<p>This study examines how university instructors balance disciplinary content and language development in CLIL art and design courses in higher education. Drawing on the adapted University Teaching Behaviour Observation-Content and Language Integrated Learning (UTBO-CLIL) framework, it analyzes 1080 min of virtual classroom observations, semi-structured interviews, and weekly reflective journals from 10 instructors and 60 undergraduate students in CLIL-integrated design courses in Zhejiang, China. The study asks how instructors’ observable behaviours align with UTBO-CLIL categories and what challenges shape the use of non-directive pedagogy. The findings show that directive behaviours, including giving directions, demonstrating techniques and providing information, were more frequent than non-directive behaviours, especially during technically complex or time-constrained tasks. Non-directive moves such as open questioning, scaffolding and offering choice were present, but they tended to occur episodically rather than as a consistently planned feature of lesson design. Interview and journal data suggest that instructors’ reliance on directive strategies was shaped by time pressure, limited CLIL-specific training and uncertainty about how to integrate design discourse with language support. Cultural and semiotic diversity also influenced classroom interaction, particularly when students drew on locally embedded design meanings that were not always fully recognized in assessment or feedback. The study suggests that UTBO-CLIL can provide a useful observational lens for identifying tensions between pedagogical intentions and classroom practices in creative CLIL settings. It also points to the need for discipline-specific teacher development that supports language-sensitive, culturally responsive and multimodal forms of studio pedagogy.</p>