of enquiry, and made accessible to a wider audience. A research inventory collating the European experience of CLIL would complement existing data from other continents. It is desirable that some future research initiatives be carried out by teams comprising both researchers and practitioners. These issues are unlikely to be addressed in a meaningful way unless official recognition of the need leads to the injection of targeted funding.

The current availability of an interactive Internet site, which can provide the tools for networking different interest groups, needs to be sustained.

• The Rationale
• CLIL in Brief
• CLIL Key Terms
• CLIL Milestones
• CLIL Potential