Effects of input on L2 writing in English and Dutch: CLIL and non-CLIL learners in French-speaking Belgium

Luk Van Mensel, Amélie Bulon, Isa Hendrikx, Fanny Meunier, Kristel Van Goethem

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

As part of a project on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in French-speaking Belgium, this study aims to explore the impact of formal and informal input on learners’ variability in writing, and to compare two target-language conditions (Dutch and English) in CLIL and non-CLIL settings in French-speaking Belgium. A regression model shows that CLIL is a significant predictor of L2 outcomes for both target languages, but that the relative impact of formal and informal input differs depending on the target language. In short, the amount of formal language exposure predicts the outcomes of the written productions of the learners of English, and the frequency of informal exposure those of the learners of Dutch. We argue that this observation is likely related to the difference in status that each of these languages holds among the pupils in our sample. The findings thus highlight the importance of the L2 status in research on CLIL, since different L2s can yield different results.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Publication statusAccepted/In press - Dec 2019

Fingerprint

L2 Writing
Content and Language Integrated Learning
Language
Belgium
Formal Languages
Pupil
Predictors

Keywords

  • CLIL
  • non-CLIL
  • writing
  • French-speaking Belgium
  • L2 English
  • L2 Dutch

Cite this

@article{297f832214ad4e58958a7d6ef4713a58,
title = "Effects of input on L2 writing in English and Dutch: CLIL and non-CLIL learners in French-speaking Belgium",
abstract = "As part of a project on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in French-speaking Belgium, this study aims to explore the impact of formal and informal input on learners’ variability in writing, and to compare two target-language conditions (Dutch and English) in CLIL and non-CLIL settings in French-speaking Belgium. A regression model shows that CLIL is a significant predictor of L2 outcomes for both target languages, but that the relative impact of formal and informal input differs depending on the target language. In short, the amount of formal language exposure predicts the outcomes of the written productions of the learners of English, and the frequency of informal exposure those of the learners of Dutch. We argue that this observation is likely related to the difference in status that each of these languages holds among the pupils in our sample. The findings thus highlight the importance of the L2 status in research on CLIL, since different L2s can yield different results.",
keywords = "CLIL, non-CLIL, writing, French-speaking Belgium, L2 English, L2 Dutch",
author = "{Van Mensel}, Luk and Am{\'e}lie Bulon and Isa Hendrikx and Fanny Meunier and {Van Goethem}, Kristel",
year = "2019",
month = "12",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education",
issn = "2212-8433",
publisher = "John Benjamins Publishing Company",

}

Effects of input on L2 writing in English and Dutch : CLIL and non-CLIL learners in French-speaking Belgium. / Van Mensel, Luk; Bulon, Amélie; Hendrikx, Isa; Meunier, Fanny; Van Goethem, Kristel.

In: Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 12.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of input on L2 writing in English and Dutch

T2 - CLIL and non-CLIL learners in French-speaking Belgium

AU - Van Mensel, Luk

AU - Bulon, Amélie

AU - Hendrikx, Isa

AU - Meunier, Fanny

AU - Van Goethem, Kristel

PY - 2019/12

Y1 - 2019/12

N2 - As part of a project on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in French-speaking Belgium, this study aims to explore the impact of formal and informal input on learners’ variability in writing, and to compare two target-language conditions (Dutch and English) in CLIL and non-CLIL settings in French-speaking Belgium. A regression model shows that CLIL is a significant predictor of L2 outcomes for both target languages, but that the relative impact of formal and informal input differs depending on the target language. In short, the amount of formal language exposure predicts the outcomes of the written productions of the learners of English, and the frequency of informal exposure those of the learners of Dutch. We argue that this observation is likely related to the difference in status that each of these languages holds among the pupils in our sample. The findings thus highlight the importance of the L2 status in research on CLIL, since different L2s can yield different results.

AB - As part of a project on Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) in French-speaking Belgium, this study aims to explore the impact of formal and informal input on learners’ variability in writing, and to compare two target-language conditions (Dutch and English) in CLIL and non-CLIL settings in French-speaking Belgium. A regression model shows that CLIL is a significant predictor of L2 outcomes for both target languages, but that the relative impact of formal and informal input differs depending on the target language. In short, the amount of formal language exposure predicts the outcomes of the written productions of the learners of English, and the frequency of informal exposure those of the learners of Dutch. We argue that this observation is likely related to the difference in status that each of these languages holds among the pupils in our sample. The findings thus highlight the importance of the L2 status in research on CLIL, since different L2s can yield different results.

KW - CLIL

KW - non-CLIL

KW - writing

KW - French-speaking Belgium

KW - L2 English

KW - L2 Dutch

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education

JF - Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education

SN - 2212-8433

ER -