Comparative analysis of critical literacy in lower secondary curricula in Finland, Italy and Spain

Implications for CLIL

Bibliographic Data

ID11182153
AuthorsMerve Bozbiyik (0000-0002-8087-2700, Mälardalen University, corresponding author), Leah Tompkins (0000-0001-6551-5601, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid), Muhammad Morshed (0000-0003-1841-9320, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid), Tom Morton (0000-0002-5102-0445, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid), Pilar Gerns (0000-0002-1754-5395, Universidad Internacional De La Rioja), Leila Kääntä (0000-0002-0642-1506, University of Jyväskylä), Sari Sulkunen (0000-0003-2790-8951, University of Jyväskylä), Lucila Pérez-Fernández (0000-0002-6148-4980, The University of Cantabria), Lucila María Pérez-Fernández (Universidad de Cantabria)
Year2026
Volume47
Issue4
Pages1-18
Publication date2026-03-23
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0143-4632 • E-ISSN: 1747-7557
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/01434632.2026.2646264
OpenAlexW7140116906
LanguageEN
References cited32

Critical literacy (CL), which refers to the use of diverse communication media to analyse and critique everyday social practices, has often been credited with advancing inclusion and diversity in schools. However, criticality has been seen as a missing dimension in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), and the extent to which it figures in mainstream curricular documents is unclear. In this scenario, we aim to determine how CL is represented in lower secondary curricula in different national contexts and subject areas. We examined curricula in history and biology subjects, which are commonly taught through a CLIL approach, in three national contexts: Finland, Italy, and Spain. We used a combination of bottom-up and top-down approaches, complementing an analysis of curriculum documents with a coding process informed by CL and Critical Thinking (CT) theories. The study reveals that CT and CL are present in both biology and history, but are emphasised differently across countries. Biology curricula tend to integrate CL more visibly, while history favours CT despite its disciplinary potential for perspective-taking. These differences highlight the need for greater balance and explicitness in how criticality is represented across subjects, with implications for designing curricula that better support criticality, both in mainstream and CLIL contexts.

Critical literacy · Curriculum · Curriculum development · Literacy · Multilingualism · Neuroscience of multilingualism · Teaching method · EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning · Multilingual Education and Policy · Second Language Learning and Teaching

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access