For many educational programs worldwide, a shift in job market demands and

social integration of language learners necessitated an adjustment in curriculum

to accommodate the shift in language use since English has gained widespread
acceptance as the world's de facto language, typically Total Physic Response
(TPR), Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Project-based Learning
(PBL), Content-based Instruction (CBI), Content and Language Integrated
Learning (CLIL), English Medium Instruction (EMI). Among these, CLIL is
one of the most innovative new approach. It is a "all-encompassing term"
(Mourssi & Kharosi, 2014) that refers to a variety of educational techniques,
including CBI, immersion, bilingual education, and multilingual education.
Generally, there is a wealth of research demonstrating that students study academic or
other subjects while also learning a foreign language at school at the same time.
According to some scholars, EFL teachers can use CLIL to create a classroom climate
that encourages students to interact with social issues, cultural complexities, and
language complications. According to SLA (Second Language Acquisition) research,
CLIL programs are more effective because they create settings for naturalistic
language instruction and acquisition, as well as the amount of time and exposure
provided to students who wish to use language in the classroom environment (Dalton-
Puffer & Smit, 2007). In summary, CLIL has inherent advantages, and it genuinely
benefits learners in a vriety of ways. This study was conducted at the Vung Tau
Tourism College located at 459 Truong Cong Dinh, Ward 7, Vung Tau
City, Ba Ria – Vung Tau. The subjects of the study included 25 male and
female sophomores. The students were all at the age of twenty and had
compulsorily learnt English for at least five years at secondary and high
school. They were supposed to be equal in English proficiency of beginner
level.

- Disadvantages of CLIL

First and foremost, teachers may overlook the necessity of teaching pupils the
language (English) holistically rather than focusing exclusively content. CLIL may be
jeopardized if teachers are unable to strike a satisfactory balance between language
and content in their lectures.

Secondly, students who lack the language or English proficiency are at a

disadvantage since they may be unable to absorb and communicate effectively in the
language. Students may get disinterested in learning as a result of this issue, as they
feel compelled to keep up.

Thirdly, there is a lack of mutual understanding between language teachers and

content teachers on their respective topic areas. Despite the fact that this is not a new
issue, it is challenging to resolve and/or increase teachers' awareness of it. The result
is that when conducting CLIL classes, subject teachers may communicate in their
native languages whereas language instructors could find it difficult to devote enough
to the curriculum (Harrop, 2012).

Finally, cultural prejudice may arise in a CLIL classroom situation. According

to Harrop (2012), CLIL promotes the 4C framework, which places a premium on
culture; nevertheless, when the method is employed, students' cultures diverge even
within the same class. Due to their own prejudices, some students struggle to learn
about cultures other than their own. When confronted with the issue of teaching in a
CLIL setting, it is critical for teachers to be aware of their own cultural
preconceptions.

Students must take an active role in CLIL classes for them to be successful.
This is because CLIL is a student-centered method that requires ongoing participation
on the part of students. Among the numerous characteristics of the CLIL technique,
Coyle, Hood, and Marsh (2010) emphasize that it requires teachers and students to
embrace student-centered approaches and to involve all pupils. CLIL classes can be
challenging to teach, even at the beginning, because they demand the instructor to
devote substantial time and effort into engaging their students in a process that
requires frequent student involvement in order for them to absorb the subject in a
foreign language.
 Anzenberger (2015) presented a similar argument, arguing that because CLIL
professors are expected to act as facilitators, a transcendental role is played by CLIL
students in their studies. As a result, students are expected to participate actively in
class, with the majority of tasks requiring peer collaboration to contribute to the
development of content and learning skills goals.

. Also, CLIL, according to Nowak (2011), is considered as “a continuum or

umbrella term” that incorporates all strategies that give students with specific
academic language support to assist them in acquiring knowledge about the subject
through that language.

Since there has been no previous research into the use of CLILL to teach
culinary students in a vocational school setting in Vietnam, the objective of this article
is to conduct a thorough investigation into this topic.

In order to determine the research question 3 given in Part I, the author will use this
conceptual framework to determine the attitudes of each participant toward each
component and, utilizing that information, conduct comparisons to determine the
research question 3.

Applying CLIL in Cooking Class

CLIL was employed in the classroom by the author to construct a cooking challenge
for her students, which required making salmon salad, which was then served to them.
To achieve her goal, he used CLIL as well as English as the medium of instruction, to
achieve success. This was done as a model for student to follow, and the author
attempted to cover the 4Cs framework as much as she possibly could.
Following the lecture, she focussed on the preparation of food, specifically salmon
salad, and built models of vegetables, salmons entirely out of paper to represent the
process of preparation. In addition, she prepared the kitchen items that would be
required for the salad preparation. In the course of her lecture, she instructed her
students to become familiar with the vocabulary related with the materials used in
salad dish by describing everything in English
Until now, students had been taught how to cook salad in class. After she finished
guiding, she encouraged her students to give a brief presentation about how they
cooked the salad in plenary to develop their public speaking skills. To achieve this
goal, it incorporated the language into the food preparation process. Students
examined how to describe the next stage of the culinary process to their peers as well
as the next stage of the cooking process and how to decorate their own salad plate.
For the final part of the lecture, she invited students to form groups of three and think
of what they need to prepare to have the best salmon salad plate. The students were
given 15 minutes to brainstorm ideas, following which they were asked to present
their thoughts in English.
 Because it would have been difficult to acquire a random sample of second-
year students representative of the entire college, this study used a convenience
sample. Additionally, even if random sampling had been practicable, it would not
have sufficiently represented all second-year students throughout the country, or even
within a single region. Second-year students attending community colleges, private
universities, religiously connected institutions, and commuter universities in urban
areas, for example, would not have been represented.

). Surveys are susceptible to problems with depth. As a result, it is difficult

to ask questions that are more precise than general inquiries that may be
comprehended by a broad variety of people. The results of surveys may
not be as reliable as those obtained through other means of data collection
that allow a researcher to conduct a complete investigation into the subject
under consideration. However, survey questionnaire is approriate jn this
research since the respondent has the flexibility to complete the
questionnaire at their own convenience; Also, it is possible to glean the
needed information from the responses provided by the respondents
(Kibuuka & Karuga, 2003).

Interactions in which one person (the interviewer) attempts to collect

information from another person by asking questions about their lives and
experiences are known as semi-structured interviews. Despite the fact that
interviewers normally prepare a list of preset questions, in-depth, semi-
structured interviews typically develop in a conversational way, allowing
participants the option to pursue issues that they believe are significant to
their research (Longhurst, 2009).

. A key advantages of SSIs are that they require a lot of time, effort, and a high
level of interviewer expertise. Interviewers must be knowledgeable, sympathetic,
poised, and quick on their feet. Interview preparation, scheduling, performance, and
analysis are rarely as straightforward as they appear. Also, SSIs need to spend a
significant amount of time going through massive amounts of notes and transcripts.
 However, the semi-structured interview is an excellent tool for engaging in in-
depth discussions. Researchers can often get sophisticated findings from attentively
examining the talks and initial superficial reactions that take place during an SSI
session. Body language and facial gestures such as hunches, laughter, and stillness
communicate secret information about a person even when they are not speaking. This
information is useful in investigating a range of exchange-related themes (Ritchie &
Lewis, 2003). Moreover, interviewers is able to synthesis multiple ideas in order to be
effective in fostering adaptation. A single researcher can engage in SSI discussions on
a variety of different topics (Deterding & Waters, 2018).

The semi-structured interview allows the researcher to ask pertinent questions

while also allowing for a more conversational approach to the interview, making it an
appropriate instrument for doing the research (Fylan, 2005). Semi-structured
interviews, rather than structured interviews, are recommended by Fylan (2005) when
dealing with sensitive topics. The interviews ranged in length from 32 minutes to 75
minutes, with an average length of 48 minutes. During the interviews, the researcher
produced an audio recording and transcribed what was said. To allow participants to
independently check and explain their own knowledge, the transcripts of the
interviews were made available to them.

Purpose of use
To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
pronunciation improvement
To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
vocabulary expansion
To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
grammatical knowledge
improvement
To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
listening improvement
To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
speaking improvement
To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
reading improvement
To clarify the belief of students
about CLIL effects toward the
writing improvement
To clarify the emotion/ feeling of
students when participating in CLIL
lessons.
To clarify the emotion/ feeling of
students toward the English usages of
their cooking teachers
To clarify the emotion/ feeling
of students when they share
ideas with their friends in
CLIL-applied lessons
To clarify students’ intention
toward studying subjects in
English in the future
To clarify students’ intention
toward recommending CLIL
to others
To clarify students’ behavior
if their content teachers use
 English in the future.
The survey questions were developed in accordance with the study's goals and
objectives, as well as the research concerns being addressed. Item responses that were
written in straightforward English that respondents could comprehend and understand
indicated the reliability of the instruments.

The instrument's content validity was validated by consulting with professionals.

Testing to see if the material being measured can be accurately represented by the
sample under study is known as content validity (also known as reliability) (Orodho,
2008). The validity of test items was evaluated by subject matter experts, such as
university supervisors hired by the researcher. Additionally, by determining if the
questionnaire was pertinent to the study's questions, the experts provided feedback on
the questionnaire's usefulness. As a consequence of the consultation, a number of their
suggestions were incorporated into the final survey.