{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024255024255024255, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004851004851004851, 'mean_word_length': 5.417777777777777, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Motivation for or from bilingual education? A comparative study of learner views in the Netherlands

ABSTRACT Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has been said to increase not only foreign language proficiency but also learner motivation (Coyle, D., P. Hood, and D. Marsh. 2010. CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). In contexts where CLIL is elective, however, the question can be raised as to whether its motivational effects can be distinguished from the pre-existing motivation that may have influenced the learner’s choice of educational route. The current study examined motivational differences between learners in Dutch-English bilingual and mainstream education. The aim was to establish whether the learner groups were differently motivated and whether their motivation appeared to be diachronically related to their chosen educational format. 581 learners in the first three years of general secondary education completed a questionnaire exploring their views on (language) learning. Results were analysed in terms of differences between bilingual and mainstream learners and across year-groups. Learners in bilingual education displayed more motivation in nearly all of the areas examined. There was little evidence, however, of this being a result of exposure to bilingual education, reinforcing the idea that motivation may be inherent to this group of CLIL learners.