內容與語言整合學習法(Content and Language Integrated Learning: CLIL)是一種將專業內容與語言學習相結合的教學方法。此研究共設計四課臺灣文化教材，主題分別是雲門舞集、眷村文化、臺灣歷史和媽祖遶境，課程設計以CLIL教學法下的CLIL語言三角(CLIL-Pyramid)為基礎，並以4Cs框架為原則，以探討此教學法在新南向專班中觀光科系越南學生的教學成效。
本研究採多模態教學，故課程須符合下列幾項CLIL教學法和多元智能理論的原則:一、語言支持鷹架和模型示範。二、內容選擇和短文結構須有系統性。三、跨學科整合建立知識體系。四、重視文化意識和跨文化能力。五、課程符合多元化評估方法。六、課程需有技術應用和數位資源。課程實踐方面，教師須給予充分的語言鷹架例如關鍵詞和句型，以及內容理解鷹架如認知比較圖和心智圖，教師也須運用形成性評估和總結性評估等，以利彈性整合臺灣文化下的歷史內容。
本研究和教學成果為經由四個月CLIL教學法實施後，學生能理解以說明文呈現之短文所傳達的主要觀點與相關訊息，並且能以連貫性的句子寫出臺灣文化主題中虛擬實境、線上影音和繪本大意。此外，學生能理解歷史背景如何影響現代臺灣社會，從中體現臺灣文化下的文化意識和觀念。

This study is based on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL). CLIL is a teaching method that combines professional content with language learning. This study designed four chapterts of Taiwanese culture teaching materials, on the Cloud Gate Dance Theatre, military village culture, Taiwan history and Mazu pilgrimage procession, respectively. The coursse design is based on the Language Triangle (CLIL-Pyramid) under the CLIL teaching method, and Based on the principle of 4Cs framework. This study explores the learning outcomes of first-year Vietnamese students in the Department of Tourism in the International Industry-Academia Collaboration Program.
The study adopts multimodal teaching, so the curriculum should be developed in accordance with the following principles of CLIL pedagogy and multiple intelligences theory: 1. language scaffolding support and model demonstration, 2. systematic selection of the content and structure, 3. interdisciplinary integration to build a knowledge system, 4. emphasis on cultural awareness and intercultural competence, 5. curriculum in line with diversified assessment methods, 6. curriculum with technical applications and digital resources. In terms of course design, teachers should provide adequate language scaffolding, such as key words and sentence patterns, as well as content comprehension scaffolding, such as cognitive comparison charts and mental maps. Teachers should also use formative assessment and summative assessment, so as to flexibly integrate the historical content under Taiwanese culture.
The result of this study and teaching is that after four months of CLIL teaching, Students will be able to understand the main ideas and relevant messages conveyed in the expository essays, and will be able to write the main ideas of virtual reality, online audio-visual and picture books in Taiwanese cultural themes in coherent sentence groups. In addition, students will be able to understand how the historical background has influenced modern Taiwanese society, and reflect the cultural consciousness and concepts of Taiwanese culture.

王若江(2006)。關於美國AP漢語與文化課程中三種交際模式的思考。語言文字應用，1，45-50。
王智瑩、林志哲 (2021)。心智圖融入會計學課程對技術型高中學生學習動機及學習成效之影響。臺北市立大學學報，52 (1)，75-96
王贊育 (2019)。以內容和語言整合學習觀點組構的大學華語聽力課程。臺灣華語教學研究，19，1-19。
台北市政府教育局(2023年6月30日)。臺北市自編CLIL雙語補充教材及聽說評量工具。https://sites.google.com/view/tp-clil
行政院 (2023年8月10日)。教育部新南向人才培育推動計畫。https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/e4cd9b44-8802-4fe8-8a17 25d0533beeb7
代憲玲（2015）。越南留學生漢語閱讀策略調查研究—以雲南師範大學為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。中國雲南師範大學漢語國際教育系。
朱我芯 (2013)。對外華語文化教學實證研究：以跨文化溝通與第二文化習得為導向。台北:國立臺灣師範大學出版中心與Airiti Press共同出版。
林宜樺(2009)。外籍留學生學位預備華語課程設計〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系。
林素菁 (2022)。生態語言教育觀之CLIL課程設計與實踐以基礎級「中文101」課程為例〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學研究所。
何佳真(2013)。大專院校外籍生來臺身心適應歷程研究－以東南亞與中南美洲外籍生為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立屏東教育大學教育心理與輔導學系。
阮黃英（2018）。漢語詞研究與對越漢語教學。華語學刊，24，8-27。
阮氏茹瓊（2018）。漢越詞對越南學生在閱讀漢語能力之影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系。
吳明清（1991）。教育研究－基本觀念與方法分析－基本觀念與方法分析。台北:五南出版社。
李桂芳 (2019)。華語教材之文化內容分析及在台華語學習者觀點研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立政治大學華語文教學碩博士學位學程。
李郁錦、陳振宇（2016）。華語教材評估指標初探：二語習得視角。臺灣華語教學研究，13，67-94。
洪佳伶(2017)。外籍生來臺就讀因素及適應問題探討-以東部 T 大學越南外籍生為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺東大學公共與文化事務學系。
范氏茉 (2011）。基於圖式理論越南中級漢語閱讀教學設計〔未出版之碩士論文〕。中國華東師範大學對外漢語系。
馬靄萱(2014)。從在臺外籍生之學習選擇看留學生遷移決策之社會建構。人口學刊，48，43-94。
真島淳 (2018)。日本大學初級華語教科書客觀與主觀文化題材分析。臺灣華語教學研究，16，165-198。
張英（2004）。對外漢語文化教材研究─兼論對外漢語文化教學等級大綱建設。漢語學習，1，53-59。
張英（2006）。對外漢語文化因素與文化知識教學研究。漢語學習，6，59-65。
張金蘭 (2022)。臺灣與美國華語教材之文化內容比較分析。教科書研究，15，81-109。
陳麗宇 (2011)。情境分佈對於華語文教材編寫的重要性探討－以CEFR之B1級商用華語教材為例。中原華語文學報，7，135-159。
陳麗宇、李欣欣 (2012)。當代初級商務華語教材之文化研究。華語文教學研究，9(4)，41-73。
陳玉蒼、楊政郎(2021)。專業課程全英語授課導入CLIL的實踐與成效。當代商管論叢，6(1)，89 -107。
彭妮絲(2016)。CFL學生華語文文化認知與語言學習策略研究。臺北市立大學學報，47(2)，17-37。
陳杰妤 (2018) 。對話華語文化教材編寫體例評估與分析〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立清華大學中國語文學系。
陶蕃瀛（2004）。行動研究：一種增強權能的助人工作方法。應用心理研究期刊，23，33-48。
舒兆民 (2001)。網路華語語體及文化課程教學設計〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系。
黃子純(2019)。華語內容與語言整合學習課程設計與教材編寫:「臺灣社會議題」〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學系。
黃玉萍 (2018)。台灣新住民教學教材中的文化分析。竹塹文獻雜誌，63，64-82。
劉品佑（2007）。外國學生的生活適應與生涯發展—以清華大學和交通大學的攻讀學位外國學生為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立清華大學科技管理研究所。
葉至誠(1999)。研究方法與論文寫作。台北 : 商鼎文化出版社。
楊懿麗 (1996)。心理語言學的內容及方法:兼論其與語言學之關係。國立政治大學學報，73，279-316。
詹佳惠 (2022)。華人茶文化融入華語教學之課程設計與實踐—以內容語言整合學習（CLIL）為本〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立政治大學華語文教學碩博士學位學程。
趙賢州 (1992)。關於文化導入的再思考。語言教學與研究，3，31-39。
鄧筱潔 (2021)。華語文化教材研究之回顧與應用 ─以中級文化教材為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺中教育大學語文教育學系。
韓光俐（2009）。來臺大學國際學生課業學習經驗與學習適應歷程之研究--以國立臺灣師範大學大學部學生為例〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學公民教育與領導學系。
黃光玉、劉念夏、陳清文譯（2004）。媒介與傳播研究方法：質化與量化研究途徑。臺北：風雲論壇。
簡妤婷 (2021)。內容與語言整合學習（CLIL）融合任務型語言教學法（TBLT）之華語文教學設計發展研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。中原大學應用華語文學系。
蘇浚生(2019)。華語教材之中華文化教學分類分析－以《當代中文課程》與《中文聽說讀寫》為例論〔未出版之碩士論文〕。銘傳大學華語文教學系。
財團法人語言訓練測驗中心(2023年7月22日)。CLIL教師資源手冊：教學與評量實務 「CLIL教師能力參考指標」。https://lttc-li.tw/clil101/
教育部統計處 (2023年5月21日)。大專校院境外學生概況。 https://stats.moe.gov.tw/statedu/chart.aspx?pvalue=36
教育部 (2024年7月21日)。新南向產學合作國際專班規範。https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed2300/News_Content.aspxn=3E8E4F90CE38C77B&sms=0458C794DB622AAE&s=F0D119F98E550945
國家發展委員會(2023年8月20日)。2030雙語政策整體推動方案。https://www.ndc.gov.tw/Content_List.aspxn=A3CE11B3737BA9EB&upn=5137965B2A81A120
Anderson, J.R. (1976). Language, memory, and thought. New York: Psychology Press.
Aldım, Ü. F. & Arıbaş, S. (2021). The contribution of CLIL approach to teaching
English as a foreign language:example of finland, poland and turkey. Journal of History School, 50, 438-464.
Bloom, B.S. (1972) Taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive domain. NY: Mackay.
Barasch, R.M., ＆James, C. V. (1994). Beyond the monitor model: comments on current theory and practice in second language acquisition. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Bentley, K. (2012). The TKT course CLIL module. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bruton, A. (2011). Is CLIL so beneficial, or just selective? re-evaluating some of the
research. System 39(4), 523-532.
Ball, P., Kelly, K., & Clegg, J., (2015). Putting CLIL into practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ball, P. (2018). Innovations and challenges in CLIL materials design. Theory Into Practice, 57(3), 222–231.
Brown, H. & Bradford, A. (2017). EMI, CLIL, & CBI: differing approaches and goals. In Clements, P., Krause, A., & Brown, H (Eds.), Transformation in English education (pp.328-334). Tokyo: JALT.
Banegas, D.L. (2017). Teacher-developed materials for CLIL: frameworks, sources, and activities. Asian EFL Journal, 19(3), 31-48.
Bauer-Marschallinger, S., Dalton-Puffer., C., Heaney, H., Katzinger., L., & Smit, U. (2021): CLIL for all? an exploratory study of reported pedagogical practices in Austrian secondary schools. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,26(9), 1050–1065.
Bertaux, P., Coonan, C. M., Frigols-Martín, M. J., & Mehisto, P. (2010). The CLIL Teacher’s Competences Grid. http://tplusm.net/CLIL_Competences_Grid_31.12.09.pdf
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Cenoz, J., Genesee, F., & Gorter, D. (2014). Critical analysis of CLIL: taking stock and looking forward. Applied Linguistics, 35, 243-262.
Coyle, D. (2002). Relevance of CLIL to the European commission language learning objectives. In Marsh, D. (Ed.), CLIL/EMILE European dimension: actions, trends and foresight potential. European Commission.
Coleman, J. A. (2006). English-medium teaching in European higher education,
Language Teaching,39(1), 1-14.
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543-562.
Coyle, D. (2008). CLIL: A pedagogical approach from the European perspective. In Hornberger, N.H. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and education (pp.1200-1214). Boston: Springer.
Coyle, D., Hood, P., & Marsh, D. (2010). Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carloni, G. (2012, August 22-25). Online CLIL scaffolding at university level: building learners’ academic language and content-specific vocabulary across disciplines through online learning. EUROCALL Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2012.000023
Cenoz, J. (2015). Content based instruction and content and language integrated learning the same or different. Language, Culture and Curriculum,28(1), 8-24.
Coyle, D., Meyer, O. (2021). Beyond CLIL pluriliteracies teaching for deeper learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dewaele, J.-M. (2005). Investigating the psychological and emotional dimensions in instructed language learning: obstacles and possibilities. The Modern Language Journal, 89(3), 367–380.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in content and language integrated learning (CLIL) classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(3), 501-502.
Dalton-Puffer, C. (2008). Outcomes and processes in content and language integrated learning (CLIL): current research from Europe. In Delanoy, W. & Volkmann, L. (Eds.), Future perspectives for english language teaching (pp. 139-157). Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Dafouz, E., Nuñez, B., & Sancho, C. (2007). Analysing stance in a CLIL university context: non-native speaker use of personal pronouns and modal verbs. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 647–662.
Dawson, S.M., & Hocker, A.D. (2020). An evidence-based framework for peer review of teaching. Advances in Physiology Education, 44(1), 26-31.
Eisner, E.W. (1979). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. Macmillan.
Eurydice. (2006). Eurdice report. Luxemburg: Publications office of European Union.
European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (2009). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at school in Europe. https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en
Fajardo- Dack, T., Argudo, J.C., & Abad, M. (2020). Language and teaching methodology features of CLIL in university classrooms: a research synthesis. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 22(1), 40-54.
Flood, J., & Lapp, D. (1994). Issues and trends: developing literary appreciation and literacy skills: a blueprint for success. The Reading Teacher, 48(1), 76–79.
Grellet, F. (1981). Developing reading skills: A practical guide to reading comprehension exercises. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Guerrini, M.C. (2009). CLIL materials as scaffolds to learning. In Marsh, P., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., Aliaga, R., Asikainen, T., Frigols-Martin, M, Hughes, S., & Lange, G. (Eds.), CLIL practice: perspectives from the field (pp.74-84). Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.
Graham, K.M., Choi, Y., Davoodi, A., Razmeh, S., & Dixon, L.Q. (2018). Language and content outcomes of CLIL and EMI: a systematic review. LACLIL, 11(1), 19-37.
Howard Gardner. (1983). Frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelligences.NY: Basic Books.
Heugh, K., Prinsloo, C., Makgamatha, M., Diedericks, G., & Winnaar, L. (2016). Multilingualism(s) and system-wide assessment: a southern perspective. Language and Education, 31(3), 197–216.
Hüttner, J., Smit.U. (2018). Negotiating political positions: subject-specific oral language use in CLIL classrooms. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(3), 287–302.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principle and practice in second language acquisition. New York: Pergamon Press.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413-468). New York: Academic Press.
Ljosland, R. (2011). English as an academic lingua franca: language policies and multilingual practices in a Norwegian university. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(4), 991-1004.
Lorenzo, F., Casal, S.& Moore, P. (2010). The effects of content and language
integrated learning in European education: key findings from the andalusian
bilingual sections evaluation project. Applied Linguistics, 31(3), 418–442.
Lasagabaster, D. (2011). English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 3-18.
Lancaster, N. K.(2016). Stakeholders perspectives on CLIL in a monolingual context. English Language Teaching, 9(2), 148-177.
Lasagabaster, D. (2017). Integrating content and foreign language learning: what do CLIL students believe? Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 5(1), 4 - 29.
Mitchell, R. (1985). Process research in second-language classrooms. Language Teaching, 18(4), 330–352.
McTaggart, R. (1998). Is validity really an issue for participatory action research? Studies in Cultures, Organizations & Societies, 4(2), 211-236.
Marsh, H.W., Hau, K.-T., & Kong, C.-K., (2000). Late immersion and language of instruction in Hong Kong high schools: achievement growth in language and non-language subjects. Harvard Educational Review 70(3), 302-346.
Marsh, D. (ed.) (2002). CLIL/EMILE- the European dimension: actions, trends
and foresight potential. Brussels: European Commission.
Marsh, D. (2008). Language awareness and CLIL. In Hornberger, N.H. (Eds) Encyclopedia of language and education (pp.1986–1999). Boston : Springer.
Mehisto, P., Marsh, D., & Frigols, M. J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL: content and language integrated learning in bilingual and multilingual education. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
Meyer, O. (2013). Introducing the CLIL pyramid: key strategies and principles for quality CLIL planning and teaching. In Eisenmann, M. & Summer, T. (Eds) Basic issues in EFL teaching (2nd ed., pp.295-313). Heidelberg : Universitätsverlag Winter Gmbh.
Mahan, K. R. (2020). The comprehending teacher: scaffolding in content and language integrated learning (CLIL). The Language Learning Journal, 50(1), 74–88.
Mahan, K. R., Brevik, L.M., & Ødegaard, M. (2021). Characterizing CLIL teaching: new insights from a lower secondary classroom. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 24(3), 401–418.
Moran, P. (2001). Teaching culture: perspectives in practice. Boston: Heinle & heinle Publishers.
Moore, P., & Lorenzo, F. (2007). Adapting authentic materials for CLIL classrooms: an empirical study. Vienna English Working Papers,16(3), 28-35.
Natsir, M., & Sanjaya, D. (2014). Grammar translation method (GTM) versus communicative language teaching (CLT): a review of literature. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies, 2(1), 58-62.
OECD (2017). OECD handbook for internationally comparative education
statistics: concepts, standards, definitions and classifications. OECD
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264279889-en.
Pérez Cañado, M. L., Rascón Moreno, D., & Cueva López, V. (2021). Identifying difficulties and best practices in catering to diversity in CLIL: instrument design and validation. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 26(9), 1022–1030.
Pawan, F. (2008). Content-area teachers and scaffolded instruction for English language learners. Teaching and Teacher Education 24(6), 1450–1462.
Pérez-Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315–341.
Piaget, J. (1972). The principles of genetic epistemology. New York: Routledge.
Rieder-Bünemann, A., Hüttner, J., & Smit, U. (2022). Who would have thought that I’d ever know that: subject-specific vocabulary in CLIL student interactions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 25(9), 3184–3198.
Rumlich, D. (2020). Bilingual education in monolingual contexts: a comparative perspective. Language Learning Journal, 48 (2), 115–119.
Robertson, R. (1994). Globalisation or glocalisation? Journal of international
Communication, 1(1), 33-52.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In Schmitt, D.N. & McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199-227). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smit, U. (2010). CLIL in an English as a lingua franca (ELF) classroom: On explaining terms and expressions interactively. In Dalton-Puffer, C., Nikula, T &
Smit, U. (eds), Language use and language learning in CLIL classrooms(p.p. 259-277). Amsterdam : John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Samawathdana, R. (2010). Development of a health study instructional model using English as a medium based on Experiential Learning Theory and Content and Language Integrated Learning approach to enhance health behavior and English communication ability of lower secondary school students [Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation]. Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.
Siepmann, P., Rumlich, D., Matz, F., & Römhild, R. (2021). Attention to diversity
in German CLIL classrooms: multi-perspective research on students’ and teachers’ perceptions. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 26(9),1080–1096.
Tedick, D. & Cammarata, L. (2012). Content and language integration in K-12
contexts: student outcomes, teacher practices and stakeholder perspectives. Foreign Language Annals, 45(1), 28–53.
Suwannoppharat, K, & Chinokul, S. (2015). Applying CLIL to english language
teach-ing in Thailand: issues and challenges. Latin American Journal of Content
and Lan-guage Integrated Learning, 8(2), 237-254.
Tsou, W. L., & Huang, Y. P. (2022). CLIL development in bilingual education
in Taiwan: past, present, and future. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 26(1),
01-26.
Ting, Y. L. T. (2010). CLIL appeals to how the brain likes its information: examples from CLIL-(Neuro) science. International CLIL Research Journal, 1, 1–18.
Ting, Y. L.T. (2011). CLIL not only not immersion but also more than the sum of its parts. ELT Journal, 65(3), 314-317.
Vygotsky, L.S, Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: development of higher psychological precesses. Boston: Harvard university Press.
Villabona, N., & Cenoz, J. (2021). The integration of content and language in CLIL: a challenge for content-driven and language-driven teachers.Language, Culture and Curriculum, 35(1), 36-50.