The Impact of Type of Approach (CLIL Versus EFL) and Methodology (Book-Based Versus Project Work) on Motivation

  1. Lasagabaster Herrarte, David
  2. López Beloqui, Raquel
Journal:
Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras

ISSN: 1697-7467

Year of publication: 2015

Issue: 23

Pages: 41-57

Type: Article

DOI: 10.30827/DIGIBUG.53737 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

This study analyses the effect of type of approach and methodology on different types of motivation: intrinsic, extrinsic, instrumental and integrative motivation; interest in other cultures and learning environment are also considered. The two types of approaches under scrutiny are CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning) and non-CLIL or EFL (English as a foreign language), and the two types of methodology are based on either the textbook or project work (PW). Previous studies have examined the effect of PW and/or CLIL on secondary education (Seikkula-Leino, 2007, Lasagabaster, 2011; Sierra, 2011), but the novelty of the present research lies in the fact that it is focused on primary education students. The data were collected through a questionnaire filled in by three groups of participants: a non-CLIL and book-based group taught conventionally, a CLIL and book-based methodology group, and a CLIL and PW group. The results bore out that CLIL is beneficial for some motivational clusters even at an early age, whereas the impact of PW was not as positive as expected.

Bibliographic References

  • Chambers, G. N. (1999). Motivating Language Learners. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
  • Coyle, D. (2007). “Content and language integrated learning: towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies”, in The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10: 543-562.
  • Coyle, D., Marsh, D. and Hood, P. (2011). CLIL: Content and Language Integrated Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Csizér, K. and Dörnyei, Z. (2005). “The internal structure of language learning motivation and its relationship with language choice and learning effort”, in The Modern Language Journal, 89: 19-36.
  • Dalton-Puffer, C. (2011). “Content-and-language integrated learning: From practice to principles?”, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 31: 182-204.
  • Dalton-Puffer, C. and Smit, U. (eds.), (2007). Empirical Perspectives on CLIL Classroom Discourse. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
  • Dörnyei, Z. (1990). “Conceptualizing motivation in foreign language learning”, in Language Learning, 40: 46– 78.
  • Dörnyei, Z. (2000). “Motivation in action: Toward a process-oriented conceptualization of student motivation”, in British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70: 519–538.
  • Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • European Commission (1995). White Paper: Teaching and Learning Towards the Learning Society, Objective IV. Brussels: Council of Europe, DGV.
  • Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.
  • Gardner, R. C. (2001). “Integrative motivation and second language acquisition”, in Z. Dörnyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language learning. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai‘i Press, 1–20.
  • Gardner, R. C., and Lambert, W. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
  • Goodrich, H., Hatch, T., Wiatrowski, G., and Unger, C. (1995). Teaching through projects: Creating effective learning environments. CA: Innovative Learning Publications.
  • Grolnick, W. S., Deci, E. L., and Ryan, R. M. (1997). “Internalization within the family: The selfdetermination perspective”, in J. E. Grusec & L. Kuczynski (eds.), Parenting and children’s internalization of values: A handbook of contemporary theory. New York: Wiley, 135–161.
  • Hunt, M. J. (2011). “Learners’ perceptions of their experiences of learning subject content through a foreign language”, Educational Review, 63: 365-378.
  • Koh, C., Wang, C. K. J., Tan, O. S., Liu, W. C., and Ee, J. (2009). “Students’ discourse and motivation in project work”, in P. L. Jeffery (Ed.), Proceedings from the Australian Association for Research in Education International Education Research Conference 2008. Brisbane, Australia: AARE.
  • Kurzel, F and Rath, M. (2007). “Project Based Learning and Learning Environment”, in Journal of Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology (IISIT), 4: 503-510.
  • Lamb, M. (2004) “Integrative motivation in a globalizing world”, in System, 32: 3-19.
  • Lasagabaster, D. (2011). “English achievement and student motivation in CLIL and EFL settings”, in Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 5: 3-18.
  • Liu, w. C., Wang, C. K. J., Tan, O. S., Koh, C. and Ee, J. (2009). “A self-determination approach to understanding students’ motivation in project work”, in Learning and Individual Differences, 19: 139–145.
  • Lorenzo, F., Casal, S, Moore, P., Afonso, T. (2009). Bilingüismo y educación. Situación de la Red de Centros bilingües en Andalucía. Sevilla: Centro de estudios Andaluces. Consejería de la Presidencia, Junta de Andalucía.
  • Marsh, D. (ed.) (2002). CLIL/EMILE—The European Dimension: Actions, Trends and Foresight Potential, Public Services Contract DG EAC, European Commission, Strasbourg.
  • Muñoz, C. and Navés, T. (2007). “Windows on CLIL in Spain”, in A. Maljers, D. Marsh, and D. Wolff (eds.), Windows on CLIL European Centre for Modern Languages. The Hague, European Centre for Modern Languages, 160-165.
  • Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A., García, T. y Mckeachie, W.J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivational strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). AnnArbor, MI: University of Michigan.
  • Ribé, R. (2000). “Introducing Negotiation Processes: an Experiment with Creative Project Work”, in Breen, M. P. and Littlejohn, A. (Eds). Classroom Decision-Making. Negotiation and Process Syllabuses in Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 63-82.
  • Ryan R.M., Deci E.L. (2000). “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions”, in Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25: 54-67.
  • Seikkula-Leino, J. 2007. “CLIL learning: Achievement levels and affective factors”, in Language and Education 21: 328-341.
  • Sierra, J.M. (2011). “CLIL and Project Work: Contributions from the Classroom”, in Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., Sierra, J.M., and Gallardo del Puerto, F. (eds.) Content and Foreign Language Integrated Learning. Bern: Peter Lang, 211-240.
  • Stoller, F. (2002). “Project Work: A Means to Promote Language and Content”, in Jack, C. Richards & Willy, A. Renandya (eds.), Methodology in Language Teaching: an anthology of Current Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 107-120.
  • Thomas, J.W., (2000). A Review of Research on Project-Based Learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation.
Data source: Dialnet