內容與語言整合學習 (Content and Language Integrated Learning; CLIL) 是一種著重於內容與語言的雙焦點教學與學習方式。 教學者透過目標語言授內容，而學習者則透過內容來學習語言，用語言來學習內容。
由於CLIL較少應用於華語教學中，故研究者欲探討華語輔助課程當中CLIL的應用性及成效。研究者結合華語（語言） 與台灣時下的社會議題（內容） ，並以Do Coyle (2010) 提出的4Cs核心原則（內容、溝通 （語言） 、認知及文化） 進行課程設計、教材編寫及教學實驗，並請觀課者填寫Do Coyle所提出的「CLIL觀課檢核表」，請學習者填寫依檢核表所編寫而成的「語言輔助課調查表」，隨後再進行兩份問卷的比較分析，並輔以觀課者的訪談以做進一步之分析。研究結果發現，CLIL的教材與教學設計皆能有效應用於華語教學上。

Content and Language Integrated Learning (hereinafter referred to as CLIL) is a dual-focused educational approach. With the approach, teachers teach content through the target language and the learners are learning the content through the language or the language through the content.
Since CLIL is rarely used in Chinese teaching, this aims to discuss the application and effectiveness of CLIL in Chinese study courses. This study combines Chinese (language) and Taiwan's current social issues (content). This paper compiles the teaching materials based on the 4Cs framework (content, communication (language), cognitive and culture), previously proposed by Do Coyle (2010), in order to conduct teaching experiments. During the trial lesson, class observers were asked to fill in a "CLIL Unit Checklist” which designed by Do Coyle, and learners were asked to complete a "supplementary class feedback" survey which based on the checklist. Then, we analyzed and compared the differences between the two, supplemented by the interviews with 4 class observers for further analysis. The results show that CLIL's teaching materials and teaching design can be effectively applied to Chinese teaching.

英文
Anderson, L., Krathwohl, D., Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., ... & Wittrock, M. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Baetens Beardsmore, H. (2002). The significance of CLIL/EMILE. In David, M. (Ed), CLIL/EMILE-the European dimension: Actions, trends and foresight potential (pp20-26). Finland: University of Jyväskylä

Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. New York: Multilingual matters.
Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J. (2016). Oxford handbooks for language teachers: Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bentley, K. (2010). The TKT Course CLIL. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objective.: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay
Brinton, D., Snow, M., & Wesche, M. (2003). Content-based second language instruction. United States of America: University of Michigan Press.
Bruton, A. (2011). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? Re-evaluating some of the research. System, 39 (4), 523-532.
Bruton, A. (2013). CLIL: Some of the reasons why… and why not. System, 41 (3), 587-597.
Cambridge Assessment International Education (2019). Bilingual Education. Retrieved from https://www.cambridgeinternational.org/programmes-and-qualifications/bilingual-education/
Cambridge Assessment International Education (2019). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Assessment_International_Education
Cenoz, J. (2015). Content-based instruction and content and language integrated learning: The same or different?. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28 (1), 8-24.
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: Taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35 (3), 243-262.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Coyle, D. (2005). CLIL: Planning tools for teachers. Nottingham: University of Nottingham.

---. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10 (5), 543-562.
---. (2008a). CLIL—A pedagogical approach from the European perspective. In N. Hornberger (Ed). Encyclopedia of language and education (pp.1200-1214). Switzerland: Springer
---. (2008b). Content and language integrated learning: Motivating learners and teachers. 1 June 2019 from http://blocs.xtec.cat/clilpractiques1/files/2008/11/slrcoyle.pdf.

---. (2013). Listening to learners: An investigation into ‘successful learning’ across CLIL contexts. In Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (Ed.). Content and Language Integrated Learning: Language policy and pedagogical practice (pp. 14-36). London: Routledge.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dale, L., & Tanner, R. (2012). CLIL activities: A Resource for subject and language teachers. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Dalton-Puffer, C., Llinares, A., Lorenzo, F., & Nikula, T. (2014). “You can stand under my umbrella”: Immersion, CLIL and bilingual education. Applied Linguistics, 35 (2), 213-218.
Harrop, E. (2012). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL): Limitations and possibilities. Encuentro, 21, 57-70
Huang, J. (2003). Chinese as a foreign language in Canada: A content-based programme for elementary school. Language Culture and Curriculum, 16 (1), 70-89.
Hüttner, J., & Smit, U. (2014). CLIL: Some of the reasons why… and why not. System, 41 (3), 587–597.
International Baccalaureate Organization (2019). IB education for a better world. Retrieved fr from https://www.ibo.org/digital-toolkit/country-specific-materials/
Klimova, B. (2012). CLIL and the teaching of foreign languages. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 572-576.
Krathwohl, D. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41 (4), 212-218.
Lasagabaster, D. (2011). English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5 (1), 3-18.
Lasagabaster, D., & Sierra, J. M. (2009a). Immersion and CLIL in English: more differences than similarities. ELT journal, 64 (4), 367-375.
---. (2009b). Language attitudes in CLIL and traditional EFL classes. International CLIL Research Journal, 1 (2), 4-17.
Llinares, A., Morton, T., & Whittaker, R. (2012). The roles of language in CLIL. New York: Cambridge University Press
Lynch, G. (2015). Introducing Content and Language Integrated Learning in study abroad programs. Journal of Kanazawa Seiryo University, 48 (2), 69-73.
Marsh, D. (2002). Introduction. In Marsh, D (Ed), CLIL/EMILE – The European dimension: actions, trends and foresight potential (pp. 15-17). Strasbourg: European Commission.
Mattheoudakis, M., Alexiou, T., & Laskaridou, C. (2014). To CLIL or not to CLIL? The case of the 3rd experimental primary school in Evosmos. Major Trends in Theoretical and Applied Linguistics 3, 215-234.
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second-language learning. London: Edward Arnold.
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
Multiculturalism (2019). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiculturalism
Muñoz, C. (2002). Relevance & potential of CLIL. In Marsh, D (Ed), CLIL/EMILE – The European dimension: actions, trends and foresight potential (pp. 33-36). Strasbourg: European Commission.
Orton, J., & Cui, X. (2016). Principles and innovation design: CLIL units in Chinese. In R. Moloney, H.L. Xu (Eds), Exploring innovative pedagogy in the teaching and learning of Chinese as a foreign language (pp. 39-60). Singapore: Springer.
Paschalidou, G. (2019). Investigating the impact of Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) on EFL oral production: a preliminary research on fluency and quantity. Research Papers in Language Teaching & Learning, 10 (1) .355-371.
Pérez-Cañado, M. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: Past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15 (3), 315-341.
Pérez-Vidal, C. (2009). The integration of content and language in the classroom: A European approach to education (the second time around). In E. Milne & M. Guerrini. CLIL across educational levels (pp.3-16). Madrid: Richmond-Santillana.
Pluriculturalism (2019). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluriculturalism
Rumlich, D. (2014). Prospective CLIL and non-CLIL students’ interest in English (classes): A quasi-experimental study on German sixth-graders. In R. Breeze, C. Saíz, C. & Pasamar, C. Integration of theory and practice in CLIL (pp. 73-95). Netherlands: Brill Rodopi.
Seikkula-Leino, J. (2007). CLIL learning: Achievement levels and affective factors. Language and Education, 21 (4), 328-341.
The Council of The European Union (2008). Journal of the European Union Council Resolution of 21 November 2008 on a European strategy for multilingualism. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:320:0001:0003:EN:PDF
Ting, Y. L. T. (2010). CLIL appeals to how the brain likes its information: examples from CLIL- (neuro) science. International CLIL Research Journal, 1 (3), 1-18.
Ting, Y. T. (2011). CLIL… not only not immersion but also more than the sum of its parts. ELT Journal, 65 (3), 314-317.

中文
王文科和王智弘（2016）。教育研究法（修訂版）。台灣： 五南
何德華（2009）。 華語教學研究方法與論文寫作。台灣：正中書局
李宇明（2011）。 當代中國：漢語國際教育必須重視的事體。載於北京語言大學對外漢語研究中心 （主編） 。國際漢語教學理念與模式創新：第七屆對外漢語國際學術研討會論文集 （頁 1-9） 。北京：外語教學與研究。
李泉（1996）。 對外漢語課堂教學的理論思考。中國人民大學學報， 5，87-93。
李堯（2011）。語言習得與語言學得。載於李堯、張怡春等 （主編）。第二語言習得理論與實踐研究 （頁 60-77）。北京：外語教學與研究。
竺靜華（1996）。 華語教學實務概論。台北市：文史哲。
馬箭飛（2009） 對外漢語教學的教學設計和大綱。載於趙金銘、徐慧如（主編） 。對外漢語教學概論（頁100-107） 。台灣：新學林。
陳振宇（2013)。Plurilingualism vs Multilingualism. 2019年5月20日，取自http://ntnuslaforum.blogspot.com/2013/06/plurilingualism-vs-multilingualism.html
陳雅文（1995）。內容分析法。圖書感學與資訊科學大辭典。2019年6月4日，取自 http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1683205/
楊殿義 （2018）。華語為第二外語的國小學童運用沉浸式學習之探究-以印尼泗水臺灣學校華裔學生為例。 台北市：國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文 （未出版） 。