Zenta Anspoka


Topicality of the problem is determined by several factors as well as the amendments on the Education Law and the General Education Law, which provide for a gradual transition to the acquisition of general secondary education in Latvian only, educational content reform and teachers experience to work in an ethnically and linguistically heterogeneous environment.

The aim of the study is to analyse comprehensive school teachers theoretical background and practice experience to work in the content and language integrated teaching and learning approach. Because language not a subject only but a mean of acquiring other subjects in the comprehensive school, too, all teachers need theoretical knowledge and practical experience to plan and carry out two important tasks in the teaching/learning process – to help to students to acquire different subjects content and purposefully to use language for this. The research methods are analyses of theoretical literature and interviewing combined with classroom observations results.

According research results the most important problems are insufficient knowledge about language role for acquisition of content, insufficient cooperation between teachers, part - understood issue, how to work with different texts as well as necessity to change attitude towards the pedagogical process and responsibility for learning outcomes.



collaboration; competence; content and language integrated learning (CLIL)

Full Text:



Anspoka, Z. (2016). Language Diversity in the Classroom and Different Subject Teachers’ Professional Competence: Some Problems and Solutions. International Dialogues on Education: Past and Present. IDE-Online Journal. Edited by Olaf Beuchling, Dr.Reinhard Golz, Erika Hasebe-Ludt, 30- 36. Pieejams:

Anspoka, Z. (2010). Valoda kā līdzeklis pamatizglītības programmā: dažas problēmas un risinājumi. ATTE Teacher of the 21st Century: Quality Education for Quality Teaching. Riga: LU, 25.-132.

Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Motivating learners and teachers in the CLIL teachers tool kit: A classroom guide. Nottingham: The University of Nottingham.

Druviete, I. (2015). Bilingvālā izglītība un CLIL: vēsturiskais atskats un attīstības prognozes. CLIL jeb mācību satura un valodas integrēta apguve: izglītības paradigmas maiņa. Populārzinātnisku rakstu krājums. Atbild. Red. S. Lazdiņa. Nr.3. Rīga: Latviešu valodas aģentūra, 19. – 37.

Fadel, C., Bialika, M., & Triling, B. (2015). Four-Dimensional Education: The Competencies Learners. Needed to Succeed. Boston: The Center for Curriculum Redisign.

Latvijas Nacionālais attīstības plāns 2014. – 2020. gadam (2012). Pieejams:

Marsh, D. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). A Development Trajectory. University of Córdoba. Retrieved from

Moe, E., Härmälä, M., Kristmanson, P. L., Pascoal, J., & Ramoniené, M. (2015). Language skills for successful subject learning . CEFR – linked descriptors for mathematics and history/civics. The European Centre for Modern Languages. Pieejams:

Nemeth, K. (2009). Many Languages, One Classroom: Teaching Dual and English Language Learners, Maryland: Gryphon House.

Noteikumi par valsts pamatizglītības standartu, pamatizglītības mācību priekšmetu standartiem un pamatizglītības programmu paraugiem. Ministru kabineta noteikumi Nr.468 (2014). Pieejams:

Pedagoģijas terminu skaidrojošā vārdnīca (2000). Autoru kol. Rīga: Zvaigzne ABC. Skola 2030 (2019). Pieejams:

Vaivade, V. (2015). CLIL pedagoģiskie aspekti: mērķi, uzdevumi un īstenošana. CLIL jeb mācību satura un valodas integrēta apguve: izglītības paradigmas maiņa. Populārzinātnisku rakstu krājums. Atbild. Red. S. Lazdiņa. Nr.3. Rīga: Latviešu valodas aģentūra, 84. – 100.



  • There are currently no refbacks.