Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine the academic performance of bilingual and non-bilingual students pursuing a primary school teaching degree and their level of satisfaction with the degree program. To this end, a sample of 1,057 students from the Faculty of Education at the University of Granada was used: 427 bilingual students (85 males and 342 females) and 630 non-bilinguals (202 males and 428 females), who followed the same curriculum and syllabuses (19 subjects in total). While the results obtained demonstrate no significant differences between the two groups in eight subjects, differences in favor of the non-bilingual group were present in two subjects: Mathematics and Learning disabilities. In the remaining nine subjects, four of which belonged to the students´ specialty of teaching English as a foreign language, the bilingual students outperformed the non-bilinguals despite the potential challenge of doing a degree in a foreign language. Satisfaction with the curriculum was slightly greater among the non-bilingual students (m=3.81) than the bilingual students (m=3.73), although these differences were not significant.
Highlights
The purpose of this study is to examine the academic performance of bilingual and non-bilingual students pursuing a primary school teaching degree and their level of satisfaction with the degree program
In reference to the level of student satisfaction with the degree program (v20), the results indicate that both groups experienced a high level of satisfaction
In this article we have presented a comparative study between the academic achievement of EMI and non-EMI students in their primary school teaching degree and their level of satisfaction with the program
Summary
Modern society is characterized by the phenomenon of globalization in both commerce and education (Stewart, 1996). The European Union, which is based on the multinational and multilingual nature, has been promoting language education. All these factors have caused educational institutions to introduce language study at all levels of education, especially English, which has succeeded in becoming the lingua franca (Seidlhofer, 2001). The acronyms ICLHE (Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education) (Wilkinson, 2004; Pérez Vidal, 2015), EMEMUS (English-Medium Education in Multilingual University Settings) (Dafouz-Milne & Smit, 2016), and CLIL (Content and Languge Integrating Language) are used interchangeably CLIL is more generic and commonly found in primary and secondary education The acronyms ICLHE (Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education) (Wilkinson, 2004; Pérez Vidal, 2015), EMEMUS (English-Medium Education in Multilingual University Settings) (Dafouz-Milne & Smit, 2016), and CLIL (Content and Languge Integrating Language) are used interchangeably CLIL is more generic and commonly found in primary and secondary education (Ruiz de Zarobe & Jiménez Catalán, 2009; Coyle, Hood, & Marsh, 2010; Lasagabaster & Ruiz de Zarobe, 2010; Dalton Puffer, 2011; Madrid, D. & Hughes, 2011; Pérez Cañado, 2012; Marsh, Pérez Cañado & Ráez Padilla, 2015)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
